Revision as of 07:01, 19 November 2014

• Computing
• Entertainment
• Humanities
• Language
• Mathematics
• Science
• Miscellaneous
• Archives

• WP:RD/L

Main page: Help searching Misplaced Pages

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.

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Misplaced Pages: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.

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

November 13

Which is the sentences the more correct? (and why)

1. It has sweet tasty. 2. It has A sweet tasty. 5.28.177.33 (talk) 06:08, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

They are both incorrect. The first is slightly more incorrect than the second. The sentence you're looking for is: It has a sweet taste. As to why, I guess it's that the object of "has" should be a noun (taste), not an adjective (tasty). The presence of the word "a" is more about what is common usage, rather than a grammatical rule, and perhaps a linguist could elaborate on that point. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 06:19, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

They're both ungrammatical, because HAVE requires either a past participle (as in "It has gone bad") or an object. An object is normally a noun phrase. A phrase headed by "tasty" is an adjective phrase; it can't be either a past participle nor an object. ¶ It occurs to me that your "tasty" might be a typo for "taste". If so, both (1) and (2) would be grammatical, because "taste" can be either uncountable or countable; however, (2) would be commoner. Where (1) would be appropriate, "It tastes sweet" would be likelier. -- Hoary (talk) 06:31, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Nothing can be either something nor the other. Only or. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:14, November 14, 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. "It has sweet taste." by itself would sound unusual in most contexts. I think it would normally be found as part of a list where the other items don't take an article, such as "It has sweet taste, less calories, and freshens your breath!" Matt Deres (talk) 15:10, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

People can have sweet taste if you like their style of dress or choice of words, but you said they had "a" sweet taste, it would imply your tongue's been on them. "It" can be a semi-person, like a robot or corporation. Coca-Cola has a sweet taste; The Coca-Cola Company exhibited sweet taste in reprogramming our ideas of Saint Nicholas. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:13, November 14, 2014 (UTC)

Malayalam translation requested

Hi there, there's been a lot of really ridiculous edit-warring going on at Twenty:20 (film) involving two editors, one who prefers an actor named Mohanlal, and another who prefers an actor named Mammootty. The short story is this: Film articles typically derive the cast order from the "billing block" that appears on the film's poster. The film posters here contain billing blocks, but I don't see the actors' names. I'm interested in knowing whether or not the actors names appear on the posters in Malayalam, and whether or not the names are consistently in the same order. The two users keep warring over which poster to use--the one where Mohanlal is on the left, or the one where Mammootty is on the left so they can order the credits per their preferences. It's a really absurd problem that I'm hoping to be able to resolve. Thank you! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:01, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Working from Malayalam script, I don't think the two names are in the Malayalam text, and I'm pretty sure that all six posters have the same text. --ColinFine (talk) 22:12, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

First, note that even if you click on the posters on the original page to enlarge them, you are given them in slightly reduced form. For the full resolution delete the trailing part (starting with ?w=) from the URL for each poster: for example, this one. However, even at full resolution the image is not good enough to resolve the finer lettering. Still, I agree with the original poster that the English-language billing block does not contain these actors' names, or indeed any of the other three actors shown as credited cast by the IMDB. I also note that Mammootty is മമ്മൂട്ടി in Malayalam, while Mohanlal is മോഹൻലാൽ, and while I don't speak the language or even read the alphabet, it seems clear that neither of those names shows up in the Malayalam text on the posters either. (I agree with Colin that it's the same on all six.)

The credit order on the actual movie would therefore seem to be the best way to resolve this, and the IMDB normally lists its credits in that manner, which would put Mohanlal first. (However, it's possible that the movie uses some form of diagonal (aka staggered) billing—a practice mentioned under Billing (filmmaking)#Competitive top billing—in order to deliberately rank the two stars as equal. If it does that, then it means the order in the IMDB was arbitrary and in that case I think there is no win.) --174.88.134.249 (talk) 05:30, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Great, thanks all! I agree that if the names don't appear on the posters, the film credits are the way to go. Hopefully there aren't TWO versions of the movie, one with Mammootty first and one with Mohanlal first...(Puts gun to head). Anyhow, thanks for the input! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:57, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Correct verb for a subject complement

Which is correct and why? Sentence A: The highlight of the year was the improved test scores. Sentence B: The highlight of the year were the improved test scores. Also, in these, which is correct and why? Sentence C: The improved test scores was the highlight of the year. Sentence D: The improved test scores were the highlight of the year. I forget what the grammatical term is. (Subject complement?) So, in other words, what do you do when you have a subject complement where one noun is singular and the other plural? Is the verb singular or plural? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:10, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Sentence A is correct of the first two. The Subject is third-person-singular, which takes "was" as a verb. English has subject-verb agreement which means you conjugate the verb based on the grammatical sense of the subject. "Highlight" is a singular word, so it takes "was". In your second pair, Sentence D is correct, for the same reason, the subject of that sentence is "scores", which is third-person-plural, and so takes "were". --Jayron32 17:17, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Is Sentence A versus B (and also Sentence C versus D) a matter of stylistic preference? Or is Sentence B (and Sentence C) flat out incorrect? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:21, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

The difference between the two sets is Voice. The difference is voice is between a situation where the subject commits the action, versus where the object commits the action. --Jayron32 17:25, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I misunderstood the question. B and C are completely wrong. The difference between choosing A or D would be one of voice, which is a stylistic choice. But B and C would never be grammatical. --Jayron32 17:31, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Although I get your gist, "voice" is not the correct topic, and to be doesn't have a passive voice. English nowadays has a pretty set word order, and if the first noun mentioned can be considered the subject (highlight in the first case, scores in the second), then the verb, here the copula, which must agree in number with the subject. The term after the copla has various names, but we have an article under subject complement. μηδείς (talk) 17:57, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

It is indeed not a matter of voice. Voice is (for English, anyway) a matter of active versus passive. (On the distinction, see Pullum, "Fear and loathing of the English passive".) BE indeed doesn't passivize -- as expected, because BE doesn't take an object. ¶ Subject–verb agreement in English isn't so simple; consider "Twenty kilometres is too far to go just for shopping"; "The majority of those present agree to strike". ¶ (A) and (D) are grammatical, but (D) is rather infelicitous; as (or to) a writer (rather than amateur linguist) I'd back e.g. "The improvement in test scores was the highlight of the year." -- Hoary (talk) 07:21, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Those are, indeed, good counter-examples. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:53, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:53, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Hoary's examples introduce two new factors not present in the first sentences. In the expression "twenty miles is", the implied or understood meaning is, "a distance of twenty miles is". Likewise, the majority agree to strike is not problematic, because a majority always implies at least two outvoting one, again the plurality is understood. In "the highlight of the year" and "the majority of those present" of is expressing the genitive case of possession or reference in the first example and the partitive genitive in the second. You could logically substititue the highlight which belonged to that year in the first case. You could not say the majority that belonged to those present in the second case. μηδείς (talk) 03:16, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

November 14

How can i view Facebook page in English?

