Revision as of 13:04, 18 December 2024 editKhajidha (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users28,088 edits →English H: ReplyTag: Reply← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 07:37, 11 January 2025 edit undoViennese Waltz (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers13,501 editsmNo edit summary | ||
(561 intermediate revisions by 67 users not shown) | |||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
{{Wiktionary|Wiktionary:Information desk}} | {{Wiktionary|Wiktionary:Information desk}} | ||
= December |
= December 29 = | ||
== |
== A few questions == | ||
# Are there any words in German where double consonant is written after {{angbr|ei}}, {{angbr|au}},{{angbr|eu}} and {{angbr|ie}}? | |||
Section {{section link|Hunsrückisch#Phonology}} states: | |||
# Is there any natural language which uses letter Ŭ in its writing system? It is used in Esperanto, a conlang, in Belarusian Latin alphabet, in McCune-Reichschauer of Korean, and some modern transcriptions of Latin, but none of these uses it in their normal writing system. | |||
:"] also occurs, with ''Dorf'' (village) becoming ''Dooref'', ''Kirche'' (church) becoming ''Keerisch'', and ''Berg'' (mountain) becoming ''Beerisch''." | |||
# Why does Lithuanian not use ogonek under O, unlike all other its vowels? | |||
I see no palatalization. The preceding sentence describes the vowel lengthening. Is it correct to describe the further change as the insertion of an ] or ? Pinging {{ping|NeorxenoSwang}}. --] 13:16, 4 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
# Why do so few languages use letter Ÿ, unlike other umlauted basic Latin letters? Are there any languages where it occurs in beginning of word? | |||
# Are there any languages where letter Ž can occur doubled? | |||
# Are there any languages where letter Ð (eth) can start a word? | |||
# Can it be said that Spanish has a /v/ sound, at least in some dialects? | |||
# Are there any languages where letter Ň can occur doubled? | |||
# Are there any languages where form of count noun depends on final digits of a number (like it does in many Slavic languages) and numbers 11-19 are formed exactly same way as numbers 21-99? Hungarian forms numbers like that, but it uses singular after all numbers. | |||
# Why English does not have equivalent of German and Dutch common derivational prefix ''ge-''? | |||
--] (]) 10:01, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:ad 10.: ] had it: ]. Then they got rid of it. Maybe too much effort for those lazy bums. --] (]) 10:19, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::Indeed, English dropped it. Maybe it got less useful as English switched to SVO word order. ] (]) 10:42, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::It disappeared early in Old Norse, as well. ] (]) 13:42, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::The reason that "ge-" got dropped in English was because the "g" become a "y" (IPA ) by sound changes, and then the "y" tended to disappear, so all that was left was a reduced schwa vowel prefix. ] (]) 00:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:ad 1.: You mean within a syllable? Otherwise you'd have to accept words like ''vielleicht''. --] (]) 10:24, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
: I suppose what the original author meant was the change from to implied in "Keerisch" and "Beerisch", but that's of course not really palatalization, but a fronting from palatal towards palatal-alveolar or thereabouts. And I can't see how the "Dorf" example would fit in with any of that, except with the vowel lengthening described in the previous sentence. But yes, the extra vowel would properly be described as epenthesis, I guess. Pity the whole article is unsourced. ] ] 13:51, 4 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::] / Strauß, which except for a name can mean 'bunch' or 'ostrich'. ] (]) 13:42, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::Some digging strongly suggests the statement is based on: Roland Martin, ''Untersuchungen zur rhein-moselfränkischen Dialektgrenze'', Deutsche Dialektgeographie Vol. 11a, Marburg, 1922. I could not find online access to this monograph. --] 22:14, 4 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::One can find plenty of references stating that a diphthong is never followed by a double consonant in German, including the ]. The two examples given don't contradict this, since ß isn't a regular double consonant (as it does not shorten the preceding vowel), and the two l in 'vielleicht' belong (as already implied by Wrongfilter) to different syllables. People's and place names may have kept historic, non-regular spellings and therefore don't always follow this rule, e.g. "Beitz" or "Gauck" (tz and ck are considered double consonants since they substitute the non-existent zz and kk). -- ] (]) 20:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::Resolved in an old edition at ]: | |||
:ad 4.: Statistics? Only few languages written in the Latin alphabet use umlauts in native words, mostly German and languages with an orthography influenced by German. Similarly, only few use Y in native words. Very few use both. ] (]) 11:07, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::Überdies tritt ] ein: Dorf wird zu ''Dooref,'' Kirche zu ''Keerisch,'' Berg zu ''Beerisch''.<sup></sup> | |||
::Swedish has both umlauts/ diaeresis and Y (and occasionally Ü in German names and a miniscule number of loanwords, including ]). Swedish still didn't see a need for Ÿ (and I can't even type a capital Ÿ on my Swedish keyboard in a regular way). ] (]) 13:56, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:: --] 07:37, 5 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::A similar situation applies to 40bus' native Finnish. ] (]) 14:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:ad 7.: Seems to be used as an allophone of /f/ under certain circumstances. It's used in ], if it is to be considered a dialect, rather than its own language. ] (]) 13:47, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Regarding 10: Middle English still had ] which goes back to ge- "]" (here it is spelled i-); it is still used in Modern English in archaic or humorous forms like: yclad, yclept, and other cases (see the Wiktionary entry I linked to). ] (]) 18:11, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:2 & 6: The ] marks short vowels with breves (while leaving the long ones unmarked) so it uses ⟨ŭ⟩ (and ⟨ư̆⟩), while the now-extinct ] has initial ⟨ð⟩s. The Wiktionary entries on individual letters usually provide lists of languages that use them. --] (]) 10:55, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== What is the possessive form of "works" in the sense of a factory? == | |||
= December 30 = | |||
The word "works", in the sense of a factory, looks plural in form but can be singular or plural. What is the possessive of "works" in that sense? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 15:28, 4 December 2024 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Teaching pronunciation for Spanish in 17th c. France and Italy? == | |||
:See ]. Probably ''works's.'' ] ] 17:55, 4 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::Hmm. I can't imagine anyone actually ''saying'' that. /wərksɨz/. That would sound very strange. | |||
::I think I would go with {{xt|works'}} for that reason, whether it's precisely grammatical or not. --] (]) 19:12, 4 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::Agreed, as does the British Parliament in 1886; {{xt|...a Bill relating to the Metropolitan Board of Works' Fire Brigade Expenses...}} ] (]) 20:55, 4 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::Well, I guess you can't imagine me, then. Sounds perfectly normal to me.--] (]) (]) 13:41, 5 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::I'm with ] here. How does one even pronounce works's? Worksers? That's ugly. ] (]) 00:12, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::::How is it any weirder than 'roses' or 'poses'?--] (]) (]) 01:37, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::::<small>There was , and . These are the Xerxes hoaxes. ] ] 06:55, 6 December 2024 (UTC)</small> | |||
:::::Works's sounds fine to me (pronounced workses ). ] (]) 03:02, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::::I added the "R" to write something that would be pronounced the way I thought you would say this. I've never heard workses. ] (]) 06:02, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::::::<small>Presumably a non-rhotic R. I remember learning ] from the (British) ''Penguin Book of Card Games'', and teaching it to my folks. The book said it was pronounced "scart", and I couldn't convince my dad to stop saying it that way. --] (]) 20:50, 7 December 2024 (UTC) </small> | |||
:::::About the same as "works is". --] (]) 05:13, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::::::<small>It's a grammar rule English acquired from ]ish. ] (]) 14:12, 8 December 2024 (UTC)</small> | |||
:We use ''Juniper Networks's'' several times in the article ]. In ] we have ''Skunk Works''' once.--] (]) 05:24, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::And in ], we use ''Marx's'' nearly 100 times. --] (]) 17:50, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::{{xt|Marx's}} sounds fine to me, {{xtg|works's}} doesn't. Couldn't tell you why. | |||
:::<small>''Or to borrow a cadence from Karl the Marx/A biting chipmunk never barx''</small> | |||
:::--] (]) 19:16, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::Possibly because your sense of grammar fails to see ''works'' as a singular. --] 10:24, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::: That could be it. --] (]) 20:44, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Although it seems that Spanish 'x' and 'j' had both taken on the sound of a velar fricative (jota) at least among the majority of the population already in the course of the 16th c. (is this correct?) the French and the Italians pronounce the title of Cervantes's novel "Don Quixote" with an 'sh' sound (which was the old pronunciation of 'x' until the end of the 15th c.; the letter 'j' was pronounced like French j like the 'ge' in 'garage'; ] still uses these pronunciations). | |||
= December 6 = | |||
So I've been wondering: Why do the French and the Italian use the archaic pronunciation of 'x'? Is it because this was still the official literate (albeit a minority) pronunciation even in Spain or had that pronunciation already completely disappeared in Spain but was still taught to students of the Spanish language in France and Italy? | |||
== What is she saying (in Hebrew)? == | |||
] (]) 12:57, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
The guy (Tzvi Yehezkeli, whose English is not too good) says in the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDzWrFZszW0&t=1h12m54s (at 1:12:54): "We need his help to know our Judaism point (sic). You see sometimes you need the other to tell you where to go." Right then the lady (Caroline Glick) cuts him off with a saying (or a quote) in Hebrew which I couldn't catch. Can someone who speaks Hebrew figure out what she says? (The guy then agrees "בדיוק!"). ] (]) 01:52, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Might just be an approximation, since French and Italian lack a velar fricative natively. ] (]) 14:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::In French, the protagonist's name is always spelled "Quichotte", never "Quixote" or "Quijote", and is pronounced as if it were a native French word. The article on the book in the French wikipedia explains that this spelling was adopted to approximate the pronunciation used in Spanish at the time. ] (]) 14:44, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::: Which is odd since the final -e is silent in French but definitely not silent in any version of Spanish I'm aware of. -- ] </sup></span>]] 19:51, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::Was final ''e'' silent in French at the tme of the novel? ] (]) 00:41, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
178.51.7.23 -- The letter "X" standing for a "sh" sound was still alive enough in the 16th century, that the convention was used for writing Native American languages (see ] etc)... ] (]) 01:05, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:אָ֭ז יֹאמְר֣וּ בַגּוֹיִ֑ם הִגְדִּ֥יל יְ֝הֹוָ֗ה | |||
:part of ]:2. ] (]) 03:14, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::the "Then they said among the nations, "The LORD has done great things" part. ] (]) 03:16, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== VIP == | |||
== ] terminology == | |||
Is the acronym "]" ever pronounced as a word, as /vɪp/? --] (]) 16:11, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
What terms would have been used by the British to identify an Indian person during the days of the ]? It's for an item I'm writing and in an ideal case, there'd be a term that today sounds dated and paternalistic, but maybe not horribly racist or offensive, as it's meant to highlight the age of the British speaker rather than insult Indians. What I'm going for is the kind of obviously dated stuff Mr. Burns sometimes uses on The Simpsons. ] (]) 02:43, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:In my understanding, only jokingly or as shorthand in environments where the meaning would be understood. You probably wouldn't see it in a news broadcast, but I could imagine it being used casually by, say, service workers who occasionally cater to high-end clientele. ] (]) 16:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:''Native.'' See for instance the opening sentences of . ] ] 07:23, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::There was a German TV programme called '']'', making a wordplay out of the fact that /vɪp/ sounds like ''Wipp-'' (from the verb ''wippen'':to rock, to swing; ''Schaukel'' is a swing). It was based on interviews with and documentary bits about famous people. But that does not mean that V.I.P. would normally have been pronounced like that. -- ] (]) 16:34, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:In Dutch it's always pronounced /vɪp/, which has no other meanings than VIP. It's still written with capitals. ] (]) 17:11, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::I believe that is the case for Swedish, as well. Possibly due to the confusion about whether the letters of English abbreviations should be pronounced the English or the Swedish way. ] (]) 21:44, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Somewhat akin to VP for Vice President, typically pronounced "VEE-PEE" but also colloquially as "VEEP". ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 21:34, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:When I was a kid growing up in the UK I used to watch a cartoon called '']'' (which was renamed ''Boss Cat'' in the UK as there was a cat food available called Top Cat). There's a line in the theme song that goes "he's the boss, he's a vip, he's the championship". Or does it say "he's a pip"? Most lyrics sites have it as "pip", but I favour "vip". Decide for yourself here: --] 10:21, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::Ah, that brings back some memories. It sounds like "vip" to me. One thing I'm now wondering: If the series in the UK was called ''Boss Cat'', did they change the song lyrics at all? ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 13:59, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Not according to my memory, @]. It was transparent even to kids that they'd been forced to change the title, but didn't change anything else. (The dialogue wasn't changed: "TC"). ] (]) 14:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::Imported American culture rarely see any changes at all. The term "spaz" might have been changed to "ass" or something, occasionally, as "spaz" is considered more harsh in the UK (and "ass" less so)... ] (]) 15:26, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
= December 31 = | |||
: ] although some do not consider it offensive. See https://www.coolitude.shca.ed.ac.uk/word-%E2%80%98coolie%E2%80%99 ] (]) 09:07, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Spanish consonants == | |||
::Agree with Card Zero above, "native" was the generally used term. British officials sometimes adopted Indian clothing and customs and were said derisively to have "gone native". | |||
::"Coolie" was specifically a labourer and could be applied to Chinese workers as well. | |||
::An educated Indian who worked in the British administration was known as a ] (or earlier "baboo"). | |||
::People of mixed British and Indian heritage were known as "]s", "Eurasians" or "Indo-Britons". ] (]) 10:40, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::A more general term applied to anyone of first-degree mixed race (including Anglo-Indians) was "half-chat", meaning "]" or bi-racial. In some instances this could be intended perjoratively, but in, for example, the British army (where marriages between British soldiers and women from the countries they were posted to were commonplace), it was used purely descriptively, and was still current in the 1970s. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 13:13, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::About that Babu article ... should I change the Greek from ''papu'' to ''páppou?'' Then there's some Indian English going on in the phrasing of "the urban trend to call "babu" to girlfriends or boyfriends, or common-friends", in the "to call X to Y" construction and the term ''common-friends.'' Should I "correct" that, or leave it be? I guess it's still English, so maybe the usual "whoever got there first" rule applies, as well as the India-themed article context. ] ] 11:37, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::Another thing I noted is that it seems to read as if the Swahili word is cognate to the Indo-European examples, which is a bit oddly phrased for a ]. I'm not entirely sure on how to rephrase it, though. ] (]) 12:12, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::: I've removed the entire passage. All those words from non-Indian languages are quite irrelevant to that article, and the claim that they are cognates is plain false, and all of it was of course unsourced. ] ] 12:29, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::::Like Wakuran says - and I didn't know this excellent term ''wanderwort'' - they probably ''are'' really distant cognates, like ''mama,'' which usually means "mother" all over the world (or "breast", or "chew", or sometimes "father"). ] ] 12:48, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::::: They are actually not ''wanderwort'' cases but ], a somewhat different category. ''Wanderwörter'' actually are related, via borrowing, which can often be historically tracked with some precision. Mama–papa words aren't related at all, but believed to be independently innovated in each language via parent–child interaction in early langauge acquisition. ] ] 12:55, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::::::Oh, OK. But it's like "no officer, I just happened to be passing the bank at the time and I wear this stocking on my head for fun, ask anyone." I remain suspicious. ] ] 13:14, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::{{small|And how does ]'s ] fit in? ] (]) 21:14, 10 December 2024 (UTC)}} | |||
::Very interesting; I always considered Coolie to be a pejorative for Chinese labourers, but it's clearly more broad than that. That could work - thank you! ] (]) 16:03, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::In ], ''kuli'' is a slur for ] people. It is not used for ]. Both ethnic groups were originally imported, under false promises, as indentured labourers. --] 10:10, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:I've seen the term "Hindoo" used in older literature. Its obviously related to the modern "Hindu", but from the context I don't think it was exactly equivalent, and I think referred more to race or ethnicity than religion. ] (]) 14:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::Consider the term '']'' applied to the macrolanguage that includes ]. — I faintly remember reading that a prominent writer of the Indian diaspora in Latin America was known there as ''el escritor hindú'', which amused him because his ancestors were Muslim. ] (]) 21:21, 10 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Why in Spanish and Portuguese, /s/ sound can never start a word if it is followed by consonant? For example, why is it ''especial'' rather than ''special'' I think that in Portuguese, it is because of letter S would be pronounced /ʃ/ before a voiceless consonant, but in beginning of word, /ʃ/ would not end a syllable. But why it is forbidden in Spanish too? --] (]) 08:50, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== ] only has 4.4m speakers worldwide, and is on ], but why does ] NOT show up on DuoLingo even though it has ~20m speakers? == | |||
:A couple of explanation options can be found in this thread: . I would mention that you can add ''sc'' to your list. An sc- at the start of a Latin word was changed into c- (scientia - ciencia), s- (scio -> se) but also into esc (schola -> escuela, scribo -> escribo). -- ] (]) 11:13, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
How come DuoLingo gets to have Norwegian but not Kinyarwanda when there are over 10m more speakers of the Kinyarwanda language in the world than the Norwegian language? | |||
::One might also note the elimination of the Latin -e in infinitives in Spanish and Portuguese (Example: Habere -> Haber, Haver) while Italian kept them. To avoid consonant clusters like -rst-, -rsp-, -rsc- between words which would be a challenge to the Romance tongue, (e.g. atender scuela, observar strellas), the intermittent e may have been required and therefore may have shifted to the beginning of such words. -- ] (]) 11:29, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::There are Italian dialects where final wovels of low ] regularly are dropped, though. It's common in Sicilian, I believe. Also, I'm not sure on whether the two phonetic shifts would be related. ] (]) 11:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
And how can I / we get DuoLingo to add Kinyarwanda to their repertoire of available languages to train ourselves on? --] (]) 23:22, 6 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::It's quite normal in standard Italian to leave the final vowel off of the infinitive auxiliary verbs (or other verbs acting in a quasi-auxiliary role, say in ''saper vivere''). But I don't think that's really what 79.91.113.116 was talking about. Anyway if the main verb starts with s+consonant you can always leave the e on the auxiliary to avoid the cluster, similarly to how a squirrel is ''uno scoiattolo'' and not *''un scoiattolo''. | |||
:Norway is a rich, Western, European country with a big economic market and widespread digitalization. ] (]) 00:05, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::As a side note, I actually think it's the northern dialects that are more known for leaving off final vowels of ordinary words, particularly Lombardian. I have the notion that ] is Milanese. But I'm not sure of that; I wasn't able to find out for sure with a quick search. --] (]) 23:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:These are both questions for DuoLingo. There is a "contact us" button on their home page. ]|] 12:14, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::An AI bot on that Quora link mentions that there are no Latin words starting with st-, I see, which however is blatantly wrong. ] (]) 11:29, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:For whatever reason, it's a part of the Spanish language culture. Even a native Spanish speaker talking in English will tend to put that leading "e", for example they might say "the United Estates". ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 11:42, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Speakers of Bengali sometimes complain that it doesn't have enough worldwide cultural prominence for being one of the languages with the highest number of speakers (the "seventh most spoken language", according to our article), but it's mostly spoken in only two countries (Bangladesh and India), and is the main national language of only one of them (Bangladesh). The languages with more global prominence than Bengali are the national languages of powerful / wealthy nations, or are spoken across many countries. The factors mitigating against the global importance of Bengali operate even more strongly in the case of Kinyarwanda. Also, U.S. and European tourists are more likely to visit Norway than Rwanda... ] (]) 00:15, 11 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::An accent isn't generally considered part of the "culture" in the broader sense. It's not really part of the "English language culture" to refer to a certain German statesman as the "Fyoorer of the Third Rike"... ] (]) 13:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::English speakers have typically always mispronounced Hitler's title. In fact, in Richard Armour's satirical American history book, he specifically referred to Hitler as a "Furor". ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 01:29, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::It is kinda proper English, so when I think about it, a better equivalent might be an English speaker talking in German about "Der Fyoorer des dritten Rikeys" or so... (I need to brush up on my German cases...) ] (]) 02:08, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:The reason why they do not occur in these languages is that the native speakers of these languages cannot pronounce ]s like /sk/. The reason why they cannot pronounce these onsets is that they do not occur in their native languages, so that they have not been exposed to them in the process of ]. --] 11:49, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::However, these onsets existed in Latin and disappeared in Spanish so at some point they got lost. See above for a more etymological approach. -- ] (]) 11:53, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:It's quite common cross-linguistically to insert a prothetic vowel before some initial clusters. Old French did it (though the /s/ has since often been lost): "étoile"; "escalier"; "épée". Turkish does it: "istasyon". Other languages simplify the cluster: English "knife" /n-/; "pterodactyl" /t-/; Finnish "Ranska" ('France') ] (]) 14:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== The <nowiki><surname></nowiki> woman == | |||
