Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language

September 3

T-V distinction in Kannada

I'd like to know if Kannada has a T-V distinction like some other Dravidian languages. The T-V article lists Tamil and Telugu examples but fails to mention Kannada. Thanks for any information on this. - 203.76.137.3 11:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

My friend in Bangalore says yes. —Tamfang 20:49, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Now called Bengaluru (since November 2006). Interesting that our article still calls it Bangalore, when we've happily adopted Chennai (for Madras), Varanasi (for Benares), Kolkata (for Calcutta), et al. But there was a long debate about it, so that's that. Consensus works in odd ways sometimes. -- JackofOz 01:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

September 4

Word

What is a word that starts with the sound "ari" and means something insulting? --124.254.77.148 03:25, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Well I've heard the word Arainst before? Perhaps you could check online somewhere like an Online Dictionary. ::Manors:: 03:38, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Is that 'Arianist'? Xn4 05:34, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

"Arriviste"? ```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bielle (talk • contribs) 03:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Aristotelian? And no doubt 'aristocrat!' would have sounded pretty insulting coming from a Jacobin or a Bolshevik. Xn4 04:30, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

"arrogant" might qualify, depending on local pronunciation. -- JackofOz 13:14, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

• In years past, I would say "Ari Fleischer" with no little scorn. --Sean 16:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

• If we reorder the letters to "air", then we have "airhead". StuRat 19:18, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Arimasp? [1] --Reuben 19:27, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Aryan (as often misunderstood). Tesseran 20:53, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

What words do you not capitalize in a header?

When writing a header or making reference to a title of a play or book or what have you, what is the list of words that do not start with a capital letter? E.G. 'How to Lose a Guy in Ten Days' - "to" "a" and "in" do not get capitalized. But what about something like 'Make the Most of it' - should the "it" be capitalized as it is the final word? Should the "Most" be capitalized or not?

Thanks! Joshua —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.140.75.133 (talk) 05:05, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

The Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation (9th Edition) says "Do not capitalize little words within titles such as a, an, the, but, as, if, and, or, nor, or prepositions, regardless of their length". See also Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization). Xn4 05:30, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, generally you capitalize everything except for "little words" as listed above. Which words are "little" and which aren't can vary by publication. Pronouns (like your "it") and forms of the verb "to be" (like "is," "are," etc.) are examples of little words that are often capitalized. --Cam 05:36, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

As Cam said, there is no universal agreement as to exactly what words should be capitalized. In places like library catalogs they typically just capitalize the first letter and any letters that would be capitalized if it wasn't a title -- which is also the style of Wikipedia article titles, and in some non-English-speaking countries is the usual style for book titles. The Wikipedia article on this is capitalization; the last time I looked at it, it suffered from trying to enumerate all possible styles without saying enough about when and where they were used. --Anonymous, 13:28 UTC, September 4, 2007.

Use of "None"

I understand that the correct use of the word "none" is supposed to be akin to "not one", such as "there is none that has collected any items" as opposed to the non-standard use of "there are none that have collected any items". By this, I mean that "none" is used in the same way as a singular item. This is a very common mistake in usage of the English language, as people don't think of it in terms of a singular, curiously, and instead as a plural.

My question is this: is there an article on Wikipedia that articulates this? I've been working with the creators of the article "List of commonly misused English language phrases" and believe it could potentially be listed there, but was wondering if anybody could shed light on a couple of things: where I can find a third party source or reference that would confirm or support this statement? Secondly, could anybody make any suggestions as to how this could be worded for an example (as you can see, my example there blows). linca^linca 07:35, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Since a language is defined by the people who speak it, and most English speakers will freely use 'none' in both singular and plural senses, I don't really believe it to be a 'misuse', since hardly anyone will notice such an error if it were used. Capuchin 07:48, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

On the contrary, the belief that "none should be singular, being the contraction of no+one" could be put on the List of Linguistic Urban Legends in English (if there were such a list). The OED says quite bluntly: "Many commentators state that none should take singular concord, but this has generally been less common than plural concord, especially between the 17th and 19th centuries."--K.C. Tang 09:17, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

A sensible guideline is that "none" is plural in any context where you might have expected more than one. "None of us was willing to climb onto the roof" but "I surveyed the whole staff and apparently none of them are left-handed.". You wanted a link: this is covered in Wiktionary at wikt:none#Usage notes. --Anonymous, edited 13:41 UTC, September 4, 2007.