I can't read oriental. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.71.124 (talk • contribs)

According to geolocate, the user seems to be stranded in Connecticut. μηδείς (talk) 02:28, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

On the blue title bar, far right hand side there is a down pointing triangle. Click on that. Click on the 4th item from the bottom. This should take you to General Account Settings. Now click on the blue word (which is Edit in English) at the far right hand end of the second item from the bottom. You will get a drop down box appear: if you use that to alter the language to English (US) you will have succeeded. --TammyMoet (talk) 10:43, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

What's better?

Peeps, can I type this cm3 (cc ) in a sentence or cm3 means cc (cubic centimetres) and I can’t. What looks professional, hot and sexy? cm3 or cc (cubic centimetres)?

(Russell.mo (talk) 15:13, 14 November 2014 (UTC))

"cc" is well understood by the older generation and in many disciplines, but use a superscript: cm for standard modern usage. You can also use "ml" in some contexts. I've no idea what you should use to make the unit look hot or sexy. Dbfirs 15:31, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

-- (Russell.mo (talk) 17:44, 15 November 2014 (UTC))

Russell's back. Where have ya been? As usual you don't give a sentence, even though you've been asked to several times. Why do you do this? Seriously, it's easier to answer if you give some context. This said, I think in most instances you can't go wrong with «cm» but in some cases «cc» may be acceptable or even the preferred option, i.e. I wonder if in some contexts «cm» may not seem pedantic, especially if it is read aloud ("cubic centimeters"). The abbreviation «cc» will most often be read as "seesee" (in both singular and plural) which sounds more informal. It depends how you wanna come across. For example if you're talking bikes use «cc» or you'll come across as a wuss. ("My Kawasaki Ninja H2R, 1000 cubic centimeters of raw power". Doesn't work.) Contact Basemetal here 16:12, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Sorry! Next time I’ll. I’ve been busy with my tough life, teaching it how tough I am… Hope you are well. -- (Russell.mo (talk) 17:44, 15 November 2014 (UTC))

"cm3" without the proper superscript will almost always look bad. Even "cm^3" would be preferable in situations where you can't do proper typesetting. SemanticMantis (talk) 17:13, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Point noted. It’s been 15 days and I’m already running low on Mbs. I wanted to relax, I ended up getting busy with adult sites, otherwise I would’ve wrote it appropriately. My price plan is kinda ‘pay bite as you go’… Thanks for the point (good to know), I only use '^' to mean the 'Ctrl' button. -- (Russell.mo (talk) 17:44, 15 November 2014 (UTC))

"C.C." should only be used for doses of poison. InedibleHulk (talk) 13:45, November 15, 2014 (UTC)

Hope you are good too -- (Russell.mo (talk) 17:44, 15 November 2014 (UTC))

Thanks guys. I guess I'll use superscript: cm. -- (Russell.mo (talk) 17:44, 15 November 2014 (UTC))

Is there any term / word that describes people who like learn medicine?

I mean something like geek... but for medicine. 194.114.146.227 (talk) 16:43, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

"Biogeek" gets lots of hits on google... though that is more general than just medicine, it would seem to be more specific than just geek. SemanticMantis (talk) 17:11, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Seems pretty common to just stick "geek" after whichever topic. Pirate geek, stats geek, medicine geek. If you think that's condescending, it also works for the -phile suffix. Pharmacophile seems about right. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:43, November 17, 2014 (UTC)

Afficianado? Lover (though that one might get misconstrued)? Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 19:22, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Have or has in front of proper nouns (British English)

Is it correct to use have or has in front of proper nouns, in the following sentence, in British English.

Manchester City Council have laid out plans to improve roads.

Or

Manchester City Council has laid out plans to improve roads.

Which is correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.66.246.54 (talk • contribs) 17:22, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Such verb agreement (which can apply to all verbs) doesn't have much to do with "proper nouns", but with collective nouns, whose semantic referents contain multiple individual members, such as "band" (of musicians), "team", "family", "group", etc. This has been much discussed as a difference between British and American English, but the difference is actually a rather minor one, since both British and American have verbs showing "semantic agreement" and verbs showing strict grammatical agreement in various contexts. They just happen to differ in this particular context (grammatically singular collective noun with semantic referent of a multi-member set). AnonMoos (talk) 17:41, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

"Have" is used with a plural subject, and "has" when it's singular. As AnonMoos says, collective nouns complicate things, but I would treat "Manchester City Council" as a single entity, and use "has". Rojomoke (talk) 17:47, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

"

The above answers have it, here are some references Collective_noun#Metonymic_merging_of_grammatical_number, and some discussions from Oxford dictionaries. . As I understand it, in AmEng, the second form is more common, an in BrEng, either can be used, but the first may be more common. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:23, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

• Context is going to matter. If you say "They were split 7 to 5, but the city council have laid out plans..." that's not going to bother an American, while "The Manchester city council has already laid out its plans while the Newark city council hasn't" places the councils in the context of single contrasting entities, not groups of people. )In america.) If it's a formal paper your are writing, ask your professor or editor what manual of style to use. μηδείς (talk) 19:20, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Sticking to your examples: both are acceptable in British English, and have very slightly different force (though in most contexts the difference can be ignored). With "have" you are referring to the Council as a group of people, with "has" as a single entity. --ColinFine (talk) 14:37, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

I always treat companies, groups and the like as collective singulars, and (as such) use "has" with them. The only time I would use "have" is if I were specifically trying to emphasise that many people make up the company. The latter usage is still rare on my part, however. Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 19:19, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

November 15

Reds

Australia's Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, has recently been aggressively rude to Vladimir Putin. Russian warships were recently seen somewhere out in the Coral Sea way off the coast of Queensland. Obviously wanting to make the connection for its less well-informed readers, one of our tabloid newspapers produced the headline "The Reds are Coming!". It seemed anachronistic to me. The USSR died 20 years ago. Are the modern Russians still called Reds elsewhere in the world? HiLo48 (talk) 04:12, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Not except in the wackier reaches of the tabloid universe and their online counterparts. Is this one of Rupert's papers, by chance? (We Yanks would love to give him back to you... please....?) --Orange Mike | Talk 04:37, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