:English speaking visitors to Norway don't need to understand Norwegian. Norwegians almost all speak excellent English. ] (]) 00:37, 11 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
In a novel I'm reading there are characters who are sometimes referred to as "the Borthwick woman" and "the Pomfrey woman". Nothing exceptional there. But then I got to wondering: why do we never see some male literary character called, say, "the Randolph man" or "the McDonald man"? We do sometimes see "the <surname> person", but never "the <surname> man". Yet, "the <surname> woman" seems fair game. | |||
::<small>But according to ] (Norwegian comedy sketch TV program) the Danes aren't quite so happy, ] (]) 19:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC) </small> | |||
We also hear these things in extra-literary contexts. | |||
::HiLo48 -- Even so, many people might want to avoid being the stereotypical English-only tourist in non-English-language country. ] (]) 01:10, 12 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
What's going on here? -- ] </sup></span>]] 10:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
= December 7 = | |||
:Traditinal gender roles, I believe. Men inherit their father's surname, while women change theirs by marrying into a new family, on some level being treated as possessions, I guess. ] (]) 11:35, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== From German to English, please translate this catchy ] theme song? == | |||
:A possible reason is that, particularly in former eras, men generally had a particular occupation or role by which they could be referenced, while women often did not, being 'merely' a member of first their parental and later their spousal families. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 13:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Thanks in advance. --] (]) 02:14, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Another aspect is that these are usually intended as, and understood as, pejorative or disrespectful ways to refer to someone. There's no need to spell it out as, e.g. "that awful/appalling/dreadful Borthwick woman". Those descriptors are understood. How subtle our language can be. I suppose the nearest equivalent for a male referent would be their surname alone, but that would need a context because it wouldn't automatically be taken as pejorative, whereas "the <surname> woman" would. -- ] </sup></span>]] 20:25, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
: you can read the lyrics in German and what Google Translate makes of it. --] 09:32, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
: |
:There's also the fact that this is not only understood as a negative towards the woman, but also an insinuation that the man is "lesser" because he can't control "his woman".--] (]) (]) 23:32, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
:: That hadn't occurred to me. In the book I referred to above, the Borthwick woman is definitely not attached to a man, and the status of the Pomfrey woman is unknown and irrelevant to the story. -- ] </sup></span>]] 08:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Why do the lyrics have basic multiplication done incorrectly? --] (]) 20:34, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
: is a use of "the Abernathy man", one of "the Babson man", and one of "the Callahan man". These uses do not appear pejorative to me. --] 12:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Because in-universe, Pippi is (in)famously depicted as having a horrible understanding of mathematics, she refers to the "multiplikationstabell" (multiplication table) as "pluttifikationstabell" ("muddlyplication table" or something)... ] (]) 23:14, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::That sounds not perjorative by avoidance or distancing, but like a "non-definite" (novel? term) similar to "A certain Calsonathy," or "If a '''man''' comes by, tell '''them'''..." (this a nongendered pronoun regardless of gendered referent; feels newish) | |||
::::'''' ] ] 23:53, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::] (]) 17:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::I'd say that's a misunderstanding of the Swedish, fartification would be "pruttifikation" and "pluttifikation" would rather mean "tinyfication". As a noun, I guess "plutt" could also mean a small lump or chunk of something viscous, but it might be a somewhat strained interpretation. ] (]) 03:14, 8 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::They were chosen to refer to specific individuals, but for the second I apparently have copied the link to a non-example. For the other two, they are Floyd Abernathy and Leonard Callahan. A better B example is "the Bailey man". we do not learn the given name, but he is definitely a specific individual. And , although we are afforded only snippet views, "the Bailey man" refers to one Dr. Hal Bailey. --] 19:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::: ], thanks for your wonderful contributions. This here is a great explanation, and "muddlyplication" is a stroke of genius that's very hard to achieve in translations. ◅ ] ] 15:15, 8 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::Further to Jack of Oz's and Lambiam's observations above , for a male equivalence one might also use near synonyms like 'chap' or 'fellow'. "That Borthwick chap . . ." would be a casual and neutral reference to someone not very well known to the speaker or listener; "that Borthwick fellow . . ." might hint at the speaker's disapproval. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 03:46, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::The use in the third link is the spoken sentence "He works during the day to the Callahan man that does the carvings." It occurs just above the blank line halfway down the page. --] 19:19, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== English vowels == | |||
== What does the Greek varia indicate? == | |||
There are some dialects which have /yː/ and /øː/, such as in South African and NZ English, but are there any dialects that have /ʏ/ and /œ/? --] (]) 14:24, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:There are some examples listed in the relevant IPA articles. ] (]) 14:45, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
= January 1 = | |||
The character ` (Greek Varia) is represented by the Unicode codepoint U+1FEF.. But what is it good for? BTW, it's not listed in the disambiguation page ]. ◅ ] ] 08:47, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:''varia'' is a modern (?) transcription of βαρεῖα (''bareia''), the greek name for the ] (see also the odd redirect ]). --] (]) 09:05, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::{{small|In Modern Greek referred to as ], also for use in other languages such as French. The original /b/ pronunciation already turned into a /v/ in Byzantine Greek. --] 09:42, 7 December 2024 (UTC)}} | |||
:::{{small|Evidence for this early transition is in the Cyrillic alphabet! ] (]) 21:25, 10 December 2024 (UTC)}} | |||
:: But of course - thanks, ]! I now see that it's already in the disamb page. <br>That said, the current link to ] could probably be improved. Either to subsection ] or to ] or to ], but then the name “varia” should be added to the linked section. <br/><small>Thanks also to Lambiam; i read your post after an edit conflict.</small> ◅ ] ] 09:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== |
== Fraction names == | ||
How do English speakers say fractions of units? For example, is 50 cm "half a metre", and 150 cm "one and half metres"? Does English refer to a period of two days as "48 hours"? Is 12 hours "half a day", 36 hours "one and half days" and 18 months "one and half years"? --] (]) 10:49, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Yes to all, except that it would be "one and a half" rather than "one and half". ]|] 12:26, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:You ask "did you forget . . .", but the article has existed for over 20 years and has had (if I've got the maths right) over 300 contributors, so the absence of mention is suggestive. | |||
:{{ec}} One does not say "one and half metres" but "one and <u>a</u> half metres". One can also say "one and a half metre" or "one metre and a half". Likewise for "one and half days/years". In "two and a half metres", one only uses the plural form. Note that "48 hours" can also be used for any 48-hour period, like from Saturday 6am to Monday 6am. --] 12:31, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:On the other hand, web searching the question retrieves (for me) AI assertions (unreliable) that it does, but only a weak statement by a speaker that they ''think'' it does (not very convincing) and no positive human-written passage detailing it. | |||
:Is then 75 minutes "one and a quarter hours"? Is 250,000 "a quarter million"? --] (]) 15:20, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Our article on Ryukyuan languages (of which it is one) states (in more than one place) "Many Ryukyuan languages, like Standard Japanese and most Japanese dialects, have contrastive pitch accent" (or similar wording): of course, "many" implies "not all". | |||
::In British English at least, 75 minutes = one and a quarter hours, or an hour and a quarter; 250,000 is a quarter of a million, or two-hundred-and-fifty thousand. ] (]) 15:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Overall, this seems to me to be inconclusive, and needing the input of a genuinely knowledgeable linguist. Anyone? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 18:00, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::Also in British English, "eighteen months" would be more usual than "one and a half years". It's common to give the age of babies as a number of months until they reach the age of two. ] (]) 16:49, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:"{{tq|Okinawan is considered a lexical pitch accent language}}".<sup></sup> --] 23:33, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::All those usages are also found in America English. Also "a quarter million" is not uncommon in casual speech whereas "a quarter of a million" sounds formal. However, "three quarters of a million" is the only correct way to refer to 750,000 with this idiom though the 's' in quaters is often not audible. ] (]) 23:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::In Finnish it is common to give age of one-year-old babies as mixed years and months, such as "yksi vuosi ja kuusi kuukautta" ("one year and six month")? ''Puolitoista vuotta'' is very commonly used to mean 18 months. Also, ''puoli vuorokautta'' is 12 hours and ''puolitoista vuorokautta'' 36 hours. Does English use ''day'' to refer to thing that Finnish refers as ''vuorokausi'', i.e., a period of exactly 24 hours (1,440 minutes, 86,400 seconds), starting at any moment and ending exactly 24 hours later? --] (]) 18:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::In English ages between one and two years are more often given in months than mixed months and years. I.e. "18 months" is more common than "a/one year and six months" but both are heard. A one day period is more often called 24 hours because "day" would be ambiguous. "One day later" could mean any time during the next day. But using "one day" or "exactly one day" in that meaning would not be obviously incorrect either. ] (]) 23:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::To my annoyance, "24 hours" and multiples thereof are often used as synonyms of "day(s)", not for precision but because more syllables make more importance. ] (]) 23:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::Misplaced Pages has an article ] (an unambiguous expression in technical English)... ] (]) 21:17, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Featured articles that were deleted. == | |||
== The two pronunciations of Hebrew letter Het in Ancient Hebrew? == | |||
Hi. i was wondering if there are any featured articles that are not on the former featured article list since they were actually deleted. I see redirected ones but not deleted ones. Please let me know. Thank you. ] (]) 19:46, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:I'm not sure why this is on the language refdesk, but I remember ], which was originally a nice-looking page about the animal/foodstuff from the ] universe. Jimbo famously hated it because it was poorly sourced (not sure it had ''any'' sources really), but I don't think he put his thumb on the scale, and it was later deleted by the regular process. It's been recreated as a disambig page. --] (]) 19:55, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
The Hebrew letters Het (<big><big>ח</big></big>) and ayin (<big><big>ע</big></big>) had two different pronunciations each in Ancient Hebrew: the Het could be pronounced like Arabic Ha (<big><big>ح</big></big>) or like Arabic kha (<big><big>خ</big></big>) while ayin could be pronounced like Arabic ayin (<big><big>ع</big></big>) or like Arabic ghayin (<big><big>غ</big></big>). | |||
= December 8 = | |||
For ayin the clue that this was the case is the transcription into Greek (e.g. in the Septuagint) of Hebrew words like the names Gaza, Gomora, etc. compared to modern Hebrew Aza, Amora, etc. The Greek gamma is in fact a reflex of the ghayin pronunciation. When the letter was pronounced ayin it was not transcribed, e.g. in Eden. | |||
== Please translate from Korean to English, the lyrics to this beautiful-sounding song "]" == | |||
But how do we know for Het? What are in the Septuagint transcribed Hebrew words that indicate that the letter Het had two pronunciations? In other words what are the two different transcriptions of letter Het in the Septuagint that are a clue to that fact? If I had to adventure a guess I would guess that the pronunciation Het was not transcribed (except possibly for a rough breathing), while the pronunciation khet was transcribed as a khi, but I don't know, and I can't think of any examples, and that's exactly why I am asking here. | |||
--] (]) 05:43, 8 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 12:28, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:For a translation, see . The two singers sing alternate lines of one running text; it is not a kind of dialogue between them. --] 17:34, 9 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Didn't Biblical Hebrew survive as a liturgical language? Maybe that proviced pointers. ] (]) 12:44, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:: No, not phonologically. From the point of view of the phonology you're mixing two meanings of "Biblical Hebrew" here. The pronunciation used when the text were composed and the ritual pronunciation of the text nowadays. That has nothing to do with the ancient pronunciation and in fact has developed differently in different traditions (ashkenazi, sefaradi, yemeni, iraqi, persian, etc. none of which preserves the double pronunciation of Het and/or ayin) which obviously cannot all be different and yet be identical to the ancient pronunciation. In any case I now changed "Biblical" to "Ancient". ] (]) 12:54, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:The het in {{Script/Hebr|הָגָר}} (]) is not transcribed in the Septuagint: {{serif|῎Αγαρ}} (Agar), while {{Script/Hebr|חֶבְרוֹן}} (]) is transcribed as {{serif|Χεβρών}} (Khebrōn). --] 13:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::In Hagar you don't have a Het (8th letter) but a heh (5th letter). However I think the idea is good. ] (]) 13:14, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Oops, yes, mistake. --] 13:27, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::Did you check the breathing in Greek Agar is soft? I would say that's a surprise. ] (]) 13:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::Yes, I did. The Vulgate has Agar. See also {{serif|]}} on Wiktionary. I suspect, though, that when the Septuagint was originally produced, breathings were not yet written. --] 13:41, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::{{Script/Hebr|חַגַּי}} (]) is transcribed as {{serif|᾿Αγγαῖος}} (Angaios), Aggaeus in the Vulgate. --] 14:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:] mentions the pair יצחק = Ἰσαάκ = Isaac vs. רחל = Ῥαχήλ = Rachel with non-intial ח. Another example of initial ח as zero is Ἐνώχ (Enoch) from חנוך. –] (]) 16:25, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::This conversation brings up the question "''Does ''the LXX contain transcriptions?" | |||
::] (]) 18:07, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::What do you mean? ] (]) 19:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::"Transcription" is perhaps not the right term. We have an article on ], but AFAIK nothing similar for Greek. (] is about a 19th- and 20th-century policy of replacing non-Greek geonyms by Greek ones, such as Βάρφανη → ].) The Hellenization of Hebrew and Aramaic names in the LXX combines a largely phonetically based transcription of stems with coercing proper nouns into the straightjacket of one of the three Ancient Greek declensions. --] 00:46, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:See () for a discussion by a distinguished scholar (]), arguing in great detail for the polyphony of <big>ח</big> (and also <big>ע</big>), representing both a pharyngeal consonant and a velar fricative in "literary" or formal Biblical recitation Hebrew down to the late centuries B.C. ] (]) 01:10, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
= December 10 = | |||
::Thanks. But except for the front and back covers (first two and last two pages) the PDF file is absolutely illegible. Were you able to get legible PDFs of this article? | |||
::Was this 1982 article the first time someone realized that these two letters were "polyphonic" in Ancient Hebrew? | |||
::I was once browsing through a Hebrew dictionary (the well-known ]) in its ca. 1960 edition and (looking in a grammatical-historical appendix in the last volume) it didn't seem like the author of the dictionary was at all aware of the "polyphony" of those two letters in Ancient Hebrew. | |||
::But when I looked in a ca. 1995 edition of that same dictionary (in a one volume so called "merukaz" edition, incidentally) that "polyphony" was clearly alluded to. | |||
::], the author of the dictionary, died in 1984 so I don't know if it was he who changed things there (not impossible, as he had two years to do it), or if it was someone after his death (there were new editions of the dictionary as late as the 2000s). | |||
::In any case I imagined that between ca. 1960 and ca. 1995 something had changed in our knowledge of the pronunciation of Ancient Hebrew but I didn't know whose contribution it was. | |||
::] (]) 19:54, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::The built-in PDF-viewers of some browers (Opera, Chrome) indeed display this document atrociously, but after having saved it locally, I could easily open it with all kinds of PDF viewers and get a legible view of it. Blau devotes four and a half pages to the history of research velar transcriptions of ayin. –] (]) 20:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::It worked. Thanks. ] (]) 21:13, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::The PDF worked fine for me. I strongly doubt that 1982 was the first time, because scholars would have been able to compare Septuagint transcriptions to proto-Semitic reconstructions decades before that... ] (]) 20:37, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== == | |||
::::There remains the question why the first editions of Even-Shoshan didn't seem to know about this. ] (]) 21:17, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Meaning of "fauve" in native French and in Ionesco's "Rhinoceros"? == | |||
I happened to come across this recent article on sv-WP. The word is also on Urban Dictionary and Wiktionary . | |||
In his play "Rhinoceros" the Romanian-born French playwright Eugène Ionesco uses the word "fauve" to refer to the rhinoceros as if it just meant "wild animal". I would say no native French speaker would do that: am I right or wrong? To me "fauve" would be used mostly for big cats (tigers, lions, leopards). Maybe for bears and wolves? (Not totally sure though). But "fauve" would never refer to just any large dangerous animal like Ionesco (who was not a native speaker of French) does. What do you say? ] (]) 12:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Does this word exist in English or other languages? Or something close? Google translate on the sv-WP article suggests "woolling" or "wooling", but I don't know if that's valid. There's some logic in it, I'll say that. ] (]) 07:58, 10 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
: |
:Looking up French Wiktionnaire and some French dictionaries, it does indeed seem that "fauve" is an acceptable - albeit perhaps dated - way to refer to ochre or wild animals in general, not a non-native misunderstanding. ] (]) 12:50, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
::Yes, I knew that. But does a word for the act exist in for example English? ] (]) 15:15, 10 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::An English hyponym is the verb '']''. --] 08:52, 11 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::That is at least related, thanks. ] (]) 08:58, 11 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::@] And thanks to you I just discovered ]. ] (]) 09:04, 11 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Use of Old Norse in old Rus'? == | |||
== Word for definition of requiring excellence == | |||
The first rulers of Rus' were Swedes (the Varangians), for example Rurik and his descendants. Is there a record of when they stopped to speak Old Norse? What are some Old Norse words in Russian that came with the Swedes (as opposed to later borrowings from Swedish possibly)? (I know of Rus' and the name of Russia itself it seems. Any other?) How about Russian personal names that go back to Swedish ones? (I know of Vladimir which goes back to Valdemar. Any other?) ] (]) 13:32, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:To start you off, Wiktionary have a ]. --] (]) 13:45, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:What's a word for an editorial comment disguised as a question. ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 13:30, 10 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:According to ], that derivation from Valdemar is something that "some sources speculate", and elsewhere (]) the borrowing is claimed to be the other way. ] (]) 15:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:] ] (]) 13:32, 10 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::How about Oleg (from Helgi?), Igor (from Ingvar?), and of course Rurik (from ????) Incidentally, is Rurik a name that is still used in Russia these days? ] (]) 19:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:]. ] ] 13:37, 10 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:This whole question is contentious, partly because of the sparsity of sources and partly because of political considerations. Some Soviet historians in Stalin's day appeared to believe that Viking assimilation with Slavic culture had been almost instantaneous because, I suppose, they wanted the foundations of the Russian state and nation to have as little foreign influence as possible. Russian historians still tend to argue for a more rapid assimilation than their Western counterparts do. However, there's a discussion of the language question by Elena A. Melnikova which concludes that "By the mid-tenth century the Varangians became bilingual; by the end of the eleventh century they used Old Russian as their mother tongue", and my old student copy of ]'s '']'' agrees that "the Rus themselves gradually lost their Scandinavian traditions and language; they must have been almost completely merged in the Slavonic people by the beginning of the twelfth century." --] (]) 10:02, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Yes. I got to that from Backfire, also ] with many more examples of the type of thing I am trying to define. I will test it on a few people, but I feel that use of the word "perverse" will make it harder to understand than easier... a perverse result in itself. ] (]) 13:39, 10 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:In general it could be an example of ] or ]: when you make an indicator into a target, it stops being a useful target. More specifically, it could be an example of ] or "credentialism", where educational degrees or credentials are used as a target that is particularly susceptible to being gamed. --] (]) 17:58, 10 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== English tenses == | |||
:Another term that comes to mind (somewhat late!) is that the applicants are ], which redirects to ]. --] (]) 00:47, 14 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Does English ever use perfect instead of imperfect (past) to describe events that happened entirely in the past but still have connections to present time, such as "this house has been built in 1955", "Arsenal has last won Premier League in 2004", "When has Arsenal last won...", "this option has last been used three months ago", "humans have last visited Moon in 1972", "last ice age has ended 10,000 years ago"? And is simple present of verb ''be born'' ever used, since birth happen only once? And would sentences like "I am being born", "She is born" and "You are being born" sound odd? --] (]) 18:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
= December 12 = | |||
:No to the first <small>(except among the "unedumacated")</small>. As for the second, I'm not sure this counts, but there is the religious "She is born again." The rest sound bizarre. ] (]) 20:34, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Italian surname question == | |||
