Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 14:09, 24 March 2010

Welcome to the language section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

Shortcut

WP:RD/L

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
Note:
- We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
- We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
- We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
- We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

March 18

Cross-Purposes

What is the etymology of cross purposes?174.3.98.20 (talk) 03:57, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is just a case of the adjective "cross" being used in a sense that is now rare, except in this particular phrase. From the OED: "contrary, opposite, opposed (to each other, or to something specified). (Now rarely predicative.)"--Rallette (talk) 08:25, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Virtually the opposite meaning of "cross" in 'cross-reference', which connects 2 things rather than separates them. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 10:38, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that rare: compare "cross traffic", "cross talk". --Normansmithy (talk) 14:16, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And don't forget crossing swords (what, no article ?). :-) StuRat (talk) 16:20, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here's your article:-) I'd do it for fore play tho.174.3.98.20 (talk) 20:15, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All forms derive from the Latin crux, and most all the ideas involve two lines crossing, as with the letter "X", which is often used as a symbol for the word "cross". Given that shape, it can imply opposites or interference, as with cross purposes, crossed swords, cross talk. It can also imply intersection, as with cross reference and a genetic cross. Cross traffic and a railroad crossing are a bit of both. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:21, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Along those lines, the ancient Sumerian cuneiform sign originally meaning either "stranger or enemy" originally had the shape of two diagonally crossed lines (a saltire). AnonMoos (talk) 02:06, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now there's "cross post" (as in "Please do not cross post to different ref desks"). I see that one as a redundant use of "cross"; take it out of the sentence and you've lost none of the meaning. -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 02:24, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. To post to a different desk sounds like it means to move a post, which is fine. The term "cross post" means to post the same Q on 2 or more Desks at once. StuRat (talk) 03:02, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hmmmm... where does that leave cross-dressers? should we take that to mean priests? --Ludwigs2 02:58, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Men who dress like women. An intersection. Although the Latin roughly-equivalent "transvestite" employs the Latin trans ("across" or "through"), as the Romans themselves evidently didn't use crux that way in general. That's more of an English idiom, and we also use "crux" to mean a key point or a "crossing" in a dilemma or other puzzling situation. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:07, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's a heritage of Usenet, and I'd argue that it's used here incorrectly. In original usage, "crossposting" refers to post to multiple groups/forums simultaneously, i.e. the same instance of the thread simultaneously appears in different groups (forums). That is in contrast to "multipost", meaning that you send distinct copies of the message in each group, and subsequent discussions are independent of each other. With those definitions in place, we're actually talking about "multiposting" here. One can actually crosspost a message to multiple Wikipedia reference desks only if he takes care to create a separate page for it, and transclude it into desk pages. No such user (talk) 08:32, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

acb

wp:acb redirects to wp:bp. What does "acb" mean?174.3.98.20 (talk) 14:42, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Account-creation block" would be my guess, considering the specific section of WP:BP that WP:ACB redirects to. Deor (talk) 14:52, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Charles The Fat

The 1st foot note mentions girth. Is this the thickness of his penis, the length of his penis, or his weight?174.3.98.20 (talk) 19:48, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

His weight. —Akrabbim^talk 19:55, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Girth" in general refers to the distance around a belly, so it is related to weight, but it is not the same thing as weight. It is more often used about animals than people, but when it is used for people, it usually means the person is bigger around than the norm for his/her height. I have never heard "girth" in reference to a skinny person or even one of average size. Bielle (talk) 01:27, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is this kind of like Gresham's law where sexual usages drive out neutral usages? In the US, girth is probably used with reference to the male organ much more than for other purposes --达伟 (talk) 08:12, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Girth and Girth. -- Wavelength (talk) 14:58, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I not convinced that "penis girth" comes up, as it were, much in conversation. It would seem to be an internet phenomenon and only in written form. The only group to whom "penis girth" could be of consuming conversational interest is likely to be teenaged boys, but I still doubt they use "girth" in the "mine is bigger than yours" taunting. However, being long past teenage years, and never having been a boy, my knowledge of their vocabulary may well be incomplete. (It strikes me a mildly amusing that a word that nomally tends one to think of things of circumference measured in meters/yards should be used in marketing for so small a matter as a penis. "The girth of my penis is X inches/centimeters" just sounds silly.) With respect to the question we are answering, however, belly circumference is the likely answer. Bielle (talk) 16:37, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While the members of the various Girth and Mirth clubs are likely also be interested in comparative penis size, the "girth" of their title does refer rather to belly circumference. +An gr 17:01, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

What is the etymology of "water under the bridge"?174.3.98.20 (talk) 20:08, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I used my Google-fu and googled "water under the bridge" definition and there are many explanations. The fourth link opines: "It means that something is in the past and no longer important. My sister and I fought when we were children, but that's water under the bridge. I think the analogy is that water under the bridge is constantly moving toward the sea. That's a little abstract, so you might also imagine dropping a leaf into the water from atop a bridge. By watching the leaf float down river you'd be witnessing the progress of the water." Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:43, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would think this term would come from a flood, which could knock down a bridge. On the other hand, the water that's already passed is "water under the bridge", meaning nothing to worry about anymore. StuRat (talk) 03:09, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or nothing you can do anything about. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:12, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's the meaning of it, Bugs. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 04:41, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to worry about anymore; nothing you can do anything about anymore. Pretty much the same idea. Or "It's in the past and can't be changed". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:52, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The OED lumps the expression in with "various similative and figurative phrases, many of which are of biblical origin." It gives examples of these "various" phrases going back to the Blickling Homilies, but the first "water under the bridge/over the dam/under the mill/over the dyke" example cited is from Wireless World, 1913: "Much water has flowed under London Bridge since those days," this apparently drifting to Kipling, 1914: "Your articles..are a little too remote..but of course{em}much water, or shall we say much blood, has flowed under the bridges since they were written." Neither of these really implies the 'nothing to be done/worry about' meaning of the expression; the first citation that seems to carry that meaning in the OED is from a 1940 Nation article: "Last year's results are water under the mill." By C.S. Forester's Good Shepard," 1955, the 'nothing to be done' meaning is clearly there: "He should not have brought the men to battle stations at all... But that was water over the dam; no time for regrets at present." Some jerk on the Internet (talk) 13:09, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"dirty laundry"

What is the etymology and meaning of "put up one's dirty laundry" or "put up (insert name here)'s dirty laundry"?174.3.98.20 (talk) 20:44, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Others can help with the origin of the phrase, but I know the meaning: It means to air one's private grievances or arguments in public. A husband and wife at the supermarket openly arguing about their marital problems would be "airing their dirty laundry". Related is the song Dirty Laundry. Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:47, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would expect that the source of this is all the personal things you can determine by looking at a family's dirty laundry: "Looks like Johnny's bed wetting is back, and Mom's on the rag again, and what's that ? Is someone doing some anal sex ?". StuRat (talk) 03:06, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I remember back when I was a teenager and just starting to have sex I accidentally left a condom in my pants pocket, and my mother wandered (dare I say snuck) into my room while I was sleeping to collect laundry. she was actually fairly cool about it - she got my little brother to pretend as though he had found it. like I would really believe my little brother would be doing the laundry at 8:00 am; but I pretended and bribed him to keep quiet about it so that he could pretend that he wasn't going to tell my ma, so that she could pretend that...

and they say relationships are built on trust.

I suspect it's just that - certain stains you don't want to be seen cleaning down at the river bank; don't want to bring those out into the open air if you can help it, because everybody knows what caused them. --Ludwigs2 03:42, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think the phrase has an origin in literal dirty laundry. Dirty laundry is simply something one doesn't wear because it is presumably soiled beyond wearability. Airing one's dirty laundry is resurrecting what has been retired from one's wardrobe due to defect. I don't have familiarity with it being used as the OP is using it. I generally hear of "airing one's dirty laundry," or "airing one's dirty laundry in public." All that is being referred to, in my opinion, is the impropriety of that general thing which is to be kept from public sight, inappropriately on full view. But real dirty laundry is unsightly, and the reference works that way too, I guess. Bus stop (talk) 03:54, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Then why wouldn't it be "wearing dirty laundry" instead of "airing" ? StuRat (talk) 03:58, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can only guess. Because wearing brings up a visual reference. Airing, by contrast, relates to wind which in turn bears a relation to speech. Bus stop (talk) 04:03, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the second definition of 'air' in my dictionary it 'to express a public opinion' - it probably relates to the way speech is carried by the air. thus 'airing dirty laundry' probably means 'talking about hidden dirty stuff in public'. --Ludwigs2 04:47, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To "air" something is to bring it out "into the open air", be it laundry, a public opinion, or a radio or TV broadcast. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:50, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing too, but I suggest it's because when you air a garment you leave it in one place for a period of time, fully exposed and unattended, so anyone could happen by and see it. In a sense it's more visible than if you were just wearing it. --Anonymous, 07:23 UTC, March 19, 2010.