You betcha. As for that generous offer, no way. He's yours now! HiLo48 (talk) 06:13, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

People still read Murdoch papers?--Jeffro77 (talk) 01:50, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

• You seem to have forgotten, HiLo, Vlad's the head of the KGB. I am surprised you aren't familiar with the "going out of business" scam. "Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss." μηδείς (talk) 04:39, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Medy, my friend, you've disappointed me. No, Putin was never the head of the KGB, but just an ordinary unremarkable KGB agent with no great achievements (apart from his short undercover spying career in Germany). In the 90s he retired from the service and was a "bodyguard" of the then St. Petersburg mayor or, saying bluntly, has been an errand boy of more powerful bosses. And I think he still is. His astonishing career from nothing is likely a result of many promotions from oligarchic "The Family". They all are no more "red" communists than Henry Ford. --Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 09:58, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Please forgive him. Contrary to his other thoughtful and substantive interventions at the RD, I never take seriously anything Medeis says about Russia because he's too obviously got a Rusyn bone to pick with Mother Russia. But I'm always grateful for a few minutes of The Who. (There's also "Baba O'Riley" from the same concert on YouTube). Contact Basemetal here 10:14, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Wasn't implied. I've just cleared the issue. And as I once said before I can't be offended by Medeis, I frankly sympathise him, he's a good guy.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 15:32, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

My fault, I thought I remembered he was head of the KGB in East Germany, at least. The comment about my having any hostility toward Russia itself is ignorant, racist, and even worse, simply false. In any case, the issue is no different from asking why an anti-Nazi politician in 1938 might refer to the Germans as the Huns, a term from WWI. Calling Putin Red is an insult, not an ideological description. μηδείς (talk) 19:52, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Would you prefer that the headline writers had said "The Russkies Are Coming"? ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 11:00, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

In answer to User:Orangemike's question above, see "Rupert’s rabid tabloids in full McCarthy mode..." . The only recent mentions of "reds" in the UK press seem to relate to Liverpool FC (and yes, the Murdoch empire is not very welcome here either, see News International phone hacking scandal). Alansplodge (talk) 11:29, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

I wanted to say this. For me "the Reds" are rather associated with sport. I suppose Aussies do not wear red uniforms? *irony* --Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 15:36, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Our national colours are green and gold, sometimes associated with white. The flag is red, white and blue. Is that confusing enough? HiLo48 (talk) 06:16, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

What's confusing is watching the current ODI series between Australia and South Africa, where both countries are wearing green and gold, and both with green predominant. What were the organisers thinking? -- Jack of Oz 08:36, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

That's nearly as silly as both teams wearing all white. HiLo48 (talk) 09:23, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Please guys if you're gonna start mentioning cricket you'll have to translate. They wear colors in One Day Internationals but both teams wear all white in Test Cricket? Is that it?Contact Basemetal here 09:36, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Yep. But there's Twenty20 as well. They wear colours there too. HiLo48 (talk) 09:54, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Does this statement make sense?

'The Cold War ensured that these contemporary ideas found ground within national states encompassing the global south whilst they struggled to come to terms with the offset of post-colonialism. The various deviations of both Communism and Capitalism that had been entrenched within the third world spawned tensions only to be exacerbated by the worlds two superpowers.' --SolliGwaa (talk) 19:21, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Well I struggled to make sense of it, but I eventually decided that they refers to the national states and that it was the tensions that were exacerbated, not the deviations. I prefer sentences where subordinate clauses refer back to the subject. Dbfirs 20:06, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

It's not too bad - I would suggest the following corrections.

• "gained ground" rather than "found ground".
• "nation states" rather than "national states".
• "Global South" rather than "global south". "Comprising" or "forming" might be better than "encompassing".
• "while" rather than "whilst" ("whilst" is a very old-fashioned word today).
• Pedantry would point out that "they" in the first sentence strictly refers back to "ideas", rather than "states". "Those states" would be the simplest correction, although it's not very elegant.
• "offset" probably isn't the right word, although it's not obvious what the replacement should be. "Consequences"? "Onset"? "Impact"?
• "deviations" isn't strictly wrong, but it implies perversion or abnormality, which I don't think is your intention. "Types" or "instances" or "examples" might be better.
• "Third World" rather than "third world".
• Being pedantic again, "exacerbated" strictly has "deviations", rather than "tensions", as its subject. "tensions, which were exacerbated" might be better.
• "world's" rather than "worlds".

Tevildo (talk) 20:18, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Couldn't really fully follow the sentence, but I did notice the missing apostrophe in "worlds". Anyway, in a lot of countries it seems that self-seeking autocrats installed cronyistic "control regime" economies (see ISBN 978-0-521-71525-6, chapter 4) which could be dressed up with phoney capitalistic rhetoric or phoney socialistic rhetoric as the occasion demanded... AnonMoos (talk) 20:44, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

True - if that is the OP's intention, something like "peversions" or ""corruptions" would be better than "deviations". "Deviations of captialism" implies "deviations produced by capitalism", rather than "deviations from (the idea of) capitalism". Tevildo (talk) 22:05, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Or just change "of" to "from". InedibleHulk (talk) 05:46, November 17, 2014 (UTC)

Pianism

Hello, I am trying to list my interests for my CV, and one of my most recent things is that I'm autodidactically learning to play the piano. I should like to put "playing piano" into one word -- I thought maybe "pianism", but I googled it and it's slightly different in meaning. I googled "pianistry" too, but that doesn't appear to be a word. Does anyone know a word meaning "playing piano"? Thanks, 92.237.191.99 (talk) 20:39, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

You could always just put "piano", but then someone might think you meant listning to it. --65.94.50.4 (talk) 21:00, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

You could switch instruments and put "drumming". Contact Basemetal here 09:53, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Now seriously, I know everyone else has long ago moved past the one word con un drum (oops that's three words), but I wouldn't want you to think that you really have to switch instruments. What matters is that you let your prospective employer believe that. Some may wonder why he (or she) would care if you played the piano, the drums, the marimba or the hurdygurdy, but, if he (or she) is into well-roundedness it seems the drums (or timpani) have that additional slight bit or roundness to them. Unless of course he (or she) is into roundness à la Nell the kitchen wench. Note "Where stood Belgia, the Netherlands? -- Oh, sir, I did not look so low." The English have always had a problem with Belgium, I'm telling you. It's a national psychiatric condition. Of the English I mean. Incidentally are Shakespeare's "Belgia" and "the Netherlands" meant to be synonymous or does he already use the one for the southern part and the other for the northern part of the Low Countries? Does anyone know? Contact Basemetal here 14:01, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Ah, actually nevermind. To remove all misunderstanding I've increased everything to two words, e.g. "reading literature", instead of just "literature", and so I can say "playing piano". Thanks 92.237.191.99 (talk) 21:17, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