:::No, that's not right as the question is stated. It's often fine to use use the present perfect (that's the better term than just "perfect") to describe events that happened entirely in the past. Say {{xt|I have been promoted to colonel}}; you can use that if you're still a colonel, even though the promotion itself happened in the past. | |||
:::What makes those sentences sound wrong is the explicit date on the sentence. That makes it very difficult to use the present perfect in idiomatic English. --] (]) 22:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::<small> If I study really hard, someday I will become underedumacated. ] (]) 23:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC)</small> | |||
::Another question: why in English Misplaced Pages, events listed in year articles are in present tense, but in Finnish Misplaced Pages they are in past tense? --] (]) 21:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Present or past tense is acceptable in English (why, I have no idea). Getting back to the original topic, the title of the first chapter of '']'' is "I am born." ] (]) 22:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::This is the so-called '']'' or ''narrative present''. --] (]) 22:37, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::The worst of it, often seen on the internet, is using past and present tenses in describing the same event, such as in a movie plot. ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 03:01, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:I am pretty sure that there are differences between British and American English in the use of the present perfect vs the simple past in such sentences. In American English all your examples sound wrong and should be simple past "this house was built", "Asenal last won", "When did Arsenal last win", "this option was last used", "humans last vistited", "the last ice age ended". When I see imperfect I thin of the past ''progressive'' tense: "was being built", "was winning", "was being used", "were visiting", "was ending" which wouldn't work in your example sentences. But I may be incorrect since my knowledge of grammatical categories is based on Classical Latin rather than modern descriptive linguistics. As for "be born", all your examples are perfectly good English. ] (]) 23:59, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::While I do think BrE uses the present perfect a ''bit'' more than AmE, I don't think that's really the issue here. I'm pretty sure (one of our British friends can correct me) that the first, second, fourth, fifth, and sixth example sentences in the original post would also sound odd (if not outright wrong) in BrE. Again, the problem is not the fact that the action is entirely in the past, but that the sentence contains an explicit marker of time in the past (1955, three months ago, etc). The third sentence, {{xtg|when has Arsenal last won}}, I'm less sure about; I find it marginally acceptable, though it would be much more idiomatic to say {{xt|how long has it been since Arsenal last won}}. | |||
::As to "imperfect", this is a little complicated. The imperfect tense in Italian, and presumably in the rest of the Romance languages, indicates a continuous or habitual action, or a background description. In Latin it was much the same, whereas the Latin perfect indicates a completed action in the past. The present perfect (or analogous construction) entered Romance languages later, maybe with medieval Latin or some such, and differs from the perfect by the emphasis on the importance of the event to the present time. | |||
::In German and English, there was never an imperfect tense per se; it was conflated with the simple past (preterite), which is the closest to the Latin perfect tense. It's true that you can use the past continuous or "would" or "used to" to emphasize certain aspects of the imperfect, but at the simplest level, the Latin perfect and imperfect are merged in English, with the present perfect being distinct from both. | |||
::Modern Romance languages keep all three tenses in theory, but usually pick one of present perfect or preterite to use overwhelmingly in practice (alongside the imperfect, so they simplify to two conversational tenses). Both French and the northern varieties of Italian rarely use the preterite in conversation, and I think Spanish (especially Latin American Spanish) rarely use the present perfect. However as far as I know they all use the imperfect and keep it separate, which was one of the hardest things for me to get right learning Italian. --] (]) 05:43, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::I think one can say, {{xtg|What have the Romans ever done for us, and when have they done it?}} Similarly, {{xtg|Sure, Arsenal has won the UEFA Cup Winners' Cup, but when has Arsenal ever won the UEFA Cup?}}. --] 12:00, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::To my ear there's a difference in acceptability between {{xt|when has Arsenal ever won?}}, which is unassailable <small>except by Arsenal fans I suppose</small>, and {{xtg|when has Arsenal last won?}}, which strikes me as borderline, the kind of thing that sounds weird and you're not sure why. I guess it must have something to do with the word "last" but I don't have a well-developed theory of exactly ''what'' it has to do with it. --] (]) 22:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Centuries == | |||
What are some examples of Italian surnames ending in ''-i'' deriving from a notional singular in ''-io'' (and excluding ''-cio'', ''-gio'', ''-glio''), like ''proverbi'' from ''proverbio''? I know I've seen one or two but I can't recall them. ] (]) 04:17, 12 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Does English ever use term ''2000s'' to refer to period from 2000 to 2099? Why is ''21st century'' more common? And is ''2000s'' pronounced as "twenty hundreds"? --] (]) 21:03, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:A few pairs of a noun ''x-io'' coexisting with a surname ''X-i'': | |||
:There is some ambiguity with 2000s; it could also refer to 2000 to 2009 (vs. 2010s), so that may be why 21st century is more used. It's pronounced "two thousands". ] (]) 22:35, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:* '']'' – '']'' | |||
:If 1900s is pronounced as "nineteen hundreds", then why 2000s is pronounced as "two-thousands"? And 2000s is sometimes used to represent the century, and the decade could be disambiguated by saying "2000s decade", "first decade of 2000s", with basic meaning being century. --] (]) 07:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:* '']'' – '']'' | |||
::It ''could'' be, sure. And it is, sometimes. ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 09:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:* '']'' – '']'' | |||
::“One thousand nine hundreds” has six syllables, “nineteen hundreds” has four, saving two. “Two thousands” has three syllables, “twenty hundreds” has four, adding one. People just pick the shorter option. | |||
:* '']'' – '']'' | |||
::BTW, 2000s refers to the period 2000–2099, but 21st century to 2001–2100. It rarely matters. ] (]) 11:29, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:* '']'' – '']'' | |||
:]. ] (]) 10:30, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Although it is plausible that these surnames actually derive from the corresponding nouns, I don't know whether this is actually the case. Surnames may be subject to modification by the influence of a similar-sounding familiar word. --] 08:12, 12 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::For me, the '00s (decade) are the "noughties". Probably I would call the '10s the "twenty tens" or "new tens". (Dunno why I feel the need to disambiguate from the 1910s.) ] (]) 11:59, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::I feel like "noughties" or "aughties" never really caught on. But it's almost time for the '00s nostalgia craze, so I suppose they'll come up with something. --] (]) 00:42, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::As a side note, I once read (possibly in an SF fanzine) that when Arthur C. Clarke and Stanley Kubrick co-wrote the ] and ] ''2001: A Space Odyssey'', Clarke expected people to pronounce the title "Twenty-oh-one . . ." (as they do for 1901, for example), not "Two thousand and one . . .". {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 12:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::That story sounds familiar. Clark maybe didn't count on the public to keep it simple amid the grandeur, so to speak, of reaching a millennium. There's a late-1940s cartoon called "The Old Gray Hare", in which Elmer is taken into the future. The "voice of God" tells him, "At the sound of the gong, it will be TWO-THOUSAND A.D." That was the predominant media usage by the time it actually arrived. The "Y2K problem" or "Year two thousand problem", for example. By about 2010, the form "twenty-ten" had become more prevalent. As suggested above, one less syllable. ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 12:28, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::Back when it was 2008 (say), I would've said "two thousand and eight", but now that that year is in the past I'd say "twenty oh eight". ] (]) 03:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::::I still say "two thousand and ", but it might be just me, or a wider 'elderly Brit' thing. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 03:19, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::Yep. One thing I recall is that ] was kind of an "early adapter" to that style, saying "twenty-oh-one" and so on. Now, pretty much everyone follows that norm. ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 06:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::::Are 20th century years ever said like "nineteen hundred and twenty-five" for 1925? Does English put "hundred and" between first two and last two number in speech? --] (]) 10:05, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::::I seem to recall that ] used to say years that way. Maybe it was a Canadian thing. ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 11:13, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::Only in the most formal contexts; but see the 1973 song, ] which I suspect used that style to aid with scansion. ] (]) 18:48, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::An example of this very formal date usage is in this : | |||
::::::::::{{xt|"In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this twelfth day of February, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and eighty-two..."}} | |||
::::::::::] (]) 18:58, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:I often say, we need a wildcard digit other than '0'. I often write "197x" and "200x" but would not do so in an article. ] (]) 22:49, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::<small>So does "the 19xx's" mean all the years from 1900 to 1999, or only the ones that are congruent to 8 mod 11? --] (]) 21:01, 4 January 2025 (UTC) </small> | |||
:::<small>Perhaps "the 19xy's" solves that problem. :) ] (]) 05:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)</small> | |||
::During the 20th century, I only ever heard the period referred to as "the 20th century". If someone had talked about "the 1900s" I would have assumed they meant the decade 1900-1909. Using "the xx00s" to refer to the whole century is something I've only encountered recently, although I don't know if it actually is a recent usage or just something that has recently been revealed via internet usage. ] (]) 11:10, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
= |
= January 3 = | ||
== Why is it boxes and not boxen? == | |||
== Japanese == | |||
Why is it foxes and not foxen? ] (]) 05:45, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Are there any pure Japanese words in which ぴゅ (specifically the hiragana variant) is used? ] (]) 02:10, 13 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
: |
:Why is it sheep and not sheeps? ] (]) 05:57, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
::{{small|Don't forget the related term "sheeps kin". ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 06:13, 3 January 2025 (UTC)}} | |||
::I thought the plural of sheep was ]! ] (]) 06:52, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Possibly because "box" has its roots in Latin. ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 06:06, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Also, ] is a word, just uncommon. ] (]) 06:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:: Because Vikings. ] (]) 07:35, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::As others have implied, "box" has always had an s-plural in English, and Vikings generally used the word "refr" for foxes. What's most surprising to me is actually that the old declensions "oxen" and "children" have survived. ] (]) 11:33, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::''Children'' is a pleonasm because ''childre'' (or ''childer'') was already plural. See ] and ]. ] ] 12:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Someone wrong -- You can look at ] to see the declensions of a thousand years ago or more. The regular pattern of modern English inflection comes from the Old English masculine "a-stems". The only nouns with a non-"s" plural ending in modern English (leaving aside Classical borrowings such as "referenda" and unassimilated foreignisms) are oxen, children, brethren, and the rather archaic kine, which have an ending from the OE "weak" declension (though "child" and "brother" were not originally weak declension nouns). There are also the few remaining umlaut nouns, which do not have any plural ''endings'', and a few other forms which don't (or don't always) distinguish between singular and plural. In that context, there's no particular reason why "box" should be expected to be irregular. However, the form "boxen" has been occasionally used in certain types of computer slang: http://catb.org/jargon/html/B/boxen.html -- ] (]) 12:18, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Likewise, '']'', '']'' and '']'' are geeky plurals of '']'', '']'' and '']''. --] 15:25, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Nerd Wikipedians trying to be droll sometimes say "userboxen". ] (]) 05:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
= |
= January 4 = | ||
== Pronunciation of "God b'wi you"? == | |||
== English hyphen == | |||
How do you pronounce "God b'wi you"? For example in Shakespeare's Henry V, Act 4, Scene 3, Line 6 (Oxford Shakespeare). The pronunciation I hear in one recording is "God by you". Folger's Shakespeare has "God be wi’ you" in writing (you can find that text online at www.folger.edu). Does that indicate a different suggested pronunciation? How would you pronounce "wi'"? Are there other variants? (Either in the text of this play or anywhere else.) There's a "God be with you" entry in Wiktionary but none of these variants are recorded. ] (]) 08:32, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Does English ever use hyphen to separate parts of a closed compound word? Are the following ever used? | |||
:]'s ''Oxford Dictionary of Original Shakespearean Pronunciation'' has for ''be with ye/you''. ] (]) 08:47, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
* New York–Boston-road | |||
::Thanks. This is the original pronunciation. How is it currently commonly pronounced on the stage? I mentioned one pronunciation I heard where "b'wi" is pronounced "by". Are there other options? | |||
* South-Virginia | |||
::Regarding the original pronunciation note videos by ] (David Crystal's son) and those of A. Z. Foreman on his YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/@a.z.foreman74. | |||
* RSS-feed | |||
::] (]) 12:05, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
* 5-1-win | |||
:I'd pronounce it "God be with you" but with the "th" sound missed off the end of "with." That might not be how they did it in the sixteenth century, but I'm pretty sure no sixteenth century people are coming to see the show. Incidentally, that's (the line didn't appear in the Branagh version). ] (]) 11:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
* Harry Potter-book | |||
== Correlation of early human migrations with languages == | |||
Neither Manual of Style nor article ] mentions that, so is it used? | |||
--] (]) 19:52, 15 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:I can think of situations where such expressions could be used, as a creative (perhaps journalistic) form of adjective, but it would feel a bit affected to do so: as if the writer was trying to draw attention to their writing. For example, if writing about a Germany v England football match and you knew your audience would understand the reference, you could say {{xt|the match had a 5–1-win vibe throughout}} (the reference being ]). <span style="font-family: Helvetica;">]]</span> 20:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::My examples are nouns, not adjectives. In many other languages, this is normal way to use hyphen. --] (]) 21:20, 15 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::Ah, OK; in English a noun would never be made in that way. Using a hyphen in that way would make it look like an adjective. <span style="font-family: Helvetica;">]]</span> 21:51, 15 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::In many other languages, a noun is like ''5-1-win'' and an adjective is like ''5-1-win-'', with prefixed as ''5-1-winvibe''. And are there any place names written as closed compounds where second part is an independent word, not a suffix, as if ''South Korea'' and ''North Dakota'' were written as ''Southkorea'' and ''Northdakota'' respetively? --] (]) 22:34, 15 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::::] might be an example of what you're looking for. ] (]) 22:54, 15 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::::But ''lake'' may be a suffix there. --] (]) 22:57, 15 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::::::Personally, it seems strange to have ''lake'' be a suffix to ''north'', but in any case what about ] and ]? ] (]) 00:00, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:I don't understand the question. ] says that if it has a hyphen, it's a hyphenated compound. If it's a closed compound, it doesn't have a hyphen. Do you want a word that can be spelled both ways? Try ''dumbass'' and ''dumb-ass''. | |||
:Your examples, if compounds, are all open compounds. | |||
:There's ''],'' also spelled wild-cat and wildcat. The hyphen may be present because a compound is being tentatively created, giving a historical progression like ''foot path'' → ''foot-path'' → ''footpath''. Or it may indicate different grammatical usage, like ''drop out'' (verb) and ''drop-out'' (noun), also ''dropout.'' ] ] 17:58, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Assuming that earliest speakers of every language family had spoke some other language during the ], were ] successfully correlated with the consequential emergence of respective language families on migration routes? I've read about ], but wonder about the overall sequence of emergence. ]<sup>]</sup> 12:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
: Street names used to be, e.g. Smith-street, rather than Smith Street. | |||
:If I understand the question the answer is no. The migrations that you are talking about took place 100,000 to 25,000 years ago and well established language families only go back 10,000-15,000 years, often less. Even at that time depth the correlation between archeology and linguistics is often controversial. See ] for example. Studies such as show that while there is correlation between human genetic and linguistic history, there are enough exception to make any precise conclusions impossible without other evidence. ] (]) 02:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:: Why in English, street name suffixes are not written together with the main part, as in most other Germanic languages? For example, equivalent of ''Example Street'' in German is ''Beispielstraße'', in Dutch, ''Voorbeeldstraat'', and in Swedish ''Exempelgatan'', all literally "Examplestreet". And in numbered streets, if names were written together, then ''1st Street'' would be ''1st street'' or with more "Germanic" style, ''1. street''. In lettered streets, ''A Street'' would become ''A-street''. --] (]) 21:54, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::I'm not sure. Lots of ''old'' place names are closed compounds, for instance the well known ox ford location, Oxford, and I think for the Saxons that included streets, such as ]. So it's tempting to say that closed compounds went out of fashion through the influence of Norman French, which is the usual cause of non-Germanic aspects of English, but the Normans would have said ''rue,'' and somehow that didn't make it into English - yet they introduced the habit of keeping ''street'' a separate word? Maybe? ] ] 07:06, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
: Years ago, here, I asked which of "instore", "in-store" or "in store" was the correct form. I don't remember getting a categorical answer. -- ] </sup></span>]] 19:33, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::See ], and see also ]. ] (]) 19:37, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::When were street names hyphenated? I'd like to see an example of that, I've never noticed it. ] ] 06:28, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::At least until the 19th-century apparently - see . ] (]) 11:22, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::Neat. I also found ], which in 1505 was Whitnourwhatnourgate. ] ] 16:56, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:There have been scholarly (and less scholarly) attempts to identify language families and relationships predating those more firmly established: see for example ] and various other such proposals linked from it, but these are inevitably limited, largely because the ] is sufficiently rapid that all traces of features dating very far back have been erased by subsequent developments. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 07:01, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Korean romanization question (by 40bus) == | |||
::Although I cannot evaluate the likelihood, I find it conceivable that a future all-out statistical analysis of all available source material will result in a reconstruction of ] that is widely accepted by scholars and much richer than what we have now. Perhaps this might even establish a connection between Proto-Afroasiatic and ] beyond the few known striking grammatical similarities. Then we may be speaking about close to 20 ]. But indeed, there can be no hope of reconstructions going substantially farther back, by the dearth of truly ancient sources and the relative scarcity of sources before the Modern Era. --] 21:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Reconstructions of Proto-Afroasiatic have been hindered by the fact that the only branches with significant ancient attestations are Semitic and Egyptian, and for most of its history, Egyptian writing almost completely ignored vowels... ] (]) 20:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Attaining cadre == | |||
In Revised Romanization, are there ever situations where there is same vowel twice in a row? Does Korean have any such hiatuses? Would following made-up words be correct according to Korean phonotactics? | |||
I hit "random article" for the first time in a while, and was directed to ], the first female professor in Nigeria (still alive at 98). In the infobox it says she's known for "eing the first Nigerian woman to attain professorial cadre", with the last two words piped to ]. | |||
* 구울 ''guul'' | |||
* 으읍 ''eueup'' | |||
* 시이마 ''siima'' | |||
--] (]) 19:57, 15 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Sure, having the same vowel twice in a row is pretty common. The word 구울 is a real word that means "to be baked": see ]. That's not really a question about Revised Romanization, though. --] (]) 19:47, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Does anyone recognize this locution of "attaining professorial cadre", or for that matter using ''cadre'' as a mass noun in any context? Is it maybe a Nigerian regionalism? Should we be using it in Misplaced Pages? --] (]) 20:46, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
= December 16 = | |||
:That remark was added 7 years ago, and the user who posted it is still active. ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 22:56, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:I think the collective sense is the older, just as for ''police'' and ''troop''. | |||
:Here are uses of, specifically, ''teacher's cadre'': | |||
:* "The smaller the city the more the teacher's cadre demand administrative support"<sup></sup> | |||
:* "the cadre in which the teachers belong"<sup></sup> | |||
:Other uses of the collective sense: | |||
:* "The officers, non-commissioned officers, and corporals, constitute what is called the 'cadre.' "<sup></sup> | |||
:* "any one individual's decision to join a cadre",<sup></sup> | |||
:* "the cadre is appropriately composed in terms of skills and perspectives"<sup></sup> | |||
