Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 11:47, 21 October 2010

Welcome to the language section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

Shortcut

WP:RD/L

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
Note:
- We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
- We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
- We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
- We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

October 15

Looking for better phrasing

This isn't really a reference question (like many questions on the language desk), but I have been wondering whether anyone here could come up with a better phrasing of the following (i.e. without the repetition of "be"). "Any contributions received after the deadline will be assumed to be intended for the following edition." Thanks for any suggestions.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:26, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You could de-passify it: "We will assume that any contributions we receive after the deadline are intended for the following edition". -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 08:34, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, or "Any contributions received after the deadline will be treated as being intended for the following edition.", or "Any contributions received after the deadline will be considered for the following edition."

Next question, can anyone come up with an alternative to Jack's de-passify? Sussexonian (talk) 08:59, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Activify? Never heard of either to be honest, but useful-sounding words the two of them. -- the Great Gavini 15:35, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that you are making assumptions about submitter's intentions. I'd just say: " Any contributions received after the deadline will be considered for the following edition." --Ludwigs2 15:44, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with that, Ludwigs2, is that you are making assumptions about the context, and changing the basic meaning of the sentence. We were given a sentence that includes reference to an assumption, and we were asked to make the wording less clumsy, not say something quite different that eliminates all mention of the assumption. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:44, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See http://www.onelook.com/?w=*ivize&ls=a. -- Wavelength (talk) 17:02, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Part of a tree

I'm looking for an English word for the "cave" you sometimes get in a tree when a branch has fallen off and the outer bark/wood remains but the inner has eroded somehow. A "knot" is a bit like that but the inner hasn't eroded away. I had thought it was a "bole", but that appears to be the tree trunk. Any good words out there? -- SGBailey (talk) 10:58, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The OED has "knot-hole: the hollow formed in the trunk of a tree by the decay of a branch." You might also be interested in looking up kerf, knag, and knar which are other bits of trees.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:49, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have said "hollow", but there really should be a more specific word. Alansplodge (talk) 16:40, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Latin translation please.

Resolved

I've been tinkering with the Albion page, and need a Latin to English translation please, for rex et primicerius totius Albionis regni, which is what King Æthelstan liked to call himself after he beat the Scots at the Battle of Brunanburh. Alansplodge (talk) 16:47, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can make out (my Latin is the rusty remains of 4.5 years of lost time, back when England was called Albion), it translates as "King and first of all the rulers of Albion". We have an article on primicerius, which does not have a simple translation. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 16:56, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regnum means "kingdom, realm"; for "primicerius" see http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0059%3Aentry%3Dprimicerius . I would say "King and chief of the whole kingdom of Albion"... AnonMoos (talk) 17:03, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou both. Alansplodge (talk) 20:01, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Perfide" (fr.) and "perfidious" (Eng.)

Is there a word more commonly used in English than "perfidious" that otherwise has the same connotation that "perfide" does in French? Thanks, from User:Bielle in a hotel lobby in Ottawa. 207.219.128.198 (talk) 19:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is treacherous. Marco polo (talk) 19:59, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's it, I suspect, though somehow "amant perfide" has a little more punch than "treacherous lover". Thank you, Marco polo from User:Bielle yet again in a hotel lobby in Ottawa. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.219.128.198 (talk) 05:23, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of the time, "perfide" is nothing more than an emphatic metaphorical adjective, like the English "dirty", "nasty", "stinking", "putrid", and "rotten": "escroc perfide" = "dirty crook"; "menteur perfide" = "filthy liar"; "amant perfide" = "slimy, two-timing boyfriend", perhaps? Of course, in certain cases "treacherous" or "perfidious" itself would be fine, especially if you wanted to convey irony: "les perfides juifs", for instance. LANTZY ^TALK 05:27, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

October 16

German word gender

I want to nickname a particular girl I know something similar to "The Stargazer" or "The Star Hunter" in German. Google translate pops out a result of "Der Sterngucker" for the former and "Der Stern Jäger" for the latter. However, a friend I know who took German tells me (as does the German Wiktionary) that "Der" is the masculine form of "the". Does it work to just switch out the "Der" for "Die" to make it feminine, or is it more complicated than that? Would it require changes to "Sterngucker" or "Stern Jäger" as well? (In short, what would be the German translation of "The Stargazer" and "The Star Hunter" when used as a nickname for a girl?)

Also, I notice that when I type just "stargazer" into Google Translate, it puts out "Sterndeuter"...but when I make it "The stargazer", that's when it pops out "Sterngucker". Which of these is the correct translation for "one who stargazes"?