You could also perform the same surgery on the non-word "nevermind".  :) -- Jack of Oz 08:33, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

I have never written a section on 'my interests' on my CV, because a potential employer doesn't want to know what you do in your spare time, but rather what you CAN do when working for him. If, somehow, he does want to know, you will be asked at the interview, anyway. I doubt my hobbies of playing wargames and mountain-biking (usually separately) would impress a future employer from a translation company, for example. KägeTorä - (_虎) (Chin Wag) 08:46, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Haha, well nevermind should be a word! And, really? Quite often, at least from my experience, employers like to see well-roundedness. (I'm sure that's not a word, but you know what I mean). The more unrelated one's hobbies are to one's job, the better it seems to be. I'm not actually looking for a job at the moment; I recently got one, so I thought I should update my CV now, when I can do it at my leisure. 92.237.191.99 (talk) 21:31, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

I think 'well-roundedness' is a perfectly good word. Contact Basemetal here 21:52, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

And 'Nevermind' is the title of a Nirvana album. So it is a word too. Contact Basemetal here 22:00, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm indebted. However, if 92 was referencing the Nirvana album when he wrote "Ah, actually nevermind" (which I have a nagging suspicion was not the case), it was kind of irrelevant to the rest of what he was saying. And if he was not intending to make any such reference, then the conclusion is left as an exercise for the reader .... -- Jack of Oz 22:11, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Maybe he's listing the album as one of his interests.--Jeffro77 (talk) 01:47, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

November 16

French: “portés à terre” in Captain Grant's message

In Jules Verne, Les Enfants du capitaine Grant, chapter 3.21. (see full text), I'm trying to understand this sentence from the French version of the bottled message Captain Grant has sent.

Portés à terre, deux matelots et le capitaine Grant ont atteint à l’île Tabor.

I'd like to know what “Portés à terre” means here. I tried to look at Wiktionary: wikt:fr:porter, but there's so many meanings I'm not sure which one applies here. If it were standing alone, my guess would be “having reached (dry) land”. That, however, would be completely redundant with the last part of the sentence, “ont atteint à l'île Tabor”, which definitely means “have reached Tabor island” according to wikt:fr:atteindre#Verbe, and so seems unlikely in context.

The translation of the novel by Bartócz Ilona gives a translation of the message which completely omits this phrase: “Két matróz és Grant kapitány partra vetődött a Tabor-szigeten.”

Please explain what that clause means, and possibly point me to which sense of wikt:fr:porter applies, if any. Thanks, – b_jonas 20:11, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

This translation of the novel renders it "Making for the shore, two sailors and Captain Grant are about to land on the continent...". So it's Wiktionnaire's sense 28, "(Marine) Se diriger vers", which indeed includes the phrase porter à terre as one of the examples of its possible use. --Antiquary (talk) 20:27, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

"Porter à" apparently has a specific meaning when used by sailors: it means "se diriger vers" so "to go towards", "to direct your course towards" (see 28th meaning in wikt:fr:porter). So "portés à terre" (for "s'étant portés à terre") means "having gone/directed their course towards land/the shore" and the whole sentence "having directed their course towards land two sailors and captain G. reached the island of Tabor." Contact Basemetal here 20:35, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Oh, how could I have missed "terre" there! I did notice the "(Marine)" label and how it means to navigate a ship towards a goal, but read only the "Porter au sud" part of the example.

So then in this case, does the "porter à terre" mean they tried to direct the ship towards the land during the storm, whereas "ont atteint à l'île Tabor" means only those three people have reached the land after the ship got destroyed close to the island? – b_jonas 20:48, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

I don't think it necessarily means that, especially since "portés" is plural. I rather think it means that those three, having abandoned ship, made for land. (But I don't know the story, so that might not fit in fact). --ColinFine (talk) 21:22, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

No, it means that those three people made for land and, having made for land, reached the island as, first of all, "portés à terre" can only refer to those three people who are the grammatical subject of "ont atteint", and second, the two events must be directly related, "portés à terre" is what caused them to reach the land, so it can't mean that, some time previously, they tried to make for land and then, some time later, in some unconnected manner, they happened to reach the island. Contact Basemetal here 21:45, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Ok, so then it means the three survivors have directed themselves towards the land after the ship has sunk, and that is why they had reached the island? – b_jonas 21:55, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes. Contact Basemetal here 22:02, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

A small note of caution here. The basic meaning is not in doubt. However note "porter à" is not a transitive verb so it cannot have a passive. The meaning of the past participle "portés" is passive. So how do we reconcile the two? I'll try to take a look at more detailed dictionaries than wikt and at the text of the passage. The use of the passive past participle suggests that their making for the shore happened not through their own decision and actions but through some external agency such as the current. But for that to be grammatical "être porté à" has to exist alongside "porter à" sort of independently. That's not automatic. You cannot automatically from "porter à" derive "être porté à" in the meaning "be caused to make towards". For example you can say "rouler vers Rouen" ("to drive in the direction of Rouen") but you cannot form *"être roulé vers Rouen" ("to be driven in the direction of Rouen") like you can in English. In any case note the English translator seems to have missed that distinction: they translate as if the phrase had been "ayant porté à terre, etc." or "portant à terre, etc.". As to the Hungarian translator she completely bypassed the problem by ignoring that part of the sentence. I'll get back to you if I find something more. Contact Basemetal here 04:30, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Basemetal: indeed. Ilmen proposed (outside this wiki) that "porter" here is not used in the meaning to direct themselves towards. He explains that if the sentence were to mean that the crew members directed themselves towards the land, then the crew members would have to be the subject of "porter", and then you would need to write "Ayant porté à terre, deux matelots et le capitaine Grant…". Instead, the crew are the object of "porter", and so it means that something (presumably the storm) has carried or brought the survivors to dry land. This would match my original first attempt, but I still think it's redundant with the end of the sentence, and is unlikely to be what Captain Grant has meant. (That said, how ironic would it be if, unknown to Captain Grant, Captain Nemo had already been near the island, and had carried Captain Grant to the land just as he had carried Cyrus Smith in the next novel.)