Cool. Thanks! The Wiktionary use is the one I was really after. As to it being an urban legend, it is the practice taught in upper and middle class grammar schools and the only reason it doesn't seem to pass to the lower end is that the school teachers in those schools don't tend to have studied in the other classes of education (hence, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree). Though there are may instances in popular literature where the use is prevalent, and the language's use depicts its structure, we don't consider the words "ain't" and such to be "real" words, despite their commonness in day to day use. linca^linca 00:27, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

While I can well believe that a grammar school in Australia is something different to a grammar school in England, I'm surprised that you say teachers at 'working class' schools haven't received education outside 'working class' schools. That seems very odd, and as if the classes are quite immiscible. Also that all upper and middle class schools should teach such out-of-date prescriptive grammar. How odd. Skittle 22:20, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

That's another urban legend. "Ain't" is a perfectly acceptable word (if not much accepted these days), but it needs to be used correctly. It's natural home is the tag question "ain't I" - eg. "I'm the best Wikipedia editor ever, ain't I?". Amn't I doesn't work euphonically, and aren't I is a shocking blunder. All those teachers who told us that ain't is always wrong need to be re-educated (don't they?). -- JackofOz 01:15, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Contractions are discouraged, and "ain't", in its nature varies considerably to other contractions in that its root words don't appear to comprise the word it becomes. The reason I mention the word "ain't" is not acceptable is not that it's never acceptable, but in fact is rarely acceptable in its common use, which is much the same with the use of "none". I suppose I didn't articulate that particularly well. linca^linca 02:12, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

"Amn't I?" and "shan't I?" were both common constructions in my house when we were children, though they were not common in the neighbourhood. Any teacher who laughed, however, was given a lecture on language use from my grandmother from which she (and they were all women) never again arose to mock. I still use them now, but more for startle effect than anything else. But this is all in Canada, and thus of little use to the rest of the world. Bielle 02:29, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

"Contractions are discouraged": that's another myth. (One which, I hear, is particularly often told as fact to Germans learning English.) Contractions are standard in many contexts. Can you imagine my first sentence being improved by substituting "that is"? Of course, in formal writing contractions are discouraged. But there ain't nothin' wrong with 'em otherwise. :-) --Anonymous, 03:15 UTC, September 5, 2007.

I'm one to use "Amn't" and certainly "Shan't", though I attended Grammar schools, so I was trained in the "proper" sense, as it were. As to the use of contractions, no, it's not a myth. Contractions should only be used in dialogue, though in the case of the majority of writing (to which novel, encyclopedia, article, essay, assignment and thesis writing all must abide) contractions are to be avoided. This is to say that, should I wish to speak, I may do so by contracting as much as possible to easily convey my message without having to embellish words. However, when writing, unless I'm writing a piece of dialogue (or, in this case, a case of my personal, first-person oriented discussion), I should always use the full words that would otherwise be contracted. --linca^linca 14:31, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Encyclopedias, assignments, and theses are places where formality is recommended, so contractions are likely to be discouraged there. But don't overgeneralize this to other writing. I just did a Google Books search for "isn't". It reported over 1/2 million hits, of which I looked at the first 30. Just one was in dialogue; the other 29 were all in book titles. Contractions are standard English. --Anonymous, 23:55 UTC, September 7.

Speaking English

Bit of a random question for all you linguists out there, which I was pondering after recently having read Ivanhoe for the first time. I've had a look at History of the English Language which, while an interesting piece, didn't totally contain the answer I seek. Namely, I was wondering this: if a hypothetical time traveller from a modern English-speaking country were to go back in time through the history of England, whereabouts would be the furthest back they could go and still be able to have a reasonable conversation with someone, where each could just about be understood by the other? 1300s? 1400s? Later, earlier? Angmering 08:04, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest any time before the Great Vowel Shift would be very difficult for modern English speakers, but, as I'm sure you've realised, it very much depends on the region and experience of the speaker and their location in the past.--Estrellador* 08:52, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

