Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language

Reference Desk

Science Mathematics Computing/IT Humanities Language Entertainment Miscellaneous Archives
How to ask a question Search first. It's quicker, because you can find the answer in our online encyclopedia instead of waiting for a volunteer to respond. Search Wikipedia using the searchbox. A web search could help too. Common questions about Wikipedia itself, such as how to cite Wikipedia and who owns Wikipedia, are answered in Wikipedia:FAQ.
Sign your question. Type ~~~~ at its end. Be specific. Explain your question in detail if necessary, addressing exactly what you'd like answered. For information that changes from country to country (or from state to state), such as legal, fiscal or institutional matters, please specify the jurisdiction you're interested in. Include both a title and a question. The title (top box) should specify the topic of your question. The complete details should be in the bottom box. Do your own homework. If you need help with a specific part or concept of your homework, feel free to ask, but please don't post entire homework questions and expect us to give you the answers. Be patient. Questions are answered by other users, and a user who can answer may not be reading the page immediately. A complete answer to your question may be developed over a period of up to seven days.	Do not include your e-mail address. Questions aren't normally answered by e-mail. Be aware that the content on Wikipedia is extensively copied to many websites; making your e-mail address public here may make it very public throughout the Internet. Edit your question for more discussion. Click the [edit] link on right side of its header line. Please do not start multiple sections about the same topic. Archived questions If you cannot find your question on the reference desks, please see the Archives. Unanswered questions If you find that your question has been archived before being answered, you may copy your question from the Archives into a new section on the reference desk. Do not request medical or legal advice. Ask a doctor or lawyer instead.
After reading the above, you may ask a new question by clicking here. Your question will be added at the bottom of the page.
How to answer a question Be thorough. Please provide as much of the answer as you are able to. Be concise, not terse. Please write in a clear and easily understood manner. Keep your answer within the scope of the question as stated.	Link to articles which may have further information relevant to the question. Be polite to users, especially ones new to Wikipedia. A little fun is fine, but don't be rude. The reference desk is not a soapbox. Please avoid debating about politics, religion, or other sensitive issues.

Pronunciation of Kegon

What is the proper pronunciation of the name of the Japanese Buddhist sect Kegon? Thanks, anon.

華厳 is pronounced like [kegõɴ], or in some dialects, [keŋõɴ]. Note that the terminal [ɴ] causes the preceding [o] vowel to be nasalised. See Japanese phonology for details. Gdr 22:17:26, 2005-09-08 (UTC)

About Cockney?

I would like to ask wheter cockney is a dialect or a slang?

It is a dialect which has its own slang. The two terms are not exclusive. Garrett Albright 05:48, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

As I understand it, it's a dialect (which incorporates slang - Cockney rhyming slang) and an accent, too. splintax ^(talk) 15:42, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

treibhireas bunaiteachd

This is the seal of Chivas Regal scotch whisky. What does it mean? Regards Donald Sinclair [email protected]

We've actually already answered that question on this page! It's Scottish Gaelic for "Honesty Constancy". Treibhireas is pronounced /ˈtʃʰrʲevərʲəs/ and bunaiteachd /ˈpunətʃʰəxk/ with an unaspirated P (and yes, that final /k/ for the letter D is correct!). --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 05:57, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

short German to English translation needeed

I´m looking for a kind person to translate the few German sentences in article Anuschka Tischer. The sentences are in italic and are titles of Tischer´s works. Cheers. Doidimais Brasil 04:13, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

Done (though I'm not at all sure this person is notable enough for an encyclopedia article). --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 06:06, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Is this Farsi correct?

http://tinypic.com/dlhk6u.png

The above sentences was found in a New Zealand "How to vote" leaflet. Is it supposed to have so many "a" in it? Thanks. 60.234.144.135 05:00, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

• I haven't written or read anything in Farsi for ten years, but I recognize some of the words, and it looks correct to me.

--anonym

I don't know any Farsi at all, but I'm pretty sure there aren't supposed to be Latin letters like "a" stuck in the middle of words otherwise written in the Arabic alphabet. Try posting the question at Talk:Persian language as well as here. --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 06:04, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

"Cædmon" etymology from proto-Welsh

If anyone has a clue about this, see Talk:Cædmon regarding an undefined ("private use area") Unicode character. Also asking at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. -- Curps 15:23, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

The transcription of Welsh from any period will only require those characters properly defined by Unicode. There will be absolutely no need to use this character (). The supplemenatary private use area does not have any universally assigned characters, so its use is not appropriate on Wikipedia. Gareth Hughes 17:07, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

I've taken care of it. --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 19:25, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

question for the "slang" reference expert

Hi, just read you excellent synopsis on HIP HOP MUSIC and it did answer many questions we had about slang and origns BUT we still have one questions: What does rgt mean, as in, "My favorite rgt right now are the Cornerstone mix CDs."

I don't know, but I'll make some guesses:

• There is a company called "RGT Music" ( http://www.rgtmusic.com/ ). Perhaps their works were what was referred to.
• Some people use "RGT" to mean "Reggae Torrent".
• It could be a typo, which should have said, "... favorite right now ....".

By the way, there is nothing wrong with asking your question here, but you might get better answers at Talk:Slang used in Hip-Hop Music. Also, please sign and date your posts on discussion pages (like this one). Uses four tildes in a row: "~~~~". — Nowhither 17:21, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Professional Designation Order

What is the correct order for professional designations, political designations and academic designations? Which one comes first? Thanks, Jana

Hallo, Jana! Have a look at style (manner of address). It doesn't answer your question, but might be the place to start researching through the many Wikipedia articles which are linked from that article. The only combination I know about is Rev Dr or Revd Dr — the Rev(d) always goes first. Gareth Hughes 18:03, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

I happen to know that its always 'General Sir not Sir General. I think Sir generally comes last, e.g. His Excellency Sir... and The Hon. Sir. Thryduulf 22:01, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Also: Admiral Lord Nelson not Lord Admiral Nelson. ("Lord Admiral" might get confused with Lord High Admiral, which is an office rather than a title, and in the UK is now vested in the Queen.) Another example: Rt. Hon. General Sir George Hewitt, KCB. Loganberry (Talk) 23:27, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks - what I am really looking for is someone who would be say, a lawyer who is also a member of government. What would the proper order be - John Smith, MLA Q.C. or John Smith, Q.C. MLA? Jana

"Zion in Hebrew"

Hello!

I can't seem to find my son's name "Zion", written in hebrew and arabic on the internet. Can anyone please show me or tell me where I can find it? Thanks for any help you can give me.

