Look up Wiktionary:Information desk in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Look up Wiktionary:Translation requests in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

A few months ago, I asked a similar question here concerning Plural nouns that are usually treated as if they were singular.

I'm still somewhat confused, however, as to whether one would prefer the adjective less or fewer with them.

The general rule is that fewer is preferred with plurals. Certain plurals treated as singular, though, seem so abstract to me that less sounds better.

e.g. "less data" vs. "fewer data", "less mathematics" vs. "fewer mathematics", "less aerobics" vs. "fewer aerobics."

Does anybody here know what dictionaries, usage guides, or style manuals say about this? Pine (talk) 00:38, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, data can be treated as an uncountable noun (data is stored), or a plural form of the countable noun datum (data are stored). So I would say less data in the former case, and fewer data in the latter one --151.56.72.91 (talk) 01:01, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also read Mass noun#The words fewer and less. Hope it helps :) --151.56.72.91 (talk) 01:05, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It needs to be pointed out that mathematics is not in fact a plural in contemporary English. What's a mathematic exactly? Nothing, of course. So mathematics is a mass noun construed as singular.

Etymologically, of course, it's plural. --Trovatore (talk) 02:10, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right, and as far as I can tell, the same reasoning applies to 'physics', 'gymnastics', etc. SemanticMantis (talk) 02:39, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is the fastest (natural) language, both in terms of how fast the words go by (i.e., probably a syllable timed language), but more importantly in terms of how fast meaning can be conveyed, how concise the language is. Thanks. 72.128.95.0 (talk) 01:42, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trust me, that's definitely not Italian. --a native Italian speaker, 01:44, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My impression is that Italian tends to have a somewhat lower information density than (for example) English, if measured by information per syllable. The other side of the coin, though, is that because Italian has a small number of vowel sounds (five to seven, depending on accent) and they are quite distinct, Italian can be spoken quickly without losing clarity. So probably the information per unit time is similar. These are my personal subjective impressions; I'd be interested to know whether the question has been rigorously studied. --Trovatore (talk) 01:53, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note also that even in English, different people manage to convey things at different speeds and efficiencies. Just think: "I'm Falconus" versus "My name is Falconus". Essentially the same, with perhaps a very slightly nuanced difference in meaning. Yet the latter has 50% more syllables. If you can't tell, I tend to be rather verbose. So, by this logic, it's shorter to say "I'm Falconus" than "Ich heiße Falconus", but "Ich heiße Falconus" has the same number of syllables as "My name is Falconus". In French, it's "Je m'appelle Falconus", which depending on regional dialects has, I believe, either five or six syllables. My question would be if certain languages are better suited at being concise, or if it just depends on the speaker. As an example of a language that may in certain cases be more concise, I find that Latin often is very succinct. "Puer puellam videbatur" (edit: "Puer puellā videbatur" - sorry, it's been awhile) is, if my memory is correct, best translated as "The boy was being seen by the girl". Obviously, in that case, it's far shorter just to say the Latin. "Falconus sum" is also short, but "Meum nomen Falconus est" is a longer way to state my name. Just food for thought. Falconus^{p t c} 05:50, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is beside the point, but "Nomen mihi Falconus est" is more idiomatic. —Angr (talk) 09:29, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I have to say that I have not had much opportunity to develop my day-to-day conversational Latin. I'm intrigued that they use the dative pronoun there; I have seen different ways to express one's name in a few different languages, but that's a new one to me. Falconus^{p t c} 14:29, 26 April 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Sometimes the dative case is used as if it were genitive. In Italian we call that dativo di possesso (= dative indicating that someone possesses something). In this case, your name belongs to you --151.56.88.10 (talk) 02:56, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think sign languages tend to be quite information-dense, but it takes longer to make a gesture with one's arms and hands than with one's tongue, so that probably slows them back down to a speed comparable with spoken languages. —Angr (talk) 09:34, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Scouse --138.217.223.214 (talk) 08:29, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a living language by any means, but Old Chinese might fit the bill. It was made of mostly monosylabic words and works in old chinese are very dense in meaning, so spoken old chinese probably is a good canditade. Rabuve (talk) 14:54, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I personally believe that all languages have essentially the same information density, in terms of information conveyed per unit of time -- I believe this is set by people's ability to integrate information cognitively. Looie496 (talk) 16:10, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rabuve -- However, old Chinese is reconstructed as having very complex syllables, so these would not necessarily have been commonly pronounced at the same rate as the relatively simple syllables of modern Mandarin... AnonMoos (talk) 17:21, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Syllables of Old Chinese are more complex than syllables of Modern Mandarin, but at maximum they would have four phonemes (CCVC), which doesn't make them any more complex than Vietnamese or Khmer (and considerably less in general). --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 19:02, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's not really what the article says... AnonMoos (talk) 03:31, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I neglected semi-vowels (didn't know how to notate them), and forgot about the odd 's' at the end, but this still does not escape the fact that Old Chinese was monosyllabic, and most of the sound combinations shown in the article are pretty straight forward, unlike those of Khmer and Vietnamese, which can and do take some time to pronounce (milliseconds, of course, but still, time). In any case, though, any answer to this perennial question would just be dogging the fled horse, because quite simply it will always depend on the speaker. Not the language. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 05:43, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Malayalam (as fastest words go by)? --Soman (talk) 19:13, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I elect Pirahã's whistled language in terms of phonemes. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 21:30, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you wanted to determine this scientifically, you'd have to take some widely translated book, acquire translated copies of it, get someone to read a sufficiently long passage out of each one while you measure the time, and compare. – b_jonas 09:39, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I need the proper pronunciation of Cocchi Americano, an aperitif wine from the Asti province of Italy. I have seen it reffered to as being pronunced "Co-key", but this is obviously not the official IPA for Italian. The word "Cocchi" is a name, so regional pronunciation may not be that of Asit province. Thanks. Colincbn (talk) 04:05, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The "k" sound in the first word is geminated. The "o" sound is an "open o", roughly the "caught" vowel for Americans who distinguish "caught" from "cot". --Trovatore (talk) 04:12, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Based on that then, the IPA would be [ˈkɔkki ameriˈkano]. Lesgles (talk) 04:30, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic, thanks a million! I'll add this to the article now. Cheers Colincbn (talk) 04:32, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In 99 words for boobs, there is the line "Schwag the showgirls show in Vegas". What does this mean? Is it supposed to be a term for boobs? --KnightMove (talk) 06:56, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Schwag is swag - booty, the goods. In this context, the answer to your question is then yes. Henry^Flower 16:24, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. And what is the literal meaning of this expression? I fail to understand it. --KnightMove (talk) 10:17, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Literally it is "Items/Goods that the showgirls show/display in Las Vegas". Dismas|^(talk) 11:02, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is the purpose of using the word "affair" in the following sentences ? The debate was a pretty disappointing affair. The party turned out to be a quiet affair. Can we not say the above as, The debate was pretty disappointing . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.211.88.150 (talk) 07:49, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is a synonym for 'event' as referenced here: (Freedictionary.com: affair). The sentences could also be structured as you have suggested with little difference to the meaning --138.217.223.214 (talk) 08:26, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The original meaning of the word affair is "business" or "commercial transaction". As such, when applied to events that one might expect to be entertaining or exciting, it is a little disparaging. Marco polo (talk) 14:51, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I was watching a TV ad for a Japanese car. An engineer was talking about the car they had designed. The ad was in Japanese with English subtitles, but I noticed that he used a couple of English words and an English phrase in his description, namely engine, design and can-do (as in can-do attitude). Are these words used in everyday Japanese?81.152.252.58 (talk) 21:01, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think you may be talking about the Toyota adverts. The mixture of English and Japanese in those adverts is actually normal - words like 'engine' and 'design' are loanwords from English. Also, there are lots of buzz-words like 'can-do' (and actually Toyota specifically has its own jargon). --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 23:23, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OP here. Many thanks KageTora, it is the Toyota adverts I was referring to194.176.105.55 (talk) 09:36, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gotta be the Mazda adverts because one of the loan words was "rotary", and only Mazda use a rotary engine - that's the main thing he was talking about. --TammyMoet (talk) 12:11, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I just guessed it was Toyota because I've only seen adverts for Toyota on telly recently (I really don't watch much telly), but in any case, are you sure? --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 14:28, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The ad is repeated ad nauseam during ITV4's cricket coverage, and was on the screen just after I hit "save page"! I see the reference to Toyota's rotary engine, which must be very recent indeed. It's not in common use, unlike Mazda's. --TammyMoet (talk) 14:54, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I guess it must be a Mazda advert, because I very much doubt Toyota would be advertising something they developed in the 1970s! --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 15:25, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They may well have done, but did they put it in a racing car and win Le Mans with it? That's in the advert as well. --TammyMoet (talk) 17:22, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to be the advert under discussion. Sussexonian (talk) 18:44, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've just seen it on TV about two minutes ago and came here to say that it is definitely Mazda. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 18:52, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just a side-note, but in the advert, the man says 「英語で言えばキャン・ドゥーですね」, which means 'In English this would be "Can-do", right', as he is introducing a buzz-word. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 22:09, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If this is the same advert that I saw, I'm surprised that they think that the concept of "Hiroshima spirit" would sell cars to Britons. Not everyone can have forgotten why we needed to bomb the place. Alansplodge (talk) 11:51, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know it may sound odd, but the idea is not 'why we needed to bomb the place', but what happened afterwards and the city's very admirable recovery. I still remember buildings were around Liverpool City Centre which had been destroyed in the blitz when I was a kid (massively badly made sentence, but you'll get my point). --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 15:27, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I see your point. I'm just astonished that they thought "Hmm... Japan, World War II, good selling point". I find it annoying that the Japanese appear (to me) to hold the atomic bombings in complete isolation from preceding events. Maybe I'm just getting old. Alansplodge (talk) 19:03, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the idea that 100,000++ innocent women and babies should be wiped out in an instant, and the survivors and their as-yet-unborn children should suffer massive pain, deformities and shortened life spans - all because of the actions of some of their menfolk - that seems to be a very old idea, Alan. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 19:46, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As compared to 100,000+ Allied soldiers being killed by the Japanese D-Day that was averted by using the Bomb? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:15, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"1.7 to 4 million American casualties, including 400,000 to 800,000 fatalities, and five to ten million Japanese fatalities". Alansplodge (talk) 17:57, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Babies don't fight in any army, mate, and so long as American soldiers don't make a habit of gang-raping and then killing children, many of those kids who died in that bomb would still be alive regardless. I won't mention the countless gang-rapes of Japanese children by American soldiers in Okinawa since the occupation began and still continuing up to the present day, because none of those kids were killed. Just scarred for life. This is a very serious and ongoing, endemic problem, and one of the many many reasons the Japanese have a perennial vote on whether to keep the Americans in Okinawa or to kick them out forever. It almost seems like these days, if you are a pedophile you have two career options: join the priesthood, or join the American Army, or Marines, or whatever they are. Same thing is happening in Korea now. It happened in Vietnam (and nearby Thailand, Laos, and Cambodia, leading the aforementioned countries to getting a reputation for child prostitution). It is happening in Afghanistan. Iraq. Anywhere where American troops are stationed, kids are getting raped. Here's hoping the Libyans will have enough foresight to evacuate their kids to a really faraway land before American boots get on the ground. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 21:57, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, you are missing the point entirely. Hiroshima has not only regained its status as a central hub of industry in Asia, it is also a symbol of peace for the Japanese. Go to Hiroshima one day and you will see. When I was at school in Kobe, my school took us on a trip to Hiroshima specifically to see the peace memorials there. The church in Hiroshima - basically the only building left standing after the bomb - is still there. We have an article on it at Hiroshima Peace Memorial. At the epicentre there is a memorial for all the people killed in the bomb - a statue of a bomb with children playing around it - and just next to that is the most horrific museum you will ever care to visit. Then there is Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park. The idea is, the Japanese have a terrible past, but so do we all (and us British have a particularly horrific colonial past - such as inventing concentration camps and tying Indians to the front of cannons just to make a point). They have fixed the problems caused by their past - most of them anyway - and are going forward to a prosperous future as a nation of pacifists. The Japanese have worked hard to redefine their image in the world and become a major economic power. That is something to be proud of. We, however, hold nuclear weapons and have been in a continual state of war since the Romans arrived. And Liverpool - my city - was once an industrial centre - a major European industrial centre, with a car industry that even the Germans envied, and that has all gone. Hiroshima did very well, considering. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 12:48, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure who you're talking to. Japan has done a remarkable job of converting itself into a peace-loving nation. Ironically, I wonder if that would have happened without the Bomb? Anyway, when our President said, "We stand with the Japanese people", to me that indicated how far we've come in 65+ years. At the Minnesota Twins home opener a few weeks ago, the flag was raised by a WWII veteran who had survived the Bataan Death March. Right after that, there was a moment of silence in respect to the victims of the earthquake and tsunami. I'm sure when the guy was being forced to march in that horrific event, the idea that we could be allies with Japan was the farthest thing from his mind. Having said all that, I get a little annoyed with folks who Monday-morning-quarterback the Bomb. It was a good military decision. We had to end the war. We didn't start the war. The Japanese attacked us, and we had to do something. And 4 years later, the Bomb ended it, sparing a D-Day style invasion that could have killed hundreds of thousands more. The people of Japan allowed their leaders to drag them into that devastating war, and they paid dearly for it... and learned from it. I'll concede that I'm not sure the US has learned that lesson yet. Maybe someday. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:46, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Bugs, my indent looked like it was addressed to you. It was addressed to AlanSplodge, whom, incidentally, I thought was the one who posted your post, which is why I indented as such. Sorry. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 21:57, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Monday-morning-quarterback? -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 20:06, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See "armchair general" -- a more military metaphor. BrainyBabe (talk) 20:29, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Both of these can be verbed? Incidentally, my mum took me shopping for a new three piece suite and I told her I really didn't care which one we got so long as it fitted in my tiny room. Seriously, for their purpose, they are all the same. I was accused of armchair generalization. :) --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 22:02, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from the humanities board
This article says Salvador's (Portuguese) historical "long name" is São Salvador da Bahia de Todos os Santos, which it defines as San Savior of All Saints' Bay. This seems like an almost-certainly flawed and/or inaccurate translation.

