Jump to content

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Reference desk

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 92.16.62.154 (talk) at 01:11, 2 October 2008 (→‎Journalist with foreign accent?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to the language section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.
skip to bottom
Select a section:
Shortcut
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.
See also:


September 26

Block in avionics?

Programmable System Guides Jet to New Heights

Hi, what does "block" mean in the article above? I've looked through some on-line dictionaries but couldn't find anything obvious. --Kjoonlee 05:24, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't strike me as avionics or military jargon. I take it to mean just a delivery or installment. Seems to be just another word for phase of development. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Guate/ Cuate/ Watey language?

Does anyone know of a language named Guate (pronounced gwa-TAY)or something similar (qua-TAY or wa-TAY)? Where is (or was) it spoken? Does it still exist? What language family is it in? Jane Elderfield (talk) 06:56, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's a Kwatay in Senegal, a Kpwate and a Fadan Wate in Nigeria. Where did you hear of it? kwami (talk) 07:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Qaqet? Cua? Guató? Watut? All these are rom Ethnologue list [www.ethnologue.com] ? --Lgriot (talk) 08:20, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There's also Guale in S. Carolina, if we start changing the t. kwami (talk) 20:58, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Drinking Cool Aid"

moved from village pump Gwinva (talk) 08:18, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is this meaning behind this expression and where did it originate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.224.88.216 (talk) 08:07, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Drinking the Kool-Aid" means believing the words of an untrustworthy/deranged source. It's from the Jonestown deaths in 1978, when 900 members of the Peoples Temple committed suicide or were murdered by drinking poisoned Flavor Aid, erroneously remembered as Kool-Aid. jnestorius(talk) 08:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I usually hear it as meaning "demonstrating strong commitment to the cause". —Tamfang (talk) 20:45, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Mm, except it usually means "demonstrating a suicidally strong commitment to the cause." It's not a positive thing. If you drink the Kool-Aid, it means you are a cult member. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 00:51, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Even if the cause is, say, abolition of slavery? — I hear the phrase most often from Silicon Valley types; they seem to mean "being fervently convinced that the project is a Good Thing", with an implication of either gullibility or comical earnestness but not necessarily self-destruction. —Tamfang (talk) 05:43, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Constitutional over-punctuation

I recently commented on some over-punctuation in a piece of the U.S. Constitution, and I’ve come across another one. The 27th Amendment reads:

  • No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.

What’s with the 3 commas? It reads either like the work of a 5th grader or some ultra-pedant who lost the plot, badly. I’m aware this was first proposed in 1789 but not finally ratified till 1992, but I’m genuinely intrigued as to why they’d put these in, even back in 1789. Did the 1992 people really have to stick with the exact punctuation as originally proposed in 1789? Was there simply no legal way of modernising it without having to re-start the whole 200-odd-year process from scratch? I guess this might come down to a legal issue rather than one of changing punctuation styles, but here’s a good place to start asking. -- JackofOz (talk) 11:19, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think, the placement of commas in that sentence, is just fine. :-þ —Angr 11:24, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, my attempts at answering stuff on this ref desk have proven that I know far less about English than I thought I did, but it seems to me that at least the first two commas are fine. The first two are offsetting the clause "varying the compensation ...", which modifies the "no law ... shall take effect" clause. The third comma seems a little more extraneous, I guess.
Fun side note about this particular Amendment: so-called "Cost of Living Increases" don't count. Loophole, anyone? :-) Dgcopter (talk) 20:01, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I read the first 2 commas as implying some parentheticality, which means all the text between the commas could be left out and the overall sense would remain. Do that, and we get "No law shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened". This is clearly not what what the intention is. The laws that the amendment are about are not just any laws but specifically "law[s] varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives". Another way of writing it would be "No law that varies the compensation for ....". In that case, a comma after "law" would be misleading and wrong. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:06, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Over the years punctuation style has simply changed. The 3nd comma is there because there's a change of subject: no A shall X, until B shall Y. Without the comma, people would read it as a compound clause with a single subject. At the time, placement of commas was defined by grammar. Now we figure that if we can follow the text without commas, and there's no ambiguity, then the commas should be left out. Just a change in convention. kwami (talk) 20:56, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jack, your country, founded by rapacious seafarers, transported malefactors, and the odd cashiered officer of the New South Wales Rum Corps, still retains, the world's number one welfare family, as its hereditary Head of State. So I wouldn't get too Worked up, by the Punctuation or the Capitalization, of a document written in a Far different Time and Place, &c.
More seriously, education was far more limited at the time, I think, and "standards" not nearly so standard as people think (or, perhaps, wish).
There may be something to the theory that once the amendment started down the road, no one wanted to upset the ratification apple cart by carping about a comma. We've managed one amendment roughly every ten years -- including a couple that cancel one another out -- and even then, started with ten right off the bat. It's by no means perfect, but as Benjamin Franklin said (not in so many words), ya dance with who brung ya. --- OtherDave (talk) 22:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's just contemporary (to 1789) English. Try reading Thomas Paine, or David Hume, or anyone else from there or therabouts in history from anywhere in the Anglophone world and you'll find exactly the same excessive (to modern readers) use of punctuation. In fact, over-punctuation might be the only thing that gives away the age of the works, which is quite surprising considering we're talking about something written two centuries ago. Koolbreez (talk) 19:27, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I see the first two as not merely excessive, but crossing the line into misleading. But if the the vast mass of Americans are not too phased by it, that's the end of that. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:38, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I'd hope they're not too fazed by it either. Malcolm XIV (talk) 09:25, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Idiomatic?

"If you (...) are searching a bailout for your crippled financial situation -due to your overuse of your credit card - the only thing I can tell you is that you should have at least a personality disorder."