Too old a reference for many of you young'uns! In ancient times, after doing the wash in your wash tub, you would hang the newly clean stuff on a clothes line outdoors (during warm weather at least) to let it air-dry. Airing clean laundry was standard procedure. Airing dirty laundry would not be; it would be putting "too much information" out in the open. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:47, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Still a commonplace practice in the UK and Europe. Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:56, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OED notes the expressions "to wash one's dirty linen at home," and "to wash one's dirty linen in public,' meaning either to or not to "discuss an essentially private matter, esp. a dispute or scandal, in public." The first example it gives is Trollope's Last Chronicle of Barset (1867): "There is nothing..so bad as washing one's dirty linen in public." Merriam Webster's Online dates "dirty laundry" in the sense above to 1967, but doesn't provide a source. Some jerk on the Internet (talk) 13:27, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Image of local women busy doing their laundry. This photo was taken on the border of Ghana and Togo (West Africa).

-- Wavelength (talk) 14:44, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Laundry in the river, in Abidjan, Ivory Coast. -- Wavelength (talk) 14:49, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that the usage has evolved from merely washing laundry in public, to hanging it on the line where everyone can see it. In addition to the time-honored "hush, the neighbors will hear", the modern equivalent is people talking on cellphones in a public place, about all manner of private things, seemingly unaware (or uncaring) that they can be heard. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:48, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are a lot of implications. Dirty laundry is produced by all of us. Thus the emphasis is not in producing something but in the fact of it being proper to keep some things from public view. Bus stop (talk) 17:53, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:53, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2 queries

What is "ekhm" and "red spots":[1]?

Why does he need to get "some serifs!"? What is a "server-fu" and its etymology:[2]?174.3.98.20 (talk) 21:16, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All of the comments you are referring to are "jocular", and not Serious, like most of the Reference Desk. Sorry about that. TomorrowTime's "ekhm" appears to be the same as "ahem", used to mean "The following word is what they call themselves, but I disbelieve their use of the term". The "red spots" reference means "they would become extremely angry" or "they would be incredulous at this". The "serifs" reference is obscure; I believe the poster was referring to the fact that Apple Computer generally called their computer the "Apple ][" rather than the "Apple II"; the "]" and "[" characters have serifs, whereas "II" does not have serifs. Adding "-fu" to anything is a Silicon Valley or geek term deriving from "kung-fu". I have most often seen it on these pages in the term "Google-fu", meaning "my ability to use Google"; "my Google-fu is weak today" means "I have been unable to find what I am seeking using the Google search engine. I humbly admit that my skills at using Google are poor today." The "-fu" suffix is supposed to give an aura of mysticism. Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:38, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The 'serif' comment was in response to my (true but probably unhelpful) remark that I read the question as about 'lle' (with two lower-case letters 'l'), which I happen to know is the Welsh for 'place', and only realised when I saw other replies that the word had two upper-case letters 'i'. In a serif font these would be distinct, but in a sans-serif font they are easily ~~distinguished~~confused.

As Tuttle says, I was using 'server-fu' to mean "obscure and clever knowledge of what you can do with a [web] server", because I had just realised that the redirects to cy.wiktionary.org don't happen in Wikipedia when you send them, but in the web server Wikipedia uses when it receives them. --ColinFine (talk) 23:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have stricken my claim about the Apple ][. I have out-nerded you, ColinFine. Comet Tuttle (talk) 00:18, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Colin, you mean that lower-case L (l) and upper-case i (I) are not easily distinguished in a sans-serif font. (Except for Verdana, the font I read Wikipedia in, which is generally sans-serif but makes an exception for upper-case i, giving it serifs exactly in order to avoid confusion like yours.) +An gr 17:23, 19 March 2010 (UTC) True. Corrected above ColinFine (talk) 18:54, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some sans-serif fonts put a little curl at the bottom of the lower-case L; Trebuchet MS for example. Alansplodge (talk) 18:16, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The "-fu" suffix ultimately comes from the newspaper columns of Joe Bob Briggs... AnonMoos (talk) 01:59, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In JBB's usage X fu means use of X as a weapon, or otherwise wacky violence involving X. In the example questioned, X fu means skill with X, not the same thing. Both of course are extensions of kung fu, which can mean either a discipline or a violent application of that discipline. I suspect independent parallel developments. —Tamfang (talk) 22:03, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

JBB was kind of the first culturally prominent example of systematically "liberating" fu to become an independent suffix. I strongly suspect influence from his writings (though possibly somewhat indirect). AnonMoos (talk) 10:19, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

的，地， and 得

Hello all. I'm leanring Chinese, and there's a test next week. I'm having trouble with the difference between 的，地， and 得. The meanings 地=earth and 得=earn I have no problem, but when they're used to join parts of a sentence I do have a problem. Could someone explain how I know when to use each? I especially need help when the following phrase is a compound construction, not a single noun, verb, etc. Thanks! --Richard —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.229.192.107 (talk) 23:12, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

的 is used as a possessive or in a relative clause: 我的车，我的衣服， etc.
得 is used to add an adverb (description of the action), when that adverb is the main idea of the sentence: 我说中文说得很好 "I speak Chinese well!". It is used after the verb.
地 is used to add an adverb when that adverb is just an extra detail, i.e. when you could remove it and wouldn't change the meaning of the sentence: 他很快地跑到市场 "he quickly ran to the store" (compare to 他跑得快 "he runs quickly"). It is used before the verb.

rʨanaɢ (talk) 23:48, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Rjanag. To be simplistic, the constructions are:

Noun/adjective - 的 - Noun

Verb - 得 - adverb/(adjective)

Adverb/(adjective) - 地 - verb --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 01:18, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I remember this from awhile ago: http://homepage.mac.com/moogoonghwa/tsongkit/notes/dik_dei_dak.html (unfortunately it's in traditional character and given in Cantonese pronunciation.) I'm surprise to see I'm one of the contributors there, I've almost forgotten about I helped out on this. :) --Kvasir (talk) 04:52, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here's one with all 3 in it: 他洗的衣服很快地變得乾乾淨淨。

Of course there are idiomatic expressions like this: 他說的是。(what) he says (is) right. -> He is right. --Kvasir (talk) 05:17, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(That, however, is still a relative clause: literally "[what he says] is".) rʨanaɢ (talk) 05:28, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My favorite short-hand is that 的 is like 's . DOR (HK) (talk) 07:18, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

的 can also mean "of", for example 加拉碧海的皇帝 = Emperor of the Caribbean. Also, 他 (he) is not the same as 地 (earth[-]), as in "earthquake" (地震). ~A H 1^(TCU) 02:35, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"of" and "'s" mean more or less the same thing anyway. As for your second comment, I don't recall anyone saying 他 and 地 were the same? rʨanaɢ (talk) 03:40, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is the reason why Chinese speakers have trouble with the A of B construction when first learning to speaking English. They are tempted to say B's A as in "Caribbean's Emperor". --Kvasir (talk) 04:03, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... I don't know, the users above seem to have made something easy seem complicated. To put it simple:

地 is used after an adjective to make it an adverb
得 is used when you're constructing a sentence like 'It's so X, it's Y.'
Use 的 otherwise.