Sincerely, Zion's mommy

In Hebrew, that would be ציון, pronounced /tsiˈjon/ in Standard Israeli Hebrew. For Arabic, I'm not sure (since it's a Hebrew word, not an Arabic one), but my best guess is صيون --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 21:08, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

In Arabic, it's صهيون (S.uhyûn), following the Aramaic. - Mustafaa 13:21, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Anglified Japanese to pictogams

In the article Spartakus and the Sun Beneath the Sea I added mention of the Japanese title of the show, wich is aparently "Acirckadia Monogatari" (acording to a comment posted on the Internet Movie Database entry on the show), what I was wondering is if anyone could "translate" that anglified (or whatever the term is) title into proper Japanese pictograms? --Sherool 00:55, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

• "Acirckadia" is not possible in the Japanese syllabary. Possibly "Acirokadia" or "Acirakadia"? -- Jmabel | Talk 04:40, September 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm assuming "Acirckadia" was a mistake for "Âkadia", i.e. "Âkadia". The circumflex is often used to denote long vowels in romanization of Japanese; Âkadia is just the "japanization" of Arkadia (the place mentioned in the show). As a foreign word, it wouldn't be written in kanji ("pictograms") in Japanese, it would be written in the katakana syllabary, thus: アーカディア. --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 06:54, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
    • According to this IMDB entry, it should be "Arkadia". So "アルカディア物語" would correspond to that. However, googling seems to show that the full title is おにぎり・アルカディア物語 (ONIGIRI ARCADIA MONOGATARI) but unfortunately I can't read Japanese, so you'd have to confirm that. -- Curps 07:36, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

"おにぎり?” Onigiri? Garrett Albright 15:45, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, yeah rice ball? Seems an odd word to put in the title... --Sherool 16:05, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Japanese is not written in pictograms, but in a combination of logograms and letters. See Japanese writing system for details. Gdr 11:38:56, 2005-09-10 (UTC)

Thanks for all the info :) --Sherool 15:52, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Capitalization of terms based on names

If a word is based on a person's name (eg Marxist, Darwinian, Satanic), does the new word get capitalized? Andjam 16:18, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Normally, yes. This is how any dictionary will show them. But there are a few words that become so familiar that people forget they are based on a name. Biro and hoover (at least the UK) spring to mind. Shantavira 17:08, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Names in the International System of Units are an exception; thus newtons after Isaac Newton, pascals after Blaise Pascal, etc. Gdr 18:39:34, 2005-09-10 (UTC)

And then there are cases like "mesmerize" and "pasteurize" which are not capitalized. User:Zoe|^(talk) 04:57, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

Hot as floogins

I have heard the expression all my life of "hot as floogins." It is used widely in Louisville, Kentucky, the birthplace of my mother. My father used it also and he was raised in Richmond, Virginia. I have spent quite some time searching for the origin, as well as the correct spelling, of the word. Can you help me in this? 70.240.228.25 19:17, 10 September 2005 (UTC) K. Mize, Houston, Texas

No I can't really help, but I did some searching, and I found a number of uses of "cold as floogins". I would guess that "floogins" is a highly nonstandard word, and so the spelling is whatever you say it is. — Nowhither 06:21, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

latin translation

hello

i wonder if anyone can help me find the latin or idealy ancient latin translation for the name tracey?

The name Tracey is a spelling variant of Tracy, which originated as a French last name derived from either of the towns Tracy-Bocage or Tracy-sur-Mer. These towns apparently get their name from the Latin name Thracius meaning "Thracian", so I suppose you could use Thracius as the Latin equivalent of the boy's name Tracy and Thracia as the Latin equivalent of the girl's name Trac(e)y/Traci(e) etc. --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 01:07, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

"It was built"

How do you say "The house was built by A as a gift to B" in English, when the intended meaning is that A didn't actually put the bricks and mortar in place himself, but instead paid a bunch of people to do so? — JIP | Talk 06:11, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

In my experience, sentences like that are usually written with the intent of communicating the meaning you mentioned above. But they are a little ambigious, I suppose. If you want to be absolutely clear, you could say, "A had the house built as a gift for B". — Nowhither 06:19, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

I'd say "A had a house built for B" or just "A built a house for B". The second one sounds more natural, assuming of course that A isn't a builder or something where the chances are quite high that he really did put the bricks and mortar, as you put it, in place for B himself.

Similarly when I say "My company mandates formal dress code Monday to Thursday", would it by any chance mean I own the company, while what I intend to say is that I work for the company. Jay 11:59, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Don't think so. Possessives are odd. Consider: my dog, my foot, my bus, my mother, my company, my house. In each of these, "my" can have a slightly different meaning. — Nowhither 12:17, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

"I have a body like Cindy Crawford's. It's in the trunk of my car." =) — JIP | Talk 14:12, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

:-D — Nowhither 17:45, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Pronunciation of the word "garage" (British)

What is the correct British pronunciation of the word "garage"? I'm not sure if it's "ga - rahj" or "ga - ridge" or what it is. Thank you,

--213.18.248.18 11:14, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Try this link [1] you will get the play back as well : JA

(At least) two pronunciations are common in England: [gæˈɹɑːʒ] and [ˈgæɹidʒ], which have reduced forms [gəˈɹɑːʒ] and [ˈgæɹədʒ] respectively. The former is typically used by speakers of Received Pronunciation, the latter by speakers with other accents. Gdr 11:42:55, 2005-09-12 (UTC)

Yes, though what isn't very common is what we Brits tend to see as the American practice of stressing the second syllable; I've only heard that rarely in the UK. Loganberry (Talk) 11:49, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

(In the UK) the second syllable is stressed when the word is used as a verb, instead of the more usual noun. There are quite a lot of words that employ this device in speech, e.g. contrast, refuse, discount, subject, record... Shantavira 13:53, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

"To garage a car" is pretty unusual in my experience; we'd say "to put the car in the garage" or some such. And on the few occasions I have heard it used, it's still been with the same stresses as the noun; maybe it's just too rarely used as a verb here to have a standard pronunciation. Loganberry (Talk) 15:05, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

I recall reading a novel from the 1930s, in which the differing pronunciations of this word in particular were a significant indication of social class. I can't say if this was accurate for the 1930s, much less for the UK today, but other things I have heard and read make it seem reasonable. BTW the novel wss Busman's Honeymoon by Sayers. DES ^(talk) 14:19, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

In my experience the second syllable is always stressed when pronouncing garage with a "French" /ʒ/ (noun or verb). However, I'd suggest that one also finds [ˈgæɹɑːdʒ] (i.e. stress on the first syllable, "long" a and ending in the sound normally ascribed to j) and that this is more common nowadays than [gæˈɹɑːʒ] among RP speakers. The use of the "French" pronunciation would, IMO, be old-fashioned or determinedly U. I'd suggest also that [ˈgæɹidʒ] (shouldn't that be [ˈgæɹɪdʒ]?) is probably becoming increasingly more widespread. In my experience, the stress does not shift to the second syllable when garage is used as a verb (whether pronounced [ˈgæɹɑːdʒ] or [ˈgæɹɪdʒ]), so this is clearly not cut and dried. (I think people tend to say park/put the car in the garage to avoid having to decide on the pronunciation of garage as a verb!) Valiantis 17:48, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

In the U.S., FWIW, the French pronunciation is pretty much universal (give or take that ɑːdʒ vs. ɑːʒ: the latter is not in everyone's phonemic vocabulary), and the verb is pretty universally understood, but not commonly used. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:07, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Which language has a wider vocabulary?