If "São" is indeed the equivalent of the Spanish "San," than it obviously begins with Holy Savior. "Bahia de Todos os Santos" obviously means 'bay of all saints' or All Saints' Bay. That would simply mean (City of the) Holy Savior of the bay of all saints (the current translation), or in other words, All Saints' Bay's Holy Savior, which simply doesn't make sense. It isn't the bay's savior, right?

Therefore, my best guess would be that the accurate English translation is (City of the) Holy Savior on All Saints' Bay. This is all independent speculation, and my question is whether anyone can help me confirm or deny this. Thanks, Swarm ^X 03:37, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That seems closer. Be aware I do not speak Portugese, but I know some Spanish, and the languages are fairly similar. Translating Portugese São to Spanish San is well-nigh useless. It's from Latin sanctus and means "Saint" or "Holy" or "Sanctified", depending on context. Reading the history, the bay was discovered first, on All Saints' Day, hence it was called Bahia de Todos os Santos, literally "Bay of All the Saints" or "All Saints' Bay". São Salvador means "Holy Savior" (i.e. Jesus). The city is within a Brazilian state called Bahia (the bay itself is now spelled Baia), and the state name Bahia is tacked onto the city name to distingush it from other cities of the same name. The article says the city is called São Salvador da Bahia de Todos os Santos. In effect, they are using Bahia to serve two purposes. If it were me, I would say, "[The City of] the Holy Savior [i.e. Jesus], of [the state of] Bahia, of All Saints [Bay]." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:00, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to "back into" the name via Google Translate, I found that "San Savior of Bahia of All Saints" works out exactly to São Salvador da Bahia de Todos os Santos. The reason I have to do it way way is that if I say "Holy Savior..." it translates as salvador santo, which I take to be the more modern way to say it in Portugese. I would still go with my translation if it were me. However, perhaps a Portugese speaker will turn up here. I know we have some. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:20, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Portuguese São, like Spanish San, usually corresponds more to English Saint than to holy in that it's generally used in conjunction with names and is not a garden-variety adjective. The corresponding adjective is santo and follows the noun. So a more accurate translation would be "Saint Saviour of All Saints Bay". In English-speaking countries, Saviour isn't usually used as a first name, but in Spanish/Portuguese it is (e.g. Salvador Allende), and the equivalent is used as a name in Italian too (e.g. Salvatore Mineo). Nevertheless, I'm pretty sure Bahía is named after Jesus in his capacity as Savior, not after some other saint who happened to be named Salvador. —Angr (talk) 07:17, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Compare El Salvador (The Saviour) with her capital San Salvador. It's hardly likely that the latter is named for a St Salvador while the former is named for The Saviour. The Wikipedia article for San Salvador says its full name is La Ciudad de Gran San Salvador (The City of the Great Holy Savior), while the Wikipedia article for El Salvador translates La República de El Salvador as "The Republic of The Savior". —— Shakescene (talk) 07:29, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cidade do São Salvador da Baía de Todos os Santos - I would say the locals translate it as , The city of the Holy Savior of All Saints' Bay. This translation also gets a lot of returns via google - http://www.salvador.info/salvador-facts.html - I have no idea who the holy savior bit is in reference to. I think the confusion originates from linguistic variations in modern usage, complicated by the similarities between Spanish and Portuguese. So I agree the current translation in our article is incorrect.Off2riorob (talk) 10:08, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Much of the confusion may come from the fact that they don't use possessive apostrophes in Spanish and presumably Portuguese. It isn't said "John's cat", it's said "the cat of John". So, we literally interpret it as "The city of the Holy Savior of the Bay of All Saints." When you reduce it to "Holy Savior of All Saints' Bay", the "of" (based on my basic Spanish knowledge) gives "All Saints' Bay" possession of "Holy Savior". It seems unlikely that the Portuguese would call Jesus "All Saints' Bay's savior". So the point raised by Baseball Bugs is actually pretty interesting. Perhaps "Bahia" or even "Bahia de Todos os Santos" actually refers to the name of the state and is one noun. Archaic Portuguese...who would've thought it'd be this confusing? Swarm ^X 11:38, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think "Holy Redeemer" is a more common form than "Holy Savior". I've seen a number of churches of the Holy Redeemer, but few or none called "Holy Savior". --Xuxl (talk) 15:27, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In which language? I can't tell you how many times a week I hear American Christians use the expression, "Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:43, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

American Roman Catholic speak. The "holy redeemer/savior" concept is very present in catholic dogma, with lots of places called San Salvador, São Salvador, Saint-Sauveur, etc. as a result (but none in the US as far as I know). --Xuxl (talk) 16:10, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly because the USA was primarily Protestant at first. There are of course many Spanish city names in the southwest that are prefixed by "San" or "Santa". Cities with English names tend to be secular. In any case, I'm not seeing an American city named San Salvador. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:20, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Catholics are most certainly not the only Christians who use the formula "Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ"! It's in the Bible, so it's fair game for all sola scriptura Protestants as well. Pais (talk) 16:38, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. I'm just saying that cities settled by protestants tended to be named in a secular way, though I'm sure there are exceptions. Corpus Christi, Texas, for example. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:51, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, my indentation made it unclear who I was responding to. I was objecting to Xuxl calling the formula "American Roman Catholic speak". Pais (talk) 17:20, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was also only refering to place names, not the use of the term in other religious contexts. --Xuxl (talk) 17:31, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think you'll find that most of the "Saint" city names in America, such as St. Louis and St. Paul, were founded by Roman Catholic missionaries/explorers. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:49, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Brazil#Advice about translating the full name of Salvador, Bahia. Forgive my BOLDness. —— Shakescene (talk) 04:26, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just to point out that in the Church of England there are many churches and schools with the dedication St Saviour's, including Southwark Cathedral.[1][2][3][4] Alansplodge (talk) 11:43, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion, of course, should really have moved over some time ago to Talk:Salvador, Bahia. I've never heard of St. Saviour's and if I had, it wouldn't register as Jesus Christ but as some saint I'd never heard of, so this just isn't a very useful translation for most readers. It adds to possible confusion rather than reducing it. I know that Saint or Sankt or Sanctus or Santo can mean Holy as well as Saint in some other languages, but it's such a very rare and archaic use in English that I'd have to think five times before recognising it. You don't see "Saint Heart" or "Saint Redeemer" or "Saint Virgin". "Saint Cross" maybe just possibly, but I think only as a translation from Saint Croix or Santa Cruz.—— Shakescene (talk) 20:48, 28 April 2011 (UTC) ¶ And I just realized that (even though I know some Spanish, attended UC-Berkeley and lived in Northern California for 25 years) I'd always thought of Santa Cruz as a female saint, like Santa Barbara or Santa Monica. So even if Saint Saviour were more common, that wouldn't mean that readers would understand it as referring to Jesus Christ. —— Shakescene (talk) 20:53, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to be a smug bastard but[5][6][7][8]. Actually, I agree with you, "Holy Saviour" would be better but I wanted to say that "Saint Saviour" is not unknown to English speakers, especially English ones. Alansplodge (talk) 21:05, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My local hospital is the Hospital of St Cross (Rugby, UK). --TammyMoet (talk) 07:46, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fairly common in Australia, too. Googling "saint saviour australia" gets over 4 million! hits. That's a misleading number, but it shows it's far fom unknown. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 00:01, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Found some sources which agree on a translation. I'll just go with that I guess. Swarm ^X 16:01, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