Is the sentence above correct? I am asking due to the "should have". Does the author meant that any card-shovers searching a bailout HAVE a personality disorder? Nobody 'should' have this. Mr.K. (talk) 16:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In American English, you could read the sentence as saying (in an ungainly fashion) "you better have at least a personality disorder if you want a bailout because you spent too much." If this interpretation is right, it's a windy way of saying "you need to be crazy" or, more likely, "you must be crazy" (with the implication that if you're not actually crazy, people will think you do not deserve the bailout). It's not an idiom; it's the offspring of overheated rhetoric and poor use of the language. --- OtherDave (talk) 21:36, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Searching for a bailout? -- JackofOz (talk) 21:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, yes... I missed that completely. You need a "for" in there someplace. (See above, "overheated" and "poor use of the language.") --- OtherDave (talk) 22:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, not just "someplace", but specifically where I indicated. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:34, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


September 27

Spanish podcasts

Hi, I'm looking for good spanish podcasts or free audio. I'm looking for news and current affairs, debates and opinions, fiction, science fiction, science or your favourite. I haven't found much yet. Any help would be appreciated. ps. I posted a similar question on the spanish ref. desk. Thanks. 190.244.186.234 (talk) 04:41, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. 190.244.186.234 (talk) 00:14, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Son of a bitch

What is the female equivalent of "son of a bitch"? 121.219.225.133 (talk) 10:50, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have occasionally heard women called "son of a bitch", but I think the more usual female equivalent is simply "bitch". "Daughter of a bitch" would be either jocular or intended literally. —Angr 11:36, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Many people just use "bitch." GO-PCHS-NJROTC (Messages) 00:10, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Surely, "son of a bitch" is merely an abusive metaphor and does not have any precise or literal meaning, so that any equally derogatory expression which can be applied to the opposite sex would be a rough equivalent? Strawless (talk) 17:31, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

arabic translations

how do you say 'thank you' and 'sorry' in arabic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.76.252.146 (talk) 15:02, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shukran lak شكرا لك is the quasi-Classical Arabic way, I believe (technically laka when thanking a male and laki when thanking a female, but such short phrase-final i`rab vowels would not often be pronounced)... AnonMoos (talk) 16:00, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I learnt the short feminine form as 'shukran lik'. Steewi (talk) 12:34, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's going more toward colloquial; don't know that much about colloquial (and it can be very different between different regions). AnonMoos (talk) 17:08, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I learned it just as "shukran", without an accompanying "you". Adam Bishop (talk) 01:14, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Shukran by itself is most standard, understood throughout the Arab world. For sorry, it's "Muta assif" for a man speaking, and "Muta assifa" for a woman. --Xuxl (talk) 16:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I assume متعسف /متعسفة (stem V active participle of ع س ف) in Arabic script... AnonMoos (talk) 19:28, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning of Ingleby Barwick

Ingleby Barwick is (new) settlement in North Yorkshire. Like many parts of the Danelaw, place names in the area are a melange of Anglo-Saxon and Norse. I've been trying to figure out the derivation of the name. At face value Ingle-by would appear to mean hearth-village (Ingle from the gaelic, by from norse). And wick generally means farm or hamlet. Our Barwick-in-Elmet article says that Barwick was called Berewit in the Domesday Book, but doesn't give a derivation. However the local council says (on this page) that "Ingleby is the old English word for Barley and Barwick means Fields, - Barley Fields". The Ingleby part of that seems very difficult to believe. The barley part seems to make sense, and I've read about a bunch of the other Barwicks there are in England and many seem to have been barley growing areas. Similarly our page on Berwick-upon-Tweed (where Berwick and Barwick seem very similar) does indeed suggest Berwick might mean "barley farm" or "barley field" (from baerwic). So is the local authority correct, or does the name infact mean (to my mind much more rationally) "hearth village barley field"? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 17:54, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford Dict. Placenames indicates that Ingleby is Old Scandinavian Englar + by: 'farmstead or village of the Englishman'; and Barwick is from OE berewic, meaning 'barley farm, outlying part of an estate'. Make of that what you will. Gwinva (talk) 19:38, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that's very informative indeed. Moreover, I didn't know the ODoP existed (and now I see it's rather affordable). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 21:41, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is this Ekwall's Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Place-names or something else? —Tamfang (talk) 20:42, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I consulted A Dictionary of British Place-Names, edited by A.D.Mills & Adrian Room, Oxford University Press, 2nd Ed 1998. Apologies for using a shorthand title, which could be confused. Gwinva (talk) 00:17, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AP Stylebook?

What dictionary does the AP Stylebook use as its authoritative source? For example, how would an American writer who follows its style spell Ojibwa/Ojibwe/Ojibway and what definition would the word have?--206.248.172.247 (talk) 20:43, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is it Webster's New World College Dictionary 4th edition?--206.248.172.247 (talk) 20:54, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just happen to have my copy of the AP Stylebook right here, so let me look ...
It says the sources used are:
  • First reference for spelling, style, usage and foreign geographic names: Webster's New World College Dictionary, 4th edition
  • Second reference for spelling, style and usage: Webster's Third New International Dictionary
  • Second reference for foreign geographic names: National Geographic Atlas of the World
The Stylebook also lists sources for things such as aircraft, ships, railroads, government issues, business names, etc. — Michael J 23:16, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What type of logical argument is this?

Suppose that one answers the question "what is the probability of the x coordinate being greater than the y coordinate?" with this: "Change the names of the x and y axis so that the x axis is now the y axis and the y axis is now the y axis. Nothing changed except the names, so the probability of y being greater than x is the same as the probability of it being less than x. Therefore, both probabilities are 50%."