I'd like to know which of these two languages has a wider vocabulary (bigger number of words): Spanish or English.

Thank you.

Clara Roca [email protected]

In terms of root words, English is almost certainly larger, because for so many things we have both a Latin root (often via old French) and a Germanic root (usually via Anglo-Saxon). Spanish, of course, has somewhat more Latin roots than we have, and probably a thousand or so Arabic roots (more if you count place names), and both languages probably have a few thousand miscellaneous borrowings, but I'm pretty sure English would end up with 30-30% more roots than Spanish. But I'm no linguist: could someone more expert weigh in? -- Jmabel | Talk 07:14, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Well, I'm a linguist, but I must say I've never understood how to go about answering this sort of question, or the usefulness of asking it. Do we count every word that has ever appeared in print in either language? Do we include those insanely long chemical names? Or do we only include words that ordinary people use in everday conversation? And what about derived forms? Do we count house and houses as one word or two? Do we count sing, sang, sung, sings, and singing as five different words? If we do, Spanish probably has more words since its verbs are more highly inflected than English (cantar, canto, cantas, canta, cantamos, cantáis, cantan, cantaba, canté, cantaré, cantando, cantado, etc. etc. etc.) And even if we say inflectional endings like those don't make separate words, what about derivational affixes? You can stick -ness onto almost any adjective in English to make a noun; are redness and shyness to be counted separately from red and shy? And so on. My professional opinion is the question is unanswerable. --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 07:40, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Angr makes some very interesting points there, without even mentioning the varying ability of a language to create compounds. Perhaps the question is really about the variety of possible idioms, nuances, and synonyms in a language. I once heard that a thesaurus had not been found necessary in any language other than English, but I don't know whether that's true. Shantavira 08:15, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

I don't think it is. I have Duden's Die sinn- und sachverwandten Wörter, which is essentially a German thesaurus. --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 08:52, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

English, and the other Germanic languages, certainly have the potential to have the largest list of roots. This is due to a phenomenon called phonesthemia due to which one-syllable roots are motivated by family resemblance, e.g. glitter, gloss, glow, glimmer, etc. Scholars have estimated that about 50% of all one syllable English words are motivated in this way. This gives the English language the potential of having a very large inventory of roots. AFAIK, Romance languages largely lack this phenomenon, although, it is not completely absent.--Wiglaf 16:57, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

"English doesn't borrow words from other languages; it stalks them down dark alleys, knocks them over the head, and rifles their pockets for loose adjectives." -- unknown

[d]/[D]/[z] and [l]/[r]

Does there exist a language which distinguishes all three of "d", "dh" and "z" from each other, yet does not distinguish "l" and "r"? Or do all languages which distinguish "d", "dh", and "z" also distinguish "l" and "r"?

What's the "dh" in your transcription? Can you give the IPA symbol? — mark ✎ 12:57, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

depending on what you mean by 'dh', Proto-Indo-Iranian may have been such a language. dab (ᛏ) 13:05, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Given the [D] in the heading I assumed "dh" was meant to stand for ð in this question. --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 13:49, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I assumed the same as Angr, having seen renderings of Icelandic place names such as "Siglufjörður" as "Siglufjodhur". Also since "t" is the unvoiced alveolar plosive and "d" the voiced alveolar plosive, "th" being the unvoiced dental fricative would lead to "dh" being the voiced dental fricative, ð in IPA. The question that the OP seems to be asking is (and I use IPA here)

Are there any languages that differentiate

• d - voiced alveolar plosive
• ð - voiced dental fricative
• z - voiced alveolar fricative

but do not differentiate

• l - alveolar lateral approximant
• ɹ - alveolar approximant

I presume any language that fulfils the last two (l and ɹ are not differentiated) would use the Alveolar lateral flap.. I'm not a linguist though. splintax ^(talk) 16:07, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

The influence of the USA on New Zealand English

Please answer the following: 1) To what extent has the USA influenced the owrds Kiwis use, through music? 2) What patterns can be seen in the United States influence on New Zealanders speaking English? 3) What words, terms and phrases are directly derived from the USA, that we use in NZ English? 4) To what extent does the USA influence the particular way that subcultures in NZ speak?

Thanks.

Your time is most appreciated.

Luke

You may want to start by reading NZ English and US English. splintax ^(talk) 16:10, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

languages in cigarettes

I found some new foreign language cigarette packet warning signs to add to my collection, 2 of which I wasn't sure of the language: The 2 are:

1. Smēķēšana nogalina/ Smēķēšana var izraisīt lēnu un mokošu nāvi (I'm guessing at Czech/Slovak/Slovenian, not quite Polish)

2. Το κάπνισμα κατά τη διάρκεια τηξ εχκυμοσύνηξ.../Tütün içmek öldürür (both on the same packet)(Educated guess says Greek and Turkish , so I'm guessing they came from somewhere like Cyprus). Cheers to Angr in advance, who seems to be answering every question on here at present :) --Wonderfool t(c) 11:15, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

I would agree with Cyprus for (2), but am inclined to suggest Latvian or Lithuanian for (1) — the hooked k represents palatalisation in these langages. Gareth Hughes 11:47, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

(1) must be Latvian because Lithuanian doesn't use the letters ē, ķ, ī, and ā. You're both right about (2). --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 12:05, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Just enter "Smēķēšana var izraisīt lēnu un mokošu nāvi" into Google search and note all the .lv websites. That should answer your question. -- Curps 22:10, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Speaking of which, I found an inconsitency in Finnish cigarette warning signs. As you know, Finland is bilingual, with 94% of people speaking Finnish and 6% speaking Swedish. Well, Finnish cigarette warning signs say:

• Älä pakota lapsia hengittämään savua in Finnish: "Don't force children to inhale smoke"
• Låt inte barn andas rök in Swedish: "Don't let children inhale smoke"

This means Swedish-speaking people are stricter than Finnish-speaking people. Finnish-speaking children can inhale smoke out of their own free will. Swedish-speaking children can't. =) — JIP | Talk 19:38, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Its like this time I was travelling Eastern Europe with a friend, and we had 6 foreign languages (en, es, fr, de, ru, it) between us. The signs in the train were in 10 or so languages, and of the languages we understood, the translations were all slightly different: Some said "Don't stick your head out of the window", other "It is completely forbidden to stick your head out the window", "We don't recommend sticking your head out of the window", "Keep head inside the carriage always". Like that the sign-writers took into account the culture of all the countries, and figured out how best to instruct them to not do something. I think it was Russian that had the strictest warning! --Wonderfool t(c) 10:59, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Another UK-US English difference

A quick question

"I wrote my mother" - US English

"I wrote to my mother" - UK english

The US version looks wrong in the UK, as we still keep the preposition (in much the same way that both the UK and US would say "I spoke to my mother" rather than "I spoke my mother"). But does the UK version look wrong to a US eye, and if so how? Shimgray 11:49, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