: --] 23:43, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::None of those uses look like mass nouns to me; they all appear to be count nouns. --] (]) 01:02, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Anyway, the phrasing is weird and probably just wrong (even in Nigerian English), so I've simplified it. ] (]) 00:07, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::: Thanks, I think that's best. I'm still curious about the phrase, though. {{ping|HandsomeBoy}} any comment? --] (]) 04:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::"Promotion (in)to professorial cadre"<sup></sup> is short for "promotion (in)to <u>the</u> professorial cadre".<sup></sup> --] 14:13, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::Thanks, Lambiam, I can almost twist my brain into following that. So far it does appear to be a Nigerianism. My reaction till proved otherwise is that we probably shouldn't use it in English Misplaced Pages, given that (unlike Americanisms and Briticisms) it's not going to be recognizable in most of the Anglosphere. But it's reminiscent of the lakh / crore thing, on which I don't have a completely firm opinion and which still seems a bit unsettled en.wiki-wide. --] (]) 21:39, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::The term 'cadre' was/is (in my experience) extensively used in translations from Mandarin where in Communist China a distinct body or group, especially of military, governmental, or political personnel, is referred to: I have also seen it used in a similar fashion regarding communist regimes and parties elsewhere, so it has something of a Marxist flavour (I wonder if ] used it in his writings?), but also in non-communist contexts. I don't think it can be characterised as a 'Nigerianism'. | |||
:::::The ] is of course relevant. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 08:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::: 94, I think maybe you came in late to the discussion. Of course the word "cadre" is not a Nigerianism. The locution in question is {{xtg|attain professorial cadre}}, which on its face appears to use the word as a ] meaning something like "status". Lambiam's search results suggest a different, slightly convoluted explanation, but all seem to come from Nigeria, which suggests to me that ''this usage'' of the word is a Nigerianism. --] (]) 20:55, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
* {{ping|Trovatore}} It's nice to see the article suggested to you, and I hope you enjoyed reading the article :). These little things motivate me to keep creating impactful articles. Regarding the usage of "cadre", I try to be creative and phrase content in a manner that is dissimilar with source references. I believe I didn't want to use the language from the source and "cadre" came to mind. It seemed like having the same meaning as my interpretation from the sources. From the discussion above, it looks like I was not entirely correct. I believe the article was created during a contest, so speed was also important to me. ] (]) 22:36, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
*:FWIW, I just did a Google search and I am seeing a lot across virtually all universities in Nigeria. So it might actually be a thing , , , , etc. ] (]) 23:07, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
= January 5 = | |||
== Ancient Greek letter rho and Latin letters rh == | |||
== Name of Nova Scotia? == | |||
Question #1: | |||
Is there any historical explanation of why the name of the Canadian province of Nova Scotia uses Latin. Is it an oddity with no explanation? Do you know of any other European colony (especially of the form "new something") that uses a Latin name instead of an equivalent in a modern European language? ] (]) 13:57, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
The initial letter rho of Ancient Greek (which always carried a rough breathing) was transcribed in Latin as 'rh', 'r' for the letter and 'h' for the rough breathing. It was not transcribed 'hr' which would be just as logical. | |||
:The semi-Latin name ''Nova Zembla'' was until fairly recently<sup></sup> the most commonly used English exonym of ]. (It is still the preferred exonym in Dutch and Portuguese.) --] 14:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
On the other hand, in the case of a rough breathing before a vowel the Latin 'h' which transcribes the rough breathing preceded the vowel: for example an alpha with a rough breathing would be transcribed in Latin as 'ha' not 'ah'. | |||
::Is "Nova Zembla" semi-Latin or just a garbled version of the Russian? ] (]) 14:42, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::In this borrowing, ''Zembla'' is clearly a phonetic adaptation, but (although this would be hard to ''prove''), I find the most plausible explanation for the component ''Nova'' that it arose by alignment with the then many Latin geonyms found on maps and atlases starting with ''Nova''. In any case, the evidence is that ''Nova Zembla'' used to be seen as a Latin name, as from the use of the ] {{serif|Novam Zemblam}} , in 1570, and the ] {{serif|Novæ Zemblæ}} , in 1660. --] 20:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:It was named in 1621, when James I made ] lord of the area. This lordship was granted in the . ''Praefato Domino Willelmo Alexander ... nomine Novae Scotiae.'' Though he left his own name as William and didn't change it to Willelmo, he apparently took the instruction to call the place ''Nova Scotia'' very literally. ] ] 14:38, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Was Nova Scotia the only Scottish colony ever? Maybe it is a Scottish thing to use Latin? ] (]) 14:45, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::: There was also the ], i.e. New Caledonia.--] (]) 15:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
How can that inconsistency in the way the rough breathing was transcribed in these two cases in Latin be explained? | |||
::::And re-used for ] by ] in 1774. <span class="nowrap">] <sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></span> 18:25, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::And Sir ] claimed ] (or Nova Albion) in the California area in 1579. <span class="nowrap">] <sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></span> 18:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Back then (the 17th century) it was a European thing to use Latin in a lot of contexts, particularly in ]. Consider for example Isaac Newton's magnum opus, ]. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 18:10, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:There are the ] (Latin for ]). ] (]) 17:31, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::And Australia, from Terra Australis (Southland), for a while also known as New Holland. ] (]) 09:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:] (Greek/Latin, location uncertain) and ] (in a former Russian colony or territory; I don't know whether the Russians named it, but the Alaskans did in 1996). <span class="nowrap">] <sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></span> 17:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
* Guys, I am grateful for all your answers. I just want to point out that my question was not about names in Latin (there are other exmples btw: Virginia, Georgia, Columbia/Colombia, Argentina, maybe Guinea, etc.) but specifically names in Latin where an equivalent in a modern European language seems to be more natural. I was simply curious as to why "Nova Scotia" instead of "New Scotland". All your examples are great but for very few of them (if any) an equivalent into a modern European language comes readily to mind. For example "New Caledonia" would have no "equivalent into a modern European language". Caledonia is itself a Latinism. So is "Batavia" say. There are many places in Europe with classical equivalents. Using one of those is not exactly the same thing as using a Latin translation of a modern name. Clearly it is not always clear cut. "Hispania" and "Austria" would be considered Latin translations of "Spain" and "Austria", but "Lusitania" and "Helvetia" would not be considered Latin translations of "Portugal" and "Switzerland". Does it depend on whether the Latin and the modern language equivalent are related etymologically? Of if that relation is commonly perceived? If the city of New York had been named instead "Novum Eboracum" would we be in one case or the other? I'll let you decide. The two names are linked but it is pretty involved. ] (]) 18:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::'Caledonia' is no more of a Latinism than 'Scotia', and is sometimes used as a near synonym for 'Scotland' in modern ] (including ], not to be confused with ], or ] in which it's called ]). It would be rather confusing if we called two different places "New Scotland" – I suppose Cook could have named his discovery "New Pictland", but I'm not sure if that would have gone down well. | |||
::You refer to 'modern European language', but these (particularly English) have long since absorbed a great deal of Latin, both in assimilated and 'classical' form, so to me your attempted distinctions appears meaningless. Others may differ. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 10:18, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::"Austria" is a Latin coinage to begin with. Otherwise, there are a few languages which have calqued the native "Österreich" (Eastern Kingdom). Navajo has apparently the descriptive moniker "Homeland of the ]". ] (]) 12:47, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::And now I'm curious about place-names in sign languages. I dimly remember (or misremember) that the Trappist sign for Jerusalem means ‘Jew city’. ] (]) 22:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::As far as I know, they're generally spelled out letter by letter, unless they are famous enough to get their own sign. Some might be "compound-signed" from their constituent parts if they're transparent enough, I guess. ] (]) 23:42, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
= January 6 = | |||
Question #2: | |||
== Lowercase L that looks like capital I with an extra serif == | |||
There are also cases of 'rh' in Latin which do not transcribe a rho with a rough breathing. There are even cases of medial 'rh' which obviously could never transcribe an initial rho in Greek, for example 'arrha' ('pledge, deposit, down payment'). | |||
I just came across on ]'s a lowercase ] that looks the like capital ] with an extra serif sticking to the left in the middle (kind of like {{angbr|1=<span style="font-family: serif;">I</span>}} superimposed with ] {{angbr|1=<span style="font-family: serif; font-variant-numeric: oldstyle-nums;">1</span>}}). See e.g. "looks", "Viola", "Winslet", etc. . | |||
What are those 'rh'? Do they always occur after 'rr' or 'double r' (as in the example)? Are there 'rr' that are not followed by an 'h'? In other words is this 'h' simply a spelling device indicating some peculiarity of the pronunciation of the 'rr'? Or are 'r' and 'rh' (or possibly 'rr' and 'rrh') two different phonemes in Latin? | |||
Is this style of lowercase L something found in existing typefaces? The font is by ] and it appears to be the only typeface of theirs that has this type of L. ] (]) 05:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 02:01, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Beats me why they're calling those all one typeface instead of five. Anyway, in the "OG serif" incarnation, they got the weird arm on the lowercase L from ]. The ] also has one. ] (from ]) also has the nub (arm? Bar? Flag?) on lowercase L in many instances, but for some reason not all of them. | |||
:A likely explanation for the inconsistency is that when such things were first devised by somebody, they weren't working to already-set rules, and went with the first idea that came to them, which might well have been inconsistent with similar things thought up by someone else, somewhere else, at some other time, that they didn't know about. This is a major difference between the evolutions of ] and writing systems, and the creations of ] and their scripts (and also 'real' solo-constructed scripts such as ]). | |||
:Edit: I think the nub is missing only in ], mainly <code>el</code>. And I think this is originally a ] thing. ] shows a similar but less distinct effect, due I think to the ]. The scribe first draws a minim, then extends it to write the lowercase L. ] has it, but only in the blackletter face (top right). I think the explanation is thus the same as ]. ] ] 12:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Similar processes explain a lot of the frankly bonkers nomenclatures used in modern physics, etc., where someone makes up 'placeholder' names intending to replace them with something better, but never gets round to doing so, and others take them up. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 04:43, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::The {{serif|⟨eſ ⟩}} pairs in the Valerius Maximus incunable also have nubless {{serif|⟨ſ ⟩}}es. --] 00:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Thanks, so there is precedent. ] (]) 09:17, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::There's a Swedish publisher, Modernista, that uses an st ligature in their logotype. I believe they also use it constantly and consistently within the books themselves, as a brand identity, which of course could come across as pretty strained. ] (]) 12:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::In that Caslon specimen the ⟨{{serif|b}}⟩ and ⟨{{serif|h}}⟩ also have nubs. The letter ⟨{{serif|k}}⟩ does not occur in the specimen's text, but we also find the Caslon black ⟨{{serif|k}}⟩ nubbed. --] 14:11, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Unsatisfied, I dug up . {{tq|The lowercase letter /l shows the most distinctive feature of the letters. It has a small serif on the left side at x-height, called ergot or sécante in French. The serif is a remnant of the calligraphic style which had not appeared in any previous typefaces. This serif makes the Romain du Roi unique. The reason why the Romain du Roi /l possessed the serif is not clearly documented. One theory says that this serif was used to distinguish it more clearly from the capital letter /l, which has the same height. The other theory claims that Louis XIV wanted to have an unmistakable feature in the /l, because his name began with this letter.}} Yeah. Thing is, Romain du Roi put the bars on the top and bottom of the glyph gratuitously, so if it then needed disambiguating from capital i, that doesn't seem like a very rational thing to have done. ] ] 17:28, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::You might not be satisfied looking for rationality. I think the aim was modernity and it might have been intended to be transitional. The {{serif|/b}} and the {{serif|/d}} have their strong upper serifs so the {{serif|/l}} could not be without its own ( there still can be felt some of that era heavy ] dynamics - digging in up - in the double {{serif|/l}} as in "brilliant"). --] (]) 23:32, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Sweet, I've updated ] and ]. ] (]) 09:38, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::The source (written in a sans serif font) falls into the same trap that it's describing. Taken literally, it says that the Romain du Roi needed to distinguish <code>l</code> from <code>L</code>, but we know what it means. Thank you for actually improving Misplaced Pages, I'll consider doing that sometimes too. :) ] ] 14:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
= January 7 = | |||
:40bus -- Latin alphabet "rh" fit in with other digraphs used when transcribing Greek into Latin, namely "th", "ph", and "ch". The sequence "hr" would only make sense if a rho with a rough breathing meant a sequence of two sounds "h"+"r", which I highly doubt. As for medial doubled -rr-, it also had a rough breathing over one or both rhos in some orthographic practices, which is included in some transcriptions -- i.e. diarrhea -- and ignored in others. By the way, words beginning with upsilon generally had a rough breathing also. ] (]) 06:59, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::A simple consistent rule is that the Latin ⟨h⟩ in transliterated Greek words immediately precedes a vowel or, exceptionally, another ⟨h⟩ digraph (as in ''chthonic'' and ''phthisis''). | |||
::BTW, if a double rho is adorned with breathing marks, the first of the pair is marked with smooth breathing, as in {{serif|διάῤῥοια}}.<sup></sup> --] 10:11, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Examples of the use of "might" as a past tense? == | |||
:::That's most standard. I was looking at Goodwin and Gluck's "Greek Grammar", and it seemed that they had rough breathings over both rhos in an intervocalic doubled rho, but on looking closer, the first one is actually a smooth breathing, as you describe... ] (]) 10:44, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
The past form of "may", "might", is mostly used as a conditional: "He might have said that, then again might not have". Uses of "might" as a past tense meaning "was/were allowed to" seem to be much rarer: "He might not say that" is most often intended to mean (and understood to mean) "it is possible that he will not say that", not as "he was not allowed to say that". | |||
:According to Wiktionary, latin ''arrha'' is from Greek, originally from Semitic: ]. So it still has to do with how Greek words were borrowed into Latin, not to do with native Latin phonetics. --] (]) 15:35, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
But that usage is not completely unknown: for example Edna St Vincent Millay writes in her sonnet "Bluebeard": "This door you might not open and you did / So enter now, and see for what slight thing / You are betrayed". | |||
== English full stop == | |||
Do you have other examples of "might" being used as a past tense of "may"? I mean examples from the literature, jounalism, etc. not examples made up by Wiktionary editors, or other dictionaries, not because I don't trust Wiktionary editors or dictionary editors, but because I'd trust more examples that were not produced specifically for the purpose of illustrating a dictionary definition. | |||
Can ordinal numbers in English be abbreviate with full stop, like 4. time (4th time) or 52. floor (52nd floor)? And does English ever abbreviate words with full stop to save space, similarly to many other languages, like in table columns, where e.g. ''Submitted Proposals'' -> ''Subm. Prop.'' would occur? There are some established full-stop abbreviations like US state abbreviations, but are there any temporary abbreviations which are used only when space is limited. And can full stops be used in dates like 16. December 2024? --] (]) 21:58, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
I'm especially interested in examples where "might" is used as a past tense in affirmative constructions! The examples above are all with "might not". I have the feeling the use of "might" in a negative sentence would sound more natural than in an affirmative sentence (if there's any example of it at all). Do you agree? | |||
:In some situations words are abbreviated with full stops, but in my experience they are never used with numbers in the way you suggest. ] (]) 22:36, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 17:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::{{EC}} In British English, no to ordinal numbers (as far as I know), yes to abbreviations (for instance Asst. means Assistant in many titles, like ), and yes for dates but only when fully numerical (today's date can be expressed as 16.12.24 - see , although a ] is more common, 16/12/24). ] (]) 22:43, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:He appointed twelve that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach. {{Bibleverse|Mark|3:14|niv}} <span class="nowrap">] <sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></span> 17:13, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:In some cases, Romance languages use ª , º abbreviations, but English has a whole series of special two-letter endings for the purpose: -st, -nd, -rd, -th... ] (]) 01:07, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::Great. Thanks. Please keep all kinds of examples coming, but watch out especially for examples where "might" is used in a main (or independent) clause (rather than a subordinate clause such as "(in order) that they might..."). ] (]) 17:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::In ] we find ''...after the dismissal of the Short Parliament, he declared it his opinion that at such a crisis the king might levy money without the Parliament''. --] (]) 18:23, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Here's another one, not directly subordinate in a ''that'' clause, though still notionally subordinate to a verb of speaking within a multi-sentence passage of reported speech, in a 19th-century summary of a parliamentary debate {{tq|"Mr BUCKNILL (Surry, Epsom) said, Member after Member had spoken of a particular company and, if he might use the expression, it had really in this Debate been ridden to death "}}. ] ] 19:12, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:In certain contexts a slight re-ordering may result in needing no ordinal indication at all: "Manhole 69", "]", "Coitus 80" (all titles of J. G. Ballard short stories, by the way); "]", "]", etc. This however might fall outside the scope of your query. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 03:16, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::I just went to Google News and searched on the phrase "he might have done". Here was one of the hits, : "A former Marine who trained Daniel Penny to apply a chokehold said Thursday that images and video suggest that he might have done so improperly when he killed a homeless man last year." And this headline : "Trump's Missing Phone Logs Mean We Don't Even Know Half the Illegal Shit He Might Have Done on 1/6". And this : "Although there is an area he might have done better." And : "But Peter persisted, and now he can reflect on the earlier disappointments and what he might have done differently". My native-speaker instinct insists that "might" is the only correct form in these cases and "may" is an error, although I know others use it. --] (]) 19:56, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Afaiknew only German uses 4. for 4th. But see ] which says 4. is an abbreviation of vierte (=fourth), but also lists several other languages where it means 4th. ] (]) 13:07, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::: To me "may have done" is usable if it is currently possible (that is, the speaker does not currently know it to be false) that it happened, whereas "might have done" is usable in that case and ''also'' in the counterfactual case (if this had happened, then that might have happened). Prescription alert: Saying "if this had happened, then that may have happened" is in my opinion an error. | |||
::So does Turkish. "4. denemede başardı..."<sup></sup> means "She succeeded on the 4th try...". --] 18:56, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::: But that isn't what the OP is asking about. The OP is asking about using "might" as a past tense of "may", in the sense that "A might do B" means "A was morally allowed, or otherwise had the permission or authority, to do B". This sense does exist but has become somewhat rare. --] (]) 20:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Does this count: "{{tq|I did what I might.}}"<sup></sup>? --] 00:12, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Also: "{{tq|Then Titul took a knife from his belt and asked the Gaul if he could kill himself; and the Gaul tried, but he might not.}}"<sup></sup> --] 00:29, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::Absolutely. Both are past tenses. The first example is a relative clause. The second example is an independent clause. And both are affirmative constructions. Thanks. ] (]) 01:01, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::Although the polarity is positive, the first of these uses sounds quite natural to me. The second use feels somewhat archaic, which, I think, was the intention of the author. --] 10:34, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::::Both of these examples seem to lose the distinction between "may" and "can", though. --] (]) 19:36, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::::Like so many lexical terms, auxiliary ''may'' has several senses. These include "to be able to" (labelled '']'' on Wiktionary) and "to be allowed to". In both uses here we see the first sense. Note that ''can'' also has both senses ("Can you help me?" and "Can I smoke here?"). --] 00:19, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
= January 8 = | |||
:::In addition to the Romance superscripts, U S English has a special one-letter ending, seen for example in 14 Cal. App. 3d 289, which expands as "Volume 14 of the report of the California Court of Appeal cases, third series, page 289. ] (]) 19:01, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Pronunciation of "breen" == | |||
= December 17 = | |||
How do you pronounce the ''-breen'' that appears at the end of ] glacier names? I went through all the Svalbard -breen glacier articles on Misplaced Pages at Category:Glaciers_of_Spitsbergen, and not a single one provides IPA. ] (]) 02:32, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Some questions == | |||
:The ''-en'' ending is the ], and '']'' means "glacier", so, for example, ''Nansenbreen'' means "the Nansen glacier". | |||
# Are there any words in English where yod-coalescense appears with a stressed vowel? | |||
:The pronunciations in ] and ] would be slightly different, with also regional variations. I have no idea which variety of spoken Norwegian is prevalent among the roughly 2,500 Norvegicophone inhabitants of Svalbard. | |||
# Are ranges of times in English-speaking countries ever presented as: 7-21, 12-18, with 24-hour clock? Would most English speakers understand "7-21" to be a range of clock times? | |||
:Extrapolating from the pronunciations of other words, I believe the pronunciation of ''-breen'' to be: | |||
# Why does English not say "Clock is five", but "It is five"? In most other Germanic languages, as well as in some Uralic languages, word "clock" appears in this expression, such as in German ''er ist '''fünf''' Uhr'', Swedish '''''Klockan''' är fem'', Finnish '''''Kello''' on viisi''. | |||
:* Nynorsk: /²brɛːn̩/ | |||
# Do most English speakers say that it is "seven" when time is 7:59? I think that it is "seven" when hour number is 7. | |||
:* Bokmål: /bʁe̞ːn̩/ | |||
#Are there any words in English where {{angbr|t}} is pronounced in words ending in ''-quet''? | |||
:For the meaning of the ] , see on Wiktionary ]. --] 10:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
#Why has Hungarian never adopted Czech convention to use carons to denote postalveolar and palatal sounds? | |||