Another example might be answering the question "what is the probability of A sitting in front of B, if the seating arrangement is random?" with "if you switch the names of A and B, you'll see it's just as likely for A to sit in front of B as it is for B to sit in front of A. Therefore, the probabilities for both are 50%". --99.237.96.81 (talk) 21:13, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's the principle of indifference. Oddly enough it just came up on the Humanities desk too: Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities#Philisophical_term. -- BenRG (talk) 21:26, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To a mathematician, it would be called "answering the wrong question". -- JackofOz (talk) 21:31, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I never heard the term "principle of indifference" in my math courses. If I was writing a proof I'd describe the result as true "by symmetry", i.e. the situation is symmetrical with respect to variable naming as the names could be interchanged without loss of generality. This was really a question for the Math reference desk; I suppose someone there might have yet another answer. --Anonymous, 03:20 UTC, September 28, 2008.

Sorry, you're right, the second one is just an argument by symmetry because we're told that the seating arrangement is (uniformly) random. But in the first one we aren't given a distribution on the points, so either there's not enough information (if it's a math problem) or it's a candidate for applying the principle of indifference (if it's a guessing game). -- BenRG (talk) 16:46, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MLA citation for CJK names?

What's the proper MLA citation for names transliterated from a language where the surname usually comes first? For example, let's say I was citing an Akira Kurosawa film, but I was pretentious or using an original Japanese copy, so I have the name "黒澤 明". Instead of reproducing the actual characters (because TNR doesn't support them for one), let's say I decide to transliterate it. Assuming I cite the surname last (John Smith), would I cite his name as Akira Kurosawa (with the surname last?) or Kurosawa Akira (as it is literally transliterated from Japenese). I understand the MLA Style Manual as some info. on this, but I don't have access to that right now. Deshi no Shi (talk) 23:23, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why not Kurosawa, Akira? --Kjoonlee 03:21, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In the specific case of Japanese names people always seem to write "Akira Kurosawa" or "Kurosawa, Akira", but I think Chinese names are sometimes written surname first without the comma. I have no idea about other languages. -- BenRG (talk) 16:38, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


September 28

<ng> in Old English

Hi, how would a scribe in Alfred the Great's Winchester pronounce <engel>? Roughly /ɛŋɡɛl/? --Kjoonlee 03:19, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Either that or /ɛndʒɛl/ depending on the word's exact phonological history. —Angr 05:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, in certain contexts, the "ng" of at least some dialects of Old English appears to have gone through a kind of palatal nasal (cf. Italian "gn") phase, to judge how "singed" came out as "seynd" in some Middle English dialects, while the past of meng "to mix" came out as Middle English "meind", "meynd", and the past of sprenge "to sprinkle came out as "spreynd" (similar also to "queint" for "quenched", "cleynt" for "clenched", etc.)... AnonMoos (talk) 17:35, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Synonym of required that starts with "A"

well... anything? Thanks, 76.187.43.14 (talk) 03:38, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Appropriate" could fit in certain contexts, although it's not really a synonym for "required", generally speaking. -- JackofOz (talk) 04:15, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Asked" in some contexts ? Try WordWeb, nifty application, basically an interface for WordNet, an english dictionary/thesaurus from Princeton University, plus web access to Wikipedia/Wiktionary/other relevant stuff. Equendil Talk 04:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Assumed" in a job advertisement is a bit of a weasely alternative for "required". As in "It is assumed that the applicant has extensive experience in whatever..." --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 12:26, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comparitives in other languages

In English, I think, single-word comparatives always tend toward more — dry, drier, driest. Are there languages where the construction is toward less — dry, lessdry, leastdry? Thanks. Saintrain (talk) 13:18, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

English: little, less, least. If I am a little drunk, you are less intoxicated and the subsequent poster is the least wobbly, than B (you) is less drunk than I am and C (as yet unknown) is almost sober, so the series goes towards a decrease in the property X. PS: I know, that´s not what you actually meant in the query. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 14:38, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that's my point. "little, less, least" is getting more and more "less" :-) Saintrain (talk) 14:50, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So what you're looking for is a language in which the words for "wetter" and "wettest" are derived from the word for "dry"? —Angr 20:40, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In the same scenario, A, B and C could be respectively little, more and most drunk. In that sense, the progression is towards less and less "little". -- JackofOz (talk) 20:50, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In German, as the second poster above is well aware, the term "Wetter" may, indeed, refer to an increase in precipitation. On the other hand, "Wetter" may indicate a reduction in humidity and mean "drier". "Confusinger and confusinger", cried --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:54, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If anybody doesn't understand what Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM means: the German term "Wetter" means weather. ;-) -- heuler06 (talk) 21:31, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Angr, yes. That's about it. Certainly the concepts of least wet, less wet, more wet and most wet are easily understood but English only has the words wetter and wettest. There's no wet-derived term for less wet etc. Are there other languages where there's a less wet but no more wet? Or both less wet and more wet? Saintrain (talk) 23:32, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
English also has -ish: dryish, dry, drier, driest. Bazza (talk) 12:45, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"What" instead of "that"

In which dialect(s) of English do they say "what" instead of "that"? They made fun of it sometimes on Monty Python (ex. "It's people like you what cause unrest.") Thanks, Mike R (talk) 19:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That could be any working-class British (at least Cockney and Glasgow patter). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 19:47, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not quite what you're asking, but some Australians say things like "I'm a better (singer, whatever) than what he is", rather than "... than he is". I don't know whether this is confined to Australia or not. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:57, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've heard Stephen King say it in an interview. "...and came back to kill the guy what done him wrong." It may be more widespread than you think. Matt Deres (talk) 14:12, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In Indian English, sometimes they'll use "what" instead of "that". For instance, "The information what I had given you", or "The conversation what we had yesterday". This could be a reflection of the British influence on India.

normal/good/fine/etc.

"How are you?" "Fine thanks." Here, "fine" is neutral, almost meaningless. (In American English sometimes the answer is "Great!", which sounds like hyperbole to ears more used to the the British variety.) But if the weather is fine, it is indeed a good day. If a patient is fine, it might be doctorspeak for something rather different from "good". COnversely, if you ask someone how they are in Russian, the answer is "Normalno" -- one's state of being doesn't usually rise above normalness. So my question is, what languages or dialects treat the baseline of being-ness as Good, and which ones treat it as Average?