Thanks in advance, Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 03:56, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You could use die Sternjägerin -- Jägerin is "huntress". Sterngucker sounds hideous regardless of gender. Looie496 (talk) 04:07, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If it's a girl that you wish to honor with this nickname, it would be "die Sternguckerin" or "die Sterndeuterin". Note the feminine suffix. The reason "The Stargazer" yields "Sterngucker" is probably because there's a piece of music of that name by Franz Lehár. I agree that "die Sternguckerin" sounds pretty silly, but "die Sterndeuterin" is reasonably euphonious by German standards. If you don't care whether this German term is colloquial and in ordinary use, you could go with something more inventive like "Sternwächterin", "Sternblickerin", "Sternspäherin", or the tongue-twisting "Sternstarrerin" ("star-starer"). However, your best bet would seem to be "Sterndeuterin". LANTZY ^TALK 05:49, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, "Sterndeuter" literally means something more like "star reader" or "astrologer", and its connotation in German is not as dreamy and metaphorical as the English "stargazer". It carries an implication of specialized knowledge. LANTZY ^TALK 05:54, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, "Sternstarrerin" sounds pretty cool, so long as I am pronouncing it correctly, (literally how it looks; Stern-star-er-in?). "Sternwächterin" isn't bad either, but I have relatively no knowledge of how to pronounce "wächterin", so I may be saying it completely wrong. Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 06:10, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A very rough approximation of "wächterin" using English phonemes would be "VESH-tuh-rin", and "Sternstarrerin" would be something like "shtairn-SHTAR-ruh-rin". LANTZY ^TALK 08:20, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's no "sh" in Wächterin, but then again I wouldn't know how to write out the pronunciation of ch for English-speakers. Rimush (talk) 15:34, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you're talking about the voiceless velar fricative (IPA /x/), I've seen it spelled as "kh" sometimes. Lexicografía (talk) 16:30, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hence the phrase "very rough approximation". I was writing it out so that an English speaker totally ignorant of German phonology might come close to pronouncing it. Lex, the "ch" in "wächterin" is not /x/ but /ç/, and the closest thing to /ç/ in standard English is /ʃ/. Remember Kennedy's "Ish bin ein Berliner." LANTZY ^TALK 21:56, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Shows my knowledge of German. Good to know. [grin] Lexicografía (talk) 22:15, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't that an East/West difference? When I watched Goodbye Lenin, the characters were saying something much closer to 'Ish', whereas the tapes and videos we saw in school (and Austrians and West Germans I've met) sounded more like the 'ch' in 'loch' (although softer?). I've not met any East Germans, so I assumed the different pronunciation in Goodbye Lenin was down to that. 109.155.37.180 (talk) 22:47, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's a pretty close sound in English to /ç/. Say "Hugh". The /j/ in /hju:/ lifts the tongue up (can't remember the technical term for this) so it's near enough to /çju:/. Say "Hugh", and draw out the initial consonant, and you're pretty close to /ç/.--Shirt58 (talk) 09:25, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that much East/West, 109.155, because there's no unitary "East German accent/dialect". What is usually referred to as East German is Thuringian-Upper Saxon German, spoken only in Saxony and Thuringia, and I don't think ch is pronounced /ʃ/ in those dialects. The realization of ch as /ʃ/ is a feature of the Berlin dialect (Goodbye Lenin takes places in Berlin), feature which is to some extent shared with the Cologne dialect (Kölsch), despite the geographical distance between the two cities. This is an interesting phenomenon to linguists, because the dialects in two far apart cities, each surrounded by different kinds of German, both grew to include some of the same features. Rimush (talk) 14:14, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's pretty cool, thanks. The only sop to accents/dialects in my lessons was zwei/zwo (sp?), and I hadn't really considered that such a clear difference would be characteristic of a city like that. 109.155.37.180 (talk) 14:44, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's a type of fish called Stargazer, which translates to Himmelsgucker ("Skygazer"), which sounds pretty neat (again, just add the "-in" at the end to create the female form). Sternstarrerin sounds really weird to a native-German ear. It would sound a little bit better if you change the star part to plural - Sternenstarrerin - (someone gazing at the stars, rather than someone gazing at one star) but still weird. Sternguckerin, even though that's the singular again, would be the better choice. The "gucken" part means looking or gazing, while "starren" is a stare. Note that Sterngucker(in) also is a term used for a fetus passing the birth canal face up rather than face down during childbirth. -- 78.43.71.155 (talk) 11:07, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the above, "-starrer(in)" sounds odd too, and not very friendly. Starren has rather negative connotations (mostly involuntary or senseless, rather than attentive purposeful gazing). Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:21, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Starren means staring, so yes. Rimush (talk) 15:34, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stern(en)beobachterin would be another option, meaning a female somebody who watches (in the sense of "monitors") a star/the stars. The "-wächterin" above would be a watcher in the sense of guarding. -- 78.43.71.155 (talk) 14:15, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To capture the feel of "star gazer", you could go with "Sternträumer(in)" (Star Dreamer). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 14:22, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For "The Stargazer", I'd say "die Sternschauerin". You may also say "die Sternblickerin" or "die Sternspäherin" ("Sternspäherin" has a connotation of looking in order to get information, not just enjoying the beauty of the stars). If you say "die Sternguckerin", that would sound as if you were teasing her a bit. -- Irene1949 (talk) 22:13, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The first thing one needs to know is _why_ you want to call her "the stargazer". Does she like astronomy? Does she like astrology? Is she a daydreamer? The optimal translation will be different for each of these cases. --::Slomox:: >< 15:00, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the primary reason being that she invited me to go 'star hunting' (essentially stargazing) with her about the second time I'd ever talked to her, and so I decided I might as well find a related nickname. Evidently, this is basically just because she likes looking at the stars (again, essentially stargazing), if that helps in translation. Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 14:23, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Like in the typical movie scene where two people are lying on a car roof or head by head in a meadow, enjoying the beauty of the stars, silently or sharing deep thoughts about the meaning of life?

In that case "Die Sternenguckerin" would be the best choice, I guess. to stargaze is "Sterne gucken". ("Sternguckerin" or "Sternenguckerin" is both okay. The difference has no semantical meaning (epenthesis). The Google count slightly prefers "Sterngucker" over "Sternengucker" but "Sternenguckerin" sounds a bit more poetic.)

"Sternendeuterin" would be somebody who seaches for meaning in the stars (astrology).

"Sternenspäherin" would be somebody who wants to discover something in the stars or discover new stars (SETI, exoplanetology etc.)

"Sternenjägerin" would be somebody who tries to track down new stars.

"Sternenwächterin" sounds kinda like a character from a science fiction fantasy novel (keeper of the stars).

"Sternenstarrerin" sounds like a lunatic mesmerized by the stars.

"Sternenbeobachterin" would be somebody who carefully watches the stars (star observer).