We can only speculate, but pronunciation and vocabulary were different enough from modern English in Shakespeare's day (c. 1600) that conversation would have been extremely difficult without some training. Even with modern actors using modern pronunciations for Shakespearian English dialogue, modern audiences strain to follow, with a comprehension rate well under 100% for the untrained. Speakers of modern English dialects with conservative pronunciations, including some in Ireland and the interior South (West Virginia, Kentucky) of the United States, would probably have a somewhat easier time conversing than speakers of dialects that have diverged further (including the present-day dialects of southeastern England). On the other hand, during the 17th century, pronunciation and, to a lesser extent, vocabulary moved close enough to modern English that halting conversation would probably succeed between most modern speakers of English and most speakers of English in 1700. (This would not apply for 17th-century speakers of regional dialects sharply different from the London standard, such as Scots, some of whose dialects are very opaque even today to Americans.) Marco polo 14:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

They might understand what you said, but they'd sure stare at you and wonder where you were from.  :) Corvus cornix 23:23, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for all of your answers — very interesting stuff! Angmering 08:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Belated, I know, but I've only just noticed a question I can help answer :) There were a number of dialects of Middle English, and the author Alan Garner writes about his experience of recognition when he read a medieval poem written in one of them. Garner comes from the Alderley Edge area of Cheshire, and grew up speaking what he describes as "North West Mercian", before he went off to university. In the essay "Achilles in Altjira", in his collection The Voice That Thunders, he describes the experience of finding later English literature unrewarding, but feeling completely at home with the language of much earlier English:

"I was reading, voluntarily, the text of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight; and I wondered why there were so many footnotes. My grandfather was an unlettered smith, but he would not have needed all those footnotes if a native speaker had read the poem to him aloud [...] This was no Latin creole. This was what I knew as "talking broad". I had had my mouth washed out with carbolic soap for speaking that way when I was five years old."

Garner reads a passage to his father, who understands it fully, and observes, "Yon's a grand bit of stuff. Is there any more?" He also mentions a word, barlay, described in the crib as "obscure", but which was common currency in his school playground. So yes, for some people, dialects from the fourteenth century might be comparatively easy!

Telsa (talk) 10:18, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

summary, precis..?

What is the name for a text that in style is a summary of another fictional work, but contains every single plot element, and all descriptions of all the things/places/people in the original work? But lacks its dramatic structure?87.102.21.232 11:01, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

A synopsis? Angmering 14:52, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

possibly.87.102.81.184 16:15, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Aclaratory note

I recently read the phrase "thanks for the aclaratory note". I couldn't find many Google hits for "aclaratory", but I've a hunch that it could be a misspelling of something much more common. Anyone got any ideas? Cheers! — Matt Crypto 11:45, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps clarificatory? DuncanHill 11:51, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Too much of a mouthful; the idiomatic English for this would be "clarifying". +ILike2BeAnonymous 17:27, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Or perhaps someone is trying to create an adjective from "alacrity". There is an obsolete adj. in the OED: "alacrious: Brisk, lively, active."--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

To me it seems like a misspelling/misremembering for acclamatory? Notes are often acclamatory... СПУТНИК^{CCC P} 13:18, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I would guess it was based on the spanish verb aclarar, meaning to clarify. Rigadoun (talk) 17:21, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks folks. I reckon the "aclarar"-derived explanation sounds pretty plausible in the context of the original phrase. — Matt Crypto 20:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I am from Spain and I can tell is an Spanish mistake, it is translated nota aclaratoria as aclaratory note while it means explanatory note

terminology

Is there a term used to refer to nieces and nephews collectively? Such as, sons-daughters are children, mother-father are parents.Litrex 13:23, 4 September 2007 (UTC)litrex

In English, not to my knowledge. But it makes sense if you think about it. Sons and daughters are closely related by blood, and mothers and fathers are closely related by marriage. But nieces and nephews, while they could be siblings, could also be cousins, which is just far enough removed to allow marriage untainted (or at least not badly tainted) by consanguinity. Imagine a group of 4 of your nephews and nieces, 2 of whom are siblings and the other 2 are cousins to each other and to the first 2. Would a collective term for such a group escape the perils of confusion? Possibly not. (On the other hand, grandchildren can be referred to collectively, but they're also as likely to be cousins as siblings.) Food for thought, anyway. -- JackofOz 13:34, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