Hmm... here in Berlin it's hard to tell, because in the local dialect of German the usual answer to "How are you?" is "Thank you." —Angr 20:38, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In Romanian, the answer is "bine", which means good. Interesting question, by the way. 80.123.210.172 (talk) 20:45, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In Swahili I gather that the usual answer is "Good (but...)" —Tamfang (talk) 21:52, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The famous French "ça va" [sa va] must be mentionned. The dialogue is usually: "Ça va?" answer: "Ça va." Which very litterally means: "Is it going?" "It's going." But I would say that "bien" (good) is the unexpressed baseline. --Lgriot (talk) 00:14, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Heh. I say that, in English. Somebody asks me "How's it going?" and I answer with, "It's going." Corvus cornixtalk 18:54, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I say "bit by bit." —Tamfang (talk) 05:46, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
… or "so far so good." —Tamfang (talk) 02:03, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In Chinese the usual greeting Ni hao ma? translates as "You good?", and IIRC the reply is usually "Good" (Hao). Similarly in Maori "Kei te pai koe?" (Are you good?) is frequently answered with "Kei te pai" (I am good). That one's a little more ambivalent, though, since "pai" can mean "well" as well as "good", and it also forms part of phrases meaning "not so good" like "tōna pai nei" (which means "so-so"). Grutness...wha? 00:29, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

September 29

Netherlands

What language is used in the Netherlands? GO-PCHS-NJROTC (Messages) 00:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch language? Fribbler (talk) 00:14, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
GO-PCHS-NJROTC, you could have found this on your own by reading the wikipedia article Netherlands. People, as stated above, please do a minimum of effort on your own. --Lgriot (talk) 00:18, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, it is much easier to type "Netherlands" in the search box, as to type the whole question on the RF. Mr.K. (talk) 10:30, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Puzzle Clue

What phrase would these words form. They are....IT OM LTI MUL MU TA; MO NE NIA NOV —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.211.41.6 (talk) 00:12, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They look like fragments of Latin words (omnia, multa, moneta, etc.), but it's hard to know how to solve a puzzle without knowing what kind of puzzle it is... AnonMoos (talk) 02:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It should be "MULTI MULTA; NEMO OMNIA NOVIT". - Nunh-huh 03:43, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's good (the first sentence needs an implied NOVERUNT to be translated). AnonMoos (talk) 04:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am interested in the meaning please? From my non-existent knowlegdge of Latin, I am guessing something like "Many more; No one is always new" or "No one knows everything"?? --Lgriot (talk) 07:13, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Many people [know] many things; no one knows everything". AnonMoos (talk) 11:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok so there is a root for "nova" which means "new", but another root for "novit" which means "to know". I guess it is an indoeuropean cognate to the English "know"? --Lgriot (talk) 23:41, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There used to be a G there in pre-classical Latin, which survived classically when there were prefixes (as in, for example, "recognoscere", the root of the English "recognize"). As far as I remember it is related to Greek words like "gnomon", and English "know" (and German "kennen" etc etc). Adam Bishop (talk) 02:20, 30 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.210.170.49 (talk) [reply]
Right, novit "knows" and novus "new" are from two different Indo-European roots, *ĝneh3- and *newo-, and both are cognate with their respective English glosses. —Angr 05:25, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Terminology

Can a strait properly be called a watercourse?

Thanks, Wanderer57 (talk) 00:46, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would say no, it's all about the flow - see Watercourse. Mikenorton (talk) 10:44, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proto-indo-European spoken out loud.

when I complete my task of taking over the World, the reconstructed Proto-Indo-European language will be the official language of The Empire since several billion people are at least somewhat familiar with one of its descendants (primarily English). But here's the thing: I can't find any source online where I can learn PIE, and what's more, I can't find any recorded samples of it (I would be tickled pink if I could find a recording of Schleicher's fable so I could hear what PIE really sounded like). Is the reconstruction so incomplete that no one can say with any certainty what PIE really sounded like? If anyone knows where I could find some recordings of spoken Proto-Indo-European, I'll probably cede a large portion of Antarctica to you when my global conquest is complete.

Thanks! 63.245.144.77 (talk) 00:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are many sound in PIE which have been identified without knowing how they were pronounced. So yes, PIE studies is mostly a written subject matter. --Lgriot (talk) 01:27, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
When you say "Schleicher's fable", do you mean the original mid-19th-century version (which certainly does not accurately represent Indo-European) or the revised late 20th-century version (which must remain somewhat speculative due to the nature of the subject)? We possess much knowledge concerning Indo-European, but there are still strong obstacles to being able to reconstruct PIE in such detail and correctness that a PIE speaker would understand what we were saying. For one thing, we simply aren't able to reconstruct in detail -- with any reliability or certainty -- as far back as the period when Indo-European was one somewhat unified language spoken over a relatively small area. And subsequent to this earliest period, Indo European spent a number of centuries as a dialect continuum, where influences spread back and forth between related nearby languages (though the dialects spoken by geographically non-adjacent language communities would often have been quite distinct from each other). When reconstructing backwards, it's very difficult to know if the various features that we've reconstructed ever all existed together at the same time, or in the same dialect. Even if by some miracle every single individual feature of the Indo-European language were to be reconstructed correctly, it still might be the case that we were putting together these language features into a reconstructed proto-language in a way that resulted in a hideous anachronistic and anti-geographical mish-mash, jumbling together things belonging to widely separated historical periods and dialects in the dialect continuum...
By the way, Indo-European wasn't the "original" language or the "best" language, or the language of any mystic ideology now accessible to us. For a basic look at some of the probable realistic factors in the early spread of Indo-European, see chapter 15 of The Third Chimpanzee by Jared Diamond... AnonMoos (talk) 03:46, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You may be interested in Modern Indo-European. —Angr 04:25, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, there we go. That's exactly what I was looking for! Thanks! 63.245.144.77 (talk) 04:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As long as you're aware that it's rather unlikely that actual historical Proto-Indo-European speakers would have been able to understand "Modern Indo-European" at all easily. Such a language is an endearingly off-the-wall concept, but some of the motivations for its creation appear to have come from misunderstandings of historical and linguistic facts... AnonMoos (talk) 11:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hoi Polloi