"Sternenblickerin" invokes no specific notion. It's a bit cold without context.

"Sternenschauerin" would be the closest competitor to "Sternenguckerin". "Sterne schauen" is used for to stargaze, but "Sternenschauer" is rather uncommon (it has a decent number of Google hits, but these mostly refer to the homographic word for meteor shower). --::Slomox:: >< 22:56, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Grimms offer a wide choice of star-gazing related terms (start typing stern... here) including a charming entry on "Sterngucker" (astrologo...seine kunst gilt gewöhnlich als unchristlich oder einfältig, also, umgangssprachlich häufig bezeichnung eines menschen, der den kopf hoch trägt). It also has Sternhure, but it seems to mean something entirely else^^--Janneman (talk) 22:41, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am German, but I never heard the word Sternhure. I can only tell you that Hure ist the German word for whore. -- Irene1949 (talk) 13:42, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The entry Janneman refers to can be viewed here. Btw, Janneman is German too and I guess that's the reason why he found the 19th century old-fashioned word Sternhure funny. Because it means 'star whore'. The funniness of Janneman's remark of course is lost in non-speakers of German. --::Slomox:: >< 13:53, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jokingly: Hanna-Guck-in-die-Luft as a female form of Hans-Guck-in-die-Luft. Not exactly stargazing, though... ;-) -- 78.43.71.155 (talk) 17:52, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've just remembered a poem by Matthias Claudius: Die Sternseherin Lise -- Irene1949 (talk) 00:12, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"shine" as a slur for a black person

I had always imagined the racial slur "shine" to be a fairly recent invention, and I strongly associate its use with Italian-Americans on the eastern seaboard. But the other day I was reading Too Many Cooks, a Nero Wolfe novel from 1938, in which one of the characters, the all-American Archie Goodwin, uses the term off-handedly in reference to black kitchen staff: "These shines can take it. They're used to it." So the term is not an Italian thing, and is far older than I thought. Does anyone know how old? Any information on its etymology? I would check the OED, but I don't have access. LANTZY ^TALK 08:32, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The OED's earliest citation is from 1908 (a dictionary of criminal slang), and—continuing the mystery-novel theme—there are also citations from Hammett's The Dain Curse in 1929 and Chandler's Farewell, My Lovely in 1940. Many of us will recall Dooley Wilson singing the 1910 song "Shine" in Casablanca. (And, coincidentally, I too recently read Too Many Cooks for the first time.) Deor (talk) 10:29, 16 October 2010 (UTC

As to the origin of the term, isn't it that shoeshine boys in the uS were stereotypically black? Sorry, no cite. --Anonymous, 16:31 UTC, October 16, 2010.

That's plausible. Looking around the interwebs, a lot of websites put forward that etymology. LANTZY ^TALK 22:06, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen King was originally going to call one of his books The Shine, but since one of the major characters is black, he was persuaded to change it to The Shining. 216.93.213.191 (talk) 20:26, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I always took it to be connected with shoeshine boys, but there might be more to it. As EO points out, "shiner" meaning a "black eye" turned up around the same time, early 1900s. Things that are black, such as the polished tip of shoe, or a dark-skinned and shaved head, can kind of "shine" or reflect light. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:57, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Word for piece of ground upon which UK Motorway Service Area is built?

When I was in France recently I noticed that on French motorways there were things which were called "Aire de.....", which had various facilities ranging from just parking and toilets to a complete set of services: parking, toilets, fuel, food etc.

I was trying to think of a English equivalent to "aire", and I was trying to remember a word I thought I had seen in official descriptions of regulations relating to UK Motorway Service Areas.

This word might not be quite the equivalent of "aire", but I would still like to try to remember what it was.

I have done various searches and asked a number of people but have not come up with the word I half remember.

I have a feeling that the word begins with p, and the best I have come up with so far is "precinct", but I have a feeling that this is not the word.

Some suggestions & thoughts I have already had, but which I do not think are the one, are "area", "plot", "perimeter", "curtilage", "messuage", "purlieu" and "premises".

It may be that I have simply mis-remembered and the word I am trying to find simply does not exist!FrankSier (talk) 12:07, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what word the official documents would use. "Area" is generic for a piece of land. The usual equivalent for "aire" is "services", but it is not exact because "aires" on French motorways might have full services (petrol station, restaurant, shop) but some are only a picnic area with toilets. All stops on UK motorways have full services AFAIK. Itsmejudith (talk) 22:10, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

french de

How do I know when to use de alone and when to use the de + definite article (du, de la, de l', des)? I am not confused about the use of the de + article for the partitive, or the alone de for Je suis de ... or like that, but what if you have a de between 2 nouns, or a de after a verb , and cases like that ? Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.92.78.167 (talk) 15:45, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're actually asking about the usage of the definite article in English vs. French. One basic rule is that French uses the article more often for abstracts ("La paix" = "Peace"). AnonMoos (talk) 16:06, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you give some examples of the cases you're referring to? rʨanaɢ (talk) 16:32, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This partly has to do with differences in uses of the definite article, but there are some other rules. For example, the definite article disappears in phrases of negation: J'ai du pain but Je n'ai pas de pain Also, the definite article disappears in phrases that call for "de" in non-partitive contexts: J'ai du pain but "J'ai besoin de pain (However, "J'ai le pain d'hier" --> "J'ai besoin du pain d'hier) One way to think about both of these rules is the following formula: de + de la OR de + du = de. As for differences in the use of the definite article, here is another example. The French equivalent of "I love bread" is J'adore le pain. On the other hand, "I want bread" is Je veux du pain. In the first case, you love all bread, you love bread as an abstract category. In the second case, you want a piece of bread. Notice that, in both cases, no article or modifier stands in front of the English word bread. English does not require the determinacy of nouns to be specified in many contexts. With few exceptions, French does require this. In French, nouns can rarely stand alone. (The main exception that springs to mind is that certain proper nouns do not require articles or partitives. Still, some proper nouns, such as the names of countries, do require definite articles in most contexts.) In French, you have to decide whether you are talking about a specific instance or the abstract idea of the referent of a given noun (definite article), a nonspecific instance of the referent of a given noun (indefinite article), or a portion of the referent of a given noun (partitive). Almost all nouns have to be assigned to one of these three categories and be prefaced with the appropriate article or partitive (with the exceptions noted above). Marco polo (talk) 19:47, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