To be honest, in primary school our teachers kept making us do exercises about these three and I found them a bit annoying :P　 Kayau Voting IS evil 14:30, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's because in Cantonese they are all pronunced differently. In spoken Cantonese, we even use different words for 地 and 的. So there's hardly any confusion there. In Mandarin it's all de. --Kvasir (talk) 22:16, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's true. But, I tell you what, in primary school our teachers taught us using PTH but I still find it super easy. FYI I typed this using the pinyin input method so I kept having to choose between the 3 :) Kayau Voting IS evil 02:32, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

March 19

Did or do

In the line "Did you know", why there is not 'do'? --Extra999 (Contact ^me) 10:35, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Did you know?" is the interrogative form of "You knew", while "Do you know?" is the interrogative form of "You know". One is past, the other present. AnonMoos (talk) 10:48, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting question and I think there is more going on here than given by the above (correct) response. For example, the question "Did you know that Obama is the President?" is not asking whether someone knew that at some unspecified time in the past. It's asking whether they're aware of it in the present. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 11:11, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what the prescriptive approach is here but I think do is more confrontational/interrogative than did. It implies that the person "should" (or is expected to) know the answer while the asker doesn't. For example Do you know what time it is? or even (with an accusatory tone) Do you know how long I've been waiting?. But did on the other hand makes it less personal - Did you know that Obama is the president?. It implies that even if the person doesn't know the answer, the asker does and will inform them anyway. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 12:31, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But you wouldn't say "Did you know what time it is?". Alansplodge (talk) 13:06, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, because the current time is always present tense. In contrast "Did you know such-and-such fact or event" implies "Did you know before I just now told you?" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:16, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What you could say is, "Did you know this meeting is supposed to end right now, at the top of the hour (or whatever)?" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:17, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it is in the past tense because the question itself provides the addressee with the very information under discussion; therefore the addressee's (possible) ignorance of this information is already a thing of the past. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.171.56.13 (talk) 13:09, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When you ask someone, "did you know Obama is the president," you're telling that person the fact (Obama is president) as you ask the question, so the person being asked knows the fact by the end of the question. The question therefore makes sense because it's saying "did you know [X fact] prior to my telling it to you right now?" "Did you know what time it is" doesn't work because the time is not provided. "Did you know it's 13:32 UTC?" would, because it is. Some jerk on the Internet (talk) 13:33, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's the point 194.* already made. I'm sure you're (both) right. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 13:39, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies; I missed 194*'s edit in my initial read. Exactly what I was trying to say, but much more succintly. Some jerk on the Internet (talk) 15:23, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. One of Johnny Carson's frequently used comments, when he would learn a new fact from a guest, was "I did not know that" implying "until now." That's a logical followup to the type of question raised here. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:07, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The linguistic term for the addition of do in questions like "Did you know?", negatives like "I did not know", and emphatics like "I did (too) know" is do-support, an article I have been waiting for years for someone to write who has access to better sources than I do. Some Celtic languages like Welsh and Manx make use of do-support too, even more than English does. +An gr 18:02, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everybody. --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 02:50, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But Angr, this isn't a question about do-support. It's a question about the use of the past tense 'did' in a particular case. My take on the answer is a little different from other suggestions above, though it overlaps with Zain Ebrahim's and Some jerk's. For me "Do you know ... " is asking for information, "Did you know ... " is imparting information (though it may be asking a subsidiary question about the respondent's state of knowledge. That question may be purely rhetorical, however). Some Jerk's argument may well explain the origin of the phrase, but is not enough to explain the usage. --ColinFine (talk) 10:50, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's interesting to compare it with the DYK sections in other Wikipedias. For those languages were I can tell the tense, fr: and sk: use the past tense like en:, but pl:, cs: and ru: use the present tense instead. Fr: actually asks Le saviez-vous?, "Did you know this?" without the ellipsis and then gives a simple list of statements of facts. Pl: seems more creative as it doesn't only ask "do you know that..." type of questions, but also "do you know how, what, who, when, where, etc.?" (examples: Do you know which book is considered the first SF novel? Do you know why Rotterdam was bombed in 1940? Do you know whether the Chenille plant stings?), hooks that don't immediately give away the answer and possibly are better at attracting potential readers to respective articles. — Kpalion^(talk) 16:14, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'Recruitment'

Can the word 'recruitment' be used to refer to a single instance of recruitment? In other words, is it correct to say "there were X recruitments in 2009", or should it be "there were X cases of recruitment in 2009"? Of course I could say "X people were recruited in 2009" instead, but assume I want to use a noun. Many thanks, --Richardrj ^talk ^email 10:44, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Recruits"? —Bkell (talk) 13:42, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That would refer to the people recruited, not the instances of recruitment. --Anonymous, 18:37 UTC, March 19, 2010.

Recruitment can be used as a kind of collective achievement (for lack of a better term), which might solve what you're trying to do -- e.g.: "Recruitment for the last 12 months exceeded 1,200 new hires." (By the way, "hire" can be used as an individual noun, including plural.)--达伟 (talk) 15:37, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To my ears, referring to people as "recruitments" or "hires" sounds a bit de-humanising, as though you're reducing them to units of production. Alansplodge (talk) 18:19, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The recruitments would be the instances of recruiting; the hires are the people. The latter is a pretty common usage in North America, especially in the phrase "new hire" to mean a new employee. --Anonymous, 18:37 UTC, March 19, 2010.

Now on the original question: If by "can it be used" you mean you want to find it addressed in a dictionary, well, I haven't. They generally give definitions like "the act or process of recruiting", which is ambiguous as to whether it refers to the business of setting up a recruiting office (as it clearly can) or the business of recruiting one person through that office.

However, it certainly is being used to refer to the recruiting of one individual, as can be seen by Google-searching for the phrases "100..1900 recruitments" or "2100..20000 recruitments". I skipped numbers between 1900 and 2100 to avoid hits where the number before "recruitments" was a year. And it seems a natural usage to me. I'd say go with it. --Anonymous, 18:37 UTC, March 19, 2010.

As an American English speaker I would vote not to use "recruitments" in the plural. In the US, "hires" is certainly common. Can you give us an example of a complete sentence (or even better, a short passage or brief paragraph) in which you plan to use the word--we might be able to give better advice that way.--达伟 (talk) 19:50, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Starters" is the usual term in my (well-known global) company for recruits/hires/new staff. "There were X starts in 2009" (using "starts" as the corresponding noun) sounds ambiguous though...) Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 14:01, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Storensay

What is Storensay What is it's etymology?174.3.98.20 (talk) 14:36, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As this page makes clear, it's the name of an imaginary island in Scotland, confected for the book. The ay part is derived from the Old Norse for "island", as found in the names of a number of the Orkneys. The name may have been suggested by the name of the actual island Stronsay, or the Storens part may have been suggested by the place name Støren, or it may just have been chosen as vaguely Scandinavian-sounding. Deor (talk) 14:58, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kiss And Tell

What does this mean and what is it's etymology?174.3.98.20 (talk) 17:03, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the wiktionary entry:[3] Wiktionary is a good starting place for any etymology questions. To literally "kiss and tell" would be to have a private lovemaking encounter and than talk about it to others. Metaphorically or generally, it means betraying a confidence. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:42, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kiss...10. To kiss and tell.1616: Jonson, Forest, V., 'Tis no sin love's fruit to steal, But the sweet theft to reveal. 1675: Cotton, Burl. upon Burlesque, 200 (1765), And if he needs must kiss and tell, I'll kick him headlong into Hell. 1695: Congreve, Love for Love, II. x., Oh fie, Miss, you must not kiss and tell. 1757: Murphy, Upholsterer, II., Why must they kiss and tell? 1816: by ron, in Letters and Journals, iii. 339 (Prothero), The old reproach against their admirers of "Kiss and tell." 1910: Shaw, Misalliance, 88 (1914), As a gentleman, I do not kiss and tell. Apperson, G. L. (1929). English Proverbs and Proverbial Phrases; A historical dictionary.

—eric 02:58, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right. One might argue that when Bill Clinton dissembled about his dalliance with Monica Lewinsky, he was just doing the gentlemanly thing and protecting the young woman's honor. PhGustaf (talk) 03:34, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. Just like when Rufus T. Firefly (Groucho) said about Mrs. Teasdale (Margaret Dumont), "I'm defending her honor, which is probably more than she ever did." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:58, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Words "than" and "then"

On this page, I have seen the word "than" misspelled as "then", and I have seen the word "then" misspelled as "than". Does this reflect a current vowel shift, possibly influenced by a popular entertainer? I have always understood them to rhyme with "man" and "men" respectively, when they are pronounced correctly. -- Wavelength (talk) 18:15, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Around here, both words are pronounced the same, and in writing if you misuse then for than or vv, people would still understand what is meant, so spelling would not appear to be very critical here. Googlemeister (talk) 18:29, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where is that, Googlemeister ? They do rhyme with "men" and "man", here in Detroit, although some lazy speakers might say "then" for both. StuRat (talk) 18:43, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does "than" rhyme with "man" when spoken in a sentence, or only in isolation? This is what I was getting to with my aside below...in my dialect at least, I always pronounce it with a schwa. I certainly don't say "I'm bigger thæn you". rʨanaɢ (talk) 18:57, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a vowel shift, it's just that some people don't know the difference between the two words. Compare to lie and lay, sit and set, etc. I too pronounce "then" and "than" the same way, but ~~pronounce~~spell them differently; in American English, the spelling doesn't reflect the pronunciation. For what it's worth, though, any differences in pronunciation that do come up, at least in my dialect, are attributable more to syntactic distribution than to the underlying sound. "Than" tends to show up in a non-stressed position in the sentence, and therefore is pronounced with a schwa; "then" takes stress more often, so can be pronounced with the full ɛ.) rʨanaɢ (talk) 18:31, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And the Award for the Most Enigmatic Statement of the Year goes to .... I too pronounce "then" and "than" the same way, but pronounce them differently. :) -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 18:37, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Thanks for catching that. Fixed. rʨanaɢ (talk) 18:38, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rjanag is right, it's not a vowel shift as such, it's just not knowing or caring that they're different. People also have that problem with "they're", "there" and "their", which are true homophones; and near-homophones like "then" and "than", or "affect" and "effect". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:52, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rjanang is also right that stress has something to do with it. Even if they're pronounced the same or very similarly, it doesn't reflect a broader "man-men" merger. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 00:23, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"They're" isn't a homophone of "there" or "their" in my (approximately RP) accent. Likewise with "you're" and "your", though I know people who confuse their spellings even though they pronounce them differently. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 19:07, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all for your answers. -- Wavelength (talk) 05:50, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Latin or Italian names??