HI THERE, I AM NEW HERE. MY QUESTION IS THE URDU PAGES. THERE ARE NOT MUCH PAGES OF URDU? here is the link http://ur.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B6%D9%84%D8%B9_%D9%85%DB%8C%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%DB%8C_%DA%A9%DB%8C_%D8%AA%D8%B1%D9%82%DB%8C_%D9%85%DB%8C%DA%BA_%D8%AE%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%AA%DB%8C%D9%86_%DA%A9%D8%A7_%DA%A9%D8%B1%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B1&action=edit&redlink=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riaz Niazi (talk • contribs) 16:24, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See ur:خاص:Statistics for how many pages there are at Urdu Wikipedia. There are over 16,000 content pages there. If you notice any articles that are missing there, feel free to sign up at ur:خاص:UserLogin and start writing articles. Pais (talk) 16:33, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You might find ضلع میانوالی (Mianwali District) a good starting point. If an article doesn't exist you can create it, but please remember that if you intend to write in the Urdu language please do so on the Urdu Wikipedia. Astronaut (talk) 19:56, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In Fatah#Etymology, the name is described as being a "reverse acronym"; i.e., the letters are taken from the words in reverse order (حركة التحرير الوطني الفلسطيني ḥarakat al-taḥrīr al-waṭanī al-filasṭīnī). Is this especially common in Arabic, and are there examples of similar acronyms in other languages? Lesgles (talk) 21:08, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Acronyms that work in French are often in reverse order in English. For example ONU = UNO, United Nations Organisation. UE = EU, European Union. Itsmejudith (talk) 22:36, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but that's because in French the words are written in that order. I'm interested in instances where within the same language the acronym is formed backwards in relation to the words. I initially thought, "it's because Arabic is written from right to left", but that doesn't really make any sense, and now I see that acronyms like Hamas are formed in the normal way. Lesgles (talk) 23:42, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lesgles -- In traditional Islamic historical terminology, a fatħ فتح (literally "opening") is the first invasion by Muslims into a non-Muslim territory, and you can bet that Arafat &co. were a lot more concerned with invoking such historical memories than with accurate acronymizing. Anyway, حتف means "death"... AnonMoos (talk) 03:26, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The pseudonym of the creator of Tintin comes to mind. Georges Rémi took his initials - GR - and reversed them - RG - which as pronounced in French become Hergé. --Nicknack009 (talk) 16:21, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good one; I hadn't thought of that! Lesgles (talk) 17:06, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's an example of the French slang called Verlan, itself an example of syllable-reversal: l'envers. BrainyBabe (talk) 20:33, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not directly on point, but: Jewish texts in Hebrew sometimes mangle abbreviations to avoid their being spelled the same as words with bad connotations. Thus, רבי עובדיה מברטנורא ‎(Rabbi Obadiah of Bertinoro) is often abbreviated ר״ב rather than רע״ב because רעב means "famine". Likewise, the number 39 is often written (especially by Sepharadim) ט״ל rather than ל״ט (which would follow the usual pattern), as טל means "dew" while לט means "black magic" (or something like that; I'm not sure exactly). And, again, the year 5751 is often written תנש״א (as תנשא means "you'll be uplifted"), rather than the expected תשנ״א (as תשנא means "you'll hate").—msh210℠ 17:29, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since Fatah#Etymology describes an alternate etymology, isn't it possible that the reverse-acronym story is just a story? A sort of backronym? Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:30, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If it's a reverse backronym, wouldn't that be a frontronym? --Jayron32 20:38, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A 'frontronym'? I think this is a Jayronym.... :) --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 23:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What are some examples of loan words loaned back into their original language? ie: English -> Japanese -> English? Fifelfoo (talk) 12:48, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the oke part of karaoke comes from English orchestra. The French word tennis is borrowed from English tennis, which is from French tenez. The German word Quiche is from French quiche, which is from German Kuchen. Pais (talk) 12:57, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To use the Japanese example, we use the phrase capsule hotel to refer to hotels with tiny rooms, coming from the Japanese 'kapuseru hoteru' which is an example of wasei eigo, or 'English made in Japan'. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 13:16, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of gairaigo and wasei-eigo terms provides a lengthy list of Japanese terms which originate from European languages. Some have then been borrowed back into a European language, such as anime, and maybe salaryman. Astronaut (talk) 09:07, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are some interesting examples from Greek > Turkish > Greek, e.g. Ancient Greek límēn ('harbour') > Turk. liman > Mod.Gr. limáni. Greek > Latin > Italian > Greek would be cannē ('reed') > canna ('reed') > cannone ('tube, cannon') > kanóni. Greek > Latin > English > Greek would be poinē ('punishment') > poena > penalty > pénalti ('penalty shoot in football'). Germanic > Italian > Germanic would be G. bank ('bench') > Italian banca > G. bank ('financial institution'). Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:49, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Vampire" is another example. It comes from Serbian vampir wich has long-standing cognates in other Slavic languages: Croatian upir or upirina, Czech and Slovak upír, Polish upiór, East Slavic upyr, ultimately derived from Proto-Slavic *ǫpyrь or *ǫpirь. Since the 19th century, these Slavic languages have made reverse borrowings from West European languages: Croatian vampir, Czech vampýr, Slovak vampír, Polish wampir, East Slavic vampir. — Kpalion^(talk) 13:26, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Chinese for "lady", furen (夫人), was loaned into Mongolian and thence into Manchu as fujin, and then loaned back into Chinese during the Manchu Qing Dynasty as fujin (福晋), meaning "noble lady" or "princess" (as in wife of a prince). --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 13:46, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why The Mall, London pronounced so it rhymes with "pal" rather than "call?" This was emphasized by Brit on-air commentators today during the Royal wedding. Doesn't double "L" at the end of a word after "A" usually result in a vowel sound like "tall" "call" or "ball" rather than "Al," "Sal" or "gal?" Are other Brit malls similarly pronounced? Edison (talk) 14:44, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To British English ears, the usage of the word "mall" and the pronunciation maul (sorry, I don't do IPA), for shopping mall (or shopping centre), sounds American - although it is increasingly used in that sense. The Mall (and Pall Mall, which historically was pronounced pell mell) predate that usage. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:56, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, remember that pronunciation is primary and spelling is secondary. The question is not "Why is it pronounced mal if it's spelled as if it were pronounced maul", the question is "Why is it spelled Mall when it's pronounced mal?" Pais (talk) 15:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This blog goes into some detail on the question. In Britain, some people (including me) pronounce shopping mall as "maul" even though they call the street in London the "Mal". Other people (generally older, in my experience) say "mal" for both. Perhaps the "mal" pronunciation is due to its etymology, from Italian pallamaglio, which has the vowel /ä/ in modern standard Italian. (Or perhaps not.) Lfh (talk) 15:20, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I reckon that explains why Pall Mall (cigarette) was pronounced "pell mell" (during the time before TV was banned from advertising cigarettes). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:33, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Most ordinary Londoners (including my good self) pronounce The Mall and Pall Mall to rhyme with "pal" although I have heard the other pronunciation recently. Other British malls are usually pronounced "shopping centre". Alansplodge (talk) 16:29, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Shopping cen-tray"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:05, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you see an acute accent? No? Then why on Earth would it be pronounced as if it did? 82.24.248.137 (talk) 19:48, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs can contemplate that while sitting in his favourite cafe.  :) But yes, the whole par-tay thing and its terrible spawn should all have been killed at birth. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 19:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC) [reply]

The confusing thing about the pronounciation of Mall in this context is the fact that it isn't pronounced like all, ball, call, fall, tall, or small. It's the same complaint that I have when people from the Southern U.S. refer to their mother's sister as a small colonial insect. Haunt, flaunt, gaunt, jaunt... the "u" is there for a reason... --Jayron32 20:06, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

well you wouldn't appreciate Scouse or Yorkshire aunties then! The phrase "eat up - you're at your auntie's" comes to mind! (auntie's here is pronounced "anti's")

Jayron, the "u" is indeed there for a reason. But not for the reason that "aunt" is pronounced to rhyme with haunt, flaunt, gaunt or jaunt - because no variety of English that I'm aware of pronounces it that way. It's "ahnt", not "awnt". -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 21:10, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You should come to Southern NH/Norther Massachusetts then. My native accent has those all rhyme. "Your aunt looks gaunt" would rhyme perfectly. --Jayron32 04:56, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How interesting. Tks for the enlightenment. I must come and visit and check out all those gaunt aunts. -- Jack of Oz [your turn]

We need an encyclopedia big enough for our purposes.

There is no one clever enough to write the whole thing.

The adjectives big and clever come after the noun phrase that they qualify—in one case, the noun encyclopedia and in the other the pronoun no one.

Can someone state a simple rule that identifies those occasions in English where an adjective normally follows the noun phrase that it qualifies? Michael Hardy (talk) 17:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some criteria for post-positive adjectives are given at Postpositive Adjectives @ The Internet Grammar of English.

—Wavelength (talk) 18:32, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've added this sentence to the article titled post-positive adjective:

Some adjectives not always used post-positively are used so in some situations; for example: in "They need a house big enough for their family.", the adjective big follows the noun house.

That fact wasn't even mentioned in the article! The example sentence is quite a routine sort of sentence, yet post-positive use of ordinary adjectives in that way was not mentioned. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the first example, the adjective need not be post-positive. For example, you can say "We need a big enough encyclopedia for our purposes." In the second example, the adjective has to be post-positive because it modifies a pronoun (no one). For example, you would have to say "There is no one clever here." However, what I think is going on here is that these are predicative adjective phrases, which must follow the noun phrase or pronoun that they modify. In each of the cited cases, I think that there is an "understood" that is between the noun and the adjective modifying it, creating a kind of subordinate clause. Marco polo (talk) 19:35, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Colloquially, you can get away with "We need a big enough encyclopedia for our purposes". But analyse it for a moment. What's an "encyclopedia for our purposes"? That doesn't seem to make any sense. "For our purposes" is qualifying "big enough" and really ought to sit right next to it.

It's even worse when something like "We need an encyclopedia comprehensive enough that we can hand it out to every schoolchild" becomes "We need a comprehensive enough encyclopedia that we can hand it out to every schoolchild" - which is revolting and disgusting English. Better to play safe and keep things that belong together together.

There's a "that is" or "which is" understood in these types of sentences: "We need an encyclopedia [that is] big enough for our purposes". If all you're doing is re-arranging the words, the implied words remain: "We need a big enough encyclopedia [that is] for our purposes", and "We need a [that is] big enough encyclopedia for our purposes", and any other combination you now care to try, make zero sense. The only way that works is having 'encyclopedia' followed by the implied 'that is' followed by 'big enough' or whatever. I grant that, in conversation, it's not always possible to think this through quickly enough, and we then end up saying something else. But in writing, we have more time.