:(Simultaneous editing) an example of Norwegian pronounciation, "Jostedaalsbreen" first mentioned around 0:06. Since Norwegian is a language of dialects I cannot rule out that there could be regional differences in pronounciation. -- ] (]) 10:24, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
#Are there any Latinates in English that have letter K before A, O and U? | |||
::This agrees with my extrapolation of the Nynorsk pronunciation. --] 10:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
#Can ''it'' and ''they'' be used as distal demonstrative pronouns in English? | |||
:::However, I believe the two ee in the middle are being distinguished in the pronounciation rather than just pronounced as a long vowel. -- ] (]) 11:40, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
(More to come) | |||
::::The long vowel represents solely the <u>first</u> ⟨e⟩. The definitive suffix ''-en'' is represented by . The vertical understroke diacritic signifies that this is a ]. --] 15:46, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
--] (]) 06:32, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::::Ok, that would make sense. Not an IPA expert here. -- ] (]) 16:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::Regarding the dialect, I found this: https://munin.uit.no/handle/10037/14074. Excerpt from Google Translation: ''This is interesting because Svalbard has no local dialect. The language community on the archipelago is instead characterized by dialectal variation. The Norwegian population in Svalbard comes from all over Norway, and the average length of residence is short. ''. On Norwegian Misplaced Pages it stated that Nynorsk spellings have to be used for all town names in Svalbard but this probably has no bearing on the pronounciation practices. -- ] (]) 17:58, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Thank you all for your input! So it's a monosyllabic /²brɛːn̩/. ] (]) 21:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Is it really monosyllabic if a syllabic vowel is followed by a syllabic consonant? By the way, I believe the common Swedish curse word ''fan'' often is pronounced somewhat similarly. ] (]) 21:45, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::<u>By definition</u>, a syllabic consonant forms a syllable on its own. So we have two syllables, the first of which ends on a vowel. --] 00:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
= January 9 = | |||
:3. Quick note that the German phrase given doesn't seem to directly use the meaning of "clock" (although of course noting the clock meaning of ]) ] (]) 08:12, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::Indeed. Also compare Dutch “Het is vijf uur,” where ''uur'' can only be translated as hour(s), not clock. The German and Dutch phrases can be calqued into English as “It's five hours.” (Dutch and German normally don't use the plural of units of measurement.) ] (]) 09:42, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Is there a term which categorises these phrases? == | |||
:3. "It is five" or "It is five o'clock" would probably be in response to "What time is it?" If you responded "Clock is five", you would probably get some weird looks. ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 09:59, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:4. If the time is 7:59, you wouldn't say it is "seven" - you would either give the exact time or else say "it's almost eight ". ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 09:59, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Is there a lexicographic word or term to describe phrases such as "out and about", "bits and pieces", or "nooks and crannies"? There are many such phrases which conjoin words which are less often used separately. I am not thinking of "conjunction", but something which describes this particular quirk. For example, where I grew up, no-one would say "I was out in town yesterday" but "I was out and about the town". ] (]) 15:29, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:5. ''Banquet'' I think everywhere, ''racquet'' in UK spelling, and ''sobriquet'' and ''tourniquet'' in American English pronunciation. ] (]) 08:11, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:I think a ], also called a set phrase, fixed expression, is the term you're looking for for the phrase. ] (for words not used outside set phrases) and ] (for phrases which have fixed order - you wouldn't say "about and out") may also be of interest. ] (]) 16:23, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:6. You should ask the Hungarians that question. ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 10:05, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
: |
::All three examples above are irreversible binomials. --] 10:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
:Once again, the "why" questions aren't really answerable. There is almost certainly no underlying reason (no "why") that explains what happened. --] (]) (]) 12:47, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:7. Kalends | |||
:1. To quote our article ], "In certain English accents, yod-coalescence also occurs in stressed syllables, as in ''tune'' and ''dune''". ] (]) 16:33, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
: If you are thinking of expressions where a single meaning is carried by a conjunction of two near-synonyms, ] may be a fit. There is a narrow definition of that term where it covers only conjunctions of two terms that logically stand in a relation of subordination to each other, but there's also a wider usage where it's used for expressions like these, where the two terms are merely synonyms. ] ] 16:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::2. No it's not used like that in the UK. I imagine that most people would guess that 7-21 would mean 07:21 (21 minutes past 7 am). I think 07:00 - 21:00 would be understood however, but in normal speech one would use "7 am to 9 pm", in the UK at least. | |||
::Such as "lively and quick". ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 18:04, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 22:19, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::And also ]. ] ] 18:42, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Do English speakers ever refer an hour from 21:00 to 22:00 as "twenty-one"? Is there any English-speaking country where 24-hour clock predominates in writing, and 12-hour clock is used orally at most, but 24-hour clock is common orally too? | |||
::::They may refer to 21:00 (9 pm) as "21 hours" or "twenty-one hours",<sup></sup> but this means a time of the day, not a period lasting one hour. The one-hour period from 14:00 to 15:00 will most commonly be referred to as "from 2 to 3 pm" or "between 2 and 3 pm". Similarly, one may use "from 21 to 22 hours".<sup></sup> --] 11:38, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
= January 11 = | |||
# Why English uses letter H in words such as ''bar mitzvah'', ''bat mitzvah'' and ''Utah''? In the first two, the {{angbr|ah}} is pronounced as a schwa, so the spelling without H would be more logical (as spelling with H would indicate a long sound). But why ''Utah'' has letter H, why it isn't just ''Uta''? | |||
# Why English uses {{angbr|ph}} instead of {{angbr|f}} in many words to indicate Greco-Latin Φ/ph? Why is it ''philosophy'', ''phone'', ''photograph'', ''-phobia'' and not ''filosofy'', ''fone'', ''fotograf'', ''-fobia''? | |||
--] (]) 20:33, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
: ''(posting by banned user removed.)'' | |||
::In Portuguese, /s/ between two vowels becomes /z/, so spelling or "Brazil" with Z approximates the original word more closely. --] (]) 20:54, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:1. Mitzvah is a transliteration from Hebrew. Here's a theory on Utah. ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 21:37, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:2. Here is some info on the photo- prefix. ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 21:37, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::2. Blame the Romans for the "ph", see . Added to that, English spelling is not phonetic but conservative and tends to preserve the original regardless of current pronunciation. ] (]) 22:12, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::The Romans are to blame, according to that article, because, when the pronunciation changed from /p<sup>h</sup>/ to /f/ and the spelling no longer matched the original pronunciation, they "{{tq|decided not to change the way it is written in Latin}}". I wonder, who decided this, the Roman Emperor, or the Senate, or was a plebiscite held? Is it known when this decision was made? --] 10:24, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Some languages have chosen to respell "ph" as "f" -- see https://en.wiktionary.org/fotografia and related Wiktionary entries -- but French, which has cultural ties to English, hasn't, nor has English. There's not really any central body in charge of spelling in the English-speaking world which could propose or enact such a change... ] (]) 23:19, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::One slightly odd (IMO) example is the Cypriot city of Πάφος, which was traditionally (and internationally generally still is) transliterated as Paphos, but is locally transliterated as Pafos. ] (]) 09:54, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::That may have to do with Turkish orthography (Cyprus is bilingual, half Greek, half Turkish), which is rather consistently ]. An occurrence of ⟨ph⟩ in a Turkish word, as for example in '']'', is pronounced as a followed by a . We also find, locally, the more phonetic Larnaka instead of the traditional ].<sup></sup> and Kerinia for ] instead of the transliteration ].<sup></sup> --] 11:12, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::: It doesn't really have anything to do with Turkish. It's just that virtually all common present-day transcription systems for Modern Greek proper names transcribe <φ> with <f>. In Cyprus, this goes both for the ] (1962) system formerly used by the British administration, and for the common ] system the country later switched to (aligned with usage in Greece). See ] for some details. ] ] 11:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:1. While "mitzvah" is generally pronounced with a schwa in ordinary speech, this seems more like the general relaxation of vowels in conversational English. If I were pronouncing it as an isolated word (or phrase with bar or bat), the final a would probably sound more like the a in father. "ah" is a common way of writing that sound. Without the final h, I would tend to pronounce the a in Utah with the sound of a in cat. --] (]) (]) 13:04, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== What countries/languages use decimal separators for years? == | |||
I sometimes come across texts from various scientific fields where decimal separators are used for years, i.e. December 17 2,024 or 2 024. Does anyone know in what languages or countries this practice is common? The texts are in English but the authors are from around the world and likely write it that way because that's how it's done in their native language. --] (]) 21:02, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Our own ] states, "Do not add a comma to a four-digit year", giving {{!xt|June 2''','''015}} as an example of an unacceptable date format. It is not hard to find examples where "{{serif|2 024}}" occurs next to "{{serif|2024}}" in one and the same text, so one needs to see this format used consistently before considering its use intentional. Conceivably, some piece of software that is too smart for its own good may see the year as a numeral and autoformat it as such. For the rest of this year, the wikitext {{mono|<nowiki>{{formatnum:{{CURRENTYEAR}}}}</nowiki>}} will produce "{{formatnum:{{CURRENTYEAR}}}}". --] 10:13, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
= December 18 = |
Latest revision as of 07:37, 11 January 2025
Welcome to the language sectionof the Misplaced Pages reference desk. skip to bottom Select a section: Shortcut Want a faster answer?
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.
December 29
A few questions
- Are there any words in German where double consonant is written after ⟨ei⟩, ⟨au⟩,⟨eu⟩ and ⟨ie⟩?
- Is there any natural language which uses letter Ŭ in its writing system? It is used in Esperanto, a conlang, in Belarusian Latin alphabet, in McCune-Reichschauer of Korean, and some modern transcriptions of Latin, but none of these uses it in their normal writing system.
- Why does Lithuanian not use ogonek under O, unlike all other its vowels?
- Why do so few languages use letter Ÿ, unlike other umlauted basic Latin letters? Are there any languages where it occurs in beginning of word?
- Are there any languages where letter Ž can occur doubled?
- Are there any languages where letter Ð (eth) can start a word?
- Can it be said that Spanish has a /v/ sound, at least in some dialects?
- Are there any languages where letter Ň can occur doubled?
- Are there any languages where form of count noun depends on final digits of a number (like it does in many Slavic languages) and numbers 11-19 are formed exactly same way as numbers 21-99? Hungarian forms numbers like that, but it uses singular after all numbers.
- Why English does not have equivalent of German and Dutch common derivational prefix ge-?
--40bus (talk) 10:01, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- ad 10.: Old English had it: wikt:ge-#Old_English. Then they got rid of it. Maybe too much effort for those lazy bums. --Wrongfilter (talk) 10:19, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed, English dropped it. Maybe it got less useful as English switched to SVO word order. PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:42, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- It disappeared early in Old Norse, as well. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 13:42, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- The reason that "ge-" got dropped in English was because the "g" become a "y" (IPA ) by sound changes, and then the "y" tended to disappear, so all that was left was a reduced schwa vowel prefix. AnonMoos (talk) 00:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed, English dropped it. Maybe it got less useful as English switched to SVO word order. PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:42, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- ad 1.: You mean within a syllable? Otherwise you'd have to accept words like vielleicht. --Wrongfilter (talk) 10:24, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strauss / Strauß, which except for a name can mean 'bunch' or 'ostrich'. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 13:42, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- One can find plenty of references stating that a diphthong is never followed by a double consonant in German, including the German Misplaced Pages. The two examples given don't contradict this, since ß isn't a regular double consonant (as it does not shorten the preceding vowel), and the two l in 'vielleicht' belong (as already implied by Wrongfilter) to different syllables. People's and place names may have kept historic, non-regular spellings and therefore don't always follow this rule, e.g. "Beitz" or "Gauck" (tz and ck are considered double consonants since they substitute the non-existent zz and kk). -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 20:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strauss / Strauß, which except for a name can mean 'bunch' or 'ostrich'. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 13:42, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- ad 4.: Statistics? Only few languages written in the Latin alphabet use umlauts in native words, mostly German and languages with an orthography influenced by German. Similarly, only few use Y in native words. Very few use both. PiusImpavidus (talk) 11:07, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- Swedish has both umlauts/ diaeresis and Y (and occasionally Ü in German names and a miniscule number of loanwords, including müsli). Swedish still didn't see a need for Ÿ (and I can't even type a capital Ÿ on my Swedish keyboard in a regular way). 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 13:56, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- A similar situation applies to 40bus' native Finnish. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 14:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- Swedish has both umlauts/ diaeresis and Y (and occasionally Ü in German names and a miniscule number of loanwords, including müsli). Swedish still didn't see a need for Ÿ (and I can't even type a capital Ÿ on my Swedish keyboard in a regular way). 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 13:56, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- ad 7.: Seems to be used as an allophone of /f/ under certain circumstances. It's used in Judaeo-Spanish, if it is to be considered a dialect, rather than its own language. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 13:47, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- Regarding 10: Middle English still had y- which goes back to ge- "Sumer is icumen in" (here it is spelled i-); it is still used in Modern English in archaic or humorous forms like: yclad, yclept, and other cases (see the Wiktionary entry I linked to). 178.51.7.23 (talk) 18:11, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- 2 & 6: The Jarai language marks short vowels with breves (while leaving the long ones unmarked) so it uses ⟨ŭ⟩ (and ⟨ư̆⟩), while the now-extinct Osage language has initial ⟨ð⟩s. The Wiktionary entries on individual letters usually provide lists of languages that use them. --Theurgist (talk) 10:55, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
December 30
Teaching pronunciation for Spanish in 17th c. France and Italy?
Although it seems that Spanish 'x' and 'j' had both taken on the sound of a velar fricative (jota) at least among the majority of the population already in the course of the 16th c. (is this correct?) the French and the Italians pronounce the title of Cervantes's novel "Don Quixote" with an 'sh' sound (which was the old pronunciation of 'x' until the end of the 15th c.; the letter 'j' was pronounced like French j like the 'ge' in 'garage'; Judaeo-Spanish still uses these pronunciations).
So I've been wondering: Why do the French and the Italian use the archaic pronunciation of 'x'? Is it because this was still the official literate (albeit a minority) pronunciation even in Spain or had that pronunciation already completely disappeared in Spain but was still taught to students of the Spanish language in France and Italy?
178.51.7.23 (talk) 12:57, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- Might just be an approximation, since French and Italian lack a velar fricative natively. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 14:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- In French, the protagonist's name is always spelled "Quichotte", never "Quixote" or "Quijote", and is pronounced as if it were a native French word. The article on the book in the French wikipedia explains that this spelling was adopted to approximate the pronunciation used in Spanish at the time. Xuxl (talk) 14:44, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- Which is odd since the final -e is silent in French but definitely not silent in any version of Spanish I'm aware of. -- Jack of Oz 19:51, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- Was final e silent in French at the tme of the novel? —Tamfang (talk) 00:41, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- Which is odd since the final -e is silent in French but definitely not silent in any version of Spanish I'm aware of. -- Jack of Oz 19:51, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- In French, the protagonist's name is always spelled "Quichotte", never "Quixote" or "Quijote", and is pronounced as if it were a native French word. The article on the book in the French wikipedia explains that this spelling was adopted to approximate the pronunciation used in Spanish at the time. Xuxl (talk) 14:44, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
178.51.7.23 -- The letter "X" standing for a "sh" sound was still alive enough in the 16th century, that the convention was used for writing Native American languages (see Chicxulub etc)... AnonMoos (talk) 01:05, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
VIP
Is the acronym "VIP" ever pronounced as a word, as /vɪp/? --40bus (talk) 16:11, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- In my understanding, only jokingly or as shorthand in environments where the meaning would be understood. You probably wouldn't see it in a news broadcast, but I could imagine it being used casually by, say, service workers who occasionally cater to high-end clientele. GalacticShoe (talk) 16:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- There was a German TV programme called Die V.I.P.-Schaukel, making a wordplay out of the fact that /vɪp/ sounds like Wipp- (from the verb wippen:to rock, to swing; Schaukel is a swing). It was based on interviews with and documentary bits about famous people. But that does not mean that V.I.P. would normally have been pronounced like that. -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 16:34, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- In Dutch it's always pronounced /vɪp/, which has no other meanings than VIP. It's still written with capitals. PiusImpavidus (talk) 17:11, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- I believe that is the case for Swedish, as well. Possibly due to the confusion about whether the letters of English abbreviations should be pronounced the English or the Swedish way. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 21:44, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- Somewhat akin to VP for Vice President, typically pronounced "VEE-PEE" but also colloquially as "VEEP". ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 21:34, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- When I was a kid growing up in the UK I used to watch a cartoon called Top Cat (which was renamed Boss Cat in the UK as there was a cat food available called Top Cat). There's a line in the theme song that goes "he's the boss, he's a vip, he's the championship". Or does it say "he's a pip"? Most lyrics sites have it as "pip", but I favour "vip". Decide for yourself here: --Viennese Waltz 10:21, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- Ah, that brings back some memories. It sounds like "vip" to me. One thing I'm now wondering: If the series in the UK was called Boss Cat, did they change the song lyrics at all? ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 13:59, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Not according to my memory, @Baseball Bugs. It was transparent even to kids that they'd been forced to change the title, but didn't change anything else. (The dialogue wasn't changed: "TC"). ColinFine (talk) 14:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Imported American culture rarely see any changes at all. The term "spaz" might have been changed to "ass" or something, occasionally, as "spaz" is considered more harsh in the UK (and "ass" less so)... 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 15:26, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Not according to my memory, @Baseball Bugs. It was transparent even to kids that they'd been forced to change the title, but didn't change anything else. (The dialogue wasn't changed: "TC"). ColinFine (talk) 14:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ah, that brings back some memories. It sounds like "vip" to me. One thing I'm now wondering: If the series in the UK was called Boss Cat, did they change the song lyrics at all? ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 13:59, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
December 31
Spanish consonants
Why in Spanish and Portuguese, /s/ sound can never start a word if it is followed by consonant? For example, why is it especial rather than special I think that in Portuguese, it is because of letter S would be pronounced /ʃ/ before a voiceless consonant, but in beginning of word, /ʃ/ would not end a syllable. But why it is forbidden in Spanish too? --40bus (talk) 08:50, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- A couple of explanation options can be found in this thread: . I would mention that you can add sc to your list. An sc- at the start of a Latin word was changed into c- (scientia - ciencia), s- (scio -> se) but also into esc (schola -> escuela, scribo -> escribo). -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 11:13, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- One might also note the elimination of the Latin -e in infinitives in Spanish and Portuguese (Example: Habere -> Haber, Haver) while Italian kept them. To avoid consonant clusters like -rst-, -rsp-, -rsc- between words which would be a challenge to the Romance tongue, (e.g. atender scuela, observar strellas), the intermittent e may have been required and therefore may have shifted to the beginning of such words. -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 11:29, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- There are Italian dialects where final wovels of low functional load regularly are dropped, though. It's common in Sicilian, I believe. Also, I'm not sure on whether the two phonetic shifts would be related. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 11:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- It's quite normal in standard Italian to leave the final vowel off of the infinitive auxiliary verbs (or other verbs acting in a quasi-auxiliary role, say in saper vivere). But I don't think that's really what 79.91.113.116 was talking about. Anyway if the main verb starts with s+consonant you can always leave the e on the auxiliary to avoid the cluster, similarly to how a squirrel is uno scoiattolo and not *un scoiattolo.