Are these names Latin or Italian and can someone tell me what they equal in English.

De Romulo primo Romanorum rege = Romulus
De Numa Pompilio secundo Romanorum rege = Numa Pompilius
De Tullo Hostilio tertio Romanorum rege = Tullus Hostilius
De Anco Martio quarto Romanorum rege = Ancus Marcius
De Iunio Bruto primo Romanorum consule = Lucius Junius Brutus
De Horatio Cocle = Horatius Cocles
De Lucio Quintio Cincinnato = Cincinnatus
De Marco Furio Camillo = Marcus Furius Camillus
De Tito Manlio Torquato = Titus Manlius Torquatus (consul 347 BC)
De Marco Valerio Corvo = Marcus Valerius Corvus
De Publio Decio = Publius Decius Mus (consul 340 BC)
De Lucio Papirio Cursore = Lucius Papirius Cursor
De Marco Curio Dentato = Manius Curius Dentatus
De Fabritio Lucinio = Gaius Fabricius Luscinus
De Alexandro Macedone = Alexander the Great
De Pyrro Epyrotarum rege = Pyrrhus of Epirus
De Hanibale Carthaginensium duce = Hannibal
De Quinto Fabio Maximo Cuntatore = Fabius Maximus
De Marco Claudio Marcello = Marcus Claudius Marcellus
De Claudio Nerone et Livio Salinatore = Nero and Marcus Livius Salinator
De Publio Cornelio Scipione Africano Maiore = Scipio Africanus
De Marco Portio Catone Censorio = Cato the Elder

Thanks.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 19:01, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These are not names, but they contain Latin names. They seem to be titles. Each begins with the word De, which in these phrases probably means "about". For example, the first one means "About Romulus, the first king of the Romans." Marco polo (talk) 19:20, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

O.K., these then seem to be De Viris Illustribus (Petrarch) of the table for Liber I.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 19:31, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like Scipio Aemilianus ~~and Gaius Claudius Nero~~ (of the article table) is NOT on this above list, correct?--Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:23, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did I get the correct English name above (links) for each of these Latin names in the above Latin list?--Doug Coldwell ^talk 21:32, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks right to me. Marco polo (talk) 22:52, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 23:05, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Curru

What is the Curry incident?174.3.98.20 (talk) 23:24, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you do a Google News Archive Search on "Adam Curry" and Wikipedia, you'll see reports from December 2005 to the effect that he was caught editing the facts in the article Podcasting in a self-serving way. I'm actually surprised that this isn't considered notable enough to be briefly mentioned in the article about him. --Anonymous, 00:15 UTC, March 20/10.

Prussiate

What is the etymology?174.3.98.20 (talk) 23:58, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In what context? If you're talking about cyanide salts try the article on Prussic acid (the connection being similar to sulphate salts and sulphuric acid), and especially the link from there to Prussian blue. If you're talking about something else please could you state your question more completely? Tonywalton ^Talk 01:04, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did you mean prussiate? ~A H 1^(TCU) 02:30, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

March 20

Decimal numbers in French

Hi. Taking the number "0,74" in French as an example, is it spoken as "zéro point soixante-quatorze", "zéro virgule soixante-quatorze", "zéro point sept quatre", or "zéro virgule sept quatre"? Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 02:28, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you visit http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/Vi/Virgule.html, you can find a different example under the heading "Commercial Usage: Virgule". By that pattern, your example would be "zéro virgule soixante-quatorze". -- Wavelength (talk) 03:45, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would go with your 4th case: "zéro virgule sept quatre". --Kvasir (talk) 03:59, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At http://untreaty.un.org/unts/60001_120000/14/23/00027133.pdf, "6,54" is expressed as "six virgule cinquante-quatre", but "2,73" is expressed as "deux virgule sept trois". -- Wavelength (talk) 04:09, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your second option is used at http://www.professeurphifix.net/numer/decimaux1_solution.htm. -- Wavelength (talk) 04:14, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If the decimal number is accompanied by a unit, like "1,74 m" or "1,74 euros", the unit name is spoken in place of the decimal point: "un mètre soixante-quatorze" or "un euro soixante-quatorze". I presume this is analogous to the "one foot six" that users of feet and inches might say: 1.74 m can be thought of as 1 m 74 cm. I don't know what happens in French when there are more than two decimal places, though. --Anonymous, 04:22 UTC, March 20/10.

What if the number is 0,74°C? Do I say the "degrés Celcius" before the '74' or after it? ~A H 1^(TCU) 14:53, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Les risques de la baignades [sic] (The risks of bathing). The text beside the rodent uses the expression "au-dessus de vingt degrés Celsius" ("above 20 degrees Celsius"). -- Wavelength (talk) 15:46, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[The page contains errors, which should be corrected as follows: "se rafraichissent" --> "se rafraîchissent"; "Beaucoup de personne" --> "Beaucoup de personnes"; "D'autres lieu" --> "D'autres lieux"; "peut représentée" --> "peut représenter"; "peut être du" --> "peut être dû"; "On ne doitt pas" --> "On ne doit pas"; "près des lieu" --> "près des lieux"; "des zones surveillée" --> "des zones surveillées"; "lorsquon" --> 'lorsqu'on"; "certaine personne" --> "certaines personnes"; "s'être baigné" --> "s'être baignées"; "si vous avez" --> "Si vous avez"; recoivent" --> "reçoivent"; "Les algues présentent" --> "Les algues présentes"; "se apparait" --> "apparaît"; "des difficulté" --> "des difficultés"; "les Algues Bleues" --> "Les algues bleues"; "sent mauvais" --> "sent mauvaise"; "des irritations cutanée" --> "des irritations cutanées"; "alques" --> "algues"; "Il n'y a pa que" --> "Il n'y a pas seulement"; "D'autres bactérie" --> "D'autres bactéries"; "symptomes" --> "symptômes" (two instances). -- Wavelength (talk) 16:32, 20 March 2010 (UTC)][reply]

[I am correcting my error ("persones" --> "personnes"). -- Wavelength (talk) 16:59, 20 March 2010 (UTC)][reply]

"[la couche…] qui sent mauvais" is correct (not "sent mauvaise") — AldoSyrt (talk) 17:54, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Learning French - How To Pronounce simple Formulas in French. -- Wavelength (talk) 00:36, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I never say "trois virgule un quatre" for "3,14" except if the situation is analogous to one where I would spell a word.

I say: "3,1" --> "trois virgule un", "3,14" --> "trois virgule quatorze", "3,141" --> "3 virgule cent quarante et un", "3,141 592 7" --> "trois virgule cent quarante et un cinq cents quatre-vingt-douze sept". — AldoSyrt (talk) 17:54, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Hello, who is it?"