It's the same deal as "He only ate three peas but gorged himself on the rest of the banquet". If all he ate was three peas - which is what "he only ate three peas" is telling us - then that's all he ate, period. Better to put the 'only' next to the thing it's qualifying, then the sentence meets the logic test: "He ate only three peas but gorged himself on the rest of the banquet".

What's the big picture - misplaced modifier? -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 19:52, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Michael: in both your examples, it looks to me like the "post-positive" adjectives are actually reduced forms of relative clauses: "We need an encyclopedia [that is] big enough for our purposes", "there is no one [that is] clever enough to write the whole thing". (Oops, I see Jack already pointed this out.) rʨanaɢ (talk) 23:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've come across the Japanese phrase 水差して悪いけど, and it doesn't make any sense in context if I translate it literally. I'm having trouble figuring out what it means, or in what contexts it's used in, so any help would be nice.--十八 22:27, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it means 'sorry to hazard a guess, but...'. 水差して refers to stabbing at water to catch fish, so it is like 'shot in the dark' (= wild guess) in English. I hope this makes sense. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 22:57, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT - I have asked the question here. I seem to be wrong at first glance, but we'll see. Good luck. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 01:23, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT2 - My colleagues suggest it means 'sorry to pour cold water on [what you were suggesting] but....' or 'sorry to be a killjoy'. I was wrong. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 01:35, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that looks like it's correct; I understand the context now.--十八 01:36, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another colourful expression current in London is "sorry to piss on your bonfire but...". Grandma wouldn't approve! Alansplodge (talk) 14:43, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone here reads Arabic and is interested in zoology? I have just put a "History" section into the article Euphrates softshell turtle, but as I know no Arabic, I would like someone knowledgeable to check it over.

In 1797, Guillaume-Antoine Olivier shot a big turtle when crossing the Euphrates, and said that the locals call it rafcht. (He wrote in French, so his ch is like English sh). The creature was accordingly named by the zoologists of the day Testudo rafcht; later the name was apparently misread as Testudo rafeht; eventually the species was reclassified from the catch-all Testudo genus into its own genus, which was accordingly named Rafetus.

As Olivier does not say what rafcht meant, I tried to look it up in a dictionary, and the closest word they have is rafš(رفش), i.e. "spade". And indeed, a Google search does find some articles which apparently (based on what Google Translate says) say that the locals still call the creature ar-rafš(الرفش). There are a couple relevant links in the article Euphrates softshell turtle. If anyone can confirm or correct, that would be much appreciated. -- Vmenkov (talk) 03:39, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"How do you find your missing pen?" seems mean "You think your pen is good or bad?", But Chinese usually translate it to "你是(do you)怎么(how)找到(find)你的(your)丢失的(missing)笔(pen)" and think should answer "The pen under the desk." or "My friend helps me find it."
Now, I really want to ask "By which way you find your pen?", how should I express it?
And is this mistake only in Chinese?--铁铁的火大了 (talk) 05:46, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if the person actually has found his pen already (找到了他的笔), you will probably use the past tense in the question: "How did you find your missing pen?". The meaning ("in what way did you find it?", rather than "how do/did you like it?) is usually clear from the context. One would also respond in the past tense ("It was under the desk", etc).

If the speaker really wants to emphasize the "how" ("怎么...") part, I guess one can ask, "How were you able to find XXX?" (if the search has been completed successfully), or "How can you find XXX?" (if he's still looking, and if you are wondering whether he can do it successfully). Or even "How are you looking for XXX?", if the search is still in progress. -- Vmenkov (talk) 06:09, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! And now I understand this question.(Tense is dreadful...)--铁铁的火大了 (talk) 07:15, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

'Find' means 找到 and therefore implies a completed action (or soon to be complete). You would use 'look for' (寻找) if the person hasn't actually found the pen yet. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 07:53, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the same! Our teacher has told us this difference, but I forget it... --铁铁的火大了 (talk) 11:37, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How about “Have you found the pen? Where was it?” – b_jonas 09:35, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

笔找到了吗？在哪里？ rʨanaɢ (talk) 23:33, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If telling a dog to get into a prone position on the floor, which is correct? "Lay down" or "Lie down"? And why? This isn't homework, I'm just curious as to which is correct and therefore whether my wife or her mother is correct. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 10:03, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine it would depend on your dialect (and the dogs'). From memory of various sheepdog trials I've seen (they were all found guilty), both commands are used. - Arwel Parry (talk) 10:08, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) Well, language changes, and many people nowadays use "lay" intransitively. When I was at school, we had it rigorously drummed into us that one lies in bed, or lies down, and that 'lay' can only be used when talking about person A laying person B down, e.g. helping them into bed, tucking them in, etc. 'Lay' also crops up in "get laid". Lay is also used in "Now I lay me down to sleep" - but that's still OK because it's understood as "I lay myself down". There, you couldn't have "I lie myself down". Although, you could say "I, myself, lie down" in the right context, but not "I, myself, lay down".

So, you tell your dog to lie down, not to lay down. But, as I say, language changes, and maybe this is considered outmoded now. And that's no lie. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 10:18, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But if you made it much longer and turned it into verse it might be a lay. Mikenorton (talk) 10:48, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Simply say "Down!". [9] Oda Mari (talk) 10:22, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It basically comes down to the prescriptive/descriptive dichotomy. Prescriptively, "lie down" has traditionally been considered correct, as Jack says, because "lie (down)" is intransitive and "lay (down)" is transitive (exception: you can say "the hens are laying" because the direct object "eggs" is understood). But descriptively, native English speakers (certainly in the U.S., maybe in other countries too) have been using "lay down" intransitively so pervasively for so long that it can no longer be considered ungrammatical, however much it annoys prescriptivists. As for Oda Mari's suggestion, I think "Down!" addressed to a dog means "Get down" (i.e. stop jumping up on people, or get down off the sofa) rather than "Lie down". —Angr (talk) 10:50, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Angr, you are wrong. Did you see the link? "Down!" is a commonly used command to lie down. Take a look at our article Obedience training#Commands. And see these too. [10][11] [12] Oda Mari (talk) 15:07, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not wrong, I simply disagree with what the link says. If I had a dog, I would distinguish between the commands "Down" and "Lie down", regardless of what some dude on the Internet says. —Angr (talk) 19:02, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For some catty discussion of it, see here. My two penn'orth would be that since we have two different verbs, we may as well keep them for different meanings. As for your wife and her mother, if either says that lie is wrong, she's wrong. Otherwise they may take their picks. Henry^Flower 15:44, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This sentence is in the present tense: In the aftermath of the tornado, many tree branches lie on the streets.

This sentence is in the past tense: In the aftermath of the tornado, many tree branches lay on the streets.

—Wavelength (talk) 19:02, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all for the effort but I'm still just as confused. And in my house, we use "down" for lay/lie down and "off" for getting off of people, counter-tops, couches, etc. Dismas|^(talk) 23:41, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What more can we tell you. You lay a tablecloth on a table; or you lay your cards on the table; those are transitive because there's an object involved (tablecloth, cards). When it's a person or an animal just resting prone on a bed or whatever, they are lying (from the verb "to lie"), not laying. That's an intransitive verb, because there's no object involved; they are not lying <anything>, they're just lying. So, when you ask a person or a dog to get into a prone position, you ask them to lie down, not to lay down. If you want a person to surrender their weapons, you might ask them to lay them down. If you carry your sleeping child over your shoulders into their bedroom, you lay them down in the bed. But if you want your awake child to stop pestering you when it's after midnight, you ask them to lie down and go to sleep. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 00:49, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Dylan had trouble with this, too. Bielle (talk) 01:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another lyric that always annoys the hell out of me is "If I just lay here", which is repeated several times in Chasing Cars. "LIE here", I repeatedly shout at the radio... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.181.205.4 (talk) 11:50, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See wikt:lie and wikt:lay and wikt:prone and wikt:supine. See also http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/lay.html and http://www.grammarbook.com/homonyms/confusing-words-3.asp and http://www.confusingwords.com/.