I think both are equally acceptable in US English. Do you not use prepositionless indirect objects at all in British English? Can you say "I wrote my mother a letter"? Can you say "I gave John a book"? --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 12:14, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

We would say "I wrote my mother a letter", but not, say, "I wrote my mother that I needed more money". Wrote seems to be a case where we keep the preposition in circumstances Americans don't, though I'm not completely sure why. Shimgray 12:19, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

The OED entry for write (section 23b) says of using it with a prepositionless indirect object "rare until c. 1770; freq. from c. 1790; often regarded as commercial or colloquial in U.K.; standard in U.S." Some examples, many of which are from British authors, are:

• 1611 - Ussher - Together with ... Mr. Cook's Books you wrote me of
• 1672 - anon. - Being in hast, have not tyme to wright any body else
• 1763 - E. Carter - I writ you from Amsterdam
• 1795 - Nelson - As I write you, ... I shall not write Mrs. Nelson this day
• 1892 - G. & W. Grossmith - I wrote Merton to that effect
• 1928 - D. L. Sayers - He wrote me yesterday and said he'd accidentally left a bag in the cloakroom.

So it looks like an innovation that got started shortly before U.S. independence and then caught in the U.S. much more widely than in the U.K. --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 12:46, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

I frquently hear (in the US) and would easily understand both forms, but would consider "I wrote to my mother" slightly better style, and prticularly in more formal writing, a preferred choice. In everyday speech and the kind of casual writing that echoes such speech, the shorter form seems often to be prefered. DES ^(talk) 13:40, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Similarly, in the UK if you said "I mailed my mother today.", then you would need quite a large package. Bovlb 18:53, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

That sounds ridiculous in US English too, unless you're using "mail" to mean "e-mail". Similarly "I messaged my mother today" or "I texted my mother today". --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 19:12, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

In those cases the rule of grammer is simple: Don't verb nouns. :) DES ^(talk) 18:48, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Grandparents in English

The debate about brothers-in-law and what not abowe got me thinking. Are there any single English words to distinguish wich "side" the grandparent is on? I Norwegian we will as a rule use compound words such as "mormor" (mother-mother) or "farmor" (father-mother) and so on, but I have the impression that such constructs are not used in English and instead you have to spell it out like "maternal grandmother", "my mothers mother" or "my grandmother on my mothers side" and such. --Sherool 22:48, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

• That's right -- English has no such words. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 22:59, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
• Argh, edit conflict; I was just going to say "That's right -- English has no such words." Elf | Talk 23:18, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
• What's the Norwegian word for "grandmother", "grandfather", or "grandparent" when you don't know whether it's a paternal or maternal grandparent, or when you don't know which sex is being referred to? (In other words, how would you translate: "My grandparent was a zoo-keeper."). - Nunh-huh 23:23, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
  • The "generic" words are "bestemor" (grandmother), "bestefar" (grandfater) and "besteforeldre" (grandparents). Grandparent (singular) gave me some pause, parents translates as "foreldre", but the singular form is virtualy unused. For example a single parent is usualy described as a single provider rather than a single parent, and in most other contexts the sex would be known and the gender spesific word used, so I had to look it up. "My grandparent was" translates into "Min besteforelder var". zoo-keeper is a bit tricky. An example of an English "word" with no good Norwegian equivelent. Would probably have to rewrite into something like "dyrepasser i en dyrepark" (literaly: animal-tender in an animal-park), though "dyrepasser i en zoo" would probably have been acceptable too (I'm no linguist).
    Anyway as mentioned these are all basicaly compoind words (wich are not hypenated in Norwegian). So for grandparents you basicaly take "beste" and add either "mor" (mother) "far" (fater) or "forelder/foreldre" (parent/parents). For one more generation back you replace "beste" with "olde" with either mother or fater to get for example "oldemor" (great-grandmoter), for each generation after that you add "tip" in front. For example "tiptipoldefar" equals great-great-great-grandfater. A slight curiosity is that if you refeer to an aunt of a grandparent then a "grand" prefix is used in Norwegian too for example "grandtante" (literaly grand-aunt), it's not a very commonly used term though, at least not among younger generations. --Sherool 00:54, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for that! (I didn't mean for zoo-keeper to be a stumper, I was interested in the "relationship words"). I wonder if we shouldn't have an article or a list or table somewhere of such "relationship" words in various languages. It would be very useful information, and would be good to have all together in one place. (e.g. for French: petit-fils = "grandson", arrière petit-fils = "great-grandson"; 'beaufils" = "son-in-law", but also sometimes "step-son", cousine germain = "first cousin"; parent = "parent" but also "relative"). - Nunh-huh 01:07, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

• Maternal Grandparent means mother's parents.
• Paternal Grandparent means father's parents.
• I am living in America, and of Scottish descent, so I not really sure if this is a standard of USA or of Scotland AlMac|^(talk) 07:46, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm an Australian and this is the standard over here too, and I assume the rest of the English-speaking world, "maternal" meaning "mother's" and all.. ;) splintax ^(talk) 16:17, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

'Most Translated Document' problem in UDHR article

Hi. This issue has been under discussion over on the Talk page for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights article. The Guinness Book of Records says the UDHR is the "Most Translated Document" in the world, translated into 321 languages and dialects. Yet the same source describes the Bible as being translated into "2,233 languages and dialects."

Tonight I've tried to be NPOV, describe the issue, and include footnotes to both citations on the Guiness website. My guess [note emphasis... :) ] which led to the wording I used tonight in the article --- my guess is, the Guiness people decided to not include religious writings within their usage of the term 'document'.

Aside from emailing Guiness and asking for clarification, is there any other place this problem could be resolved? As I mentioned in the Talk page discussion, if we leave the 'Most Translated Document' citation out, someone will likely come along and add it. If we leave it in, people will likely continue to object. For myself, I'd rather settle this ASAP and do more work on writing articles. :) Any help you can provide would be most appreciated! Cheers, Madmagic 01:30, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I would guess that "most translated document" doesn't exclude religious writings per se, but does take an overly narrow definition of "document" as "single thing, not a book"... Shimgray 12:30, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Certainly. Guiness has no reason to exclude religious writings. I imagine they would say that the UDHR is the "most translated document", while the Bible is the "most translated book". Still that usage of the word "document" is odd. Probably what happened here is that some Guiness flunky wrote the section using his own private, somewhat nonstandard, version of the word "document", and the Guiness editors didn't catch it. Let them know, and they might change it.

As for what to do on Wikipedia; that's tricky, since we have a clear, authoritative reference for the UDHR being the "most translated document", and authoritative references are what Wikipedia is supposed to be based on. But here is my suggestion: Change "It appears Guinness does not include religious writings ...." to "It appears Guinness does not include lengthy works ...." and move the whole discussion to a note at the end of the article.