Is that a rare example of the acceptable use of "it" as a gender-neutral pronoun applied to humans? 213.122.22.138 (talk) 15:27, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

no, not at all. Viz: "it's the cable people". it here is like there, "who's there"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.153.237.214 (talk) 16:57, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's not that simple. The answer to "who is it?" would be "It is me" (not "there is me"), so I would say that "who is it?" is not the same as "who is there?". In my opinion the "it" might indeed be a gender neutral pronoun. Kreachure (talk) 18:00, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or should that be it is me? ;) --Tango (talk) 18:21, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in that exact context, "who are you?" would make more sense (but is not idiomatic). I agree that it is being used as a gender neutral pronoun, but I don't know why we use the 3rd person. --Tango (talk) 18:21, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe because "It am I" would sound really stupid, even if ultra-pedantically "correct". -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 03:58, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not "It is I"? Bielle (talk) 04:06, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(said with faux annoyance) You really must get your levels of pedanticism sorted out, Bielle. "It is I" is pedantically correct. "It am I" is, as I said, ultra-pedantically correct, to the point that it's slipped over the edge and has fallen into the Abyss of Error. :) -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 04:18, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"What is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:45, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"It is I, Leclerc... " Monsieur_Roger_LeClerc --TammyMoet (talk) 09:02, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jack, I think the reason for that is that the subject and 'predicate nominative' in a sentence like this are not equally important. The focus is on the "it", that is, the person on the other end of the line. That is to say, when you say "it's me" or "it's just the landlord", you're not making a comment about 'me' or about the landlord, you're making a comment about the person on the other end of the line, and pointing out that that person happens to be one and the same as 'me', the landlord, etc. That's why the verb agrees with "it" rather than "I". This is the same as when you say, for example, "the president of the company is me!" (Not "the president of the company am me". Notice that, in this case, you can say "The president of a company am I", in a slightly singsong way, but the meaning is quite different.) rʨanaɢ (talk) 21:49, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, that was a common form in Victorian times, G&S etc ("A jolly merry gay rover am I, la la la"). But interestingly, the form "The president of the company is I" is prescriptively correct but rarely heard, while the form "The president of the company is me" is prescriptively wrong but far more widely found and thus descriptively correct. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 07:13, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"It" is not the same as "there", no, but I don't think it is a pronoun. It cannot pluralise: you can say "Who are they?" but it corresponds to "Who is that?" not "Who is it?". Similarly "They are our neighbours" is pragmatically different from "It's our neighbours" --ColinFine (talk) 10:37, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that the 'it' in "Who is it?" was a prop it/dummy it/empty it (name varies based on who you ask) like the "it" in "Is it raining?" -- 174.21.243.94 (talk) 21:37, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, it's not.

It pretty much refers to "the person on the other end of the line/the other side of the door". rʨanaɢ (talk) 21:44, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do you pronounce Zdzislaw Beksinski?

Please only answer if you really know. Vranak (talk) 16:41, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would say [ˈzdʑiswaf bɛkˈɕiɲski]. If you can't read the IPA, here's an explanation. The first syllable consists of a "z"-sound and then "JISS". Then there's the syllable "waff", where the "a" resembles the vowel sound in the English word car, but is much shorter and without an "r"-sound after it. The family name begins with "beck", which would rhyme with "deck". Then there's "SHIN", where the "n"-sound is pronounced like the "ny"-combination in the word canyon or like the letter ñ in Spanish. And there's a syllable that sounds like the English word ski, but the vowel sound is a bit shorter. So here's an approximate representation: ZJISS-waff beck-SHIÑ-ski (the syllables in caps are stressed). I hope that helps. Please note that I'm not a native speaker of Polish. --Магьосник (talk) 19:28, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As a native Polish speaker, I confirm that both the IPA and the approximation provided by Магьосник are correct. — Kpalion^(talk) 19:32, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried sounding out Beksinski and I am arriving at either b'SHIN-ski or b'SIN-ski. Are they both wrong? Vranak (talk) 19:36, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - as Магьосник said, it's "beck" rather than "b'". -- the Great Gavini 20:20, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well I simply can't pronounce his name properly. I am calling him Jee-slav B'shin-ski from now on. It seems is name is as impenetrable as his works! Vranak (talk) 21:02, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can lead a horse to water... Alansplodge (talk) 23:13, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you're remembering Zbigniew Brzezinski and somehow conflating them, Vranak. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 03:55, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added the IPA to the Zdzisław Beksiński article. — Kpalion^(talk) 20:45, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dash versus semi-colon

Hello! I know people have asked before about using semi-colons in writing, so I understand it's not an easy subject to tackle. What I want to ask, though, is about the dash (excuse me, the em dash) as compared with the semi-colon. Is there a practical difference between the two in writing? Evidently, I refer only to the cases when there is a single of either in a sentence. A prime example of this would be the following sentence:

"And so my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country."

My question would be, could the dash in a sentence such as this be replaced by a semi-colon? (For the record, you can easily find this quote with either.) Thanks in advance, Kreachure (talk) 17:54, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a semi-colon could be used there. A dash is often used when transcribing (or scripting) spoken language to indicate a pause, whatever the meaning of it. A semi-colon is actually part of English grammar. A dash can be used pretty much anywhere (and, in formal writing, probably shouldn't be used much at all) since there aren't many rules for it. A semi-colon can only be used in specific situations - the key thing is that the text on each side must be a valid sentence. (My fingers typed the dash in that sentence with no real thought from me! I use dashes a lot... That dash should really be a semi-colon, but I'll be honest and leave it in.) --Tango (talk) 18:29, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd actually prefer to see a colon in this instance. Colons (in UK English anyway) tend to be used to separate two clauses giving the opposite idea, which is happening here.--TammyMoet (talk) 20:39, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A colon would be quite wrong in that sentence. The colon signals to the reader that the part of the sentence after the colon proves and explains the part before. That is not the case here at all. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 20:48, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I don't know where TammyMoet gets the idea that colons are used to join opposing clauses: "but" is used for that. (That is what colons are for, although I wouldn't have used one there normally. I'm just making a point!) --Tango (talk) 09:12, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, wherever TammyMoet got the idea, I've got it too. I'm very surprised not to find any guides that mention this, as I'm sure it's one of the uses I saw described years ago. I would expect to see a colon in "Man proposes: God disposes". Actually, in the Biblical verse which may be the source of that proverb, the KJV has "A man's heart deviseth his way: but the Lord directeth his steps." Proverbs 16:9, which is arguably an instance of just what TammyMoet and I are suggesting. And Tango's rejoinder is hardly to the point: "but" may be used for an opposition, but particularly in rhetoric may be omitted, as in the quotation which started this thread. --ColinFine (talk) 11:11, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The colon article actually mentions both its use for explication and apposition, although it barely mentions its use in lists as that article is actually using it. The two quotes above are appositions which are just seem to be in the form of oppositions but how how opposite these parts actually are is debatable. As to the use of em dashes—thought I should try to be ontopic—, they are supposed to be for parenthetical statements, so to use only one is akin to leaving off a curved bracket at the end of a line (you really should should not do that. ERROR: Unmatched '(' But parenthetical statements are often affixed at the end of lines so the dropping of the final dash is more common than its retention. I would say that "ask what you can do for your country" is far from parenthetical and is actually key to the entire speech—indeed the entire Kennedy administration—and therefore the dash is inappropriate (although the Oxford Guide to English Usage (1993) says a single dash can stand for a colon informally). I just wish to add the usual disclaimer: I use punctuation in the most haphazard ways myself and I don't really mind how other people use theirs, also I believe usage is ever in flux and perhaps more so now than ever so don't let it worry you too much As there'll always be some fuss-budget to tell you that you're wrong). meltBanana 19:11, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Crazy transliterations at Contraction_(grammar)#Chinese

I was looking at the transliterations at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraction_(grammar)#Chinese and I find it hard to believe, for example, "不之" (buzhi), as I, who speak some Chinese, would pronounce it, would be transliterated as "pǝ tǝ", even in ancient Chinese. Can someone who knows more about wiki and Chinese than me take a look at that? THanks -- Nick

Classical Chinese was pronounced a lot differently than modern Chinese languages, especially Mandarin, are. I wouldn't be surprised for the transliterations to look quite foreign, seeing as how Classical Chinese is essentially a different language. rʨanaɢ (talk) 20:50, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The transcriptions are Sergei Starostin's reconstructions. IMHO, these aren't the most widely accepted reconstructions, but they're not appalling. The reconstructed transcriptions show the basis of the contractions, which aren't as obvious from their modern pronunciations (in other dialects as well as Mandarin). Steewi (talk) 01:59, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps there should be a note in the main text explaining this. --ColinFine (talk) 11:14, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are already footnotes, I think those should be sufficient already. rʨanaɢ (talk) 12:44, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

March 21

&c.

[4]

What does "FUR" and "&c." mean?174.3.113.245 (talk) 06:07, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

&c. means et cetera or etc. FUR seams to mean "Fair Use Rationale." --Kjoonlee 06:28, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's what FUR typically means in wikipedia, anyway. Regarding ampersand-with-c, the ampersand is a stylized "et". "&c." used to be used in print a lot, not so much anymore, but it's perfectly legitimate, as it's really just a stylistic way of writing "etc." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:02, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify: "et" is Latin for "and". --Tango (talk) 09:14, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. The ampersand by itself is used to mean "and". The word "ampersand" is a slurring of "and, per se [by itself], and." "&" can often be seen in old samplers as kind of like a 27th letter of the alphabet: "A through Z, and, by itself, 'and'". That's the concept. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:34, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about the period?174.3.113.245 (talk) 00:51, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The period's there because it's an abbreviation. Just like "etc." has a period. rʨanaɢ (talk) 00:54, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By the way et cetera has its own article. Rckrone (talk) 19:23, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resources for listening to Chinese

I'd quite like to find some free online resource for listening to Chinese to try to get my ear trained to hear the tones. This would probably be Mandarin, but since I'm just trying to hear the tones I'm not that fussed. A YouTube video with accompanying subtitles or text, drawing attention to the different tones, would be super.