—Wavelength (talk) 02:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Jack, for this latest explanation. A lot of what is said above is wishy-washy and doesn't really say it succinctly enough for me to get it. But now that I see that 'lay' has to have an object, I think I have it. Dismas|^(talk) 02:31, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Luckily for me, most of the people I try to lay bring their own objections with them, so it's easy to remember... Matt Deres (talk) 14:49, 2 May 2011 (UTC) [reply]

..I've found this phrase here and it has been found faulty in a review in de:Wikipedia:Kartenwerkstatt for a map I'm working on. Is it a common phrase or maybe even wrong? Is there a somewhat more common phrase, e.g. "anticipates it to become"? Kind Regards, --Alexrk2 (talk) 12:44, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing wrong with it. Anticipate is followed by a gerund, not by to + infinitive. If anyone doesn't like it for aesthetic reasons, anticipates that it will become would also be fine. Thanks for introducing me to the new German verb zu guttenbergen, by the way. Henry^Flower 15:51, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The German WP commenters may be unfamiliar with the English construction, but it's not wrong. Deor (talk) 16:00, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. I guess for us Germans the gerund is somewhat unusual. --Alexrk2 (talk) 18:24, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just to anticipate any further discussions you may have with other editors, "anticipates it to become" is bad English (it may not be grammatically wrong, but it's poor usage), while "anticipates its becoming" and "anticipates that it will become" are perfectly acceptable. —— Shakescene (talk) 07:31, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When I learned French lo these many years ago, I learned that the word for "crazy" is normally fou in the masculine singular, and the variant fol occurs only before vowel sounds (unless they're protected by h aspiré). And Wiktionary's article fol confirms this. If that's the case, why in "La chanson des vieux amants" does Jacques Brel sing "Vingt ans d'amour, c'est l'amour fol" instead of "...c'est l'amour fou"? Is it purely poetic license, so that it will rhyme with envol in the next line? Is it the sort of thing that's only permitted in poetry, but would be considered ungrammatical in prose? —Angr (talk) 22:17, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Editors can see the lyrics at http://comnet.ca/~rg/ch_b016.htm.

—Wavelength (talk) 22:40, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think poetic license is the right explanation. See [13]: "La forme fol est employée, sans raison d'euphonie, dans le style archaïsant ou p. plaisanterie" and "on l'emploie encore dans des domaines archaïsants tels que le droit, la poésie; on la conserve dans les proverbes : bien fol est qui s'y fie..." Lesgles (talk) 00:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's a mistranscription because amour is feminine and the feminine of fou is folle (homophone of fol). 72.128.95.0 (talk) 03:57, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, amour is indeed masculine. --Wrongfilter (talk) 07:14, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know that in formal singing, poetry and recitation (rhetoric) in French, many consonants are pronounced that are dropped in normal (and proper) conversation. I wonder if that would have any relation to the choice of forms in writing poetry or very formal, stylised theatre. —— Shakescene (talk) 07:24, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Amour in modern speech is treated as masculine, but in the context of a poem or song it may also be feminine, especially if the writer is trying to write in a literary or careful registre. One can see in the first line that he says 'nous eumes', which implies this is the case. Ou peut-être je me trompe. 72.128.95.0 (talk) 15:19, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That would be possible, but two things point against it. First, even in the literary language, amour is normally feminine only in the plural, though there are exceptions. Second, Brel usually pronounces his e muets, but there is no hint of one in the word fol in his recording[14] (and if he had used folle it technically wouldn't have rhymed with envol). Lesgles (talk) 15:36, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is the word "egal" when used in German a borrowed French word? (In French it seems to mean "equal", just as the German "gleich" means "equal", but apparently in French it is also used in the sense that it has in German: French "ça m'est egal" = German "Ist mir egal" = English "I don't mind; I don't care". Michael Hardy (talk) 02:23, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Deutsches Etymologisches Wörterbuch by Gerhard Köbler has the following entry:

egal, Adj., »gleich, gleichartig, gleichgültig
(1. H. 19. Jh.)«, 1. H. 17. Jh.? bzw. 18. Jh.
(Berckenmeyer 1712) Lw. frz. égal, Adj.,
»gleich, gleichgültig«, aus lat. aequalis,
Adj., »gleich«, zu lat. aequus, Adj., »gleich«

So, yes, it would seem that it does come from French (and ultimately, Latin). Gabbe (talk) 04:07, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that this might be a fairly modern word for German, as French and Latin are Romance languages; I'm reminded of the Spanish "igual". Also: Wiktionary: Egal --Lazer Stein (talk) 04:36, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Does "18. Jh." mean it was used in the 18th century in German? It seems as if in the present day, Germans say "gleich" when they're talking about something being exactly the same as something else, and "egal" when that mean something is a matter of complete indifference, so "gleich" doesn't seem synonymous with "egal" in German, but maybe in French "egal" has that meaning. Michael Hardy (talk) 04:31, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly "unimportant" is the most usual meaning of egal in colloquial German, but according to my Duden, it can also mean "equal". Example sentences are Die beiden Teile sind nicht ganz egal ("The two parts are not quite equal") and Bretter egal schneiden ("cut boards [to] the same [length]"). Duden also says that dialectally, egal can have another meaning of gleich, namely "just now" (Es hat egal geregnet "It's just rained") or "immediately" (Er ist einer von denen, die egal meckern müssen "He's one of those people who complains right away"). I've never heard these other meanings of egal myself, but I'm not a native speaker, and I trust the editors of Duden to record the attested meanings of words even if they're old-fashioned or dialectal. —Angr (talk) 08:49, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Isn't "Ist mir egal" an idiomatic phrase? If so then it's kind of pointless to try to hammer out the precise meaning of its constituent parts, it would be like asking "In the phrase 'kick the bucket', what does the word 'bucket' mean?". I've always assumed that the proper meaning of "egal" by itself was "equal", and that "Das ist mir egal" should therefore be interpreted as literally meaning "That is equal to me". So, a reply to "Would you like to go to the movies or a cinema?" could be "Das ist mir egal" → "That is 'egal' to me" → "Those two options are equal in my eyes" → "I'm indifferent as to which one". Gabbe (talk) 10:39, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm a native speaker (and reader). Die beiden Teile sind nicht ganz egal and Bretter egal schneiden are uses that are somewhat quaint, but which I have seen before, especially in technical or trade contexts. But I don't remember having ever seen or heard the temoral interpretation (Es hat egal geregnet, etc.). This is either a very old-fashioned or a very local usage. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 11:07, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Duden labels it "landsch., bes. ostmd.", so maybe it's something farmers in Thuringia, Saxony, and Silesia say or used to say. —Angr (talk) 11:47, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, c'est égal or ça m'est égal was once a very common idiom in French. I believe it has been superseded by c'est pareil. The French- and German-speaking areas are neighbours, with large bilingual regions (in Belgium, Luxembourg, Alsace, parts of Switzerland) in between, and up to the 19th century there was also a great deal of language interchange due to wars (the 20th century wars were less effective in this way, I believe) and the fact that the language of the Versailles court / the French Revolution was fashionable. So it's not surprising that German borrowed it along with thousands of other words and expressions.

Egal really exists in (modern) German only for this idiomatic use. You can replace egal by gleich (the German word with the same meaning) or einerlei. But this sounds a bit artificial. It reminds me a bit of 19th century Romanticist attempts to rid German of words of non-Germanic origin. Hans Adler 10:56, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That last topic reminds me of Uncleftish Beholding, an essay written in a sort of English that is the author's guess as to what English would be like if it had no non-Germanic words. "Firstbits have a forward bernstonish lading" is incomprehensible if taken out of context, but if you start at the beginning, then by the time you reach that sentence, you understand that it means protons have a positive electric charge. The term firstbit rotting never appears, but it would have to mean proton decay. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all. I'm taking a Mandarin pilot course at school as a curiosity. I want to write "he failed the test", but I can only think of 不及格 (not pass) or other expressions saying what he didn't do (他最近的考试没考及格). How does one say "fail" in Chinese, but directly, not through saying what he didn't do? The dictionary suggets 失败 but a native speaker has advised me that one does not usually use 失败 to describe a test, and also recommended 不及格. I want to put high negative emphasis on the fact that he failed, which saying it indirectly des not allow. THanks. 72.128.95.0 (talk) 04:09, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in Hong Kong we would say "肥佬". F (talk) 14:00, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting question, the only ways I know of to say this are all negatives, 考不及格 or 不通过, etc.