October 17

Rake building

What can the word 'Rake' mean in the following phrase: 'The hotel is located in the late 19th century Rake building?'Thank you Seaweed71 (talk) 04:56, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming it is talking about the Klaus Kurki Hotel in Helsinki, I think "Rake" simply refers to the Rake Group company who has owned that real estate on Bulevardi since the 19th century and gave the building its name. ---Sluzzelin talk 05:11, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's just a proper noun. rʨanaɢ (talk) 11:06, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I think it is just the answer95.143.17.191 (talk) 14:13, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How many words?

I'm asking myself how many words a normal man uses in English? And a person's learning English how many words he have to know to become enough fluent? I saw simple english uses 851 words and special english 1500. Is it quite?--Kaspo (talk) 23:03, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The question of how many words you need to know to become passively fluent doesn't really have a definite answer. Also, Basic English was an experiment of the 1930's which has not really stood the test of time... AnonMoos (talk) 00:17, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on Vocabulary claims that the 2000 most common words would cover 96% of everyday informal spoken usage, though that would probably not be sufficient for fluency in some situations. As stated above, there is no fixed number. The more words you know, the more fluent you will become. Dbfirs 08:18, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Everyday informal spoken English would cover only everyday situations. Conversations about anything specific (politics, business, even the weather) would require a much larger vocabulary. Even in everyday spoken situations, I can imagine conversations in which the 4% of the vocabulary that goes beyond the 2,000 most common words could be crucial to understanding. I think 2,000 words might be enough to get by if you just want to be able to get around an English-speaking city and maybe do some kind of manual work that doesn't require complex communication. I would think that a person should probably know more like 5,000 words to begin to be really fluent in English. Marco polo (talk) 17:19, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on Vocabulary states:

James Flynn reports the remarkable differences in vocabulary exposure of pre-schoolers between different classes in the U.S.A. Apparently, pre-schoolers of professional families are typically exposed to 2,150 different words, pre-schoolers from working class families to 1,250 words, while those from households on welfare just 620.^[1]

and

Several word lists have been developed to provide people with a limited vocabulary either quick language proficiency or an effective means of communication. In 1930, Charles Kay Ogden created Basic English (850 words). Other lists include Simplified English (1000 words) and Special English (1500 words). The General Service List,^[2] 2000 high frequency words compiled by Michael West from a 5,000,000 word corpus, has been used to create a number of adapted reading texts for English language learners.

A useful distinction is between a person's active vocabulary, the words they use in speech and writing, and the (usually much) larger passive vocabulary, those that are understood in listening and reading. BrainyBabe (talk) 18:20, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At first, the vocabulary difference between classes seemed unbelievable, but then I remembered a friend at university, who was doing a master's degree. In primary school, she had been on the special needs register, and she told the story of being very confused at the age of 8 because the class were told a story about a frog, and asked to draw relevant pictures. She didn't know what a frog was, had no clue, couldn't even guess it was an animal she had never heard the word. Luckily, she was both very smart and at a school that took this stuff seriously, bringing her up to speed, but it really is amazing. 109.155.37.180 (talk) 13:27, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

October 18

Request for translation: English to Thai

how will i translate good afternoon everyone i am maxine padilla in thai language —Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.193.13.240 (talk) 00:47, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Google gives this: สวัสดีทุกคนฉัน Maxine Padilla, but you should wait for a human translator who might come along. Rimush (talk) 10:23, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would not trust Google translate for even the simplest sentences. In my experience it almost never produces a natural sentence in the target language, and often produces garbage. 01:19, 19 October 2010 (UTC). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.26.143 (talk)

How to pronounce Mettā?

As in the article, Mettā, I've searched the article and google and I am unable to find how to pronounce the word Mettā. Are you ready for IPv6? (talk) 03:10, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See the Pali article. Pali words are pronounced as they are written. The a is long (pronounced ah).--Shantavira|^{feed me} 05:58, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Function pointer

The question has been moved to the Computing reference desk.

Hindi

i want to read in hindi,how could be it possible? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kinngkumar.10 (talk • contribs) 18:13, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A good way to start would be to take a class in Hindi or buy a Hindi textbook. rʨanaɢ (talk) 18:16, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you an Urdu speaker? If so, then someone here (though not me) might have some advice specific to your situation. Lfh (talk) 20:19, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you asking whether you can read Wikipedia articles in Hindi? There's no tool for viewing English Wikipedia pages in other languages, but there is a Hindi Wikipedia at hi:wikipedia. Ka renjc 22:05, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can try tradukka for online translation of sentences. Gil_mo (talk) 13:15, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Hindi page at UPenn. -- Wavelength (talk) 23:01, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yo maricón

It's not uncommon these days to hear American gays, especially the studiedly edgy, self-applying terms of opprobrium like "faggot" and "homo". I'm curious as to whether Spanish-speaking gays do the same with "maricón". Apparently they sometimes do, as in the movie Cachorro, but is that worldwide, or a peninsular thing, or a left-wing thing, or what?