Given the term hoi polloi means the masses, is there a corresponding Greek term used in the English language meaning the élite? Thanks. seresin ( ¡? )  05:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hoi oligoi ("the few") is the usual opposite of hoi polloi ("the many"). It isn't used often in English, though. —Angr 05:11, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Except in oligarchy. kwami (talk) 12:42, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As a side note, I've heard many a talk show radio host use "hoi polloi" to mean "the elite". I guess because it sort of sounds like "hoity toity"? Drives me nuts, regardless. Dgcopter (talk) 19:54, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Death suffix

What root/suffix/prefix, meaning: All/Everything, can I add to "-cide" or other suffix meaning: Death?

—Preceding unsigned comment added by L3tt3rz (talk • contribs) 08:01, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think such a word exists in common usage, but I would use either omnicide or polycide -- Ferkelparade π 08:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Pancide? -- JackofOz (talk) 08:11, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
-cide is Latin, isn't it? So omni- is preferable to poly- or pan- which are Greek. —Tamfang (talk) 08:27, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) "-cide" doesn't exactly means "death", it means "killing". "The killing of everything" would presumably be "omnicide". (I took the liberty of changing the title of this section since there is already a section called "Question!" on this page.) —Angr 08:28, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Panthanasia? [1] Bazza (talk) 12:39, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Are you talking about the death of everything, or the death of all people? If the latter, you could say "Democide". Corvus cornixtalk 18:56, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I'm talking about the Death of All-Living: Man, Woman & Child w/o Discrimination... Would "Anthropocide" work? —Preceding unsigned comment added by L3tt3rz (talk • contribs) 20:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since we know there's only one human race, could "genocide" be made to fit the bill these days? -- JackofOz (talk) 22:23, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Humanicide gets me a number of ghits, with varying definitions. It could fit the bill. Steewi (talk) 03:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Latin translation

Quid aliud est mulier nisi amiticiæ inimica

Hi, what would the above mean? I can recognize some words/roots, but I have no idea. Tried searching but got no satisfactory results. --Kjoonlee 09:02, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"What else is a woman but the enemy of friendship?" The penultimate word should be "amicitiae". Googling suggests it's from the Malleus Maleficarum. —Angr 09:11, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Considering the purpose of Malleus, I'm reminded of Catherine Carswell's observation, "It wasn't a woman who betrayed Jesus with a kiss." --- OtherDave (talk) 12:32, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It appears to be the late-15th-century scholarly Latinate way of saying "bros before hos"... AnonMoos (talk) 14:23, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :) --Kjoonlee 04:36, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

requesition letter for an atm card

Do you have a question? The title is not enough. (I have removed your example image, which seemed to serve no purpose.) Gwinva (talk) 09:14, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Writing style forum

What is the best forum in the internet for writing style? Is there any forum out there dedicated to the analysis of texts? Mr.K. (talk) 11:18, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Political term

How would you classify someone whose views lie between "moderate" and "liberal"? (since I'm looking for a word, I think the language desk is the right place to post this...)128.239.177.28 (talk) 13:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)SneezingPanda[reply]

If not just "moderate liberal", then "center-left" is all I can think of. AnonMoos (talk) 13:17, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) By whose definition of "liberal"? In Europe, political parties called "Liberal" tend to be right-of-center, relatively conservative on fiscal issues and relatively progressive on social issues. In the U.S., "liberal" has somehow come to mean "left-wing". If you're thinking of the U.S. defintion (and since your IP address is associated with the US I suspect you are), I guess I'd say "left of center". —Angr 13:20, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The term "moderate liberal" works, too. The Jade Knight (talk) 07:48, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

what age

how old do you think this kid was who said "a diamond is a TYPE of pearl"? At what age could you have made a mistake like that?