F, is your suggestion Cantonese, or Hong Kong Mandarin? rʨanaɢ (talk) 23:34, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's Cantonese, but sometimes Mandarin has a habit of borrowing HK terms. F (talk) 05:56, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK 肥佬 is borrowed into Mandarin only in the sense of "fat guy" and not in the sense of "failing an exam". --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:28, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Depending on the test, 落第 (literally fallen off the rankings) or 落榜 (literally fallen off the roll) is a way of saying "failing the test" where the test is some sort of qualification or entrance test, in other words "failing to make the cut" (by failing the test). The original context is in the Imperial Examination where the names of those who pass are listed and if one's name is not listed on the roll then one has failed the examination. These days it is quite often used for the National Higher Education Entrance Examination, where somone who has failed to secure a place at a university or college is said to have "落榜". More poetic variations include 名落孙山 ("name fell behind Sun Shan"). Another way of expression the same idea might be 未通过, though that still has a negative element.

不及格 is the closest equivalent of the English concept of "failing" a test, and in Chinese is usually conceived as a "single" concept rather than the negative of passing. Is there a reason why you cannot use "不及格"? Perhaps someone here can suggest another way of expressing the idea you are looking to express. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 05:42, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dock leaves. -- Kittybrewster ☎ 11:12, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Which meaning of "dock" and which meaning of "leaves"? —Angr (talk) 11:43, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The plant grows next to nettles. Kittybrewster ☎ 11:50, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The interwiki link points to no:Syreslekta. --Wrongfilter (talk) 11:58, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) According to Norwegian Wikipedia, the genus Rumex, some species of which are called "dock" in English, is called syreslekta or just syre in Norwegian; so I suppose syreblader (cf. [15], [16]). —Angr (talk) 11:59, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to Store Norske Leksikon ("the great Norwegian encyclopedia", or at least it used to be great before the Norwegian Wikipedia came along) it is hagesyre (lit. "garden acid"), see http://www.snl.no/hagesyre . Found by googling "Rumex patientia" (from the en.wp article) with "only display results in Norwegian". Google translation to English seems readable. Jørgen (talk) 20:24, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Recent events in the UK reminded me of a language point that's always confused me. In a traditional wedding ceremony, the parties say something like "I take thee, so-and-so, to my wedded wife/husband". To me, this doesn't make any sense (or certainly doesn't mean what it's intended to mean). Surely it should be "to be my wedded wife/husband"? Does anyone know the origin of this odd phrasing? 86.181.205.4 (talk) 11:59, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can't answer your question, but I myself have always simply assumed it was an aspect of Early Modern English grammar that no longer holds in today's language. —Angr (talk) 14:54, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The OED has this under sense 11b of "to": "Indicating resulting position, status, or capacity: For, as, by way of, in the capacity of. Obs. or arch. exc. in certain phrases, as to take to wife, to call to witness, etc." It makes slightly more sense if we think of "husband" and "wife" not as words for people but as roles that the person "thou" is figuratively moving into. Lesgles (talk) 15:57, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, in the US we have abandoned that and we do use the "be". Some other vestiges of older English, though, still crop up; depending on where the wedding is, sometimes people will still use "till death us do part" rather than "till death do us part" (and when I think of it, even the formerlatter is not exactly modern English). rʨanaɢ (talk) 17:02, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Even "Till death us do part" started out as sort of an eggcorn. In the earliest version of the Book of Common Prayer, it was "Till death us depart" using an obsolete meaning "separate" of depart. That meaning was already obsolete by 1662, when the stable edition of the BCP was published, so depart was changed to do part since that's what people thought they were saying anyway.[17] (And I think you mean "even the latter" rather than "even the former".) —Angr (talk) 17:23, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(oops, you're right! corrected rʨanaɢ (talk) 17:40, 1 May 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Cf "take to bed". BrainyBabe (talk) 17:04, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the replies. 86.160.84.52 (talk) 02:42, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is the Arabic name of Al-Thager Model School? I'm trying to find it, but I'm having trouble WhisperToMe (talk) 07:38, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

مدارس الثغر النموذجية --Soman (talk) 13:49, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Their website is http://www.thghr.com/ --Soman (talk) 14:16, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much :) WhisperToMe (talk) 17:47, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can a nonelected government employee use the phrase "I, as an inspector for ABC County, have a constituent who has asked me to check out his drainage?" Do only elected officials have constituents or are all voters in a municipality considered the constituents of all government employees? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.129.129.219 (talk) 14:23, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would not use "constituent" in that wider sense, and the OED concurs: " a. One of those who elect another to a public office, esp. as their representative in a legislative assembly; an elector; more widely, any inhabitant of the district or place so represented." There may be people who do use the word in the way you are suggesting, though. --ColinFine (talk) 15:02, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In praxis, no. In theory, though, yes. In Hernando County, Florida (where your IP directs to) you elect representatives who then make decisions for you, such as appoint inspectors to check out drainage. Someone who said this to me would be giving off airs of narcissism to me, having a inflated ego for being so appointed. Schyler (one language) 22:17, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say "resident" or something, rather than "constituent". The inspector has an area he is responsible for, but it isn't really a constituency. --Tango (talk) 22:57, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In a conversation today a guy used "ennui." I went along with it because I understood what he meant by the context. Later I looked it up, and all it means is "boredom." I have a feeling that it carries a much deeper meaning in native context, because the guy was using it like it meant insatiable desire, or boredom after reaching a goal, as in carnal goals, or the desire for a higher high after taking a drug. Can someone enlighten me as to the usage of this term among French speakers? Thanks Wikipedians! Schyler (one language) 22:12, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure it's in reference to general French usage; more often it refers to an overall spiritual emptiness which was fashionable among some intellectuals during certain periods... AnonMoos (talk) 00:03, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That definitely fits. This guy was a would-be intellectual who liked quoting Xenophon while receiving a Witness.
Anymore insight is welcome! Thanks! Schyler (one language) 01:06, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I hope I don't embarrass myself again by pretending to know what French speakers mean, but it can also just be regular boredom. It's also part of the verb "ennuyer", so you can say "ça m'ennuie" ("I'm bored" or "this is boring"), or describe something as "ennuyeux" or "ennuyant". But "ennui" can also mean "trouble", like you've done something bad and are in trouble for it. On the other hand, in English, I would assume it refers to the soul-crushing spiritual emptiness AnonMoos mentioned, and that the person using it would be speaking either pompously or ironically. Adam Bishop (talk) 10:22, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think in this case it's an example of the english loanword having a different meaning than the original. Much how in German "angst" simply means "fear" but in english it means something more philosophical (a generalized kind of pain and fear of the world in a very gothy sort of way). I think the best translation of the english meaning of ennui would be world-weariness. Perhaps it can best be illustrated with a quote from Shakespeare's Hamlet: "How weary, stale, flat, and unprofitable Seem to me all the uses of this world!" HominidMachinae (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:38, 3 May 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Ok. Thanks all. Just wondering, though: can it still be used in the senses in which I originally interpreted it? Schyler (one language) 13:29, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't hear the conversation, but based on your description I'd say your acquaintance was probably misusing the word. Marco polo (talk) 13:42, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not really as written, but it's associated with the concepts, at least in English. "Ennui" as a word used in English writing and conversation has drifted a bit from it's original French meaning, and is most commonly used to describe world weariness and emptiness of the soul (French terms used in English tend to get overloaded with grand connotations). It doesn't mean "insatiable desire," but it can be applied to the feeling of pointlessness one might have after the realization that ones deepest desires can never be obtained, or the "boredom after reaching a goal", as one realizes that the achievement of the goal now leaves you driftless, or if one realizes that the goal wasn't worth pursuing and all the effort spent obtaining it was wasted, thus putting you off pursuing any further goals. If you're wanting to use it to mean the goal itself, though, that's not any usage of ennui I've ever heard, but if it was in reference to a feeling of pointlessness or emptyness surrounding the goal, that's within the spectrum of common usage. -- 174.31.219.218 (talk) 16:05, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe he was just trying to waste the Witness's time. A lot of people think it's an amusing use of their own time to make a Witness' job as difficult as possible. Adam Bishop (talk) 16:08, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Schyler has the challenge of managing time efficiently while making a reasonably accurate assessment of a person's interest and attitude. Probably no one can meet that challenge perfectly.