An anthropologist friend of mine told me some people in cultural anthropology circles use the neologism nibling, but I don't think it's enjoyed wide circulation. —Angr 15:11, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Closest I can think of is 'extended family' which isn't very satisfactory and includes all sorts of people apart from neices and nephews Worm ^{(t | c)} 10:12, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

On a side note, while niece redirects to cousin, there is a stublet on nephew. ---Sluzzelin talk 11:02, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Our family uses - joculazrly - nibling. We thought we'd invented it, on the analogy of sibling - specifically for a boy-and-girl twin pair.MacAuslan 11:42, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

french

what is House of Commons defence Committee in french? - 91.106.51.123 15:05, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Assuming you are referring to Canada, according to the Government website, the French name for the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs is Comité permanent de la défense nationale et des anciens combattants. I guess the full name would be "Le Comité permanent de la défense nationale et des anciens combattants de la Chambre des communes."-- Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 15:17, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

The OP's IP address is in the UK. I suspect they are asking for a translation of the British House of Commons Defence Select Committee. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 16:06, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I probably should have done the WhoIs first. Perhaps, "Le Comité spécial de la défense de la Chambre des commune du Royaume-Uni". I have translated "Select Committee" based on wording in use in Ontario [2]. However, reading Select Committee (Westminster System) suggests that it is more like a Standing Committee, in which case use "permanent" for "spécial". Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 17:37, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

A not-very-related question: why do government agencies and entities seem to be averse to using apostrophes where they're needed? It should be Veterans' affairs. --Reuben 16:21, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

It is spelled correctly in at least one case. Mind you, the apostrophe usually goes missing whenever DVA is mentioned in the newspapers. -- JackofOz 01:29, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Good on ya, mates! --Reuben 02:31, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Comité isn't a word used much in Europe. The usual French word is commission, and in the European institutions Standing Committee is translated as Commission permanente. Google reveals several on that pattern, such as the Commission permanente canado-américaine de défense, Commission permanente mixte de défense, Commission permanente de la défense nationale et des affaires étrangères, Commission permanente de la défense nationale, etc. Xn4 18:58, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

This Wikipedia... the things you learn! Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 19:49, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

For what it's worth, it is translated here as la Commission de la Défense à la Chambre des Communes britannique. I think comité is mainly used for a small group of people or organizations who have come together on their own initiative for a common cause, and don't need to answer to any higher body.  --Lambiam 19:55, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Translation (fr --> en) check

I recently translated (part of) a page from the French Wikipedia to the English one. Most of the page was technical abbreviations which posed no problem. However, the following note needed to be done:

Le plan de type "e" est un plan avec double glissement, le long de deux directions différentes, qui existe dans cinq types de groupes d'espace à réseau centré. L'utilisation du symbole "e" est devenue officielle à compter de la cinquième édition du volume A des Tables internationales de cristallographie (2002).

Here is my rendition. Could someone check it for me, both for accuracy and for conversational clarity? If it helps, the original page is this section of this page.

An "e" plane is a double glide plane, along two different directions, which exists in five types of face-centered space groups. Usage of the symbol "e" became official with the 5th edition of the International tables of crystallography, volume A (2002).

Thanks, Baccyak4H (Yak!) 17:48, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I'd use mixed case and italics for book titles in English, so: "...the 5th Edition of the International Tables of Crystallography, Volume A (2002)." My French isn't very good, but perhaps the word "slip" is better than "glide". Also, are you sure it says face-centered (I don't see "visage" in the French version) ? I get something more like "space-centered network". You might also want to post this on the Science Ref Desk, since this appears to be geology, and people there could check the technical accuracy of the result (as opposed to the translation). StuRat 18:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I think I'll check there too; the alternatives you mention make sense but the words I chose are English technical terms and are almost certainly the right ones ("face" should be double checked though -- thanks) Baccyak4H (Yak!) 19:19, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, "face" is probably wrong; it should be "base", but that is informed by knowledge of the content and is not likely discernable from the contextless French version. Anyway, here is the page with my English version, and I'll take this question to the Science desk. Baccyak4H (Yak!) 19:31, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

(after edit conflict) The official title is International Tables for Crystallography.[3] Instead of "face-cent(e)red", use "with a cent(e)red lattice" (see the terminology in Space group). Getting into the matter-of-taste level, I'd say either "along two different vectors" (my preference) or "in two different directions". Also, "is found" sounds better than "exists" (although the latter is the more literal translation), and I prefer "The use" over "Usage". "Double glide plane" is fine.[4]  --Lambiam 19:37, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Fantastic. Mahalo! Baccyak4H (Yak!) 19:43, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

September 5

Cast a Dispersion?