Note further two sentences from the novel. Firstly, in the same chapter, Captain Grant had explained that after the ship broke, the three survivors have reached the island after many failed attempts: "nous parvînmes à gagner la côte après vingt tentatives infructueuses". This, however, doesn't clearly exclude any interpretation. Secondly, Paganel suggests in the novel that the British captain need not have had a perfect command of French: "il a été écrit par un Anglais, auquel les idiotismes de la langue française pouvaient ne pas être familiers".

– b_jonas 08:50, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

As a French native speaker, I understand: "Portés à terre , deux matelots ", "Carried by the waves , two seamen ". The phrase is porter par. Meanings 1 and 5 from wikt:fr:porter apply. Do not hesitate to correct my English translation — AldoSyrt (talk) 09:07, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Jules Verne wrote " ont atteint à l'île Tabor…" Note the "à" and note that the ellipsis are by the author. The sentence is interrupted, the object complement of atteindre is missing. So, the translation: "they reached Tabor island" would be wrong, it would be: "On Tabor island, they reached…" — AldoSyrt (talk) 10:38, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

AldoSyrt: I believe "Tabor" is the last word of that sentence of the message. The ellipsis is there because Paganel interrupts Captain Grant recounting the message. Grant then goes on to tell the next sentence of the message: "Là, continuellement en proie à une cruelle indigence, ils ont jeté ce document par 153° de longitude et 37°11' de latitude." Captain Grant certainly wouldn't have omitted half a sentence after Paganel and Lord Glenarvan has specifically asked him for its contents. – b_jonas 10:46, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

I can assure you that in French "atteindre à l'île Tabor." is not grammatically correct (and I doubt that it could be a mistake usually done by an English native speaker) . It could be a typo... I'll try to check, I lost my copy (Les Enfants du capitaine Grant), years ago — AldoSyrt (talk) 11:04, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

But I already linked to wikt:fr:atteindre#Verbe which says under the heading "atteindre à" that it is correct, it's a specific idiom, and it means they reached the island. – b_jonas 11:11, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Atteindre à (atteindre au sommet, atteindre au large, atteindre au pôle, etc) is as correct as atteindre tout court (atteindre le sommet, atteindre le large, atteindre le pôle, etc). It does sound slightly more recherché or unusual than atteindre tout court, and there is a slightly different shade of meaning (see wikt article), but it wouldn't shock me outre mesure even if it was used as a quasi-synonym. More later. Contact Basemetal here 11:59, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Of course you're right! And, while a little bit "old fashion", it is better because pour qu’on ne puisse pas y arriver sans quelque effort fits well the situation. Apologies. — AldoSyrt (talk) 12:47, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

There remains the question of how to understand "portés à terre". If one takes this (as Ilmen, whoever he is, and AldoSyrt) to simply mean "carried to shore" ("portés à terre ") and if that shore is the shore of the island of Tabor then, if not exactly redundant with "reached the island" (because it gives some additional information as to how they reached the island), it is certainly clumsy, as much in English as in French incidentally: instead of writing "having been carried to shore they reached the island" just write "they were carried to the shore of the island" ("deux matelots et le capitaine ont été portés à l’île de Tabor"). So rather than believe Jules Verne could write a sentence many 9 year olds would know better than to write, I prefer to stick to my idea that in this instance "portés à terre" means something else than simply "carried to shore". And the most probable to me is that it is that "porter à" phrase from maritime jargon we were talking about. There remains to account for the syntactical oddity that I mentioned and that is bothering every one. If this is uttered by an English speaker then I think we might have a plausible explanation. Contact Basemetal here 20:03, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

The problem is that this clause doesn't appear in any of the translations of the fragmented documents, so it doesn't seem to be constrained by the plot at all, so I see no reason why Jules Verne would have written it with bad grammar. – b_jonas 20:37, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Only a speculation of mine. If J. Verne had choosen to use the nautical phrase, he would have written: "Après avoir porté à terre" or "Ayant porté à terre". But the sentence would be clumsy, because it would have been the boat that had done this or the crew (not only the three survivors). Better?:"Après qu'il a porté à terre.." . But he wrote "Portés à terre..."; this phrase looks like and sounds like a nautical phrase. Syntax oddity? no. Bad style? I don't think so. @b_jonas. Even great writers make mistakes or write poor passages — AldoSyrt (talk) 21:57, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

For those who want to know different interpretations of the bottle message without reading the book (in French), please refer to — AldoSyrt (talk) 22:29, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Not in the fragmented documents? The English version of the message can be seen here. Note that the word "aland" is used. "aland" = "ashore" = "towards or onto land from water", according to the Webster's dictionary — AldoSyrt (talk) 22:59, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Ah, right! I'm sorry, it is there. So the “à terre” translates to “aland”, and that's in the fragments. And indeed the first two interpretations contain “Se dirigeant à terre, deux matelots et le capitaine Grant…”.

Ok, let's give all the chapters together then: 1.2. gives the three fragments and the first interpretation that leads to Patagonia, 1.24. gives the second interpretation that leads to Australia, 3.19. gives the third interpretation for New Zealand, and 3.21. gives the actual text. – b_jonas 06:57, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Hungarian Syllables

b_jonas since I've got you a Hungarian speaker nearby may I ask you a question about syllabization in Hungarian? When you syllabize a line of verse, do final consonants and initial vowels combine to form syllables, for example the sentence above (ok, that's not a line of verse) should it be syllabized as follows?

két - mat - ró - zés - grant - ka - pi - tány - par - tra - ve - tő - döt - ta - ta - bor - szi - ge - ten

Or to take material from real verse: is the following well known poem to be syllabized as I do below?

Text:

Fa leszek, ha fának vagy virága,

Ha harmat vagy: én virág leszek.

Harmat leszek, ha te napsugár vagy...

Csak, hogy lényink egyesüljenek.

Ha, leányka, te vagy a mennyország:

Akkor én csillaggá változom.

Ha, leányka, te vagy a pokol: hogy

Egyesüljünk, én elkárhozom.

Syllabization? (Is this correct?)

fa - le - szek - ha - fá - nak - vagy - vi - rá - ga -

ha - har - mat - va - gyén - vi - rág - le - szek -

har - mat - le - szek - ha - te - nap - su - gár - vagy -

csak - hogy - lé - nyin - ke - gye - sül - je - nek

ha - le - ány - ka - te - va - gya - meny - nyor - szá - gak -

ko - rén - csil - lag - gá - vál - to - zom -

ha - le - ány - ka - te - va - gya - po - kol - ho - gye -

gye - sül - jün - ké - nel - kár - ho - zom

Or is it not the case that final consonants and initial vowels are joined into syllables? Thanks.