This is an online version of a Reference desk. Your question is inappropriate. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 14:38, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You would expect that by their teens children would know that a diamond differs from a pearl. I guess you assume this is Common knowledge? It seems pretty basic information to me, and i'm not sure why someone would equate a diamond and pearl as enough alike for one to be a 'type' of them - presumably they've never seen either? Perhaps they were confused? Either way you could obviously make the mistake at any age, but you'd expect that as age increases the likelihood of making the mistake decreases - though i guess past a certain age it could start to go back up as dementia and senility start to ravage once brilliant minds. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 15:13, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
what does "by their teens" mean to you? Like, probably by 12? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.120.111.254 (talk) 21:13, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not usually. Teens start at 13 (thirteen) in my world. What the kid may have been thinking of is that pearls and diamonds have more than one thing in common. They're both produced as the result of natural processes that take a considerable time (a lot more with diamonds, but pearls don't happen overnight either); they're both forms of jewellery; they're often worn together; they're both very valuable; you'd buy them both in the same shop; and they both often appear in the same song lyrics. I wouldn't judge them too harshly for thinking laterally, even if they did express themselves unscientifically. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:21, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Jack, I just said that (see below). And, besides, in some languages, teens start at 'ten', such as Japanese, Chinese, and Korean. We don't know where the OP is from.--ChokinBako (talk) 21:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
???? Not to mention ????. That sounds like you're chiding me for repeating something you already said. Let the chronological record speak for itself, I say. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, sorry, I only noticed it after I posted. I must not have noticed you had posted in the first place. Very unlike me, I must say! Sincere apologies.--ChokinBako (talk) 01:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, ChokinBako. Apology accepted. Your second point is interesting, though. In English. we define "teenager" and "being in one's teens" by the words that happen to end in -teen (13 through 19). Is there an equivalent to "teenager" etc in those other languages? If a Korean "teenager" aged 10, say, comes to the USA, is it a problem for them to understand that they've suddenly dropped back to being a "child", and won't resume being a teenager until they get to 13? -- JackofOz (talk) 01:56, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It depends how educated they would be. There's no a priori reason to know the difference between various forms of jewelry. As to the nature of the error—it would require more information to know. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 00:49, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I never thought of that. It is probably made even more complicated by the fact that the Japanese sometimes use the English word teen (ティーン) to mean 'teen', but in the Japanese sense of the word (i.e. 10 and older). The original Japanese word 'juudai' (十代) means 'the age of tens', and there is no separate word for anyone who is 13 or older. I suppose it would annoy/confuse them that they are no longer 'teen', even though they are still 'juudai'. I love exploring word equivalency/lack thereof! Let's do colours next!--ChokinBako (talk) 16:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I would not scold the kid for saying something like that. It would be like saying a 'zebra is a type of horse'. Diamonds and pearls are both used as jewelry and are both made from minerals, albeit in completely different ways and both are subsets of the term 'jewelry', but there is some logic logic in it, even though it is mistaken logic. I am not defending the kid, though, because, by that logic, one could say a pig is a type of horse, as they are both animals.--ChokinBako (talk) 19:21, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A better analogy would be horse and camel: related not by nature but by use. —Tamfang (talk) 05:50, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, like husband and wife, perhaps?--ChokinBako (talk) 21:59, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request

I need help. If somebody has free time (and it won't be difficult for him) I want to ask him to read my article Sergei Bodrov, Jr. and tell me if the translation is normal or poor. Somebody wrote on article's discussion page that the language is extremely vague. I don't understand if he meant the indicated sentence or the whole article. Thanks.--Slav9ln (talk) 14:36, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He meant the sentence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.171.56.13 (talk) 17:30, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The article in its entirety has a few odd phrases and inaccurate words that I and probably others will correct. The final sentence in the "schooling" paragraph requires rewording but I can't understand what is meant by the present sentence. Richard Avery (talk) 18:36, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for help!!--Slav9ln (talk) 15:37, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Cheri" in English

A Hot Chocolate song is called "Cheri Babe". Now "chéri" is a French word, used both as a noun ("darling") and an adjective ("beloved"), but in both cases for males only. Now in what way and what meaning exactly is the word used in English? And is its pronounciation in any way different to "sherry"? --KnightMove (talk) 20:59, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's just a girls name: [2]. A variant of Cherie. Pronunciation is as "Sherry". Fribbler (talk) 21:02, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thx, but is it usual to use a name in a construction like this? "Sally babe", "Emily babe"...? --KnightMove (talk) 07:24, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Usual" is relative. It is not unheard of to use "-babe" (or "-baby") as a way of turning a name into a diminutive in the US. It's not terribly common, but few diminuitives including the name are in English. The Jade Knight (talk) 08:04, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
See, for example, "Sherry Baby."]

what is the meaning of the turkish word balim in english?

what is the meaning of the turkish word balim in english? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.118.77.70 (talk) 21:06, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"My honey" in an affectionate way. Fribbler (talk) 21:13, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's actually "balım" with a dotless i, though. —Angr 21:17, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's right. Delayed my dictionary search, that did. Fribbler (talk) 21:18, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't vowel harmony require undotting? —Tamfang (talk) 17:07, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

whats your interpretation of this quote?

“Greatness lies not in being strong, but in the right using of strength…” - Henry Ward Beecher —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.183.233.251 (talk) 21:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do your own homework? I mean, honestly, just read it over, it's not impossible to make sense of. Consider whether the US intervention in Iraq has been a display of American greatness or lack thereof, as a concrete example. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 00:47, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

September 30

"upwards of"

I'm wondering about the expression "upwards of".

For example, does "upwards of fifty" mean - less than but close to fifty - more than fifty - somewhere in the vicinity of fifty?

Thanks, Wanderer57 (talk) 01:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At least fifty, but probably more. (Not as much as 60, of course, else you'd say "pushing 60", or similar .) Think of it as "above". Gwinva (talk) 02:16, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone know this Kanji?

Does anyone know this Kanji? 鑑. In my document, it is used as '[verb]ことに鑑み' and comes at the end of a clause. Cheers!--ChokinBako (talk) 12:08, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My kanji dictionary says かんがみる, meaning "in view of [a situation]". TomorrowTime (talk) 12:25, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, that makes perfect sense!--ChokinBako (talk) 12:35, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Name of a report?

If I'm making a report to my manager to assess the current situation of a service and making suggestions on what changes and options are possible to improve the quality and efficiency of the service and how to reconfigure and optimize the workflow or the way phone lines are set up, what is that called? an "assessment and suggestion report"? surely there must be a standard term for this kind of research and recommendations document. in the end it's the manager who receives the report who can decide what he wants to do, but now he is fully informed of his options.--Sonjaaa (talk) 16:21, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Name the report something logical to what you are doing "Optimisation of Phone Line to Improve Service Quality and Efficiency" would seem to be alright. Something such as Project_management#Project management artifacts might be a place to consider more official sounding titles. The problem is that every company will incorporate different 'tools' and so will have different report naming conventions. ny156uk (talk) 18:52, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Italian translation

Hy there, could someone translate me this Italian sentence: "NESSUNO COME NOI"? Much obliged. Flamarande (talk) 17:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it means "no one like us". —Angr 18:49, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think so too. —Tamfang (talk) 17:08, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mama and papa