- As a side note, I actually think it's the northern dialects that are more known for leaving off final vowels of ordinary words, particularly Lombardian. I have the notion that Cattivik is Milanese. But I'm not sure of that; I wasn't able to find out for sure with a quick search. --Trovatore (talk) 23:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- There are Italian dialects where final wovels of low functional load regularly are dropped, though. It's common in Sicilian, I believe. Also, I'm not sure on whether the two phonetic shifts would be related. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 11:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- An AI bot on that Quora link mentions that there are no Latin words starting with st-, I see, which however is blatantly wrong. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 11:29, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- For whatever reason, it's a part of the Spanish language culture. Even a native Spanish speaker talking in English will tend to put that leading "e", for example they might say "the United Estates". ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 11:42, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- An accent isn't generally considered part of the "culture" in the broader sense. It's not really part of the "English language culture" to refer to a certain German statesman as the "Fyoorer of the Third Rike"... 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 13:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- English speakers have typically always mispronounced Hitler's title. In fact, in Richard Armour's satirical American history book, he specifically referred to Hitler as a "Furor". ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 01:29, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- It is kinda proper English, so when I think about it, a better equivalent might be an English speaker talking in German about "Der Fyoorer des dritten Rikeys" or so... (I need to brush up on my German cases...) 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 02:08, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- English speakers have typically always mispronounced Hitler's title. In fact, in Richard Armour's satirical American history book, he specifically referred to Hitler as a "Furor". ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 01:29, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- An accent isn't generally considered part of the "culture" in the broader sense. It's not really part of the "English language culture" to refer to a certain German statesman as the "Fyoorer of the Third Rike"... 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 13:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- The reason why they do not occur in these languages is that the native speakers of these languages cannot pronounce onsets like /sk/. The reason why they cannot pronounce these onsets is that they do not occur in their native languages, so that they have not been exposed to them in the process of speech acquisition. --Lambiam 11:49, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- However, these onsets existed in Latin and disappeared in Spanish so at some point they got lost. See above for a more etymological approach. -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 11:53, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- It's quite common cross-linguistically to insert a prothetic vowel before some initial clusters. Old French did it (though the /s/ has since often been lost): "étoile"; "escalier"; "épée". Turkish does it: "istasyon". Other languages simplify the cluster: English "knife" /n-/; "pterodactyl" /t-/; Finnish "Ranska" ('France') ColinFine (talk) 14:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
The <surname> woman_woman-December_31-20241231103000">
In a novel I'm reading there are characters who are sometimes referred to as "the Borthwick woman" and "the Pomfrey woman". Nothing exceptional there. But then I got to wondering: why do we never see some male literary character called, say, "the Randolph man" or "the McDonald man"? We do sometimes see "the <surname> person", but never "the <surname> man". Yet, "the <surname> woman" seems fair game.
We also hear these things in extra-literary contexts.
What's going on here? -- Jack of Oz 10:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC)_woman"> _woman">
- Traditinal gender roles, I believe. Men inherit their father's surname, while women change theirs by marrying into a new family, on some level being treated as possessions, I guess. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 11:35, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- A possible reason is that, particularly in former eras, men generally had a particular occupation or role by which they could be referenced, while women often did not, being 'merely' a member of first their parental and later their spousal families. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 13:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
Another aspect is that these are usually intended as, and understood as, pejorative or disrespectful ways to refer to someone. There's no need to spell it out as, e.g. "that awful/appalling/dreadful Borthwick woman". Those descriptors are understood. How subtle our language can be. I suppose the nearest equivalent for a male referent would be their surname alone, but that would need a context because it wouldn't automatically be taken as pejorative, whereas "the <surname> woman" would. -- Jack of Oz 20:25, 31 December 2024 (UTC)_woman"> _woman">
- There's also the fact that this is not only understood as a negative towards the woman, but also an insinuation that the man is "lesser" because he can't control "his woman".--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 23:32, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- That hadn't occurred to me. In the book I referred to above, the Borthwick woman is definitely not attached to a man, and the status of the Pomfrey woman is unknown and irrelevant to the story. -- Jack of Oz 08:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Here is a use of "the Abernathy man", here one of "the Babson man", and here one of "the Callahan man". These uses do not appear pejorative to me. --Lambiam 12:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- That sounds not perjorative by avoidance or distancing, but like a "non-definite" (novel? term) similar to "A certain Calsonathy," or "If a man comes by, tell them..." (this a nongendered pronoun regardless of gendered referent; feels newish)
- Temerarius (talk) 17:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- They were chosen to refer to specific individuals, but for the second I apparently have copied the link to a non-example. For the other two, they are Floyd Abernathy and Leonard Callahan. A better B example is "the Bailey man". Here we do not learn the given name, but he is definitely a specific individual. And here, although we are afforded only snippet views, "the Bailey man" refers to one Dr. Hal Bailey. --Lambiam 19:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Further to Jack of Oz's and Lambiam's observations above , for a male equivalence one might also use near synonyms like 'chap' or 'fellow'. "That Borthwick chap . . ." would be a casual and neutral reference to someone not very well known to the speaker or listener; "that Borthwick fellow . . ." might hint at the speaker's disapproval. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 03:46, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- The use in the third link is the spoken sentence "He works during the day to the Callahan man that does the carvings." It occurs just above the blank line halfway down the page. --Lambiam 19:19, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
English vowels
There are some dialects which have /yː/ and /øː/, such as in South African and NZ English, but are there any dialects that have /ʏ/ and /œ/? --40bus (talk) 14:24, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- There are some examples listed in the relevant IPA articles. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 14:45, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
January 1
Fraction names
How do English speakers say fractions of units? For example, is 50 cm "half a metre", and 150 cm "one and half metres"? Does English refer to a period of two days as "48 hours"? Is 12 hours "half a day", 36 hours "one and half days" and 18 months "one and half years"? --40bus (talk) 10:49, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yes to all, except that it would be "one and a half" rather than "one and half". Shantavira| 12:26, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) One does not say "one and half metres" but "one and a half metres". One can also say "one and a half metre" or "one metre and a half". Likewise for "one and half days/years". In "two and a half metres", one only uses the plural form. Note that "48 hours" can also be used for any 48-hour period, like from Saturday 6am to Monday 6am. --Lambiam 12:31, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Is then 75 minutes "one and a quarter hours"? Is 250,000 "a quarter million"? --40bus (talk) 15:20, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- In British English at least, 75 minutes = one and a quarter hours, or an hour and a quarter; 250,000 is a quarter of a million, or two-hundred-and-fifty thousand. Bazza 7 (talk) 15:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Also in British English, "eighteen months" would be more usual than "one and a half years". It's common to give the age of babies as a number of months until they reach the age of two. Alansplodge (talk) 16:49, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- All those usages are also found in America English. Also "a quarter million" is not uncommon in casual speech whereas "a quarter of a million" sounds formal. However, "three quarters of a million" is the only correct way to refer to 750,000 with this idiom though the 's' in quaters is often not audible. Eluchil404 (talk) 23:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- In Finnish it is common to give age of one-year-old babies as mixed years and months, such as "yksi vuosi ja kuusi kuukautta" ("one year and six month")? Puolitoista vuotta is very commonly used to mean 18 months. Also, puoli vuorokautta is 12 hours and puolitoista vuorokautta 36 hours. Does English use day to refer to thing that Finnish refers as vuorokausi, i.e., a period of exactly 24 hours (1,440 minutes, 86,400 seconds), starting at any moment and ending exactly 24 hours later? --40bus (talk) 18:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- In English ages between one and two years are more often given in months than mixed months and years. I.e. "18 months" is more common than "a/one year and six months" but both are heard. A one day period is more often called 24 hours because "day" would be ambiguous. "One day later" could mean any time during the next day. But using "one day" or "exactly one day" in that meaning would not be obviously incorrect either. Eluchil404 (talk) 23:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- To my annoyance, "24 hours" and multiples thereof are often used as synonyms of "day(s)", not for precision but because more syllables make more importance. —Tamfang (talk) 23:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- In Finnish it is common to give age of one-year-old babies as mixed years and months, such as "yksi vuosi ja kuusi kuukautta" ("one year and six month")? Puolitoista vuotta is very commonly used to mean 18 months. Also, puoli vuorokautta is 12 hours and puolitoista vuorokautta 36 hours. Does English use day to refer to thing that Finnish refers as vuorokausi, i.e., a period of exactly 24 hours (1,440 minutes, 86,400 seconds), starting at any moment and ending exactly 24 hours later? --40bus (talk) 18:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- In British English at least, 75 minutes = one and a quarter hours, or an hour and a quarter; 250,000 is a quarter of a million, or two-hundred-and-fifty thousand. Bazza 7 (talk) 15:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages has an article Nychthemeron (an unambiguous expression in technical English)... AnonMoos (talk) 21:17, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
The two pronunciations of Hebrew letter Het in Ancient Hebrew?
The Hebrew letters Het (ח) and ayin (ע) had two different pronunciations each in Ancient Hebrew: the Het could be pronounced like Arabic Ha (ح) or like Arabic kha (خ) while ayin could be pronounced like Arabic ayin (ع) or like Arabic ghayin (غ).
For ayin the clue that this was the case is the transcription into Greek (e.g. in the Septuagint) of Hebrew words like the names Gaza, Gomora, etc. compared to modern Hebrew Aza, Amora, etc. The Greek gamma is in fact a reflex of the ghayin pronunciation. When the letter was pronounced ayin it was not transcribed, e.g. in Eden.
But how do we know for Het? What are in the Septuagint transcribed Hebrew words that indicate that the letter Het had two pronunciations? In other words what are the two different transcriptions of letter Het in the Septuagint that are a clue to that fact? If I had to adventure a guess I would guess that the pronunciation Het was not transcribed (except possibly for a rough breathing), while the pronunciation khet was transcribed as a khi, but I don't know, and I can't think of any examples, and that's exactly why I am asking here.
178.51.7.23 (talk) 12:28, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Didn't Biblical Hebrew survive as a liturgical language? Maybe that proviced pointers. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:44, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- No, not phonologically. From the point of view of the phonology you're mixing two meanings of "Biblical Hebrew" here. The pronunciation used when the text were composed and the ritual pronunciation of the text nowadays. That has nothing to do with the ancient pronunciation and in fact has developed differently in different traditions (ashkenazi, sefaradi, yemeni, iraqi, persian, etc. none of which preserves the double pronunciation of Het and/or ayin) which obviously cannot all be different and yet be identical to the ancient pronunciation. In any case I now changed "Biblical" to "Ancient". 178.51.7.23 (talk) 12:54, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- The het in הָגָר (Hagar) is not transcribed in the Septuagint: ῎Αγαρ (Agar), while חֶבְרוֹן (Hebron) is transcribed as Χεβρών (Khebrōn). --Lambiam 13:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- In Hagar you don't have a Het (8th letter) but a heh (5th letter). However I think the idea is good. 178.51.7.23 (talk) 13:14, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oops, yes, mistake. --Lambiam 13:27, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Did you check the breathing in Greek Agar is soft? I would say that's a surprise. 178.51.7.23 (talk) 13:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, I did. The Vulgate has Agar. See also Ἄγαρ on Wiktionary. I suspect, though, that when the Septuagint was originally produced, breathings were not yet written. --Lambiam 13:41, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Did you check the breathing in Greek Agar is soft? I would say that's a surprise. 178.51.7.23 (talk) 13:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- חַגַּי (Haggai) is transcribed as ᾿Αγγαῖος (Angaios), Aggaeus in the Vulgate. --Lambiam 14:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oops, yes, mistake. --Lambiam 13:27, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- In Hagar you don't have a Het (8th letter) but a heh (5th letter). However I think the idea is good. 178.51.7.23 (talk) 13:14, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Biblical Hebrew#Phonology mentions the pair יצחק = Ἰσαάκ = Isaac vs. רחל = Ῥαχήλ = Rachel with non-intial ח. Another example of initial ח as zero is Ἐνώχ (Enoch) from חנוך. –Austronesier (talk) 16:25, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- This conversation brings up the question "Does the LXX contain transcriptions?"
- Temerarius (talk) 18:07, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- What do you mean? 178.51.7.23 (talk) 19:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- "Transcription" is perhaps not the right term. We have an article on Latinization of names, but AFAIK nothing similar for Greek. (Hellenization of place names is about a 19th- and 20th-century policy of replacing non-Greek geonyms by Greek ones, such as Βάρφανη → Παραπόταμος.) The Hellenization of Hebrew and Aramaic names in the LXX combines a largely phonetically based transcription of stems with coercing proper nouns into the straightjacket of one of the three Ancient Greek declensions. --Lambiam 00:46, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- See "On Polyphony in Biblical Hebrew" (PDF here) for a discussion by a distinguished scholar (Joshua Blau), arguing in great detail for the polyphony of ח (and also ע), representing both a pharyngeal consonant and a velar fricative in "literary" or formal Biblical recitation Hebrew down to the late centuries B.C. AnonMoos (talk) 01:10, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks. But except for the front and back covers (first two and last two pages) the PDF file is absolutely illegible. Were you able to get legible PDFs of this article?
- Was this 1982 article the first time someone realized that these two letters were "polyphonic" in Ancient Hebrew?
- I was once browsing through a Hebrew dictionary (the well-known Even-Shoshan) in its ca. 1960 edition and (looking in a grammatical-historical appendix in the last volume) it didn't seem like the author of the dictionary was at all aware of the "polyphony" of those two letters in Ancient Hebrew.
- But when I looked in a ca. 1995 edition of that same dictionary (in a one volume so called "merukaz" edition, incidentally) that "polyphony" was clearly alluded to.
- Avraham Even-Shoshan, the author of the dictionary, died in 1984 so I don't know if it was he who changed things there (not impossible, as he had two years to do it), or if it was someone after his death (there were new editions of the dictionary as late as the 2000s).
- In any case I imagined that between ca. 1960 and ca. 1995 something had changed in our knowledge of the pronunciation of Ancient Hebrew but I didn't know whose contribution it was.
- 178.51.94.220 (talk) 19:54, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- The built-in PDF-viewers of some browers (Opera, Chrome) indeed display this document atrociously, but after having saved it locally, I could easily open it with all kinds of PDF viewers and get a legible view of it. Blau devotes four and a half pages to the history of research velar transcriptions of ayin. –Austronesier (talk) 20:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- It worked. Thanks. 178.51.94.220 (talk) 21:13, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- The built-in PDF-viewers of some browers (Opera, Chrome) indeed display this document atrociously, but after having saved it locally, I could easily open it with all kinds of PDF viewers and get a legible view of it. Blau devotes four and a half pages to the history of research velar transcriptions of ayin. –Austronesier (talk) 20:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- The PDF worked fine for me. I strongly doubt that 1982 was the first time, because scholars would have been able to compare Septuagint transcriptions to proto-Semitic reconstructions decades before that... AnonMoos (talk) 20:37, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- There remains the question why the first editions of Even-Shoshan didn't seem to know about this. 178.51.94.220 (talk) 21:17, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- The PDF worked fine for me. I strongly doubt that 1982 was the first time, because scholars would have been able to compare Septuagint transcriptions to proto-Semitic reconstructions decades before that... AnonMoos (talk) 20:37, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Meaning of "fauve" in native French and in Ionesco's "Rhinoceros"?
In his play "Rhinoceros" the Romanian-born French playwright Eugène Ionesco uses the word "fauve" to refer to the rhinoceros as if it just meant "wild animal". I would say no native French speaker would do that: am I right or wrong? To me "fauve" would be used mostly for big cats (tigers, lions, leopards). Maybe for bears and wolves? (Not totally sure though). But "fauve" would never refer to just any large dangerous animal like Ionesco (who was not a native speaker of French) does. What do you say? 178.51.7.23 (talk) 12:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Looking up French Wiktionnaire and some French dictionaries, it does indeed seem that "fauve" is an acceptable - albeit perhaps dated - way to refer to ochre or wild animals in general, not a non-native misunderstanding. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:50, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Use of Old Norse in old Rus'?