—Wavelength (talk) 16:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In Theodore the Black for example, what is the proper term for "the Black"? Clarityfiend (talk) 23:25, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Epithet"? -- AnonMoos (talk) 23:55, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, epithet it is. DuncanHill (talk) 23:56, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okey dokey. Now, for bonus points, what kind of categories can be attached to The Black (epithet)? Clarityfiend (talk) 00:13, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[ [Category:Names] ]? Schyler (one language) 01:10, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll add that to the new Category:Epithets. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:50, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested to know that species names are classically epithets as well, see specific name. This is why many specific epithets are re-used across genera. For example, Coffea robusta could be translated as "Coffee the bold", or Cannabis ruderalis as "Cannabis the weedy". Not sure if this is appropriate for Category:Epithets, but I'd lean towards 'yes' :) SemanticMantis (talk) 16:19, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is the plural "kings consort" or "king consorts"? Thanks. Joefromrandb (talk) 02:26, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on whether he's a type of consort or a type of king; that is which word is playing the role of the noun. I'd be inclined to pluralize it "kings consort", because consort describes the kind of king he is. --Jayron32 04:40, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But bear in mind that this term is not commonly used, as the husband of a queen regnant is not normally given the title king, unless he is a co-ruler. Prince Consort (pl. Princes Consort) would be more usual. Rojomoke (talk) 15:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can't anyone who understands Old Norse and modern Norwegian language help me translate the names of the Kings of Norway?--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 06:02, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Go on, I do Icelandic. PM me. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 06:51, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikipedians, I am writing a letter to my new employer. I wonder which of the following is correct?

1. I am eagerly looking forward to joining your firm.
2. I am eagerly looking forward to join your firm.

Thanks in advance. Sincerely, 59.182.87.222 (talk) 08:45, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The first one is the better one, but I'd use "looking forwards" (British English speaker). --TammyMoet (talk) 09:21, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree the first one is better, and I'd use "looking forward" (American English speaker). Pais (talk) 10:23, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree the first one is better, and I prefer "forward". But what's of more interest to me is that we say "I am looking forward to joining your firm", but "I am looking to join your firm". That intrigues me, because I can't quite see why we make that distinction. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 11:00, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You would say "I am looking to join your firm" when writing an initial letter of approach, to see if there is a suitable vacancy. In this case, the OP has a new job and is writing to his/her new employer, and expressing anticipation. --TammyMoet (talk) 11:33, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say "look forward to" has to be followed by a noun, and a gerund like "joining" counts as a noun. But "look" in the sense of "seek" is followed by an infinitive. So you look forward to something, but you look to do something. In AmEng I wouldn't say "I am looking to join your firm" at all, but the IP is from India, so AmEng probably isn't relevant. Pais (talk) 11:44, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Looking to join" is a colloquialism almost of the same depth as "Fixin' to join". Regarding the OP's question, the first item sounds right and the second sounds like the writer does not speak English natively. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:07, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am a British English speaker and would NEVER say "looking forwardS to joining". "Looking forwards", in my view, can only refer to a direction of looking i.e.

"Which way were you looking at the time of the accident?"

"I was looking forwards".

If you are anticipating something, I feel the only choice is "to look forward to".

As for "joining" or "join", I concur with "joining" as under option one. 164.36.44.4 (talk) 13:30, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit conflict] Can another British English speaker confirm that the British standard is to say "I am looking forwards to doing..."? While my version of the language is American English, I normally recognize British usages as regular British usages, but this one just looks wrong to me. I know that the British prefer forwards to forward when it stands alone. ("We are moving forwards" instead of "We are moving forward".) However, I thought that looking forward to [a future experience] was a set idiom on both sides of the Atlantic. Is the standard British expression really looking forwards to [a future experience]? Thanks. [As I was writing this, someone else was providing the requested confirmation, but I am wondering if a British RefDesker with a login name could also confirm.] Marco polo (talk) 13:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I (BrE) would never say "I am looking forwards to doing...", and I don't think I've ever heard anyone else say it. It's just not idiomatic. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 13:41, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I think we should say clearly that the second option presented by the questioner is not just less preferable. It is incorrect. Marco polo (talk) 13:38, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

←Thank you everyone for the responses. It's clear to me that option 2 is incorrect. But after going through the discussion I am confused between "I look forward to joining..." vs "I am looking forward to joining..."? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.182.8.71 (talk) 13:46, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Linguistically, the difference is the "simple present" versus the "present continuous". Somewhat strangely, the actual use is a bit reversed from what one would expect from the names. I would interpret "I look ..." as the "express habitual actions" meaning of the simple present, whereas I would take the "I am looking ..." to be in the "describe something which is happening at the exact moment of speech" sense of the present continuous. They're effectively equivalent, but there are slight connotation differences regarding the extent and duration of the action, but not so much in this case that one would be definitely preferred over the other. -- 174.31.219.218 (talk) 15:47, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"I am eagerly looking forward to joining ..." has a somewhat conversational tone, and it implies "at the moment" or a weaker commitment, so it has a more transitory feel. By contrast, "I eagerly look forward to joining..." suggests more commitment, and it is a bit more formal in tone. In short, I think that "look forward" is more appropriate in a professional letter to a law firm. Marco polo (talk) 17:34, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone reading this know Gascon? An inscription under the statue of Our Lady of Lourdes says Que soy era Immaculada Councepciou, which the article Bernadette Soubirous tells us is Gascon (a dialect of or language closely related to Occitan) for "I am the Immaculate Conception". I don't know Gascon or Occitan, but I know some other Romance languages, and I'm wondering about this. The only word of the first three that looks right is "soy" for "I am", which is the same in Spanish. "Que" looks like it ought to mean "that", as if it were introducing a wish ("Oh that I were..."), and "era" looks like it ought to mean "(I, he, she) was" (< Latin eram, erat). But if our translation is right, then "que" has to mean "I" and "era" has to mean "the". Could this be right? Could "que" come from Latin "ego" and be cognate with French "je" rather than French "que"? Could "era" come from Latin "illa" and be cognate with Spanish "la" and "ella" rather than Spanish "era"? Our articles on the two languages don't go into this kind of detail. Pais (talk) 13:20, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know anything about this particular language either, but I agree it's suspicious. On the other hand, it seems conceivable (to me) that the personal pronoun might have been omitted as redundant, and that que might mean only, as in French ne ... que. That's not very plausible of course. Hans Adler 13:51, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The occitan version of the article doesn't help, either. But you could ask for help at oc:Wikipèdia:La tavèrna. It doesn't seem to be completely dead. Hans Adler 14:01, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Or you could trust random information on the internet: [18] (found by googling for "que soy era"). Hans Adler 14:04, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good link, thank you! The Aragonese Wikipedia (of all things) has an article on the definite article in Occitan, which confirms that the masculine singular def.art. is eth and the feminine singular is era. And the origin of the "que" according to the link is interesting: "Jo que soy..." ("I who am" or "It's me who is") gets shortened to "Que soy" so you wind up saying literally "Who am..." to mean "I am...". That's kind of cool. Pais (talk) 14:39, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's interesting, because I did a little work with Google Translate, which has a "Catalan" option, and Catalan is fairly closely related to Occitan, and it says that "era" means "was" in Catalan. For example, "I was the Immaculate Conception" in Catalan is "Jo era la Immaculada Concepció", and "la" is clearly the definitive article, and "era" is clearly the verb. However, I also tripped over Occitan_conjugation#.C3.88sser_.28.22to_be.22.29, which states that the first person "Present indicative" of "To be" in Gascon is "soi", which seems close enough to "soy" to make it right for our purposes. --Jayron32 15:03, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The same link shows that in Gascon, "was" is èra, so the difference between "the (fem. sing.)" and "was" in Gascon is a grave matter indeed! ;-) Pais (talk) 15:43, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is the pronunciation of the surname “Verboten”? --84.61.132.230 (talk) 16:48, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's pronounced [fɛɐ̯ˈboːtən] (English approximation "fair-BOAT-en"), but I never knew it was a surname. It's just the German word for "forbidden" or "prohibited". Pais (talk) 16:52, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]