As a free bonus question, I would like to know if "maricón" is truly comparable, in despective force, with the word "faggot", or if it is closer to "poofter" or "swish" or something. I've talked to a lot of different Spanish-speakers and they all seem to disagree about that. My intuition is that it's a more playful term than "faggot", less steeped in murderous imagery, more associated with outward effeminacy than with sexual deviancy. But my intuition may be wrong. LANTZY ^TALK 21:29, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At one time in the US, "faggot" or "fag" did mean an "unmanly" man. As George Carlin once said about his old neighborhood, "a faggot was someone who wouldn't go downtown and help beat up queers". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Having been to more than a few soccer matches in southern Spain I can confirm that there 'maricón' is definitely a term of insult. When shouted by thousands in conjunction with a player's name it has a lasting impression! Richard Avery (talk) 14:34, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There could be some regional discrepancies. In Argentina, the term marica or maricón has more or less the past connotation Bugs describes of faggot. It certainly can be used to describe homosexuality, but uttering the word onto a soccer player (in Argentina, again) is nothing compared to saying trolo or puto, which are really the two basic rude Rioplatense terms for (male) homosexuals. Pallida Mors 22:01, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder what the etymoloy of maricón is. If it's somehow connected with the female name "Maria", its usage would be almost perfectly translated by this one old-fashioned term for unmanly men, "sissy Mary". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:32, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hum, that's precisely the etymological association of marica (hence, maricón) given by the RAE. Pallida Mors 08:41, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

October 19

Japanese language question

How do you know whether to use a kanji character's On or Kun reading, in general in a section of written Japanese? 76.27.175.80 (talk) 00:15, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Kanji#Readings. -- Wavelength (talk) 00:49, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese alphanumeric codes

In countries that use the Latin alphabet, alphanumeric codes such as ABC123 are used for various purposes (e.g. product codes or other identification codes). In Japan, is there any analogous system using any of the native Japanese characters (e.g. あいう123)? Or do the Japanese use the Latin alphabet for this purpose? Or is there no equivalent in Japan to Western-style alphanumeric codes? 86.135.26.143 (talk) 01:16, 19 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]

My Google image search for japanese licence plates found images of licence plates with characters from one or more of the following character sets: kanji, hiragana, Roman letters, and Hindu-Arabic numerals, all four sets being represented.

—Wavelength (talk) 02:24, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Latin letters and Arabic numerals are very common, but 〇一二三四五六七八九 or 零壱弐参肆伍陸漆捌玖 are sometimes used as digits instead of 0123456789, and いろは… or あいう… or their katakana equivalents are sometimes used in place of ABC... (For example, the notes called ABCDEFG in English are イロハニホヘト in Japanese.) -- BenRG (talk) 03:32, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Japanese addressing system and Postal Information for Japan. -- Wavelength (talk) 03:48, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Equation corresponds to the Japanese article ja:方程式, and

the article Chemical formula corresponds to the Japanese article ja:化学式.

—Wavelength (talk) 15:21, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can see the Nihon Keizai Shimbun at http://www.nikkei.com/. -- Wavelength (talk) 15:35, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kid -- the young of the goat and the young of the human, are they related somehow?

(Moved from Humanities desk - -- the Great Gavini 04:30, 19 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Does this word have the same origin to both meanings? I am very much curious about this. I would appreciate a very clear note on this from anyone of you. Thank you so much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.202.223.19 (talk) 03:55, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently they are related - both probably to chit - but it's not very surprising that a word denoting a young animal would also come to be used of people. -- the Great Gavini 04:35, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They are not "related"; they are the same word in different contexts. It would be more correct to say that "kid" is used of a child by extension. In that context it is slang (according to the OED), in the same way that some people might refer to a young woman as a kitten.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:20, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What Shantavira said. The goat sense came first, and the usage as applied to humans was an extension. They are the same word, etymologically - from Middle English kide. Lexicografía (talk) 14:51, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

" They are not "related"[...]" - actually, they would be related if they are the same word. I could understand if you wrote "not just related", but what you've written is just nitpicking for the sake of it. -- the Great Gavini 04:09, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This phenomenon exists also in other languages (e.g. Middle Aramaic, in the phrase: kad hawina talya, i.e.: "when I was a kid"). Note also that a few personal names (e.g. Rachel) derived from the Bible, mean "ewe". Eliko (talk) 08:42, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Young people can still today be called a "young pup" or "my lamb"; girls are called "chicks", etc. Pais (talk) 17:06, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Chicks" comes from "chickens"; Chico Marx (whose name was originally spelled Chick-o) was what his brother characterized as a "chicken chaser". Regarding "kid", Entymology Online says "kid" for human child is several hundred years old and indeed was from the word originally used for the young of goats: [1] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:25, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Whom It may concern,

You know the article Wales Millenium Centre, I am writing to say it's a little confusing because nobody had written the translation of the words on the building itself it's an obivious feature but tell the other members to do so —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.182.63 (talk) 17:28, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's there in the article, see Wales Millenium Centre#Calligraphy.—Emil J. 17:41, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite paranoid

The following sentence appears in the article Seattle General Strike; "Paranoid reactions called it the work of Bolsheviks..."

Now the word "paranoid" in this case sound very POV to me, and I have no qualms in replacing or removing it (you know, be bold and all that).

However, while I might be bold, I'm not at all sure that I'm knowledgeable enough to use the exact word that would fit the situation.

I realize that the Discussion Page for the article might be more appropriate for this question, but it would be nice to get some expert advise (yeah, I mean you) about what word to use. Some that have come to mind are (er... is...are....is...oh heck!) extreme, untoward, confused, or just dropping it entirely.