Incidentally, is Hungarian poetry based on the number of syllables? Here you've got an alternation of 10 and 9 syllable lines but is this sort of regularity in the number of syllables of verse lines a general principle? Does syllabic quantity matter? (Hungarian having long and short vowels.)

Contact Basemetal here 11:32, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

PS: Regarding the poem above it seems from what I found on the net that it is actually longer? Is that correct? Does it continue with what follows? Or what?

Barna kislány fekete szemébe,

Szerelmes lett egy szőke legény,

Meg van az a sors könyvébe írva,

Elkárhozik ő majd a szegény.

Mért van az, hogy mindig azt imádjuk,

Aki hűtlen aki mást szeret

Mért van az hogy szív epedve várjuk,

Pedig rajtunk ő majd csak nevet.

Contact Basemetal here 11:32, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

I don't think so. The first one is a famous poem: Petőfi Sándor, “Fa leszek, ha...” (read on Wikisource), (read also on MEK). I don't know where the second part comes from. – b_jonas 16:51, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Neither had I ever heard of a second part. That's why I asked. Contact Basemetal here 17:18, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

November 17

Plaintiff's decedent, intestate, etc.

Many cases where the plaintiff is not the injured party but is suing on behalf of someone else use language like the above. What is going on here grammatically? ÷seresin 02:34, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Grammar as in 'proper grammar' is a sentence-level matter. Intestate has a meaning (having died without a will) and it's an adjective. Plaintiff's decedent is a possessive phrase. Can you give some example sentences? μηδείς (talk) 02:56, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

"Plantiff's decedent helped the horse to its feet" and such. Grammatically was the wrong word. It just seems like an odd construction to me. ÷seresin 03:28, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

These are well-established legal idioms. "Plaintiff's decedent" means "the person who died and on behalf of whose estate the plaintiff is suing." "Plaintiff's testator" means the same but specifically means the decedent died leaving a will that designated the plaintiff as executor. "Plaintiff's intestate" means the deceased died without a will and the court has appointed the plaintiff to administer the estate. Newyorkbrad (talk) 04:16, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, Brad's answers are correct. μηδείς (talk) 04:24, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Linguistic term for the female ending of something?

I do remember that there is a specific linguistic term for the female ending of something. People use it to make a noun feminine. Some languages have this feature, some not. 71.79.234.132 (talk) 14:59, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Suffix? Not specific to the feminine though. There's all kinds. Contact Basemetal here 15:29, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Diminutive. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 16:12, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Not quite, "Bobby" is the diminutive form of "Robert" -- not en ending, and not feminine. SemanticMantis (talk) 16:17, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

It's used for both. Read the links. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 17:25, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

I did read the links. -ette (-elle, etc.) is a diminutive suffix that gives feminine gender, but "diminutive" is not a word that means "suffix that gives a feminine gender" I think the article explains this all rather clearly. SemanticMantis (talk) 17:42, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, and there are also masculine diminutive suffixes, such as -ito in Spanish. Marco polo (talk) 18:26, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, and 'managerette' (if existing) would be clearly diminutive, whereas 'manageress' simply specifies gender which I have no problem with, because if I go out with a woman on a date and she insists on gender equality, I expect her to pay half the bill - can't have two worlds at once.... KägeTorä - (_虎) (Chin Wag) 18:43, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

• In general, it would be a feminine derivative suffix. There may very well be a more specific term, but I can't remember having heard one. Let's ping AnonMoos, he may know. μηδείς (talk) 18:39, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
  • EO calls "-ess" simply a "feminine suffix". ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 19:50, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
    • That's fine in that context, but derivative suffixes are usually distinguished from grammatical suffixes like -ing, -ed, -s, -'s, so the full answer is -ess is a derivative suffix, while -a in Latin is the desinence of a singular nominative first declension noun, associated with, but not equivalent to a feminine suffix. μηδείς (talk) 01:39, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Dennis Baron in ISBN 0-300-03883-6 just calls them "feminine suffixes". Latin first declension -a would be an inflectional feminine suffix (though some first declension nouns, such as "nauta" and "poeta" are actually masculine), while English -ess would be a derivational feminine suffix... AnonMoos (talk) 02:27, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Meaning of Japanese characters

What does ニ ミク口一ル mean? 120.145.150.16 (talk) 16:46, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Can you supply the rest of the sentence? KägeTorä - (_虎) (Chin Wag) 18:44, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

That shows an unusual mixture of katakana and kanji. If "口" is supposed to be "ロ", then it could be pronounced Ni Mikurōru (have no idea what it means)... AnonMoos (talk) 02:23, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Also the "一" ('one') would have to become "ー" (long vowel mark). —Tamfang (talk) 08:07, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

And I wonder if the initial 'ni' isn't actually a kana and meant to be part of the sequence rather than the kanji (given the other oddities). But let's not worry about it too much. We seem to be more interested by all this than the OP, who's gone surfing. Contact Basemetal here 08:59, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Little Latin inscription

What does this mean?

TIMOTHEVS ALDEN
PRA S.PRI. COLL.ALL LAP. AN
AVLÆ. BENTLIENSIS
POSVIVI A.S.H. MDCCCXXII

This is the entirety of an inscription on the side of Bentley Hall, designed by Timothy Alden and in the middle of construction in 1822. Over the 192 years since the inscription was placed, it's degraded a good deal, and I'm not sure that I've performed the transcription correctly. Nyttend (talk) 01:07, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Don't feel like trying to unpack all the abbreviations, but the key words are LAP. = lapidem "stone" and posuit "placed, set"... AnonMoos (talk) 02:34, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

If there's a possibility that there's an E between PRA and S at the beginning of the second line, then "PRAS.PRI. COLL.ALL" might expand to something like PRAESES PRIMUS COLLEGII ALLEGHENENSIS ("first president of Allegheny College"). LAP. AN might be lapidem anguli, I suppose, meaning "cornerstone". AVLÆ. BENTLIENSES is "of Bentley Hall", of course. POSVIVI isn't anything I recognize as Latin (although just POSVI, "I placed", would make sense), but I think AnonMoos is right that it's supposed to be some form of pono. I don't know the abbreviation A.S.H. So maybe "I, Timothy Alden, first president of Allegheny College, placed the cornerstone of Bentley Hall 1822", or something like that? I'm offering this with considerable diffidence, since abbreviations like these are often hell to interpret, and I'm not familiar with the ones used in the 19th century. Deor (talk) 03:39, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

According to this book, there is a similar inscription that reads

"Timotheus Alden

Praæs. Pri. Coll. All. Lap. Angu. Huj.