The first rulers of Rus' were Swedes (the Varangians), for example Rurik and his descendants. Is there a record of when they stopped to speak Old Norse? What are some Old Norse words in Russian that came with the Swedes (as opposed to later borrowings from Swedish possibly)? (I know of Rus' and the name of Russia itself it seems. Any other?) How about Russian personal names that go back to Swedish ones? (I know of Vladimir which goes back to Valdemar. Any other?) 178.51.7.23 (talk) 13:32, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- To start you off, Wiktionary have a Category:Russian terms derived from Old Norse. --Antiquary (talk) 13:45, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- According to wikt:Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/Voldiměrъ, that derivation from Valdemar is something that "some sources speculate", and elsewhere (wikt:Valdemar) the borrowing is claimed to be the other way. ColinFine (talk) 15:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- How about Oleg (from Helgi?), Igor (from Ingvar?), and of course Rurik (from ????) Incidentally, is Rurik a name that is still used in Russia these days? 178.51.7.23 (talk) 19:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- This whole question is contentious, partly because of the sparsity of sources and partly because of political considerations. Some Soviet historians in Stalin's day appeared to believe that Viking assimilation with Slavic culture had been almost instantaneous because, I suppose, they wanted the foundations of the Russian state and nation to have as little foreign influence as possible. Russian historians still tend to argue for a more rapid assimilation than their Western counterparts do. However, there's a discussion of the language question by Elena A. Melnikova here which concludes that "By the mid-tenth century the Varangians became bilingual; by the end of the eleventh century they used Old Russian as their mother tongue", and my old student copy of E. V. Gordon's Introduction to Old Norse agrees that "the Rus themselves gradually lost their Scandinavian traditions and language; they must have been almost completely merged in the Slavonic people by the beginning of the twelfth century." --Antiquary (talk) 10:02, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
English tenses
Does English ever use perfect instead of imperfect (past) to describe events that happened entirely in the past but still have connections to present time, such as "this house has been built in 1955", "Arsenal has last won Premier League in 2004", "When has Arsenal last won...", "this option has last been used three months ago", "humans have last visited Moon in 1972", "last ice age has ended 10,000 years ago"? And is simple present of verb be born ever used, since birth happen only once? And would sentences like "I am being born", "She is born" and "You are being born" sound odd? --40bus (talk) 18:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- No to the first (except among the "unedumacated"). As for the second, I'm not sure this counts, but there is the religious "She is born again." The rest sound bizarre. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:34, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- No, that's not right as the question is stated. It's often fine to use use the present perfect (that's the better term than just "perfect") to describe events that happened entirely in the past. Say I have been promoted to colonel; you can use that if you're still a colonel, even though the promotion itself happened in the past.
- What makes those sentences sound wrong is the explicit date on the sentence. That makes it very difficult to use the present perfect in idiomatic English. --Trovatore (talk) 22:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- If I study really hard, someday I will become underedumacated. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Another question: why in English Misplaced Pages, events listed in year articles are in present tense, but in Finnish Misplaced Pages they are in past tense? --40bus (talk) 21:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Present or past tense is acceptable in English (why, I have no idea). Getting back to the original topic, the title of the first chapter of David Copperfield is "I am born." Clarityfiend (talk) 22:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- This is the so-called historical present or narrative present. --Trovatore (talk) 22:37, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- The worst of it, often seen on the internet, is using past and present tenses in describing the same event, such as in a movie plot. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 03:01, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- This is the so-called historical present or narrative present. --Trovatore (talk) 22:37, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Present or past tense is acceptable in English (why, I have no idea). Getting back to the original topic, the title of the first chapter of David Copperfield is "I am born." Clarityfiend (talk) 22:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- I am pretty sure that there are differences between British and American English in the use of the present perfect vs the simple past in such sentences. In American English all your examples sound wrong and should be simple past "this house was built", "Asenal last won", "When did Arsenal last win", "this option was last used", "humans last vistited", "the last ice age ended". When I see imperfect I thin of the past progressive tense: "was being built", "was winning", "was being used", "were visiting", "was ending" which wouldn't work in your example sentences. But I may be incorrect since my knowledge of grammatical categories is based on Classical Latin rather than modern descriptive linguistics. As for "be born", all your examples are perfectly good English. Eluchil404 (talk) 23:59, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- While I do think BrE uses the present perfect a bit more than AmE, I don't think that's really the issue here. I'm pretty sure (one of our British friends can correct me) that the first, second, fourth, fifth, and sixth example sentences in the original post would also sound odd (if not outright wrong) in BrE. Again, the problem is not the fact that the action is entirely in the past, but that the sentence contains an explicit marker of time in the past (1955, three months ago, etc). The third sentence, when has Arsenal last won, I'm less sure about; I find it marginally acceptable, though it would be much more idiomatic to say how long has it been since Arsenal last won.
- As to "imperfect", this is a little complicated. The imperfect tense in Italian, and presumably in the rest of the Romance languages, indicates a continuous or habitual action, or a background description. In Latin it was much the same, whereas the Latin perfect indicates a completed action in the past. The present perfect (or analogous construction) entered Romance languages later, maybe with medieval Latin or some such, and differs from the perfect by the emphasis on the importance of the event to the present time.
- In German and English, there was never an imperfect tense per se; it was conflated with the simple past (preterite), which is the closest to the Latin perfect tense. It's true that you can use the past continuous or "would" or "used to" to emphasize certain aspects of the imperfect, but at the simplest level, the Latin perfect and imperfect are merged in English, with the present perfect being distinct from both.
- Modern Romance languages keep all three tenses in theory, but usually pick one of present perfect or preterite to use overwhelmingly in practice (alongside the imperfect, so they simplify to two conversational tenses). Both French and the northern varieties of Italian rarely use the preterite in conversation, and I think Spanish (especially Latin American Spanish) rarely use the present perfect. However as far as I know they all use the imperfect and keep it separate, which was one of the hardest things for me to get right learning Italian. --Trovatore (talk) 05:43, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think one can say, What have the Romans ever done for us, and when have they done it? Similarly, Sure, Arsenal has won the UEFA Cup Winners' Cup, but when has Arsenal ever won the UEFA Cup?. --Lambiam 12:00, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- To my ear there's a difference in acceptability between when has Arsenal ever won?, which is unassailable except by Arsenal fans I suppose, and when has Arsenal last won?, which strikes me as borderline, the kind of thing that sounds weird and you're not sure why. I guess it must have something to do with the word "last" but I don't have a well-developed theory of exactly what it has to do with it. --Trovatore (talk) 22:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think one can say, What have the Romans ever done for us, and when have they done it? Similarly, Sure, Arsenal has won the UEFA Cup Winners' Cup, but when has Arsenal ever won the UEFA Cup?. --Lambiam 12:00, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
Centuries
Does English ever use term 2000s to refer to period from 2000 to 2099? Why is 21st century more common? And is 2000s pronounced as "twenty hundreds"? --40bus (talk) 21:03, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- There is some ambiguity with 2000s; it could also refer to 2000 to 2009 (vs. 2010s), so that may be why 21st century is more used. It's pronounced "two thousands". Clarityfiend (talk) 22:35, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- If 1900s is pronounced as "nineteen hundreds", then why 2000s is pronounced as "two-thousands"? And 2000s is sometimes used to represent the century, and the decade could be disambiguated by saying "2000s decade", "first decade of 2000s", with basic meaning being century. --40bus (talk) 07:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- It could be, sure. And it is, sometimes. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 09:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- “One thousand nine hundreds” has six syllables, “nineteen hundreds” has four, saving two. “Two thousands” has three syllables, “twenty hundreds” has four, adding one. People just pick the shorter option.
- BTW, 2000s refers to the period 2000–2099, but 21st century to 2001–2100. It rarely matters. PiusImpavidus (talk) 11:29, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- xkcd:1849. Nardog (talk) 10:30, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- For me, the '00s (decade) are the "noughties". Probably I would call the '10s the "twenty tens" or "new tens". (Dunno why I feel the need to disambiguate from the 1910s.) Double sharp (talk) 11:59, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- I feel like "noughties" or "aughties" never really caught on. But it's almost time for the '00s nostalgia craze, so I suppose they'll come up with something. --Trovatore (talk) 00:42, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- As a side note, I once read (possibly in an SF fanzine) that when Arthur C. Clarke and Stanley Kubrick co-wrote the film and novel 2001: A Space Odyssey, Clarke expected people to pronounce the title "Twenty-oh-one . . ." (as they do for 1901, for example), not "Two thousand and one . . .". {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 12:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- That story sounds familiar. Clark maybe didn't count on the public to keep it simple amid the grandeur, so to speak, of reaching a millennium. There's a late-1940s cartoon called "The Old Gray Hare", in which Elmer is taken into the future. The "voice of God" tells him, "At the sound of the gong, it will be TWO-THOUSAND A.D." That was the predominant media usage by the time it actually arrived. The "Y2K problem" or "Year two thousand problem", for example. By about 2010, the form "twenty-ten" had become more prevalent. As suggested above, one less syllable. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 12:28, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Back when it was 2008 (say), I would've said "two thousand and eight", but now that that year is in the past I'd say "twenty oh eight". Double sharp (talk) 03:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- I still say "two thousand and ", but it might be just me, or a wider 'elderly Brit' thing. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 03:19, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yep. One thing I recall is that Charles Osgood was kind of an "early adapter" to that style, saying "twenty-oh-one" and so on. Now, pretty much everyone follows that norm. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 06:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Are 20th century years ever said like "nineteen hundred and twenty-five" for 1925? Does English put "hundred and" between first two and last two number in speech? --40bus (talk) 10:05, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- I seem to recall that Alex Trebek used to say years that way. Maybe it was a Canadian thing. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 11:13, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Only in the most formal contexts; but see the 1973 song, Nineteen Hundred and Eighty-Five which I suspect used that style to aid with scansion. Alansplodge (talk) 18:48, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- An example of this very formal date usage is in this US Presidential Proclamation:
- "In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this twelfth day of February, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and eighty-two..."
- Alansplodge (talk) 18:58, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Only in the most formal contexts; but see the 1973 song, Nineteen Hundred and Eighty-Five which I suspect used that style to aid with scansion. Alansplodge (talk) 18:48, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- I seem to recall that Alex Trebek used to say years that way. Maybe it was a Canadian thing. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 11:13, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Are 20th century years ever said like "nineteen hundred and twenty-five" for 1925? Does English put "hundred and" between first two and last two number in speech? --40bus (talk) 10:05, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Back when it was 2008 (say), I would've said "two thousand and eight", but now that that year is in the past I'd say "twenty oh eight". Double sharp (talk) 03:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- That story sounds familiar. Clark maybe didn't count on the public to keep it simple amid the grandeur, so to speak, of reaching a millennium. There's a late-1940s cartoon called "The Old Gray Hare", in which Elmer is taken into the future. The "voice of God" tells him, "At the sound of the gong, it will be TWO-THOUSAND A.D." That was the predominant media usage by the time it actually arrived. The "Y2K problem" or "Year two thousand problem", for example. By about 2010, the form "twenty-ten" had become more prevalent. As suggested above, one less syllable. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 12:28, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- For me, the '00s (decade) are the "noughties". Probably I would call the '10s the "twenty tens" or "new tens". (Dunno why I feel the need to disambiguate from the 1910s.) Double sharp (talk) 11:59, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- I often say, we need a wildcard digit other than '0'. I often write "197x" and "200x" but would not do so in an article. —Tamfang (talk) 22:49, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- So does "the 19xx's" mean all the years from 1900 to 1999, or only the ones that are congruent to 8 mod 11? --Trovatore (talk) 21:01, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- Perhaps "the 19xy's" solves that problem. :) Double sharp (talk) 05:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- During the 20th century, I only ever heard the period referred to as "the 20th century". If someone had talked about "the 1900s" I would have assumed they meant the decade 1900-1909. Using "the xx00s" to refer to the whole century is something I've only encountered recently, although I don't know if it actually is a recent usage or just something that has recently been revealed via internet usage. Iapetus (talk) 11:10, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- So does "the 19xx's" mean all the years from 1900 to 1999, or only the ones that are congruent to 8 mod 11? --Trovatore (talk) 21:01, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
January 3
Why is it boxes and not boxen?
Why is it foxes and not foxen? Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 05:45, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Why is it sheep and not sheeps? HiLo48 (talk) 05:57, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Don't forget the related term "sheeps kin". ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 06:13, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- I thought the plural of sheep was sheeple! Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 06:52, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Possibly because "box" has its roots in Latin. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 06:06, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Also, foxen is a word, just uncommon. GalacticShoe (talk) 06:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Because Vikings. Maungapohatu (talk) 07:35, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- As others have implied, "box" has always had an s-plural in English, and Vikings generally used the word "refr" for foxes. What's most surprising to me is actually that the old declensions "oxen" and "children" have survived. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 11:33, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- Children is a pleonasm because childre (or childer) was already plural. See wikt:calveren and wikt:-ren. Card Zero (talk) 12:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- As others have implied, "box" has always had an s-plural in English, and Vikings generally used the word "refr" for foxes. What's most surprising to me is actually that the old declensions "oxen" and "children" have survived. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 11:33, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- Because Vikings. Maungapohatu (talk) 07:35, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Someone wrong -- You can look at Old English grammar#Noun classes to see the declensions of a thousand years ago or more. The regular pattern of modern English inflection comes from the Old English masculine "a-stems". The only nouns with a non-"s" plural ending in modern English (leaving aside Classical borrowings such as "referenda" and unassimilated foreignisms) are oxen, children, brethren, and the rather archaic kine, which have an ending from the OE "weak" declension (though "child" and "brother" were not originally weak declension nouns). There are also the few remaining umlaut nouns, which do not have any plural endings, and a few other forms which don't (or don't always) distinguish between singular and plural. In that context, there's no particular reason why "box" should be expected to be irregular. However, the form "boxen" has been occasionally used in certain types of computer slang: http://catb.org/jargon/html/B/boxen.html -- AnonMoos (talk) 12:18, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Nerd Wikipedians trying to be droll sometimes say "userboxen". Cullen328 (talk) 05:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
January 4
Pronunciation of "God b'wi you"?
How do you pronounce "God b'wi you"? For example in Shakespeare's Henry V, Act 4, Scene 3, Line 6 (Oxford Shakespeare). The pronunciation I hear in one recording is "God by you". Folger's Shakespeare has "God be wi’ you" in writing (you can find that text online at www.folger.edu). Does that indicate a different suggested pronunciation? How would you pronounce "wi'"? Are there other variants? (Either in the text of this play or anywhere else.) There's a "God be with you" entry in Wiktionary but none of these variants are recorded. 178.51.8.23 (talk) 08:32, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- David Crystal's Oxford Dictionary of Original Shakespearean Pronunciation has for be with ye/you. Nardog (talk) 08:47, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks. This is the original pronunciation. How is it currently commonly pronounced on the stage? I mentioned one pronunciation I heard where "b'wi" is pronounced "by". Are there other options?
- Regarding the original pronunciation note videos by Ben Crystal (David Crystal's son) and those of A. Z. Foreman on his YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/@a.z.foreman74.
- 178.51.8.23 (talk) 12:05, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- I'd pronounce it "God be with you" but with the "th" sound missed off the end of "with." That might not be how they did it in the sixteenth century, but I'm pretty sure no sixteenth century people are coming to see the show. Incidentally, that's what they did in the Olivier movie (the line didn't appear in the Branagh version). Chuntuk (talk) 11:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Correlation of early human migrations with languages
Assuming that earliest speakers of every language family had spoke some other language during the out of Africa expansion, were early human migrations successfully correlated with the consequential emergence of respective language families on migration routes? I've read about Linguistic homeland#Homelands of major language families, but wonder about the overall sequence of emergence. Brandmeister 12:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- If I understand the question the answer is no. The migrations that you are talking about took place 100,000 to 25,000 years ago and well established language families only go back 10,000-15,000 years, often less. Even at that time depth the correlation between archeology and linguistics is often controversial. See Proto-Indo-European homeland for example. Studies such as A global analysis of matches and mismatches between human genetic and linguistic histories show that while there is correlation between human genetic and linguistic history, there are enough exception to make any precise conclusions impossible without other evidence. Eluchil404 (talk) 02:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- There have been scholarly (and less scholarly) attempts to identify language families and relationships predating those more firmly established: see for example Nostratic and various other such proposals linked from it, but these are inevitably limited, largely because the evolution of languages is sufficiently rapid that all traces of features dating very far back have been erased by subsequent developments. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 07:01, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Although I cannot evaluate the likelihood, I find it conceivable that a future all-out statistical analysis of all available source material will result in a reconstruction of Proto-Afroasiatic that is widely accepted by scholars and much richer than what we have now. Perhaps this might even establish a connection between Proto-Afroasiatic and Proto-Indo-European beyond the few known striking grammatical similarities. Then we may be speaking about close to 20 kya. But indeed, there can be no hope of reconstructions going substantially farther back, by the dearth of truly ancient sources and the relative scarcity of sources before the Modern Era. --Lambiam 21:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Reconstructions of Proto-Afroasiatic have been hindered by the fact that the only branches with significant ancient attestations are Semitic and Egyptian, and for most of its history, Egyptian writing almost completely ignored vowels... AnonMoos (talk) 20:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Although I cannot evaluate the likelihood, I find it conceivable that a future all-out statistical analysis of all available source material will result in a reconstruction of Proto-Afroasiatic that is widely accepted by scholars and much richer than what we have now. Perhaps this might even establish a connection between Proto-Afroasiatic and Proto-Indo-European beyond the few known striking grammatical similarities. Then we may be speaking about close to 20 kya. But indeed, there can be no hope of reconstructions going substantially farther back, by the dearth of truly ancient sources and the relative scarcity of sources before the Modern Era. --Lambiam 21:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Attaining cadre
I hit "random article" for the first time in a while, and was directed to Adetoun Ogunsheye, the first female professor in Nigeria (still alive at 98). In the infobox it says she's known for "eing the first Nigerian woman to attain professorial cadre", with the last two words piped to professor.
Does anyone recognize this locution of "attaining professorial cadre", or for that matter using cadre as a mass noun in any context? Is it maybe a Nigerian regionalism? Should we be using it in Misplaced Pages? --Trovatore (talk) 20:46, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- That remark was added 7 years ago, and the user who posted it is still active. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 22:56, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think the collective sense is the older, just as for police and troop.
- Here are uses of, specifically, teacher's cadre:
- "The smaller the city the more the teacher's cadre demand administrative support"
- "the cadre in which the teachers belong"
- Other uses of the collective sense:
- "The officers, non-commissioned officers, and corporals, constitute what is called the 'cadre.' "
- "any one individual's decision to join a cadre",
- "the cadre is appropriately composed in terms of skills and perspectives"
- --Lambiam 23:43, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- None of those uses look like mass nouns to me; they all appear to be count nouns. --Trovatore (talk) 01:02, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Anyway, the phrasing is weird and probably just wrong (even in Nigerian English), so I've simplified it. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:07, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, I think that's best. I'm still curious about the phrase, though. @HandsomeBoy: any comment? --Trovatore (talk) 04:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- "Promotion (in)to professorial cadre" is short for "promotion (in)to the professorial cadre". --Lambiam 14:13, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, Lambiam, I can almost twist my brain into following that. So far it does appear to be a Nigerianism. My reaction till proved otherwise is that we probably shouldn't use it in English Misplaced Pages, given that (unlike Americanisms and Briticisms) it's not going to be recognizable in most of the Anglosphere. But it's reminiscent of the lakh / crore thing, on which I don't have a completely firm opinion and which still seems a bit unsettled en.wiki-wide. --Trovatore (talk) 21:39, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- The term 'cadre' was/is (in my experience) extensively used in translations from Mandarin where in Communist China a distinct body or group, especially of military, governmental, or political personnel, is referred to: I have also seen it used in a similar fashion regarding communist regimes and parties elsewhere, so it has something of a Marxist flavour (I wonder if Karl Marx used it in his writings?), but also in non-communist contexts. I don't think it can be characterised as a 'Nigerianism'.