The reason I'm asking here, rather than just searching, is because I've seen some awful videos supposedly teaching, for example, how to speak with a British accent. I can see and hear how people could be led astray by those, and I can hear how awful the advice and accent are in these cases. I have no way of telling if a person is speaking bad Chinese, or getting the tones wrong. So I'm hoping to be guided towards something that isn't laughable :) 86.177.124.127 (talk) 16:55, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Take this one as a first step. HOOTmag (talk) 17:10, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can try renting some Chinese films. See Cinema of China for some recommendations. rʨanaɢ (talk) 20:50, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This may be unorthodox but my recommendation would be to visit the Youtube channels of both of the following individuals: http://www.youtube.com/user/laoshu505000 and http://www.youtube.com/user/Glossika. They both speak Chinese well, particularly Glossika. Neither is a native speaker, but their videos, especially Glossika's would be a very good introduction. Glossika speaks multiple Chinese languages/dialects/topolects. Make sure you choose Mandarin. You might also leave a message on their comment boards and ask their recommendations for good videos to watch, and also you can look in their "Favorites" to see if they have any introductory videos linked. If any Ref Desk regulars find linking to real people's channels inappropriate, you can delete this advice.--152.3.129.38 (talk) 20:58, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that's the best resource just for getting used to the sound of Chinese. I just watched a couple of Glossika's videos and, no offense to him intended, but most of it seems to be him spending a lot of time explaining stuff. Perhaps a good resource for learning something about the structure of Chinese, but I had to dig through many minutes worth of video before I managed to hear any Chinese at all. If someone's just trying to see what tones sound like, I think temporary immersion (i.e., watching a movie or a skit or something) will be better. rʨanaɢ (talk) 21:05, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Standard Mandarin#External links has a link (11th of 12) to Learn to Speak Chinese like a Chinese.–Wavelength (talk) 22:22, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not very helpful either. The first section has tones presented in isolation, and the second is read so slowly it's not going to help anyone who's trying to "get their ears trained" to hear what they sound like in real speech. rʨanaɢ (talk) 22:29, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One solution would be to search for TV broadcasts in Mandarin...look up any of the stations in w:Category:Chinese-language_television and find them on Youtube (e.g. CCTV in Mainland; TTV, CTV in Taiwan; ATV, RTV, TVB, Phoenix Television in Hong Kong)--达伟 (talk) 23:08, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I found [5] very useful. Steewi (talk) 00:45, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No need to go to Youtube - CCTV, being a public broadcaster, makes most of its programs available online for free.

Phoenix TV (ifeng.com) also has a range of online content. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:26, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Movies may be both educational and fun. 124.214.131.55 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:25, 22 March 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Movies might help one to learn slang, but they are unreliable for teaching formal language. -- Wavelength (talk) 16:23, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That depends on the movie. And the OP never said he is trying to learn "formal language"; he just said he wants to get a feel for the tones. rʨanaɢ (talk) 13:57, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following might provide some useful listening material: http://www.youtube.com/user/ChineseLearn; http://www.youtube.com/user/PeggyTeachesChinese; http://www.youtube.com/user/chineseclass101; http://www.youtube.com/user/immediatechinese; http://www.youtube.com/user/ilovechinesecn; http://www.youtube.com/user/chinesebits --达伟 (talk) 12:49, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What's the word for...

I'm thinking of a particular phenomenon, where someone describes some position with a word or phrase, meaning it derisively, but then the defenders of that position adopt the phrase, and use it to describe themselves. I'm hoping there's some snappy word or phrase to describe this, and I know if anyone can find it for me, the bright folks at the reference desk can. Thanks. 24.98.14.73 (talk) 20:45, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption. Turning the tables on. Taking it to heart. Defiance. Bus stop (talk) 20:47, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See reappropriation. ---Sluzzelin talk 20:50, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Sluzzelin. "reappropriation" is the term used to describe what's happened to words like nigger and gay, and what some people have tried with chink. "reclaiming" is also used. rʨanaɢ (talk) 20:52, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Mocking" comes to mind. "Rallying cry" could be related too. That also happened with "Yankee". Even today it's used as an anti-American slur, while Americans sing patriotic songs about Yankees on July 4th. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:59, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Although it's still a slur if it's said by someone from Boston ;) rʨanaɢ (talk) 22:02, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or in the south, for that matter. But it depends on the context. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:18, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An interesting example (which, yes, I know you didn't actually ask for) is the term Big Bang which an early opponent of that theory, the Steady State theory proponent Fred Hoyle, was generally believed to have coined as a slightly derisory epithet (though he later denied this intention) but which came to be adopted. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 22:36, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, everyone. I was looking for something a bit snazzier, perhaps, but appropriation will serve my purpose well enough. Llamabr (talk) 23:18, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These answers don't come cheaply. We'll be sending you an appropriation bill. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:25, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Co-opting. Vranak (talk) 14:52, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reclaimed word is an article similar to reappropriation. One early example is suffragette. From our article:

Suffragette is a term originally coined by the Daily Mail newspaper as a derogatory label for the more militant members of the late-19th and early-20th century movement for women's suffrage in the United Kingdom, in particular members of the Women's Social and Political Union (WSPU). However, after former and then active members of the movement began to reclaim the word, the term became a label without negative connotations. It derives from the word "suffrage", meaning the right to vote.

BrainyBabe (talk) 18:35, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Although the term "Suffragist" was the term preferred by the group, yes? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

March 22

Name suffixes

I've been wondering about these suffixes some historically-important people have. For example: Richard the Lionheart, Charles the Wise, Boleslaw the Pious, Owen the Bald, Vlad the Impaler, and Robert the Strong.

1) Is there a name for these kinds of suffixes?
2) Are they always posthumous?
3) Are these a thing of the past or are they still used? --✚Cōdell 03:05, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They aren't exactly suffixes, they're descriptive phrases, especially from a time when surnames were not particularly in use. Probably not so common in modern times, but a few examples that come to mind are Billy the Kid, Stan "the Man" Musial, and Murray the K. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:12, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Epithet has some of the answers. Deor (talk) 03:35, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As does George Dubya meltBanana 03:37, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Epithet seems to be what I am looking for. --✚Cōdell 03:49, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strictly speaking, yes. The article only gives a quick pooh-pooh to the colloquial meaning of "epithet", which refers to an insulting name, but even if it's been "discredited", it's still used that way. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:13, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Epithet is apparently distinctive from Sobriquet, in that the latter is often used in place of a regular name, rather than as a suffix. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:17, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

... and Alexander the Great. Michael Hardy (talk) 05:07, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about cognomen? Isn't it used in the sense as well? — Kpalion^(talk) 11:39, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - see List of monarchs by nickname Alansplodge (talk) 20:23, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My favourite is Charles VI of France who is Charles le Fou, sometimes (but sadly not in Wikipedia) translated as "Charles the Silly". Alansplodge (talk) 14:13, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget Philip II of Spain, otherwise known as "Philip the Sap"[6] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:19, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or Æthelred the Unready. StuRat (talk) 14:44, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or Achmed the Mad a.k.a. Achmed the 'I Just Get These Headaches'. Gandalf61 (talk) 16:07, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If I remember correctly, C. L. Sulzberger's A Long Row of Candles referred to Ahmed Bey Zogu, who proclaimed himself Zog of the Albanians, as "King Zog the Last." --- OtherDave (talk) 19:20, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, and there's Ragnar Hairybreeks, sometimes translated as "Hairy Trousers" (is it "Hairy Pants" in the US ?) and two other Viking chaps who might have been his sons, Ivar the Boneless and Sigurd Snake-in-the-Eye. Alansplodge (talk) 20:03, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And a rather obvious one I had overlooked, "Popeye the Sailor". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:20, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I always found Eric the Lisp and Lame of Sweden amusing. It's unfortunate that Wikipedia names him with his ordinal, since he is almost only ever referred to with the epithet in Swedish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coffeeshivers (talk • contribs) 22:40, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vowels in English, French, and German

It's easy to think of a vowel that's heard in French and German but not in English: the sound in the French word rue. It is similarly easy to think of a vowel heard in English and German, but not in French: the "short i" sound in English bit. In trying to think of one heard in English and French but not in German, I am handicapped by not knowing French. I have heard "Madames et Monsieurs" pronounced in a way that made the second syllable of the first word sound to me like the vowel in English cat, and similarly the vowel in French dingue. But I wonder if maybe that fails to qualify because it's an allophonic variant of something? Michael Hardy (talk) 05:07, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know German, but English has a pretty large vowel system; 11 or so monopthongs (depending on the dialect), not to mention dipthongs. Of course, French has nasal vowels, which English doesn't. But French certainly doesn't have æ (the vowel in American English "cat"; what you hear in "dingue" is ɛ̃). French also lacks English ʌ ("but"), ʊ ("book"), and ɪ ("bit"). rʨanaɢ (talk) 05:18, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is [ w ] in Wikipedia:IPA for English and in Wikipedia:IPA for French, but not in Wikipedia:IPA for German.