What does it mean when someone "casts a dispersion"?

Ex. "I was afraid he'd cast a dispersion on my mother."

There is remarkably little to be found on the internet about this colloquialism. So I am thinking the person I heard it from didn't say it right.

Any help would be greatly appreciated Mr Vain 18:29, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

It's actually "cast aspersions", meaning to question someone's good faith or motives. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 18:33, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

It's not a colloquialism but a malapropism, a (perhaps intentional) mangling of a word or phrase. +ILike2BeAnonymous 18:35, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Mildly off-topic: my family use the malapropism "casting nasturtiums" for the same phrase. SaundersW 19:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Mine too! DuncanHill 20:12, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

"Casting nasturtiums"! What a dreadful insult to one of my favorite garden flowers. It is incredibly easy to grow (huge seeds), has beautiful flowers, can be used as a border plant, a ground cover, or a vine. Not to mention the fact that the flower buds and leaves are edible in salads--they have a sort of peppery flavor like water cress. Also, they make great cut flowers for small bouquets. Casting nasturtiums, indeed!--Eriastrum 22:31, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Keep the Aspidistra Flying... AnonMoos 00:26, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

One time when someone asked me "Are you casting aspersions?" I cracked her up by replying "No, I'm not Catholic!" —Tamfang 00:53, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Translation

What does "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet sed diam nonummy" mean? Is it Latin or gibberish? It is on the bottom of a page on the Apple website. Xarr☎ 23:36, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure it means something, but when putting it in a language translator I get: "Lorem itself pain he is amet but diam ninth" :S ::Manors:: 00:12, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Lorem ipsum --Reuben 00:15, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

We have an article Lorem Ipsum -- AnonMoos 00:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

So yes, in reply to the OP, it's Latin and gibberish. :) FiggyBee 10:04, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

What it means is that the Apple web designer likely forgot to delete this commonly used "dummy" or placeholder text before publishing the page to the website! From www.lipsum.com: "Lorem Ipsum is simply dummy text of the printing and typesetting industry. Lorem Ipsum has been the industry's standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book. It has survived not only five centuries, but also the leap into electronic typesetting, remaining essentially unchanged. It was popularised in the 1960s with the release of Letraset sheets containing Lorem Ipsum passages, and more recently with desktop publishing software like Aldus PageMaker including versions of Lorem Ipsum." "Contrary to popular belief, Lorem Ipsum is not simply random text. It has roots in a piece of classical Latin literature from 45 BC, making it over 2000 years old."

Need Help With Translation

Can anyone translate this phrase- "Be yourself"- into casual French, Japanese, and Korean? (Assume that the "be" is imperative, yet not aggressive.) You don't have to do all three at once. :) Kikiluvscheese 01:11, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

French: Sois toi-même. —Angr 05:16, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you kindly. :] Kikiluvscheese 01:27, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm only a student of japanese, but my stab at this (and it's difficult because to refer to the person using a pronoun tends to indicate familiarity) would be "anata o ite kudasai", literallly "you (object) please be", or thus, "please be you" (iru in the te form is ite, right? because itte is from iku...).... it's still kind of a weird statement. If you want to literally use "yourself", I think that's "jibun" rather than "anata", but you'd want to probably state "anata ga jibun o ite kudasai" to avoid saying "please be myself". And of course, the person's name should be used instead of "anata" in more formal situations Kuronue | Talk 22:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Japanese: いつもの自分でいなさい "itsumo-no jibun de inasai". -Paul D. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.29.16.127 (talk) 14:50, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

September 6

When should the hyphen be used, and when should it not be used?

Is it "fair-use" or "fair use"? --166.121.36.232 03:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I was always told to use the hyphen when the phrase is describing something else (acting as an adjective, as in fair-use restrictions), and to leave it out when the phrase stands by itself (acting as a noun, fair use). —Keenan Pepper 03:58, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

It's a good rule and I agree with it, but it's only fair to point out that hyphens seem to be dropping out of fashion and many people would now write 'fair use restrictions". --Anonymous, 04:36 UTC, September 6, 2007.