Some articles said the similarity between "mama" and "papa" in many less related languages is "false cognate". Are there exist some opposite linguistic theories or evidences that support other viewpoints? I am thinking about that maybe some of these "mama"s are real cognate because recent researches suggest that all the people have same origin. luuva (talk) 20:09, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you haven't already, check out mama_and_papa. A question very similar to this came up on this Language Desk a month or so ago. You might find more information in the Archives.--El aprendelenguas (talk) 20:37, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

USA v UK abbreviations

Why is it that Americans abbreviate every thing with initials, whereas Brits use a 'shortened' form. e.g. Video Cassette Recorder, US = VCR, UK video Television, US = TV, UK = telly Automatic teller machine, US = ATM, UK = hole in the wall Improvised Explosive Devise, US = IED, UK = bomb

Thanks, Colin, a Brit living in the US —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.170.128.65 (talk) 20:46, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We stopped saying 'hole in the wall' when people started stealing them, and they were, literally, a hole in the wall! What era did you come from?! --ChokinBako (talk) 23:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm 28 from the UK. I say "cash machine". The term "hole in the wall" is now a trademark of Barclays Bank! doktorb wordsdeeds 23:07, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
We also do use the Lloyds TSB copyrighted term 'Cashpoint' quite a bit as it's easier to say that Barclays' copyrighted 'hole-in-the-wall'. Nanonic (talk) 23:08, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Terms like that are uncopyrightable. I think you mean they are trademarks. Algebraist 09:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) Because British and American English are different dialects. No, seriously, that is all the answer there is. We say 'lorry' but Americans don't, what we call a 'mobile' Americans usually call a 'cellphone', and so on. Because they're different dialects. It may be the case that Americans use more initialisms, than we do, but I'm not convinced. I don't think many Americans would talk about their 'GP', for example.
Incidentally, I'm dubious about both 'telly' and 'hole in the wall'. I don't deny that they are used, but not in the same way as 'TV' and 'ATM': I don't think I would say 'telly' except jocularly, and I normally say 'cashpoint' or 'cash machine' rather than 'hole in the wall'. Come to think of it, one reason for 'ATM' being less readily taken up in the UK may be that the word 'teller' is very much less common that in the US. --ColinFine (talk) 23:15, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Meh, these things vary of course. I'd say 'telly' as easily as 'TV', but 'hole in the wall' definitely has a jocular edge for me - only used in certain moods and circumstances. Maybe 10 or so years ago I would have considered it the normal word for the people I heard say it. Would never use ATM though (except as abbrev. for at the moment). Cash machine would seem more every day usage. 130.88.52.36 (talk) 18:08, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"no no" ( babyish expression..)

To say that soemething is a "no, no " is quite common in current English.I don't like it , especially outside its pediatric context , as it sounds infantile and trivialising. I *believe* it originated from Dr Benjamin Spock, but I have been able to find an origin, Can anyone help ? Feroshki (talk) 23:32, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The OED gives a 1942 citation. The noun form appears in L. V. Berrey and M. Van den Bark's The American Thesaurus of Slang. In the 1953 edition, "no-no" appears on page 297. Spock's book Baby and Child Care was not published until 1946. Michael Slone (talk) 00:58, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a "no, no"; it's a no-no. While the phrase is obviously older, it was popularized in the 1960s by Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In. --Anonymous, 05:25 UTC, October 1, 2008.
Before Laugh-In, there was "that's a Bozo no-no".... I see our article on Bozo lacks the Bozo no-no, "Cram it, Clownie!" story, for which, see here- Nunh-huh 18:26, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 1

Bach title

I've tripped over an arrangement of a Bach composition, subtitled in German "Wenn Meine Trubsal als mit Ketten". While I can translate each individual word adequately, I can't put them together into a coherent phrase. Trubsal should be Trübsal, distress; Ketten are chains, but how would you render than into, say, a cantata title in English?

(If my distress was all in chains? Were my distress like chains?)

--DaHorsesMouth (talk) 03:57, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This gives the following translation of the Aria:
Wenn meine Trübsal als mit Ketten
When my sorrow as if with chains
Ein Unglück an dem andern hält,
joins one misfortune to another,
So wird mich doch mein Heil erretten,
then will my saviour rescue me,
Daß alles plötzlich von mir fällt.
so that everything suddenly falls away from me.
Wie bald erscheint des Trostes Morgen
How soon appears a morning of consolation
Auf diese Nacht der Not und Sorgen!
after the affliction and worry of this night! -- JackofOz (talk) 04:06, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, Jack beat me to it. I was just going to say you need the next phrase too. Grsztalk 04:08, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The translation has a couple of (relatively minor) issues, namely:
  • So wird mich doch mein Heil erretten: "Heil" is not the saviour but that which the saviour (German "Heiland") brings; I'd probably translate it with "salvation" or "grace".
  • Wie bald erscheint des Trostes Morgen: there's a genitive that's not correctly rendered in the English sentence; "Trostes Morgen" should be "consolation's morning".
  • Auf diese Nacht der Not und Sorgen: this is also not quite correctly translated, it should be "this night of affliction and worry".
And the first word is open for interpretation as it's a bit ambiguous in German; a (temporal) "when" certainly works and makes sense in the context of the cantata, but a case could also be made for a (conditional) "if" which would change the tone of the passage slightly -- Ferkelparade π 08:16, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exposition to alcohol causes...