-- Wavelength (talk) 05:57, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Québécois has ɪ. -- the Great Gavini 06:28, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But w is a consonant, not a vowel, according to the article you linked, Wavelength. (w in the "English word cwm is a completely different sound.) 75.41.110.200 (talk) 13:32, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How about [ɑ] - it is certainly phonemic in many English dialects, also phonemic in some French dialects according to French phonology, and not usually given as a phoneme of German - although I remember reading an argument somewhere that German /a/ is really [ɑ]. Lfh (talk) 13:36, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, maybe there are no fully uncontroversial or unqualified examples of the sort I asked about.

The sound in English book is of course another example of one shared by English and German but not found in French. Michael Hardy (talk) 06:05, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, "Madames et Monsieurs" is incorrect. The plural is Mesdames et Messieurs. 07:47, 23 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.185.253.158 (talk)

Sacred Seventeen

Does it have a figurative meaning? If yes, where does it come from? Thanks.--Omidinist (talk) 06:24, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since nobody has yet answered I assume none of us have come across this phrase. Some context would be helpful. Where have you encountered it? Googling only throws up some random suggestions.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:18, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

US banks that must be protected from bankrupcy?[7] Grateful Dead shows?[8] Haiku syllables?[9]

I suspect that "sacred <number>" is a fairly common expression in some circles used to refer to a group of especially privileged people or organisations. "Sacred 3" and "sacred 4" are found in paganism and other branches of mysticism. There's the "Sacred 5 of China"[10], and various results for 6 and 7[11]. "Sacred Sixteen" brings up a few Google hits too. And perhaps an earlier sighting, the "Sacred Twenty" first female US navy nurses[12] (see United States Navy Nurse Corps). Sorry, but I've no idea what the original of this was, but it seems it can be used to refer to almost anything. --Normansmithy (talk) 16:05, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the context shows what Normansmithy suggests should be true. The context is 'the sacred seventeen who were the East India Company's Board of Governors'. Thanks so much. --Omidinist (talk) 17:39, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kataab Ashbal Al Islam Al Salafi

The phrase "Kataab Ashbal Al Islam Al Salafi" has been translated in the news as "Islamic Salafist Boy Scout Battalions", but that seems suspect. Islam and Salafi are fairly obvious, but Boy Scout is usually kashafa or Scout in Arabic. Can anyone reliably translate kataab and ashbal? ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 12:22, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Caveat: I know next to nothing about the language, but probably "reliable" dictionaries I've checked seem to yield "cub" or "lion cub" for the latter word (apparently from a root that has something to do with "caring"). The former looks like words meaning "battalion" (from that textbook K-T-B root). So "ashbal" is the scouts part, and "kataab" is the battalion part (I think). -- the Great Gavini 17:28, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The original translation is correct. Kataab (کتائب) is battalions; and al-shbal or ash-shbal (الشبل) is what the Great Gavini suggests. --Omidinist (talk) 18:11, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Now that I know what to look for, Ashbal Saddam (Saddam's Lion Cubs) is noted at Fedayeen Saddam. I'm guessing this is a new group coopting the older name. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 18:19, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My dictionary defines shibl (plural ashbāl اشبال) as meaning "lion cub; a capable young man, brave youth, young athlete". In the current Iraqi context, I would imagine that the word "Salafi" was chosen to announce to everyone loud and clear that they're against Shi'ites and against so-called "secularists" (across-community political movements). AnonMoos (talk) 21:24, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks— we knew it wasn't Boy Scout, but the translation has certainly propagated in the media. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 22:43, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The word shibl (Plural ashbāl) in Arabic does not only mean a lion cub, but also refers to a junior member of the Boy Scouts. 78.101.128.50 (talk) 21:33, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, as noted in Boy Scouts of Bahrain. I think we can rule out any Scouting connection to this group. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 22:06, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Latin to English translation

Please provide a Latin to English translation: "Omnibus ad quos hae Literae pervenerint, Salutem in Domino sempiternam." Thank you. (64.252.6.148 (talk) 14:05, 22 March 2010 (UTC))[reply]

See Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2009 July 1#To all to whom these presents shall come, greeting! for another discussion. (In correctly spelled Latin, the word litterae [or Litterae] has a double t. -- Wavelength (talk) 14:36, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probably just another Wash U. alum who can't read his diploma. :-) Deor (talk) 14:56, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All joking aside, I suppose I should supply the requested translation: "To all to whom these letters [i.e., this message] will come, everlasting greeting in the Lord." Deor (talk) 15:12, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re "Salutem in Domino sempiternam": "may the Lord ever preserve and keep you" from [13] -- a "conventional greeting" [14] 198.161.238.18 (talk) 18:59, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Caecilius est in horto. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.103.172.9 (talk) 15:25, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology of "broke"

How did the term "broke" come about to describe someone who is poor or someone with no money? Is there any connection to the everyday word "broken"? Thank you for any insight. (64.252.65.146 (talk) 00:53, 23 March 2010 (UTC))[reply]

One of the many definitions of "break" is "to ruin financially". The adjective "broke" is a Middle English "alternate" of "broken". In modern usage, you would say you're "broke" if you have no money, and "broken" if you feel severely depressed about it (or about any other tragedy). Curiously, "bust" or "busted" is a colloquialism for "burst" and is often used as a synonym for "broke" or "broken". As in "the balloon busted". Or the company "went bust"; or "I'm Busted", the Johnny Cash song about a farmer with no money and no good prospect of getting any. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:13, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=bankrupt. -- Wavelength (talk) 02:52, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

March 23

Forcefully, forcibly

What is the difference between them please? 92.24.91.12 (talk) 00:15, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Forcefully" means "with force". "He spoke forcefully" means he spoke with great force or strength.

"Forcibly" means "by force". "The residents were forcibly evacuated" means that the residents were removed by force. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 00:18, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Forcibly" means "against your will". "Forcefully" does not. StuRat (talk) 17:33, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The act of taking forcibly could require acting forcefully, e.g. by knocking a door down. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:47, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lies

What is lies-on-the-ground?174.3.113.245 (talk) 05:09, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There was a message posted at my talk page. There's no any hidden meaning it the words you are asking about. They are written in plain English, and they means what they mean and noyhing else. The word "ies" mean Lie and "on-the-ground" means Wikipedia. I hope I responded you question to your satisfaction.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:12, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- IP, Please discard the comments made Baseball_Bugs. I assure you there was no PA meant against any person.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:55, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I can believe you or I can believe my own eyes. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:49, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Methinks that's a veiled personal attack against another user. Let's leave it at that. [Or not, apparently.] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:16, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Lies-on-the-ground" was Mbz1's personal attack against the user Factsontheground. Forgetting that part, though, it's a play on words, taking "lies" to be the opposite of "facts". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:45, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See also wikt:facts on the ground and facts on the ground. Quite a clever choice of username, I think. --Avenue (talk) 22:44, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that find, Avenue! I am afraid now we've got IP completely confused :)--Mbz1 (talk) 00:04, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He's learned a lot so far, I should think. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:49, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As a matter of fact, so did I thanks to Avenue.--Mbz1 (talk) 02:52, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Every day is an opportunity for a new learning experience. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:58, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bengali, What does "Da" after a name signify

What does "Da" after a name signify. Is it the same as "Ji" in Hindi? -- Q Chris (talk) 14:35, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The same kind of thing, apparently. The second line in the lead section of our article Ghanada says: "The suffix "da" behind the name "Ghana" commonly means "respected elder brother" in Bengali". However, there is no citation to confirm this. Ka renjc 20:21, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Holla?