Aulæ Bentliensis

Posuit 5 Jul. 1820"

Which seems to support some of what Deor wrote. I would expect it to read "posuit" rather than "posui", because this is common in inscriptions and because there's no "ego". - Lindert (talk) 12:46, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Presumably, then, Nyttend's version says "POS. V IVL". I can't think of what A.S.H. would be, but if that's correct, then "anno" something, I guess? It must be something else, just difficult to read due to the degradation. Adam Bishop (talk) 15:24, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Here is a picture, by the way - looks like I am right about POS V JUL but it does seem to say A.S.H. pretty clearly. (Assuming this is the real cornerstone - I was expecting it to be fancier!) Adam Bishop (talk) 15:50, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Ante summo homine (endings? my Latin is rusty) makes sense in context, but I can't say that I've ever seen AD written that way before. shoy (reactions) 17:22, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

A.S.H. is anno salutis humanae. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 23:57, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Until the eighteenth century CE, the term Anno Salutis ("in the year of salvation") or Anno Nostrae Salutis ("in the year of our salvation"), Anno Salutis Humanae ("in the year of the salvation of men"), and Anno Reparatae Salutis ("in the year of accomplished salvation") were sometimes used in place of AD. . -- Jack of Oz 00:04, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

The text references (endnote #3) the article Anno Domini as of 28 July 2006. And indeed, there was a section 3.2. in Anno Domini stating that. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 00:27, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Aha! That's definitely it, perfect. Adam Bishop (talk) 01:26, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Semi-Officially Accurate Renderings

I have an extended form of the Greek alphabet here that is based on my research on the various Modern Greek dialects, but I wanted to know if there are any better methods of transcription that comply with certain standards or the like.

It's hard to further explain my question, but let me try:

Are there any phonemes listed on the aforementioned page that have other transcriptions that have some sort of "official" status or something similar?

In addition, if I have made any mistakes with any of the phonemic values given on that page, please let me know.

I'm hoping that the aforelinked extended Greek alphabet can function as a way to try and transcribe certain sounds of Ancient Greek that have been lost in Modern Greek in a way that speakers of Modern Greek can understand (as well as contain some additional phonemes as a bonus). Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 02:44, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

I have seen the name "Woodcock" transliterated into Greek as "Γουντκοκ", in the line-up of a football team on television, but I don't know if it is any way "official". "πφ" and the other similar examples seem misleading transliterations for "pʰ" etc. to me. I would have thought that "πχ" was at least as good. --ColinFine (talk) 18:00, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

I was under the impression that τθ, πφ and κχ were the recommended ways to transcribe /tʰ/, /pʰ/ and /kʰ/ respectively. I know at least that I have seen more than one person transcribe them that way. But perhaps I am incorrect here? Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 19:47, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

WWII C-H posters

Continuation of this archived thread.

I have received nothing from the Smithsonian Museum, and nothing definitive from AllExperts.com.

The last comment in the earlier thread was:

It appears that the posters may have come with a blank spot at the bottom. Compare File:Don't blab. Loose traps help the Japs. Increase production for Axis destruction. - NARA - 535396.jpg with the C-H version. Nanonic (talk) 07:05, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Looking closely at this example, one can see that stickers probably made of vinyl have been added to the top and bottom. They are both wrinkled, but the rest of the poster has little or no wrinkles. Further, the text at the bottom says, "SIGN UP FOR WAR BONDS. Make your department 100%". Clearly this is addressed to employees of a specific company.

Apparently the posters were produced by the War Production Board, but a company applied their own stickers to them. Per Nanonic's comment above, the posters may have even included empty space with that in mind.

Per Nanonic's research in the other thread, the most likely candidate for this company—and the only candidate we've found—is Cutler-Hammer of Milwaukee. Cutler-Hammer was acquired by Eaton Corporation in 1978, and Eaton's current CEO is Alexander Cutler (possibly a son of the C-H Cutler?).

I think that's the best we can do, and good job guys. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 08:49, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

What a puzzle to unravel! Given that info, here's a pre-War advertisement which contains their logo which includes a "C-H". I found that and others by googling "cutler-hammer world war ii". A rather more stylized C-H is still part of their brand today, which you can see by googling just "cutler-hammer". ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 15:04, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

I think that nails it. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 16:21, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Very good! --Stephan Schulz (talk) 00:42, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, well done. That was bugging me. Matt Deres (talk) 00:58, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

November 18

Pronunciation entries for each topic - they are not understandable. Why are they there?

Example: The Assiniboine River (/əˈsɪnɨbɔɪn/) I just want to know how to pronounce it. As-ini-bone? The (/əˈsɪnɨbɔɪn/) does not help. Thoughts on why this spelling is there instead of something like "As-ini-bone"? If I have to take a course on how to use "əˈsɪnɨbɔɪn" then it is not a terribly helpful tool. -- 19:32, 18 November 2014 — Preceding unsigned comment added by FOY0CH00 (talk • contribs)

It's roughly uh-SIN-uh-boyn. If you hover your computer's cursor over the IPA respelling, it will show you how to pronounce each IPA symbol. You might also want to have a look at IPA for English. Deor (talk) 19:44, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

They're there because there are geeks who can interpret that notation which is called the International Phonetic Alphabet. You don't need to take a course. You just have to read Help:IPA for English. More information can be found at International Phonetic Alphabet chart for English dialects. One can also indicate pronunciation through respelling (see Misplaced Pages:Pronunciation respelling key) which may seem more familiar to you, but there's no general policy on Misplaced Pages that recommends one or the other, as far as I am aware. In the case of the Assiniboine River the respelling of the pronunciation indicated by the IPA notation would be "a-SIN-ib-oin", if I'm interpreting the IPA correctly, but I'm not one of those geeks so caveat emptor if you know what that means. The last syllable is "oin" so it rhymes with "coin" not with "cone". The primary stress is on "sin", the second syllable. Contact Basemetal here 19:55, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Anonymous OP, you must understand that fauxnetic transcription systems (like the one you recommended) do not take dialects into account, and as such, while they might help you out, they might be absolutely useless for a guy thirty miles away from you. No one pronounces things exactly the same way, and (as such) the use of fauxnetic transcription systems is a waste of time. Furthermore, IPA is not all that hard to learn, and is also one of the most highly recommended phonetic transcription systems out there. Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 20:00, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Actually the OP isn't anonymous. He just forgot to sign. Contact Basemetal here 20:05, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Any college that has an English requirement for graduation should teach the IPA. It's standard in Europe, but in the US each dictionary maker has its own absurd system. Is there an article for fauxnetics? -- 20:39, 18 November 2014 Medeis