— Nowhither 18:58, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether it's relevant, but the count for the Bible brings up a number of questions, like whether that number is for a complete translation. More pedantically, translations have been done from the English, the Latin and various editions of the original Greek and Hebrew texts. (I suspect there have been non-academic translations from the Septugiant and non-English vulgar languages, too.) In this sense, the Bible translations are not translations of one document; they are translations of a collection of similar, related documents.--Prosfilaes 20:15, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I am a Christian, but I know that there are more Muslims in the world in more countries than Christians, so I suspect that the Koraan has been translated more than the Bible. AlMac|^(talk) 07:49, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

You sure about those figures? Whitaker's says a billion or so Muslims, versus... hmm, doesn't give a single figure for Christians. 80m Anglican, 40m Baptist, 840m Catholic, 70m Lutheran, 60m Methodist, 300m Eastern Orthodox, 34m Oriental Orthodox, 100m Pentecostalists, 12m Seventh Day Adventists, 11m Latter-Day Saints, 6m Jehova's Witnesses, plus a few sects where figures not given or world adherence below a million - so it totals about one and a half billion. Don't know of a breakdown by country, but I suspect it's a wash either way these days - there's not many places you can't find at least a small population of missionaries.

As for the Koran, it's been translated into a wide range of languages, but it should be noted that the original text, in Arabic, is considered significantly more important to the faith - other versions are sort of a retelling rather than a literal translation - so there's a lot less of an impetus for translation. Shimgray 12:51, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

All sources disagree with you, so that's an bit unreasonable. The use of pure reason over factual analysis should have gone out with the Middle Ages.

Factually, you're wrong; there are 2.1 billion Christians in the world, compared to 1.3 billion Muslims (according to Religion, which does give a unified population for Christians). More over, the use of language is different in Christianity and Islam. Even in the Catholic Church, the use of Latin as a liturgical language has declined in favor of indigenous languages, and Protestants have always used the native tongues, especially including the Protestant missionaries that have translated the bible into the most of those 2000 languages. It is no coincidence that possibly the most important institute studying minority languages around the world, the Summer Institute of Linguistics, has as a primary goal to translate the Bible into those languages. The first Bible typeset in the US was into a Native American language, and the first work typeset in many Native American languages, the first work typeset in a vast number of minor historically unwritten languages is the Bible.

Islam, on the other hand, considers the original Arabic text of the Koran and Arabic itself to be especially holy. Most Muslim translations of the Koran are not labeled as translations; they usually include the Arabic text along side the translation and call themselves merely aids to the interpretation of the Arabic. Historically, Arabic spread along with Islam, and even in countries where Arabic is not native, the Koran is still usually taught in Arabic. You can become a Muslim without knowing Arabic, but you will usually be encouraged to learn it. Islam does not have the massive drive towards translation that Christianity (especially Protestant) does and hence doesn't have nearly the number of translations.--Prosfilaes 13:19, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

In general, Christian and Bahai missionaries appear to be very concerned with getting their holy texts out in the native language no matter how few speakers it may have (bordering on obsession in the case of SIL), while Muslim missionaries are usually content to proselytize in the main local trade language (say, Hausa or Malay), and the fact that salat can normally only be done in Arabic reduces the urgency of detailed translation. The Bible is the most translated, but not necessarily the entire Bible: the missionaries often stop after completing a couple of the more essential books, understandably not wanting to confuse people with the Book of Kings or Leviticus ;) . My guess is that the most translated book would be the Gospel of Mark. - Mustafaa 13:29, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Grammar of a sentence

Which of the two sentences has correct grammar:
For instance the US, despite being one of the most rapidly growing countries in the world, still have 70% of the forest which was there 400 years ago when America was first settled.
For instance the US, despite being one of the most rapidly growing countries in the world, still has 70% of the forest which was there 400 years ago when America was first settled.
Thanks! --Fir0002 10:11, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

In this case most writers would choose has — 'the US still has'. Only when you unpack US as United States would the plural verb, have, start to look more appropriate. However, even if the subject is strictly plural, it is generally treated as a singular proper noun — it is the name of a country. Also, think about changing most to more — you are comparing countries' growth rates. Gareth Hughes 10:30, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Although not absolutely necessary, consider changing which to that as the relative clause is restrictive on forest. Gareth Hughes 10:35, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

There should also be a comma after "instance." "For instance the US" is a run-on clause. Garrett Albright 11:08, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

No grammatical advice from me --I agree with the comments above--, but I'd strongly recommend changing "first settled" in "colonized by European countries and companies" ... Benne 17:22, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree with the comments above. See FAQs page on why "that" is appropriate above, and not "which". While it is not necessary to change it, it is never encessary to fix grammatical errors -- just a very good idea. Ground Zero | t 18:17, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Note that "United States" was I understand, commonly treated as a plural noun prior to the American Civil War, and commonly treated as a sigular noun afterwards. If this is accurate, then the change in usage parrlleed a change in political theory and to some extent political reality. DES ^(talk) 18:56, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I don't recall ever seeing "The United states have ...." although I suppose it is a possibility. "The US have ...." does sound awful, however. I would not be surprised if usage is different in English-speaking regions outside the US, however. It is certainly different in other languages. For example, in French, one always says, "Les États-Unis ont ...." — Nowhither 19:27, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Note also the common term "these United States", used more frequently earlier, I believe, but also in more modern times (e.g. Reagan's first inaugural address: "These United States are confronted with...". I think it likely, then, that, "the United States have also used to be more common. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 14:44, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Putting it all together, we are suggesting that the sentence be: For instance, the US, despite being one of the more rapidly growing countries in the world, still has seventy percent of the forest that existed 400 years ago, at the time of European colonization. Gareth Hughes 14:57, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Sexist terminology

There is no reason to genderize Wikipedia-related websites as "sister" sites. Like ships, hurricanes, countries, radio stations, etc., websites are inanimate objects or entities (commonly run by men) and applying female names or pronouns to them is simply gratuitous sexist stereotyping. The fact that the practice remains common simply testifies to the persistence and trivialization of objectification of women.

This woman gets mighty tired of hearing that Katrina flirted cruelly with her victims along the Gulf Coast or that Ophelia continues to ply her trade at sea while threatening to wreak her wrath ashore. Yacht racing rules penalize the yacht for her violations as if no man were at the helm. Mother ships provide support services. Daughter cells are spawned by mother cells. Mother Nature is often a destructive force.

So give us a break. Edit out "sister" and substitute "related" or "allied" or whatever term factually describes what you are talking about.

Thanks.

Twiss Butler

Sounds like someone's got a problem with something other than Wikipedia. Personally, I find nothing offensive about a project whose stated goal is to become the largest repository of free information in the world using "sister project". Humans personify things, which means assigning genders. Get over it. — Laura Scudder | Talk 18:02, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Hurricanes are no longer named using female names only. They are now named with alternating female and male names. Mother Nature is both a destructive force and the source of all life. I don't think that the use of "Mother Nature" reflects badly on women. Father Time is wearing us all down, isn't he? As far as Wikipedia's sister sites, there is nothing derogatory about the use of that phrase. We like our sister sites. They are a part of the big, happy Wikpedia community. To be sure, there is a lot of sexist writing and use of language out there that demeans and marginalizes women, but this isn't it. Ground Zero | t 18:17, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Like Ground Zero above, I hardly see how referring to the other projects as "sister" projects "objectifies women." As the Sister disambiguation page notes, "sister" is a pretty common name for related projects, cities, colleges and so on. "Allied cities" would mean something else entirely, as would "related cities".