Is it appropriate to use the word "exposition" in place of "exposure"? --Seans Potato Business 09:50, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. Why would it be? Algebraist 09:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Only if you tell your troubles to the bottle. —Tamfang (talk) 17:11, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

even more probable to be true

How can you express the idea that if A is true, B is even more probable to be true. (i.e. there is even more evidence to B). Mr.K. (talk) 10:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"A makes B more likely/probable."? Zain Ebrahim (talk) 10:47, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe correlation? Not quite a perfect match to the described scenario but sort of similar. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 11:06, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Bayes' theorem is perhaps a more closely related concept than correlation, in my opinion (though as you're asking on the Language ref. desk page you're probably not after mathematical concepts anyway).--85.158.137.195 (talk) 12:03, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure if this is a general question or if you have a specific example in mind. In general, one might say: "A implies B". In particular cases, there are many ways to express the idea depending on how strongly A and B are linked. Wanderer57 (talk) 12:27, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A forteriori? Provided A does not imply B, but there are stronger reasons to believe B is true.80.58.205.37 (talk) 15:42, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's no such word, AFAIK. Did you mean a fortiori? — Emil J. 15:50, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
yes, I meant a fortiori. 80.58.205.37 (talk) 17:43, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish

Why is there a Scots wikipedia? Surely the language has to be the first language of a group of people to be at all useful; and seeing as in Scotland the first language is Scottish English; which all business education and broadcasts etc. are conducted in; who does this benefit? Te only people that can read it can read the English (probably better, as they probably only learnt the semi-archaic Scots for a bit of fun) and the English one has far more content. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.16.62.154 (talk) 12:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no "first language" criterion for a Wikipedia to exist; indeed there is an Esperanto Wikipedia. A Wikipedia in a given language exists purely when there is enough interest (and then enough activity) for one to exist. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 12:32, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My personal opinion on this has long been that one of the things Wikipedia isn't is Asterix; therefore Wikipedias should exist only in languages used as the medium of instruction somewhere, rather than every language and dialect someone thinks it would be neato to have a Wikipedia in. I don't know whether Scots fulfills that criterion though, and anyway it's only my personal opinion, not Wikimedia policy. —Angr 12:46, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the people over at Meta.Wikimedia.org have pretty much adopted a "no new dead-language Wikipedias" policy, which means that there will probably be no further Wikis like Latin, Classical Chinese, and Old English. The Klingon Wikipedia and the Tokipona Wikipedia were shut down 2-3 years ago... AnonMoos (talk) 13:01, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sweet suffering succotash, this notion is enough to make me wish I knew enough Latin to start a online encyclopedia. How does the GNU general public license restrain me from doing so? (Answer: it doesn't.) The policy listed above deals with new language subdomains of existing projects on Wikimedia (who, fortunately, don't seem to view themselves as the Galactic Emperor). The esteemed Finlay, above, shows good sense: if a bunch of people want to have an online encyclopedia in Scots or Latin on Klingon, so what? If they succeed, they succeed; if they fail, they fail. Some folks need more important things to worry about, like whether Andy Murray is a British tennis player or a Scottish one. The world wonders. --- OtherDave (talk) 15:13, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There's a Klingon Wikia, but there isn't a Klingon Wikipedia anymore. There is, however, an established Latin Wikipedia (just like I already said above). AnonMoos (talk) 15:21, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Right you are; my misreading. The point's the same, though: whatcha gonna do if someone starts an online encyclopedia in, say, Elvish? Send Jimbo Wales to beat them up? --- OtherDave (talk) 19:37, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They're welcome to do so, but not under a subdomain of wikipedia.org... AnonMoos (talk) 21:01, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I remember they tested out Quenya in the Incubator but I don't think it took off. bibliomaniac15 21:33, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OtherDave, I have no issue with someone starting a website of any form, in whatever language they like, but I just thought the cost incurred by dead language wikipedias may be wasted funds, as no-one benefits from it. If they do it in their own domain they can do what they want. But this is an organization that depends on charity to make ends meet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.16.62.154 (talk) 00:38, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unidentified symbol

This question comes by way of Ryan North, of Dinosaur Comics: Does anyone know if there are any languages that have a symbol that resembles this? -- MacAddct1984 (talk &#149; contribs) 15:58, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've never seen it, but if there were a language spoken only by cricketers, it might in a cryptic sort of way represent the word for a sticky wicket (see sticky wicket for what I'm talking about). -- JackofOz (talk) 16:17, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Journalist with foreign accent?

Is it my impression or the CNN journalist here does have a foreign accent? Is it possible to be a journalist not being a native speaker?80.58.205.37 (talk) 17:42, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What? Is there some sort of requirement that people only take jobs in the country they were raised in or something? 70.90.171.153 (talk) 17:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The journalist in question is named as Felipe Barral; according to this page, he is "assignment editor/producer for CNN en Español". I guess he can occasionally be called upon to do reports for CNN in English if it's simpler than sending a native speaker to a place where he already is. In general, broadcast journalists will be native speakers; historically, even those with regional accents were rarely allowed on the air (hence "BBC English" and General American#General American in the media). However, if a reporter has a particular unusual speciality, that may outweigh the disadvantage of an accent. In particular, foreign correspondents for a news organ are often natives of the country reported on rather than of the news organ's home market. CNN International, being global, has lots of nonnative English speakers. jnestorius(talk) 19:31, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Utterly unthinkable. What do those foureen mutts imagine, appearing on CNN like that?

Dear IP Adress, you, sir, have some serious issues that need to be dealt with. Or maybe you just have some growing up to do, that's possible, too. TomorrowTime (talk) 22:56, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Naughty naughty; feeding the trolls.

Please translate the following?

The words SVAZ PRAEL USA JIHOZAPADNI ALLIANCE appear on a lapel pin showing the Statue of Liberty. What does it mean and what language is it? ForgetergalForgetergal (talk) 20:45, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps Czech. Grsztalk 21:26, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Svaz=Association Jihozápadní=Southwest Grsztalk 21:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 2

english language

importance of language in administration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.219.254.32 (talk) 00:24, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I concur (after all what else can I do with a statement) but please see English grammar and note that all english sentences should have a verb and a subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.16.62.154 (talk) 00:26, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Language&oldid=242388277"