What does it mean when characters say it in Hamlet, for instance. I've seen it in other plays of the era, too. My professor jokingly related it to the modern hola, used in hip-hop culture : ] ?EVAUNIT^{神になった人間} 18:24, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your professor is unwittingly on the right track. The question was asked at answers.yahoo.com a couple of years ago, which I found by googling [hamlet holla]: [15] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:50, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As to the origin of "Holla" itself, my Webster's says "unknown". It would be reasonable to guess that it could be a colloquialism for "Halt", which comes from the German for "Hold", but Noah must not have thought so. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:03, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is from the Online Etymological Dictionary. Pallida Mors 19:53, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. We should use that site as a first line of defense anytime an etymology question arises. I also note that "holler" is a related word. One amusing thing is the 1926 argument that "Hello" is impolite and that you should answer with your name. That's standard procedure in a business setting nowadays, but on your home phone you're not likely to give a caller your name unless you recognize the phone number on your caller-ID. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:03, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic/asian(?) symbol on back of $10 bill USD

What is it? http://reisio.com/tdbw-symbol.png ¦ Reisio (talk) 23:25, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It would be kind of you to indicate what you mean in some format more convenient than a 3.5 megabyte download. AnonMoos (talk) 23:29, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://reisio.com/tdbw-symbol-cropt.png ¦ Reisio (talk) 23:35, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like s.o. named "Nasir" put his stamp on the bill. kwami (talk) 23:48, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Nasir (name). -- Wavelength (talk) 00:01, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note that it says "nṣir" (نصـيـر), not "naṣr" (ناصر). Gabbe (talk) 00:23, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Arabic dictionary, the words naṣīr / نصـيـر and nāṣir / ناصر have pretty much the same basic meaning of "helper", protector", though each has some specific connotations. AnonMoos (talk) 00:39, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to Behind the Name: Arabic Masculine Names and this page, they are variants of each other.

-- Wavelength (talk) 00:41, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all :) ...now, why would someone have a fancy stamp for their name that they use on banknotes? I can imagine a fair number of reasons, but am curious if there are any well known practices this falls into. Would a financial institution do this? ¦ Reisio (talk) 03:11, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought at first this was some variant on "Where's George?", but I'm not seeing it. More research is needed. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:30, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

March 24

footnotes and punctuation

Should a footnote be placed before or after punctuation? I thought it made more sense to put it before, but it looks better from an esthetic standpoint to place it after. Which one is right?flagitious 04:20, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

For Wikipedia. In general I'd say wherever it is the least distracting without becoming contextually confusing. ¦ Reisio (talk) 04:37, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Footnotes also covers the subject in depth, and provides cross-links to other WP:MOS details. The illustrations, and usage I've seen here, indicate after punctuation. But a general guideline would be as Reisio said above. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:40, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! flagitious 05:00, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Is sometime redundant here?

In the article Marine Midland Building we cn find the statement The bomb ... was placed ... sometime during the evening. In my view, sometime during can be replaced with in. The main argument for this is that in both formulations the event is tied to the same time interval. But the word sometime seems to signal a perceived lack of preciseness. So, one version says This is the time period that the event occurred in. The other says This is the time the period that the event occured in, I think you expect me to constrain the event to a shorter time period, but I am not able to do that. My view is that in an encyclopedia, such as Wikipedia, we always try to provide as good information as we can and we should assume that the reader expects this. Thus the sometime is redundant in this context. Am I right in this?

Actually I think "sometime" should be in the sentence, indicating that the exact time is not known and may never be known. I think the addition of "sometime" to the sentence has added some precision and some value to the sentence. Personally, I am uncomfortable with the word "sometime" as an adverb in the past tense, for some reason, and I would always say "at some point" in order to avoid it; but that's just me. Comet Tuttle (talk) 05:54, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, "sometime" signaling "a perceived lack of preciseness" is precisely the point. And if the source says "sometime during the evening", that's how we should say it. It reminds me of a minor issue that arose recently where someone died "of natural causes". They wanted to simply say "died" because "of natural causes" was "too vague". But it's what the source had. It's not up to us to "improve upon" the sources with our own spin. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:01, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vowel trapezium and the Bark scale

According to Ladefoged, (for example, in this book on page 130), humans don't hear vowels in a linear scale, and a vowel trapezium such as the one at right reflects vowel space such that "...frequencies are spaced in accordance with the Bark scale, a measure of auditory similarity, so that the distance between any two vowels reflects how far apart they sound." This is different from a linear formant chart like the one on the left. The latter is easy to do (for example, in microsoft excel), but I'm not sure how to convert to the trapezium. Our article Bark scale doesn't help me out in this regard. Anyone know the trick to this? — Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 05:58, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're better off using something more like the Mel scale these days than the Bark scale. The article has a link to conversion. Alternatively, converting the axes to a log scale is a reasonable substitute for most purposes (if it worked in my thesis, then you can use it too :P). Steewi (talk) 07:29, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

economically and financially active

Ann is laid off, is eligible for government aid (e.g. Jobseeker's Allowance), and stays on the dole for a few months, watching soaps. She goes onto government statistics as economically inactive. Bob is laid off, is ineligible for the same aid (perhaps he has savings), and volunteers for charitable activities, helping kids learn to read, comforting the dying at a hospice, coppicing trees on a nature reserve. Does he count as economically inactive? He is contributing, but not earning money. I see that both are financially active, in that they continue to spend money, on groceries if not aon plasma screen TVs. BrainyBabe (talk) 07:17, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'm right in saying that "economically active" includes those in receipt of JSA, but excludes those not receiving any form of employment-related benefit. So Bob is economically inactive but Ann isn't. The definition is not universally accepted, and the EU seems to have different definitions here, counting only people who are active in the production of goods or services. I couldn't find on a Google search a definition which included people on benefits, however, a Google search for "define economically active" does include them! --TammyMoet (talk) 08:49, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're right, Tammy. Economically active is defined in the EU (and also in the ILO?) as working (whether employed or self-employed) or looking for work. Ann, as a long-term, discouraged job-seeker, should be receiving some targeted help to get her back into the labour market. Bob might be well advised to take some part-time paid work alongside his volunteering so that his national insurance contributions are kept up. Itsmejudith (talk) 13:09, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delight, opposite of de-light

A newcomer to English could easily analyse "delight" and come to the view that it means 'de-light', i.e. a removal of light, a darkening. But that's sort of the opposite of what happens to a person's face when they're delighted - it "lights up".

I'm after some other examples of this sort of thing: where the apparent meaning is the opposite of the real meaning. Any ideas? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 11:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Proscribe"? Since "pro" as a generic preposition means "in favour of", but to "proscribe" is to forbid. And indeed, to "forbid" something does not mean to be "for" it. Lfh (talk) 11:16, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if this fits your request, but I was always delighted by the word "predate": to pray upon and to pre-date! --151.51.62.111 (talk) 11:18, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about "until" and "unto"? They look like they should mean the opposite of "till" and "to", but instead they're synonyms of them. And "unless" doesn't mean "more"! +An gr 11:25, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All good. I just thought of "denude". That should mean to clothe, but it doesn't. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 11:30, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All words that start with in-, since it usually means un- but sometimes means en-. Hence inflammable doesn't mean fireproof and incrustation doesn't mean crust-removal... and inconsistent doesn't mean super-uniform. And the im- words, too: to be immortal doesn't mean to be on the verge of death, to be imprisoned doesn't mean to be set free. 213.122.38.148 (talk) 11:37, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, depredate is the same as predate. Or maybe denominative, deprivation, disgruntled. Usually, an antibody is good for your health. --151.51.62.111 (talk) 12:34, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 262: / Line 262: @@
 I'm after some other examples of this sort of thing: where the apparent meaning is the opposite of the real meaning.  Any ideas?  --  [[User:JackofOz|<font face="Papyrus">Jack of Oz</font>]] [[User talk:JackofOz#top|<font face="Papyrus">'' ... speak! ... ''</font>]] 11:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 :"Proscribe"?  Since "pro" as a generic preposition means "in favour of", but to "proscribe" is to forbid.  And indeed, to "forbid" something does not mean to be "for" it. [[User:Lfh|Lfh]] ([[User talk:Lfh|talk]]) 11:16, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 ::I don't know if this fits your request, but I was always delighted by the word "predate": to pray upon and to pre-date! --[[Special:Contributions/151.51.62.111|151.51.62.111]] ([[User talk:151.51.62.111|talk]]) 11:18, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
-::::<small>That's actually to "prey upon".  Saying "pray upon" would [[altar]] the meaning. :-) [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] ([[User talk:StuRat|talk]]) 14:09, 24 March 2010 (UTC) </small>
 :::What about "until" and "unto"? They look like they should mean the opposite of "till" and "to", but instead they're synonyms of them. And "unless" doesn't mean "more"! +[[User:Angr|'''An''']][[User talk:Angr|''gr'']] 11:25, 24 March 2010 (UTC)