I'd say far and away the femenine references are positive, not negative. "Mother Nature" is almost always a nuturing force; ships are beautiful, and things to be respected; our mother tounge is the language we first learned are are most fluent and eloquent in; our mother country is that which we came from, and yearn to be back in. Note nowadys the term "Fatherland" is almost always associated with Nazi Germany.

Note also that our language, English, comes from other languages where these nouns were always gendered. Navis, Domus, Lingua, Terra, (Boat, home, language, earth) in Latin are feminine.

So sure, these terms continue the stereotype that women are nurturing, life giving, beautiful and to be respected. Personally, I don't find those stereotypes too offensive, though that could well be because I am a man. Regardless, terms such as "allied" or "related" hardly mean the same thing. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 13:53, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

If we were to use the term brother sites would that trivialise or objectify men? Perhaps we should prefer sibling sites. With regard to single cells, daughter and mother are more accurate terms than son and father, as maleness (as far as the Y chromosome is concerned) can be regarded as a genetic defect which only occurs in more complex animals :) Valiantis 20:10, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

With all due respect to Ms. Butler, I think people who have something against any vestige of gender references in language should be glad they speak one of the minority of languages that doesn't put a gender marker on all words. What would they do if they spoke Spanish? Take the "a" or "o" off every word? Incidentally, there used to be a radio station aimed at men in Toronto which was described as a "brother station" by other stations owned by the same company. It sounded ridiculous. Mwalcoff 15:18, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

is this correct

The three secretary's computers were stolen.

No. "'s" is not used to form plurals. It could be "The three secretaries' computers were stolen." In general, to form the possesive of a plural noun ending in s, and a trailing apostophe. If the plural form does not end in s, add "'s" to the plural form. It might be better to rewrite, for example "The computers assigned to the three secretaries were stolen." DES ^(talk) 19:11, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Well, it might be strictly correct, but highly misleading, if the intended meaning was that one secretary had three computers, and they were all stolen. In that case, I would say, "The secretary's three computers were stolen". And, I agree, if there are three secretaries, then it is "The three secretaries' computers were stolen." — Nowhither 19:18, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I have always assumed that " secrearies' " is really short for " secretaries's ", but that the second 's' is omitted because of the preceding 's' because it would look ugly or one might be incined to pronounce a double 's' or something. Is this true? DirkvdM 19:53, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

No. --Anonymous

IIRC, the use of an apostrophe at the end depends on whether or not the word is pluralized. For example, "Mr Coutts's cat" is correct, if the cat's owner is Mr Coutts, but "secretaries'" is always correct, because the word "secretaries" is plural. splintax ^(talk) 16:27, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

This is right as far as it goes; however, if the plural does not end in an S or Z sound, then it's made possessive by adding 's, the same as the singular. Conversely, if a singular does end in an S or Z sound, it may be made possessive either by adding 's or just by adding an apostrophe. Both forms are widely used, and many people who use one of the spellings use the pronunciation that would logically go with the other one.

Ordinary		Possessive
Singular	Plural	Singular	Plural
cat	cats	cat's	cats'
ass	asses	ass' or ass's	asses'
man	men	man's	men's

--Anonymous, 04:55 UTC, September 17, 2005

A Chinese and a Japanese translation

How would you say "the devil's kitchen" in Chinese, and "the multimillion-dollar hunt" in Japanese? I don't need to know how to pronounce the expressions, I only need to see the written form. Thanks, anon.

P.S. My friend and I are writing a fiction story that takes place in Tokyo, so I'll probably be requesting many such Japanese translations in the future.

I don't know the answer to your question, but I suggest to you that it might be a somewhat misguided one. Languages differ in many usage and cultural details that a simple translation may not deal with. What you really need is not just an answer to your question, but an extended conversation with a couple of native speakers. You need to know not just how to translate some particular phrase, but how to say something that might reasonably appear in some particular place in your story. Those are not the same thing. — Nowhither 01:18, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Good advice. In case you decide to ignore it, "the devil's kitchen" is literally, "阎王的厨房" (simplified) or "閻王的廚房" (traditional). - Nat Krause 02:06, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

english litleture translater in hindi language

hi i have been serching the net to fine any english litreture (friction or non friction) into hindi but has no luck,please can you suggest any such work in form of books,junorals or internet sites. suboor

you might have better luck searching for translations of

• fiction
• non-fiction

You could start with

1. Google
2. Teoma
3. Vivismo
4. Dog Pile
5. There are LOTS more search engines but since I had no trouble whatsoever finding places on the web that do hindi translation, perhaps you should post a question on the reference desk asking for a guide to using search engines effectively
   1. There are search engines aimed at people in different native languages ... if you want to find things in a second language that you are not good at, it can be ineffective for you to try to translate words into that second language then try to use a search engine designed for that language ... you are better off using a search engine designed to work in a language you are good at, then using the translation tools available on the internet to get to the language whose info you looking for

Also check sites in nations that speak hindi such as India. AlMac|^(talk) 07:53, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

'Once upon a time'

What's up, homies. I was surprised to find there wasn't an article entitled Once upon a time, giving information on perhaps the most frequently used and famous opening line of fables, novels and mythology, ever. And conversely, one entitled Happily ever after, or And they all lived happily ever after. Now, I've stuck them on the requested articles, but figure I wold like to start working on them. Unfortunately, what I could write off the top of my head would be enough to get it past speedy deletion and on to VfD, but that would be about it. I've poked around the internet, but 'Once upon a time' seems to be such a frequently used term (over a half million hits), I can't find anything about the actual history., usage, applicaiton and mythos of these terms. So, my question is twofold: 1) Are this 2 articles actually encyclopaedic? and 2) Can someone help me out? A few links in the right direction, or even start the article and I'll chip in, whatever. Proto t c 10:25, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

To be honest, I've actually had that exact article stubbed in my Sandbox for many months now, but never got around to turning it into an article (and certainly wasn't able to find anything on its history as a story opening). If you were to start the article (which could definately be encyclopedic), I'd be happy to help out. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 13:28, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

The usage is discussed at some length in J. R. R. Tolkien's essay "On Fairy Stories". You coulkd do worse than read that for a starting point. DES ^(talk) 15:42, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

I think such material is better treated as a whole, possibly as a section in storytelling or within something like stock phrase (since they only occur and make sense within classical tales). Circeus 15:50, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Don't forget that the use of fossilized phrases to open and to end stories is universal (i.e. not only found in 'classical' Western tales). I agree with Circeus that a good context might be Storytelling. Some examples:

• Ekoti (Mozambique, Bantu): Rakú z'éepo waarí-vó oswááipu nwúlw'eéne saána 'Once upon a time, there was a truly great friendship...'.
• Iraqw (Kenia, Cushitic) tokaro-yâ 'once upon a time (standard opening phrase); aa fák 'it is finished' (common end to a story).
• In oral literature, phrases like "I remember something that our father told me and that is this:" are common (Iraqw: Kar aníng te-'ée' to-ká a inhláw ar aakó doo-rén ni alki'-a i tí). Endings are often like "Such is the story that our father told us" (Iraqw: a-n ti'itá-r akóo doo-rén na alki'íit).
• Another nice one, from Goemai (Nigeria, West Chadic): Tamtis noe lat/ dok ba mûaan yi wa 'My tale has finished, (it) has returned to go (and) come home.'