- The Wiktionary entry is of course relevant. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 08:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- 94, I think maybe you came in late to the discussion. Of course the word "cadre" is not a Nigerianism. The locution in question is attain professorial cadre, which on its face appears to use the word as a mass noun meaning something like "status". Lambiam's search results suggest a different, slightly convoluted explanation, but all seem to come from Nigeria, which suggests to me that this usage of the word is a Nigerianism. --Trovatore (talk) 20:55, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, Lambiam, I can almost twist my brain into following that. So far it does appear to be a Nigerianism. My reaction till proved otherwise is that we probably shouldn't use it in English Misplaced Pages, given that (unlike Americanisms and Briticisms) it's not going to be recognizable in most of the Anglosphere. But it's reminiscent of the lakh / crore thing, on which I don't have a completely firm opinion and which still seems a bit unsettled en.wiki-wide. --Trovatore (talk) 21:39, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Trovatore: It's nice to see the article suggested to you, and I hope you enjoyed reading the article :). These little things motivate me to keep creating impactful articles. Regarding the usage of "cadre", I try to be creative and phrase content in a manner that is dissimilar with source references. I believe I didn't want to use the language from the source and "cadre" came to mind. It seemed like having the same meaning as my interpretation from the sources. From the discussion above, it looks like I was not entirely correct. I believe the article was created during a contest, so speed was also important to me. HandsomeBoy (talk) 22:36, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- FWIW, I just did a Google search and I am seeing a lot across virtually all universities in Nigeria. So it might actually be a thing UniAbuja, RUN, KWASU, Unibadan, etc. HandsomeBoy (talk) 23:07, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
January 5
Name of Nova Scotia?
Is there any historical explanation of why the name of the Canadian province of Nova Scotia uses Latin. Is it an oddity with no explanation? Do you know of any other European colony (especially of the form "new something") that uses a Latin name instead of an equivalent in a modern European language? 178.51.8.23 (talk) 13:57, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- The semi-Latin name Nova Zembla was until fairly recently the most commonly used English exonym of Новая Земля. (It is still the preferred exonym in Dutch and Portuguese.) --Lambiam 14:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Is "Nova Zembla" semi-Latin or just a garbled version of the Russian? 178.51.8.23 (talk) 14:42, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- In this borrowing, Zembla is clearly a phonetic adaptation, but (although this would be hard to prove), I find the most plausible explanation for the component Nova that it arose by alignment with the then many Latin geonyms found on maps and atlases starting with Nova. In any case, the evidence is that Nova Zembla used to be seen as a Latin name, as from the use of the accusative case Novam Zemblam here, in 1570, and the genitive case Novæ Zemblæ here, in 1660. --Lambiam 20:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Is "Nova Zembla" semi-Latin or just a garbled version of the Russian? 178.51.8.23 (talk) 14:42, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- It was named in 1621, when James I made William Alexander, 1st Earl of Stirling lord of the area. This lordship was granted in the royal charter, written in Latin. Praefato Domino Willelmo Alexander ... nomine Novae Scotiae. Though he left his own name as William and didn't change it to Willelmo, he apparently took the instruction to call the place Nova Scotia very literally. Card Zero (talk) 14:38, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Was Nova Scotia the only Scottish colony ever? Maybe it is a Scottish thing to use Latin? 178.51.8.23 (talk) 14:45, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- There was also the Darien scheme, i.e. New Caledonia.--2A04:4A43:909F:F990:E596:9C8F:DF47:1709 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- And re-used for New Caledonia by James Cook in 1774. -- Verbarson edits 18:25, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- And Sir Francis Drake claimed New Albion (or Nova Albion) in the California area in 1579. -- Verbarson edits 18:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Back then (the 17th century) it was a European thing to use Latin in a lot of contexts, particularly in law and academia. Consider for example Isaac Newton's magnum opus, Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 18:10, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- There was also the Darien scheme, i.e. New Caledonia.--2A04:4A43:909F:F990:E596:9C8F:DF47:1709 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- There are the Carolinas (Latin for Charles). Matt Deres (talk) 17:31, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- And Australia, from Terra Australis (Southland), for a while also known as New Holland. PiusImpavidus (talk) 09:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thule (Greek/Latin, location uncertain) and Ultima Thule Peak (in a former Russian colony or territory; I don't know whether the Russians named it, but the Alaskans did in 1996). -- Verbarson edits 17:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- Guys, I am grateful for all your answers. I just want to point out that my question was not about names in Latin (there are other exmples btw: Virginia, Georgia, Columbia/Colombia, Argentina, maybe Guinea, etc.) but specifically names in Latin where an equivalent in a modern European language seems to be more natural. I was simply curious as to why "Nova Scotia" instead of "New Scotland". All your examples are great but for very few of them (if any) an equivalent into a modern European language comes readily to mind. For example "New Caledonia" would have no "equivalent into a modern European language". Caledonia is itself a Latinism. So is "Batavia" say. There are many places in Europe with classical equivalents. Using one of those is not exactly the same thing as using a Latin translation of a modern name. Clearly it is not always clear cut. "Hispania" and "Austria" would be considered Latin translations of "Spain" and "Austria", but "Lusitania" and "Helvetia" would not be considered Latin translations of "Portugal" and "Switzerland". Does it depend on whether the Latin and the modern language equivalent are related etymologically? Of if that relation is commonly perceived? If the city of New York had been named instead "Novum Eboracum" would we be in one case or the other? I'll let you decide. The two names are linked but it is pretty involved. 178.51.8.23 (talk) 18:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- 'Caledonia' is no more of a Latinism than 'Scotia', and is sometimes used as a near synonym for 'Scotland' in modern British English (including Scots English, not to be confused with Scots, or Scottish Gaelic in which it's called Alba). It would be rather confusing if we called two different places "New Scotland" – I suppose Cook could have named his discovery "New Pictland", but I'm not sure if that would have gone down well.
- You refer to 'modern European language', but these (particularly English) have long since absorbed a great deal of Latin, both in assimilated and 'classical' form, so to me your attempted distinctions appears meaningless. Others may differ. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 10:18, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- "Austria" is a Latin coinage to begin with. Otherwise, there are a few languages which have calqued the native "Österreich" (Eastern Kingdom). Navajo has apparently the descriptive moniker "Homeland of the leather pants". 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:47, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- And now I'm curious about place-names in sign languages. I dimly remember (or misremember) that the Trappist sign for Jerusalem means ‘Jew city’. —Tamfang (talk) 22:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- As far as I know, they're generally spelled out letter by letter, unless they are famous enough to get their own sign. Some might be "compound-signed" from their constituent parts if they're transparent enough, I guess. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 23:42, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- And now I'm curious about place-names in sign languages. I dimly remember (or misremember) that the Trappist sign for Jerusalem means ‘Jew city’. —Tamfang (talk) 22:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- "Austria" is a Latin coinage to begin with. Otherwise, there are a few languages which have calqued the native "Österreich" (Eastern Kingdom). Navajo has apparently the descriptive moniker "Homeland of the leather pants". 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:47, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
January 6
Lowercase L that looks like capital I with an extra serif
I just came across on Harper's Bazaar's website a lowercase L that looks the like capital I with an extra serif sticking to the left in the middle (kind of like ⟨I⟩ superimposed with text-figure ⟨1⟩). See e.g. "looks", "Viola", "Winslet", etc. here.
Is this style of lowercase L something found in existing typefaces? The font is SangBleu OG Serif by Swiss Typefaces and it appears to be the only typeface of theirs that has this type of L. Nardog (talk) 05:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- Beats me why they're calling those all one typeface instead of five. Anyway, in the "OG serif" incarnation, they got the weird arm on the lowercase L from Romain du Roi. The long s also has one. This incunable (from incunable) also has the nub (arm? Bar? Flag?) on lowercase L in many instances, but for some reason not all of them.
- Edit: I think the nub is missing only in ligatures, mainly
el
. And I think this is originally a blackletter thing. This handwritten bible shows a similar but less distinct effect, due I think to the minim (palaeography). The scribe first draws a minim, then extends it to write the lowercase L. Caslon's specimen has it, but only in the blackletter face (top right). I think the explanation is thus the same as the origin of the nub on long S. Card Zero (talk) 12:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)- The ⟨eſ ⟩ pairs in the Valerius Maximus incunable also have nubless ⟨ſ ⟩es. --Lambiam 00:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, so there is precedent. Nardog (talk) 09:17, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- There's a Swedish publisher, Modernista, that uses an st ligature in their logotype. I believe they also use it constantly and consistently within the books themselves, as a brand identity, which of course could come across as pretty strained. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- In that Caslon specimen the ⟨b⟩ and ⟨h⟩ also have nubs. The letter ⟨k⟩ does not occur in the specimen's text, but here we also find the Caslon black ⟨k⟩ nubbed. --Lambiam 14:11, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Unsatisfied, I dug up this brief discussion of Romain du Roi's lowercase L.
The lowercase letter /l shows the most distinctive feature of the letters. It has a small serif on the left side at x-height, called ergot or sécante in French. The serif is a remnant of the calligraphic style which had not appeared in any previous typefaces. This serif makes the Romain du Roi unique. The reason why the Romain du Roi /l possessed the serif is not clearly documented. One theory says that this serif was used to distinguish it more clearly from the capital letter /l, which has the same height. The other theory claims that Louis XIV wanted to have an unmistakable feature in the /l, because his name began with this letter.
Yeah. Thing is, Romain du Roi put the bars on the top and bottom of the glyph gratuitously, so if it then needed disambiguating from capital i, that doesn't seem like a very rational thing to have done. Card Zero (talk) 17:28, 7 January 2025 (UTC)- You might not be satisfied looking for rationality. I think the aim was modernity and it might have been intended to be transitional. The /b and the /d have their strong upper serifs so the /l could not be without its own ( there still can be felt some of that era heavy cavalry dynamics - digging in up - in the double /l as in "brilliant"). --Askedonty (talk) 23:32, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Sweet, I've updated Romain du Roi and L. Nardog (talk) 09:38, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- The source (written in a sans serif font) falls into the same trap that it's describing. Taken literally, it says that the Romain du Roi needed to distinguish
l
fromL
, but we know what it means. Thank you for actually improving Misplaced Pages, I'll consider doing that sometimes too. :) Card Zero (talk) 14:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- The source (written in a sans serif font) falls into the same trap that it's describing. Taken literally, it says that the Romain du Roi needed to distinguish
January 7
Examples of the use of "might" as a past tense?
The past form of "may", "might", is mostly used as a conditional: "He might have said that, then again might not have". Uses of "might" as a past tense meaning "was/were allowed to" seem to be much rarer: "He might not say that" is most often intended to mean (and understood to mean) "it is possible that he will not say that", not as "he was not allowed to say that".
But that usage is not completely unknown: for example Edna St Vincent Millay writes in her sonnet "Bluebeard": "This door you might not open and you did / So enter now, and see for what slight thing / You are betrayed".
Do you have other examples of "might" being used as a past tense of "may"? I mean examples from the literature, jounalism, etc. not examples made up by Wiktionary editors, or other dictionaries, not because I don't trust Wiktionary editors or dictionary editors, but because I'd trust more examples that were not produced specifically for the purpose of illustrating a dictionary definition.
I'm especially interested in examples where "might" is used as a past tense in affirmative constructions! The examples above are all with "might not". I have the feeling the use of "might" in a negative sentence would sound more natural than in an affirmative sentence (if there's any example of it at all). Do you agree?
178.51.8.23 (talk) 17:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- He appointed twelve that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach. Mark 3:14 -- Verbarson edits 17:13, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Great. Thanks. Please keep all kinds of examples coming, but watch out especially for examples where "might" is used in a main (or independent) clause (rather than a subordinate clause such as "(in order) that they might..."). 178.51.8.23 (talk) 17:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- In Francis Cottington, 1st Baron Cottington we find ...after the dismissal of the Short Parliament, he declared it his opinion that at such a crisis the king might levy money without the Parliament. --Trovatore (talk) 18:23, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Great. Thanks. Please keep all kinds of examples coming, but watch out especially for examples where "might" is used in a main (or independent) clause (rather than a subordinate clause such as "(in order) that they might..."). 178.51.8.23 (talk) 17:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Here's another one, not directly subordinate in a that clause, though still notionally subordinate to a verb of speaking within a multi-sentence passage of reported speech, in a 19th-century summary of a parliamentary debate
"Mr BUCKNILL (Surry, Epsom) said, Member after Member had spoken of a particular company and, if he might use the expression, it had really in this Debate been ridden to death "
. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:12, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Here's another one, not directly subordinate in a that clause, though still notionally subordinate to a verb of speaking within a multi-sentence passage of reported speech, in a 19th-century summary of a parliamentary debate
- I just went to Google News and searched on the phrase "he might have done". Here was one of the hits, in the New York Times: "A former Marine who trained Daniel Penny to apply a chokehold said Thursday that images and video suggest that he might have done so improperly when he killed a homeless man last year." And this headline from Vanity Fair: "Trump's Missing Phone Logs Mean We Don't Even Know Half the Illegal Shit He Might Have Done on 1/6". And this from the Seattle Times: "Although there is an area he might have done better." And from the BBC: "But Peter persisted, and now he can reflect on the earlier disappointments and what he might have done differently". My native-speaker instinct insists that "might" is the only correct form in these cases and "may" is an error, although I know others use it. --142.112.149.206 (talk) 19:56, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- To me "may have done" is usable if it is currently possible (that is, the speaker does not currently know it to be false) that it happened, whereas "might have done" is usable in that case and also in the counterfactual case (if this had happened, then that might have happened). Prescription alert: Saying "if this had happened, then that may have happened" is in my opinion an error.
- But that isn't what the OP is asking about. The OP is asking about using "might" as a past tense of "may", in the sense that "A might do B" means "A was morally allowed, or otherwise had the permission or authority, to do B". This sense does exist but has become somewhat rare. --Trovatore (talk) 20:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Does this count: "
I did what I might.
"? --Lambiam 00:12, 8 January 2025 (UTC) - Also: "
Then Titul took a knife from his belt and asked the Gaul if he could kill himself; and the Gaul tried, but he might not.
" --Lambiam 00:29, 8 January 2025 (UTC)- Absolutely. Both are past tenses. The first example is a relative clause. The second example is an independent clause. And both are affirmative constructions. Thanks. 178.51.8.23 (talk) 01:01, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Although the polarity is positive, the first of these uses sounds quite natural to me. The second use feels somewhat archaic, which, I think, was the intention of the author. --Lambiam 10:34, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Both of these examples seem to lose the distinction between "may" and "can", though. --Trovatore (talk) 19:36, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Like so many lexical terms, auxiliary may has several senses. These include "to be able to" (labelled obsolete on Wiktionary) and "to be allowed to". In both uses here we see the first sense. Note that can also has both senses ("Can you help me?" and "Can I smoke here?"). --Lambiam 00:19, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Both of these examples seem to lose the distinction between "may" and "can", though. --Trovatore (talk) 19:36, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Although the polarity is positive, the first of these uses sounds quite natural to me. The second use feels somewhat archaic, which, I think, was the intention of the author. --Lambiam 10:34, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Absolutely. Both are past tenses. The first example is a relative clause. The second example is an independent clause. And both are affirmative constructions. Thanks. 178.51.8.23 (talk) 01:01, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- I just went to Google News and searched on the phrase "he might have done". Here was one of the hits, in the New York Times: "A former Marine who trained Daniel Penny to apply a chokehold said Thursday that images and video suggest that he might have done so improperly when he killed a homeless man last year." And this headline from Vanity Fair: "Trump's Missing Phone Logs Mean We Don't Even Know Half the Illegal Shit He Might Have Done on 1/6". And this from the Seattle Times: "Although there is an area he might have done better." And from the BBC: "But Peter persisted, and now he can reflect on the earlier disappointments and what he might have done differently". My native-speaker instinct insists that "might" is the only correct form in these cases and "may" is an error, although I know others use it. --142.112.149.206 (talk) 19:56, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
January 8
Pronunciation of "breen"
How do you pronounce the -breen that appears at the end of Svalbard glacier names? I went through all the Svalbard -breen glacier articles on Misplaced Pages at Category:Glaciers_of_Spitsbergen, and not a single one provides IPA. 2601:644:4301:D1B0:B94F:4C6C:A635:20B6 (talk) 02:32, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- The -en ending is the Norwegian definite mascular singular suffix, and bre means "glacier", so, for example, Nansenbreen means "the Nansen glacier".
- The pronunciations in Nynorsk and Bokmål would be slightly different, with also regional variations. I have no idea which variety of spoken Norwegian is prevalent among the roughly 2,500 Norvegicophone inhabitants of Svalbard.
- Extrapolating from the pronunciations of other words, I believe the pronunciation of -breen to be:
- Nynorsk: /²brɛːn̩/
- Bokmål: /bʁe̞ːn̩/
- For the meaning of the toneme , see on Wiktionary Appendix:Norwegian Nynorsk pronunciation § Stress and tonemes. --Lambiam 10:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- (Simultaneous editing) Here an example of Norwegian pronounciation, "Jostedaalsbreen" first mentioned around 0:06. Since Norwegian is a language of dialects I cannot rule out that there could be regional differences in pronounciation. -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 10:24, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- This agrees with my extrapolation of the Nynorsk pronunciation. --Lambiam 10:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- However, I believe the two ee in the middle are being distinguished in the pronounciation rather than just pronounced as a long vowel. -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 11:40, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- The long vowel represents solely the first ⟨e⟩. The definitive suffix -en is represented by . The vertical understroke diacritic signifies that this is a syllabic consonant. --Lambiam 15:46, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ok, that would make sense. Not an IPA expert here. -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 16:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Regarding the dialect, I found this: https://munin.uit.no/handle/10037/14074. Excerpt from Google Translation: This is interesting because Svalbard has no local dialect. The language community on the archipelago is instead characterized by dialectal variation. The Norwegian population in Svalbard comes from all over Norway, and the average length of residence is short. . On Norwegian Misplaced Pages it stated that Nynorsk spellings have to be used for all town names in Svalbard but this probably has no bearing on the pronounciation practices. -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 17:58, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- The long vowel represents solely the first ⟨e⟩. The definitive suffix -en is represented by . The vertical understroke diacritic signifies that this is a syllabic consonant. --Lambiam 15:46, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- However, I believe the two ee in the middle are being distinguished in the pronounciation rather than just pronounced as a long vowel. -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 11:40, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- This agrees with my extrapolation of the Nynorsk pronunciation. --Lambiam 10:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you all for your input! So it's a monosyllabic /²brɛːn̩/. 2601:644:4301:D1B0:B94F:4C6C:A635:20B6 (talk) 21:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Is it really monosyllabic if a syllabic vowel is followed by a syllabic consonant? By the way, I believe the common Swedish curse word fan often is pronounced somewhat similarly. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 21:45, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- By definition, a syllabic consonant forms a syllable on its own. So we have two syllables, the first of which ends on a vowel. --Lambiam 00:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Is it really monosyllabic if a syllabic vowel is followed by a syllabic consonant? By the way, I believe the common Swedish curse word fan often is pronounced somewhat similarly. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 21:45, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
January 9
Is there a term which categorises these phrases?
Is there a lexicographic word or term to describe phrases such as "out and about", "bits and pieces", or "nooks and crannies"? There are many such phrases which conjoin words which are less often used separately. I am not thinking of "conjunction", but something which describes this particular quirk. For example, where I grew up, no-one would say "I was out in town yesterday" but "I was out and about the town". 51.148.145.228 (talk) 15:29, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think a phraseme, also called a set phrase, fixed expression, is the term you're looking for for the phrase. Fossil word (for words not used outside set phrases) and Irreversible binomial (for phrases which have fixed order - you wouldn't say "about and out") may also be of interest. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 16:23, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- All three examples above are irreversible binomials. --Lambiam 10:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- If you are thinking of expressions where a single meaning is carried by a conjunction of two near-synonyms, Hendiadys may be a fit. There is a narrow definition of that term where it covers only conjunctions of two terms that logically stand in a relation of subordination to each other, but there's also a wider usage where it's used for expressions like these, where the two terms are merely synonyms. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Such as "lively and quick". ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 18:04, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- And also Pleonasm. Card Zero (talk) 18:42, 9 January 2025 (UTC)