All help appreciated. Bunthorne (talk) 20:28, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alarmist? (Probably still too POV, and coincidentally mine:-) In any case whatever attribute is used should be referenced, in my opinion. ---Sluzzelin talk 20:33, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One of the best ways to avoid POV is to avoid adjectives completely in situations like this. If it's well sourced (and a quick look at the article doesn't make that clear) we need simply say whose reactions they were. If it's not well sourced, maybe it shouldn't be there at all. HiLo48 (talk) 20:56, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) What about "alarmed"? That can be shown to be true. Actually the term "reactions" needs to be changed, too; a reaction doesn't call something a Bolshevik. "Alarmed commentators", perhaps. Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:57, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Meh. 'paranoid reactions' seems to me to be a code phrase for 'reactions by people who are paranoid', and as such it would be better to identify those people neutrally and directly than to use to use indirext aspersions. something like 'Conservative reactionaries called it' or 'Early anti-communist political figures called it...', or whatever's appropriate - I haven't really looked myself to see who was using that language. --Ludwigs2 22:17, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But then, a non-paranoid person can have a one-off paranoid reaction, can't they? Or would the person themself be classified as temporarily paranoid for the duration of the reaction? I think not. Paranoid describes a person who habitually and generally suspects others of having bad motives against them. Having such a suspicion in one isolated case does not make the person paranoid, but their reaction could be described as similar to that which a paranoid person might make. And if you all disagree with me, I'll take it very personally and assume you're all out to get me sooner or later. :) -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 23:50, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but wikipedia does not get to make the diagnosis of whether someone is behaving in a paranoid fashion; same reason we say Charles Manson was "an American criminal" rather than "a complete nutjob". Criminal is objective and factual, nutjob (and paranoid) are evaluatives.

and I'm glad that this appearance of disagreement has blinded you to our real plan. <Meeeeh heheheheheheheeeeeeh> --Ludwigs2 00:13, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input y'all. I'll take Comet Tuttle's suggestion. So I'll get the credit and glory for making the change, and if it turns out to be horribly wrong, Comet gets the blame. Thanks again. Bunthorne (talk) 22:19, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

October 20

Book says this sentence is correct:

"There was only a bed and a dresser in the dingy room." Why "was"? Thanks. 67.243.7.240 (talk) 01:54, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Past tense perhaps? It sounds like the sentence could be referring to a memory. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 01:58, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"There were only a bed and a dresser in the dingy room."—Wavelength (talk) 02:23, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've only ever heard the copula pluralised if the first object is plural: "There is a bed and a dresser", "There are beds and a dresser". Wavelength's sentence sounds somewhat literary, perhaps based on some prescriptivist "rule". I'm hesitant to ascribe it to Old English having a verb in the singular with a compound first subject (e.g. gefeaht Æþered cyning ond Ælfred... from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle); I'd ascribe it to people not going back to change the verb if another object comes to mind. -- the Great Gavini 04:26, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finally found sources. Some Merriam-Webster Guide to English Usage allegedly says: When a compound subject follows the verb and the first element is singular, the verb may be either singular or plural: "There is a lake and several small streams." "There are a dog and a few cats in the house." The singular construction is more common. Still, some writers insist on formal agreement and use a plural verb: "There were an apartment house and a parking lot at the end of the block." They're not prescriptive enough for some tastes, but it should help answer the OP's question. -- the Great Gavini 04:31, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fluency in a language in a year?

My friend told me today that in the 4th Grade she could speak Danish fluently, because during that year her class studied Danish (probably not at an immersive level) in preparation for an end-of-the-year trip to Denmark, but that she then lost it almost immediately when she began to learn Spanish. I found this.... doubtful, and in polite terms I thought her definition of "fluent" is not consistent with the general linguistic definition of "fluent". I might be wrong, however, so I ask the educated (and perhaps not-so-educated) linguists of the Wikipedia Reference Desk: Is it possible to become fluent in a language (by the general linguistic definition), in a non-immersive environment, in only a year? Tak. 24.92.78.167 (talk) 02:17, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Daniel Tammet. -- Wavelength (talk) 02:24, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not normally, no. Of course, there are always exceptions. rʨanaɢ (talk) 03:53, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like press release hyperbole about such-and-such celebrity who is fluent in six languages (they probably know how to say "hello" in all six). Adam Bishop (talk) 15:17, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

where do the most beautiful women live?

I saw that headline. Does it mean where do the women who are the most beautiful live, or where do the most women who are beautiful live? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.153.225.74 (talk) 12:28, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probably the first meaning. If the second meaning had been intended, it would probably have read "Where do most beautiful women live?", without the definite article. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:31, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to Hyphen#Compound modifiers, paragraph 3 (permanent link here),

the phrase more-important reasons ("reasons that are more important") is distinguished from more important reasons ("additional important reasons"), where more is an adjective.

—Wavelength (talk) 15:29, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No-one says "more-important" in real life. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:28, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

is this irony?

". Nobody should dehumanise any other and those who try to dehumanise another are not human." is it ironic that he chose to say "are not human", directly counter to his whole point? 84.153.225.74 (talk) 13:10, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting question; I will be interested in the answers. I think that it would be ironic if someone condemned dehumanisation of others while unknowingly dehumanising others in the process. The sentence given appears to be a deliberate word play, which I don't think is ironic. I have heard this sort of thing before ("I abhor exaggeration above anything else in the entire universe", "a misspelled sentence is unwurthy of consideration", etc.) and I am sure that there is a term for this sort of sentence, but I don't know what it is. -- Q Chris (talk) 15:11, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Satire ? Gandalf61 (talk) 15:26, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is definitely an example of satire. I have a feeling there is a specific term for this sort of sentence that states a principle but in itself disobeys the principle though. Edit: I haven't found the term but here is a nice collection of sentences. -- Q Chris (talk) 15:40, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The term you're looking for is Fumblerules. Bunthorne (talk) 01:42, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! -- Q Chris (talk) 08:38, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Pretentious? Moi?" (an actual quote from my teenage years) —Angr (talk) 21:58, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or as Tom Lehrer put it, "I'm sure we all believe we should love our fellow man; and I know there are some people that do not love their fellow man, and I hate people like that!" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:19, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hyphen in Dutch cabinet names