— mark ✎ 12:20, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Oh, Uncle Mark! Tell us some more, please! Gareth Hughes 12:34, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Mi Mark ní mùùrà ngà kɔ́ — my name is Mark and my story is finished... (Nafaanra, Ghana, Senufo) — mark ✎ 13:26, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for all the comments, guys. And yowch, that Storytelling article really needs writing in the correct style; it looks like a cut and pasted essay. I've started the article, please lend your expertise. Especially Mark, as it definitely needs a section on 'fossilized phrases' in other languages. I've cut and pasted the ones used here. Proto t c 14:52, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

• Classical Arabic: kân yâ mâ kân fî qadîmi zzamân wal`aSri wal'awân... (There was, oh what there was / there was or there wasn't) in the oldest of days and ages and times...

• Algerian Arabic: Hajitek ma jitek I've told you what's coming (?)

Both expressions are kind of obscure, and don't seem to make total sense; however, the former is paralleled by the Kurdish and Neo-Aramaic equivalents "there was, there wasn't" (I can't remember the exact expressions, but I think they were respectively hebûd nebûd and ithwa laythwa.) - Mustafaa 13:38, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

French Sign Language books

Hi there, I want books in French Sign Language but I can't find one. Thanks, Michelle

I don't speak French, but searching amazon.fr for "Langue des signes française" returns this list: [2]. French sign language also links to a wikibook at our sister project: [3]. — Laura Scudder | Talk 16:26, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

You can also go to Amazon.com or bn.com and type in the query "French Sign Language". You'll find a lot of excellent results. — Stevey7788 (talk) 00:32, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Use of Apostrophe

Hi, I've had an ongoing debate about whether or not a specific phrase requires an apostrophe. When writing "The waters edge" is water a possessive noun or does edge merely reflect a geographical location, i.e. the edge of the water. Should it be "The water's edge" of "The waters edge." Any insight would be most appreciated. Best wishes, Barry Jones

"The edge of the water" is a possessive: the water possesses an edge. Thus "the water's edge" in any case. — mendel ☎ 19:41, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

I believe the apostrophe is required. As discussed in The American Heritage Book of English Usage, although it is a "possessive construction," this particular form is showing description more than possession. LarryMac 19:44, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Yes, certainly. The phrase "edge of the water" is a possessive phrase (the edge belongs to the water, and not to the tree to the sky), as is "water's edge". They mean the same thing. "Waters" is plural, and is used only in flowerly language ("the crystal waters of Lake Memphramagog"). I don't know where "waters edge" could be used. Even if we were talking about the edge of more than one water, it would be "waters' edge". Ground Zero | t 19:49, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

It should be the water's edge. The clitic 's does not only indicate possession as in ownership, but diverse (and often vague) relationships of belonging. If you can write the X of the Y (as in the edge of the water) then this will demand an apostrophe if you rephrase this as the Y's X (as in the water's edge). The only senses that I can make of the phrase the waters edge are waters provide a border or waters move cautiously :) Valiantis 19:52, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

honorific titles

In Botwsana, women are called Mma, men are called Rra. What do those titles stand for?

Hello, I knew nothing about your question, but I decided to try to figure it out anyway. So, I did a little research and asking around. For what it's worth:

• First of all, it is awfully hard to get a straight answer from anyone about these words, however ...
• It appears to me that they are just words, and don't stand for anything (just like the English "Mister" doesn't stand for anything). They are generic, respectful titles for women and men.
• ... but then I really don't know what I am talking about.

— Nowhither 00:33, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

DEFINITION OF MEETING

Wiktionary:meeting

Wonderfool

Are there good puns on my name in other language? A portmanteau of wonderful and fool. I figured "Foumidable" works in French, but stumbled in German&Spanish. --Wonderfool t(c) 10:59, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

In German, you might try Wundernarr, which combines wunderbar (wonderful) and Narr (fool). I can't guarantee that it might not have slightly different secondary associations than Wonderfool. Valiantis 12:44, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

The or the?

It has always been disputed over the use of 'the' in our writing in class. What I mean is whether the 'the' before some nouns, should be in capital letter (The) or left as a "small letter" (the). For example, should it be The United States of America or the United states of America? This has widely been disputed in our essays and writings etc, and I hope you can help me solve this little problem. --anonymous

Generally, the "the" is not capitalised. In this case, a quick glance at style guides suggests that it's definitely lowercase unless explicitly known otherwise (for example the title of a book which is known to include "The"). So "the United States of America". Shimgray 13:25, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Chicago Manual of Style says that "the" should not be capitalizaed, even if is considered to be a part of the name.

See here:

Q. Are there any exceptions to paragraph 8.180 in CMS 15, which states that the “the” in newspaper and magazine titles should be lowercase and roman? I’ve seen some publications keep the article uppercase (i.e., The New Yorker). Thanks for your insight.

A. It has been our policy for decades to recommend that any initial “the” in the titles of periodicals (journals, magazines, and newspapers) be subsumed by the surrounding text or simply dropped, depending on circumstances.

The New Yorker’s cartoons are great for people on the go, like me. I can justify the subscription without having to feel bad about not reading the articles.

When I read the Times, I pretend not to see the crossword puzzle. I have enough work to do as it is.

Ground Zero | t 16:58, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

However, Wikipedia has articles on The New Yorker and The Times (etc.), presumably on the basis that the article is part of the title, so clearly this is not a cut and dried issue where the name of newspapers and magazines is concerned. The Times' own style guide insists on the capitalisation of the article in most circumstances [4], whilst its rival The Guardian insists on lower-case for all newspapers (including itself) [5]. Valiantis 16:54, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Lincolnshire village.

At it's foundation in 1142 the Cistercian Abbey at Revesby in Lincolnshire was given all the land in the villages of Revesby, Thoresby and Stichesby by the earl of Lincoln. Please advise me of the current spelling of the village refered to as Stichesby and it's location if still in existence.

The Popular Dictionary of English Placenames lists no "Stichesby", but there's a "Stickney" in Lincs. This doesn't look like it, though - it's derived from OE "Stichenai" as opposed to "Resuesbi" and "Toresbi". I suspect that Stichesby has ceased to exist in the intervening timeframe. Note that according to [6] the village of Revesby itself was depopulated at the time; it's possible the other villages they were granted the land of was also empty. Shimgray 15:39, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

plural of ethos?