Also, because letters in English do not have one-to-one correspondence to sounds, amateur phonetic respellings are often open to more than one pronunciation even within a given dialect of English. Even a well-defined phonemic system will run into problems at boundaries between English dialects, since there is some variation in phoneme inventories between dialects. At least IPA expresses the pronunciation in a specific dialect fairly clearly and unambiguously. Marco polo (talk) 21:09, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Medeis -- One reason why many UK dictionaries use IPA and most U.S. dictionaries don't is that UK dictionaries indicate the RP (or nowadays quasi-RP) standard pronunciation, while makers of U.S. dictionaries are very aware that most Americans who consult a dictionary don't want to learn the pronunciation of a word in some arbitrarily-decreed standard dialect, but rather what the pronunciation of the word would be in their own dialect... AnonMoos (talk) 02:15, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Medeis, when people from the South (for example) look up a word, most of the time they really don't want to know how Walter Cronkite would have pronounced the word -- instead, they want to know how the word would be pronounced in terms of the sound system of their own way of speaking. You may consider the reasons why most U.S. dictionaries don't use IPA to be inadequate, but there are real reasons -- it's not pure arbitrary whim or dumbing down... AnonMoos (talk) 03:58, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

I dispute your claim that they don't want the Gen Am pronunciation, and again, a simple comment for readers on either (1) regional varieties, or (2) on mergers, or (3) alternative entries: "oil": /ɔɪl/, /ɔ:l/ (Southern) /ərl/ (NYC, obs.) and "fine": /faɪn/, /fa:n/ (Southern) is an extremely simple solution to the supposed problem. μηδείς (talk) 04:56, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

The Concise OED was using respelling or their own system of diacritics (depending on the entry) until about 1980. I guess there was a big surge of people suddenly wanting to learn RP about 1980? Besides don't Americans love audio pronunciations which are even more specific than IPA descriptions? In fact anyone (who can decipher IPA) on seeing an IPA description or hearing an audio pronunciation aid in a standard dialect is usually able to transfer that information to their own dialect. There must be some other reason why US dictionaries don't like IPA. Contact Basemetal here 03:04, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Webster's Dictionary with its more and less successful spelling reforms predated the IPA by some 70 years and in many American homes it might have pride of place next to the Bible. It set the precedent, and other American publishers seem to have followed along. μηδείς (talk) 03:12, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, people who don't know IPA are ignorant, and cannot communicate pronunciation as clearly as people who do. Readers indeed ought not be ignorant; they ought to know as much as Misplaced Pages editors do. And yes, it's someone else's fault that a great many of our readers are ignorant. But, whom are we trying to serve? Isn't it the ignorant? Jim.henderson (talk) 01:56, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

What mean 'people', 'ignorant', 'communicate', 'pronunciation', 'clearly', 'readers', 'ought to', 'editors', 'a great many', 'serve'? Contact Basemetal here 02:28, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

This is one of the reasons why in Europe there exists a stereotype about "dumb Murricans". While mature and educated people in God-blessed Murrica consider the well-known well-established transcription of their own language a great challenge, in Europe pupils from 3 or 4 grades are supposed to know English phonetic alphabet entirely and read it in dictionaries. Are 10-years old European children smarter than 40-years old Murricans?--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 05:45, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Simply better educated in certain subjects. μηδείς (talk) 06:32, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

When I tried in America to order a Coke, in my middle of the road Australian accent, I was not understood (more than once). There is no possible standard using common letters. HiLo48 (talk) 06:07, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Did you want a Coca-Cola? You'd probably've been understood if that's what you'd wanted and you'd said it. Then you'd've been asked if you were a furriner. Of course there's always the option of learning RP. No American has a problem with that. Unfortunately Australian vowels are uncouth to American ears. μηδείς (talk) 06:32, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Is there a colloquial or formal term of address for female bosses?

I know in Chinese, people may use 老板 to refer to a boss, male or female. People may add a 娘 at the end in order to colloquially refer to a female boss. Likewise, is there a colloquial or formal term of address for female bosses in English? Also, is there a colloquial or formal English term of address for a male boss's wife or lesbian woman boss's wife? 140.254.136.154 (talk) 22:01, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Female bosses are a modern phenomena and very rare, and lesbians even moreso that I doubt "female bosses lesbian wife" has ever come up in real life, much less enough for a specific word to have evolved to describe it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.174.192.16 (talk • contribs)

Are you limiting the scope of your answer to Gansu Province? Female bosses being very rare seems an odd statement to this American. μηδείς (talk) 03:04, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

English to a Japanese

Does English script look as weird and alien to Japanese people as Japanese script looks to us? 117.174.192.16 (talk) 23:14, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

I can't say how weird it is. But I can say that the "English script" you are talking about is the Latin script. Or you may be talking about Anglo-Saxon runes. 71.79.234.132 (talk) 23:50, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

The Latin alphabet (what everyone here is typing in) is known as Romanji (or "Roman letters") in Japanese. Romanji is not exactly rare over there, so there's at least a significant portion of the population who are familiar with Romanji. Most of the Japanese programs I've seen where someone was typing on a computer or sending a text message, they typed a Romanji character first, and the computer then changed it to the relevant Hiragana character. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

117.174.192.16 -- Nowadays the Latin alphabet is pretty much a component of the Japanese writing system, which was not a great stretch, since the Japanese writing system already included 2,000 or more logographic characters, and two different syllabaries containing about 50 syllable signs each... AnonMoos (talk) 02:24, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

November 19

What does "going down on me" connote in Irish English?

The term pretty much only means performing fellatio on me in American English, unless you pick some odd context like a stock investment, which does not apply here. Does Irish have that meaning for the phrase as well? Does it have any other literal or figurative meaning? Might it be a double entendre? I came across the phrase in a text written by an Irish author, but don't want to mention the text for fear of prejudicing responses--and it's not Joyce, but contemporary. Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 02:28, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

When I was involved in managing mainframe computers, the system crashing was often described as "the system went down on me". If it happened often, it would be "the computer kept going down on me". HiLo48 (talk) 07:01, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

• Pages automatically checked for accidental language links
• Misplaced Pages resources for researchers
• Misplaced Pages help forums
• Misplaced Pages reference desk