It appears Dutch government cabinet articles all have a hyphen in their name when there is a need to number them (e.g. Netherlands cabinet Balkenende-4 for the fourth Balkenende cabinet). See List of cabinets of the Netherlands. Is this hyphen correct in English? In Dutch, there is a hyphen between "cabinet" and the name (e.g. kabinet-Balkenende) and it's an often-made mistake to put the hyphen between name and number. So I'd say it a mistake carried over from Dutch, but maybe it's correct in English to put that hyphen in that place? Also, if you say the hyphen is incorrect and I'd like to remove it from the relevant articles, where should I discuss this (which village pump)? Mtcv (talk) 16:24, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That use of the hyphen is not a standard style in English. That is, it looks wrong. I think that the hyphen should be removed from the title. The place to discuss any significant change to the article is on the article's Talk (Discussion) page. Marco polo (talk) 17:27, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I'd say that the use of Arabic numerals for this sort of thing is unusual. If I saw that sort of thing in English I'd expect it to be something like "Balkende Cabinet IV". But more likely is "the fourth (or 4th) Balkende cabinet". Compare the way we say "Second World War" or "World War II", but not "World War 2" (even if we do use WW2 as an abbreviation). --Anonymous, 19:21 UTC, October 20/10.

Yes, one reads of the Second Grant Administration, Pierre Trudeau's second government, Gladstone's Fourth Ministry or the historic Third Labour Government (1945-1950). After a general election is over, cabinets in the U.S., Canada, and Britain tend to reshuffle or change office by office, rather than in the distinct blocs seen in countries which negotiate their cabinets to satisfy the partners in a coalition government. So few people would be able to recognize or agree on what would have constituted Nixon's Cabinet III, or the FDR Cabinet - 7. (We'll see what happens to David Cameron's and Nick Clegg's coalition cabinet a year or two from now.) —— Shakescene (talk) 20:24, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the entire title is awkward for English. I think the most natural title would be "Fourth Balkenende government". In English, we speak of governments rather than cabinets, even though the cabinet is the key structure of the government. I don't think "Netherlands" needs to be part of the title. If there happened to be a "Fourth Balkenende government" in some country other than the Netherlands, then maybe the title should be "Fouth Balkenende government (Netherlands)". Marco polo (talk) 20:30, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or "Fourth Balkenende administration". --ColinFine (talk) 23:09, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I don't think the use of those numerals in the List of cabinets of the Netherlands looks all that obscure or unnatural in English; since it's a table, that's a common form of abbreviation. It wouldn't be that unusual to abbreviate the two administrations of Grover Cleveland as Cleveland I and Cleveland II or Franklin Roosevelt's third as FDR III in such a table. The real difficulty is in using that kind of abbreviation in an article title that doesn't benefit from the helpful ready comparison with other cabinets. I can't see such an article (as opposed to a table entry) entitled "Cleveland I" or "Theodore Roosevelt II" (which actually redirects to Theodore Roosevelt, Jr, ancestor of Theodore Roosevelt III and Theodore Roosevelt IV). —— Shakescene (talk) 05:27, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

English to Spanish translation request

What is the following in Spanish?

"PS: In case of refusal of the above terms the author reserves the right to take legal action.

This license and the rights granted hereunder will terminate automatically upon any breach by you of the terms of this license. In this case the author reserves to demand declaration to cease and desist, and compensation (according to the MFM fee references currently in force). Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder."

While I know a little bit of Spanish, legal words are far beyond my scope. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:09, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

meaning of a word

In Mark Haddon's book "The curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time the word "skip" is mentioned "between the skip & a Ford Van" What does the word skip mean??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.233.117.72 (talk) 18:12, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Skip (container). Algebraist 18:13, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

in America it would be called a dumpster. Dumpster might be a trademark? 85.181.48.193 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:50, 20 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Dumpster is a genericized trademark. rʨanaɢ (talk) 22:26, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But what the article does not say is that 'skip' is sometimes used of open oblong bins of other sizes used in particular places; for example when I first worked in a pub in the 1970's, we had a 'skip' behind the bar which we dropped empty bottles in. But out of special context, the big rubbish skip is what would be understood. --ColinFine (talk) 23:12, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Given the context quoted, it's going to be a big waste skip left at the roadside. Alansplodge (talk) 11:44, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

how to remember a.m. and p.m.

hi, how do I remember a.m. and p.m.? someone explained "post" to me like "postmodern" but I still forget. do you have other nemonics? 85.181.48.193 (talk) 22:36, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"a" comes before "p" in the alphabet. Morning comes before afternoon/evening in the course of a day. ---Sluzzelin talk 22:40, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One mnemonic which I recommend is a thorough reading of the article "12-hour clock", to impress on your memory the spellings and meanings of the Latin phrases abbreviated as "a.m." and "p.m."