Is ethos its own plural? Or is ethoses, ethoi, or anything else its plural form? And if ethos is strictly plural, what is its singular form?

• Ethoi. It doesn't seem too widely used, though. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:20, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Off the top of my head, I think ethos is third declension neuter → ethē (εθη) would be the plural. Gareth Hughes 16:36, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

• I've found one note that says in passing that it's ethoi[7], one that says it's ethe[8], one that says it's ethea[9] but so far I haven't found a clear authoritative reference. Elf | Talk 18:12, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
  • it's ta ethea, ta ethē, depending on dialect[10][11], from swedh-es-h. But since the question was probably for the English plural, we should answer that there is none. You can't have several ethoses. dab (ᛏ) 18:29, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Waiiiiiit--so there's only one ethos in the whole universe? That really simplifies things, doesn't it! I no longer have to worry about what the other guy, group, or terrorist is thinking! Elf | Talk 19:14, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
    • it should be added that ethea is very rare, compared to ethē, so the latter is standard. It should also be added that the plural is much more rare than the singular even in Greek (about ten times fewer hits in TLG). In English, use ethe if you want to sound highbrow, ethoses if you don't have such ambitions, but only use ethoi if you want to make a complete fool of yourself. dab (ᛏ) 18:50, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Pronouncation of the word 'gatecrasher'

How to pronounce correctly the word 'gatecrasher' both in english and american?--Ilya

Received pronunciation = /ˈɡeɪtˌkɹæʃ.ɚ/ or /ˈɡeɪʔˌkɹæʃ.ɚ/

General American = /ˈɡeɪt.kɹæʃˌəɹ/

Gareth Hughes 21:22, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

More French pitfalls

There are some words in Template:Fr that have no conjugation in certain tenses. For example, there are two verbs: "clore" (to close) and "traire" (to milk (a cow)); which for all dictionaries under the heading past historic, have N/A as an entry. Why is this please? Guesses lead me to thinking: "Its because of the way they're spelt. All logical ways of forming the past historic have been already taken by other, more important words" or "its because they're not very important words - who would ever write about milking a cow in a historical context anyway?". Can anyone shed any light on this? --Wonderfool t(c) 22:05, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Who would ever write about milking a cow in a historical context?

Would you write about milking a cow in a historical context? Answers below please. -WF

No, I don't imagine I ever would. Garrett Albright 14:22, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

The past historic (which is also sometimes - more usefully - called the preterite) is used in written French to express completed actions (there is no need to have an historical context). It is often the standard tense of narrative in novels. In spoken French (and in less formal written French) the perfect tense is used instead. So one might quite legitimately want to write he milked the cow in the past historic if you were writing a novel (even if the context was not historical). I'd suggest you might, in this case, have to cheat with a perfect - il a trait.... As for clore, my grammar (Byrne & Churchill 4th Ed.) marks this as little used, even in literary style, other than in the infinitive [clore] and past participle [clos], so you would probably say il ferma or il clôtura or some other word meaning 'close' depending on context. (My French is mediocre so I imagine someone else may be able to give more specific examples). Valiantis 17:39, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Meaning of " de parvis grandis acervus erit "

On the google toolbar, if you go help, about google toolbar, there is the words "de parvis grandis acervus erit" any one know is meaning, and what language it is?

Thanks Brian New Zealand 23:48, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

It's Latin. Roughly: "From small things a great accumulation will be made". Perhaps the Google motto?? - Nunh-huh 00:39, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

It is not a Google motto (the corporate motto is Don't be evil). For more detail about your Latin phrase, see this message board thread. Ornil 05:09, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

...which apparently requires a subscription. Shimgray 19:41, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

what is chuchu?

We would need some context to give you a good answer. Where did you see the word? In any case, it might be:

• the sound a steam train engine makes
• the old spelling of a Malay word for "grandchild" (I believe they now spell it "cucu").

— Nowhither 00:45, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps you are looking for Cthulhu, the monster in H. P. Lovecraft's writings?-gadfium 01:59, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

It's a vegetable. --cesarb 03:36, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

English version: Chayote. --cesarb 03:44, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Seeking a Compliment / Denying What is Obviously True

Is there a word for seeking a compliment? I'm asking more on the lines of denying what is true.

For example:

A skinny girl saying, "I'm Fat", or a beautiful girl saying, "I'm so ugly," obviously waiting for someone to say, "No, you're no-o-o-ot."

Is there a word for that?

I can't do it in a word... how's "ploy for sympathy"? "manipulativeness"?- Nunh-huh 03:28, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

The phrase I would use is "fishing for compliments", but there's no single word that I know of.-gadfium 04:42, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

"put oneself down"? Shantavira 12:58, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

I would say "trolling for compliments", but it has the same meaning. User:Zoe|^(talk) 22:49, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

LOATHING

i was wondering what "loathing" means?

Greetings! "Loathing" simply means disliking greatly. May I refer you to Dictionary.com should you need the definition of a word or a term? Also noteworthy is Mozilla Firefox's lookup feature, which allows you to obtain a definition by typing dict loathing, should "loathing" be the word you need the meaning of. Grumpy Troll ^(talk) 10:27, 17 September 2005 (UTC).

definition of garde bien

I would like to know the meaning of this phrase "garde bien"

"Garde bien" translates to "keep well" in French. Grumpy Troll ^(talk) 17:07, 17 September 2005 (UTC).

The Frug

I was looking up novelty dances of the 1960's, and I need to know how to pronounce "The Frug". Is it Frug as in rhymes with rug? Or is it froog, as in frugal?

The latter: Froog. If you don't know, there's no easy way to find out, unless you ask your parents<g> - since it's not in the dictionary. Still, here's a reference - an a ref for the Watusi, the Freddy and the Jerk<g>. I can't think of a thing "frug" rhymes with. Not "moog", which rhymes with "vogue"..... - Nunh-huh 23:59, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank You! I suppose it could rhyme with "droog", a fictional slang term from "A Clockwork Orange". Or was it "droogies"? Or both?

As for my parents, that was WAY after their time. My older sisters' both agree with you, though.

The article you referenced spelled it two ways: "The Frug" and "The Frugg".

Well, for what it's worth, the number in the Broadway musical Sweet Charity is spelled "Rich Man's Frug". - Nunh-huh 04:18, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

what is the meaning and spelling of complacent

^{From Dictionary.com:}
com·pla·cent
adj.

1. Contented to a fault; self-satisfied and unconcerned: He had become complacent after years of success.
2. Eager to please; complaisant.

Grumpy Troll ^(talk) 22:02, 17 September 2005 (UTC).

what is a verb modifier

An adverb?? AlMac|^(talk) 02:23, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

STOUCH

Have noticed on a number of times in reading the newspapers the word "stouch" appears. There is no guide within the sentence/paragraph that leads to an understanding/meaning of the word. Your advice please.

David F