—Wavelength (talk) 23:43, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It may also help to know that "ante" means "before", as in the amount you put in the pot before you start a poker game - in this case, "before noon". And as noted, "post" means "after", as in to "postpone" some event, meaning to "put later" - in this case, "after noon". If all else fails, go to a 24-hour clock. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:17, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised that articles are mnemonics now! :))

But anyway, I'm not sure if this will help, but you can divide the clock into the usual four quarters (morning, afternoon, evening, early morning) and read the time as you would using a 12-hour clock. Early morning and morning (00:00 to 11:59) would fall under a.m., while the afternoon and evening (12:00-23:59) would fall under p.m. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 04:33, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A.M. means "ante meridian" and P.M. means "post meridian". You can think of meridian as being the midpoint in the sun's passage across the sky (i.e. midday or noon). What can be confusing is if you think of the "M" as an English word because noon doesn't begin with M, while morning, midnight and midday all do. —— Shakescene (talk) 05:08, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually they stand for "ante meridiem" and "post meridiem", which when directly translated from Latin, would give "before midday" and "after midday". --Theurgist (talk) 06:32, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

British English

A story I'm writing has a British character in it, so how do I write British English (e.g. different grammar and vocabulary)? --70.250.212.44 (talk) 23:31, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You find a helper/beta/editor who speaks British English, and have them go through your work. Although, in practice, you also need to refine your idea of what exactly this character is supposed to speak, because they should have their own 'voice' rather than a generic 'British English' voice: consider that Hagrid, Dumbledore, Harry, Ron and Draco (from the Harry Potter series) all speak British English, but each uses words, phrases, and even grammar that others would not. Unless your helper/beta/editor is going to write this character completely for you (and is actually good at characterisation and dialogue), you're going to need to do some work on this. The simplest way is to model the character on an existing character (from a British work) or celebrity, and learn how that character/celebrity talks. You don't need to model your character's personality or appearance after your model, but you should be aware that their speech patterns will reflect subtle aspects of class, as well as where they grew up, how old they are, and what education they received. 86.163.212.182 (talk) 23:59, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A very similar question was asked the other day here. We have articles on British English, American and British English differences, List of British words not widely used in the United States, Category:American and British English differences, and many more - which may help (even if the questioner is not from the US). Ghmyrtle (talk) 06:58, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Beta"? Anyway, you definitely want a genuine British person, preferably from approximately the same region and social class as your character, to look over what you've written to make sure it's authentic. One recurring problem when American authors write about British characters is that they exaggerate the character's Britishness to the point of being a ridiculous stereotype. (You often find the same exaggeration when British authors write about American characters, too.) Pais (talk) 09:23, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Beta" is short for "beta reader" (by analogy with "beta tester"). Marnanel (talk) 11:11, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah'd recommend tae narrae doon yir definition ae "British" the now. "British" means aw kindae gadges en weys tae spraff, ken?--Shirt58 (talk) 11:36, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes indeed. If you can't find a real Brit to help you (even a Scottish one), try watching some British-made movies. Find a character that matches the region / social class / era that you want and copy the style and phrases that he/she uses. There are some suggested movies at the question linked above (avoid Dick van Dyke or any Disney cartoon though). If you give us a brief profile of your character, I can try to point you in the right direction. Alansplodge (talk) 11:39, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

October 21

Spatial timeline

In Chinese, in some expressions, time is perceived as going from 'up' to 'down' rather than from 'left' to 'right' (for instance, 上个月 and 下个月, "last month" and "next month", are literally "above month" and "below month"; same thing for "last week" and "next week" and some other expressions). I'm just wondering, is this also the case in any other languages of the Sinosphere (particularly Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese), or any other languages anywhere? rʨanaɢ (talk) 09:04, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not in Japanese. Last month is 先月 or 前月/previous month and next month is 来月/coming month. But 先 is also used when you talk about future. So it might be difficult for non-native speakers to understand the usage. [2] Oda Mari (talk) 09:21, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It makes sense in Chinese. In Chinese, 先 means "earlier" or "earliest" or "past". --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 09:56, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"If" means, both: "providing", and: "whether".

Is this semantic connection between "providing" and "whether" recognized / unrecognized in other languages? Eliko (talk) 10:28, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't work in German, where ob – which I believe is actually cognate with "if" (someone tell me if I'm wrong) – means "whether", but not "if". Lfh (talk) 11:00, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In Chinese "if" (如果 rúguǒ or 要是 yàoshi) only means "providing", not "whether". A common error learners often make is overextending these terms into the wrong domain. For instance:

*Wǒ bù zhīdào rúguǒ tā lái le

I not know if he came PERF

Intended: "I don't know if he came"

(early learners of Chinese often say the above sentence instead of the correct one, which is below:)

Wǒ bù zhīdào tā yǒu méiyǒu lái

I not know he did didn't come

"I don't know if he came" (lit: "I don't know he come-not-come")

rʨanaɢ (talk) 11:09, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

^ Flynn (2008), p. 102.
^ West (1953)

[1] Flynn (2008), p. 102.

[2] West (1953)

[1]

[2]

@@ Line 257: / Line 257: @@
 ::::"Beta" is short for "[[beta reader]]" (by analogy with "[[beta testing|beta tester]]"). [[User:Marnanel|Marnanel]] ([[User talk:Marnanel|talk]]) 11:11, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 ::::: Ah'd recommend tae narrae doon yir definition ae "British" the now. "British" means aw kindae gadges en weys tae spraff, ken?--[[User:Shirt58|Shirt58]] ([[User talk:Shirt58|talk]]) 11:36, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
-::::::Yes indeed. If you can't find a real Brit to help you (even a Scottish one), try watching some British-made movies. Find a character that matches the region / social class / era that you want and copy the style and phrases that he/she uses. There are some suggested movies at the question linked above (avoid [[Dick van Dyke]] or any Disney cartoon though). [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 11:39, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
+::::::Yes indeed. If you can't find a real Brit to help you (even a Scottish one), try watching some British-made movies. Find a character that matches the region / social class / era that you want and copy the style and phrases that he/she uses. There are some suggested movies at the question linked above (avoid [[Dick van Dyke]] or any Disney cartoon though). If you give us a brief profile of your character, I can try to point you in the right direction. [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 11:39, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 = October 21 =