For the Manual of Style guideline, check out WP:HYPHEN and if you're interested even further in horizontal lines as punctuation be sure to read WP:DASH just below! --JayHenry 06:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

If the use of hyphens is dropping out of fashion, it is a shame. I will continue to use them, fashionably or not, because they help to avoid ambiguity. With a hyphen, it is clear that "fair-use restrictions" refers to restrictions on fair use. Without a hyphen, "fair use restrictions" could refer either to restrictions on fair use or to fair restrictions on use. This is why we use hyphens and other forms of punctuation. Marco polo 13:54, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Help with foreign language links

The Eagle Has Landed (film) was split off from The Eagle Has Landed (novel). I transferred over the Russian link. Could someone confirm that I've read the Cyrillic correctly, i.e. "фильм" as "film". Also, I can't read Japanese; the same link is in both articles. Where should "鷲は舞い降りた" go? Clarityfiend 06:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes (or maybe да), фильм = film. -- JackofOz 06:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

To judge from [5], the Japanese article is about the novel, but gives the year as 1976 rather than 1975; the film is mentioned only in passing. —Angr 06:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. (The translation of the Japanese article is hilarious.) Clarityfiend 04:52, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

The "鷲は舞い降りた" is the name of the film, if that helps. --Manga 23:46, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Spanish phrase

Hi! Could anyone confirm whether "¿Has podido entrar a ...?" means "Have you been able to enter ...?" as I suppose? Thanks in advance. —Daniel Šebesta {chat | contribs} 08:50, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Yup Drmaik 11:49, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Drmaik! —Daniel Šebesta {chat | contribs} 21:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

words in other languages

how can i get words used in other languages for a word in english languge ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.98.85.136 (talk) 10:59, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I suggest using dictionaries. —Daniel Šebesta {chat | contribs} 11:13, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Particularly a bilingual dictionary. Depending on the target languages, some are even available online, or bundled with CD-ROM versions of mainstream dictionaries such as Encarta's. -- Deborahjay 15:28, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

You might like to use Wiktionary. [6]--El aprendelenguas 16:03, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Growth of English acceptability of (Middle) English

Whop was the first King of England to have used English as his first (or most usual) language?

I have heard that it was Richard II, Henry IV or Henry V but cannot find a reference in my earlier reading. Now I can't find it in wikipedia.

MacAuslan 11:20, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, Richard II was the first king born after English became the official language of the English courts in 1362. He was also a patron of Geoffrey Chaucer, so he probably had some appreciation for and at least a good working knowledge of the language. According to this somewhat dubious source, Henry IV was the first king whose native language was English. The kings were roughly contemporary, and both were born to mothers who were born and raised in England, according to our articles, so there is nothing in the circumstantial evidence to distinguish them. Certainly both could speak English. Marco polo 14:29, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

You might also try posting this on the Humanities desk; this seems like the kind of question Clio the Muse could answer. --Cody.Pope 14:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Edward III was king in 1362 when English became the official language. Our article says he was bilingual but preferred French. Adam Bishop 15:04, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Whoever it was, it certainly wasn't King Whop I, II or III. :) JackofOz 04:35, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Here is an answer that Clio put on her talk page: "Middle English had made steady progress in the course of the fourteenth century and it is likely that Richard II, and possibly even Edward III, had a working knowledge of the language; but the first king to use English publicly was Henry IV in his coronation address of October 1399. Thereafter the use of English became standard practice. Clio the Muse 22:35, 6 September 2007 (UTC)" --Cody.Pope 09:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

invitation question...

I am a member of a non-profit group called: Charleston Women in International Trade. We are developing invitations for a function that we are hosting.

Should the invitation read:

Charleston Women in International Trade invite you...?

or

Charleston Women in International Trade invites you...?

Please provide the rule which decides this and references, if possible.

Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Perplexedmotherof1 (talk • contribs) 20:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

There is no hard set rule here. Differing sources suggest that you should use the singular verb, the plural verb, or either. Since all the women are acting as a singule group, you would use the singular "invites" here. If you were acting independently, you might use the plural. HYENASTE 21:47, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

In British English, definitely plural. In American English, it depends on whether or not you consider "Charleston Women in International Trade" an entity distinct from its membership. —Tamfang 21:45, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

In American English there is a tendency for a plural form of name to imply a plural verb: it's "women", hence "invite"; but in formal usage organizations are usually singular. To make everyone happy you might consider using another wording, like "The members of ... invite you". --Anonymous, 01:03 UTC, September 7, 2007.

Our article on American and British English differences, in the subsection "Formal and notional agreement", states:

Proper nouns which are plural in form take a plural verb in both AmE and BrE; for example, The Beatles are a well-known band; The Colts are the champions.

However, in the form this rule is stated it is too absolute; our own articles on the United States and the United Nations use singular verb forms (The United States of America is a federal constitutional republic; The United Nations is an organization), which is a common way of handling noun–verb agreement for these proper nouns even in British English. The style guide of The Times gives this rule:

plurals make corporate bodies and institutions singular unless this looks odd. Thus “The National Trust is...”, but sports teams are plural, eg, “Arsenal were worth their 8-0 lead”. Whether singular or plural, always maintain consistency within a story.[7]

I could not find a ruling on when something "looks odd".  --Lambiam 05:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I think that's where the individual's personal sensory apparatus comes into play, Lambiam. They probably meant to say "unless it sounds odd when spoken", but that looks odd (or sounds odd) because we're used to the expression "looks odd" in relation to the written word. Is any of this making sense?  :) -- JackofOz 12:06, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, everyone. I'm inclined to say that we need to us the word, "invites" because we are one group; but the person actually doing the invitations says I'm wrong. I think we are going to look pretty uneducated if we send them out using "invite", but...I guess you have to pick your battles (or so I'm told). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Perplexedmotherof1 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

What if it were written as CWIT? Would it then always be singular? DirkvdM 18:28, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Spanish "ya"

I'm trying to learn some Spanish on my own. What is the meaning/usage of the word "ya" I see in Spanish sentences? --Halcatalyst 21:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

"Already", basically. But it's also used idiomatically. Corvus cornix 21:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

... as an intensifier, I gather. —Tamfang 21:43, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes. "Voy" means "I go." "Ya voy" means "I'm already going". Idiomatically, "I'm on my way" HYENASTE 21:51, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, or ya lo sé, "I know, I know" (lit.: "I already know it"). When used emphatically like that it can also often mean "now": dímelo ya, "tell me now!" (English also uses "already" in emphatic statements to mean "right this instant", though not as commonly as Spanish uses ya that way: "come ON, already!"). Also, ya no is "no longer" (ya no trabaja aquí, "he doesn't work here anymore") --Miskwito 21:58, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I studied Spanish for nine years, minored in Spanish in college, and I still don't get the usage of the word ya. It just pops up everywhere in the speech of native Spanish speakers. -- Mwalcoff 01:04, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Related thread. A.Z. 04:04, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

It can also mean "enough", when a person is putting milk in your coffee or you are buying a length or quantity of something in a shop, you say "ya" meaning "OK, that's enough". It can be used in many situations where you are adjusting or moving something with or for another person who will tell you "ya" with the same meaning. My experience is living in Andalucia - whether they use the word like this elsewhere in Spain...?Richard Avery 14:53, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Wouldn't you say "ya, basta"? Corvus cornix 16:11, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... "ya" is much more appropiate in the situations described by User:Richard Avery. "ya, basta" (though in colloquial Spanish "vale ya" would be more common) would be for somebody who performs repeatedly an annoying action on you and you would like him to stop. Moreover, I don't think that word varies much in its usage in different regions of the Spanish-speaking world. If somebody gave specific examples, we could give specific translations. --Taraborn 10:33, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

"Ya" can also be a weak affirmative word kind of like the English "yeah." Its usage as such is more popular in some dialects than in others.--El aprendelenguas 21:19, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

September 7

A fast system to deplagirize text?

Hello, I am wondering if anyone knows of the fastest way to text someone else's text and rewrite it so it's your own words? If I try to rewrite it in my own words outright it takes a long time and I end up unconsciously being unable to think of new ways to write things. If I just switch words with synonyms, run it back and forth through an automated translator, then run it through MsWord grammar check it takes a very long time and then it doesn't change it enough. If I try to do the main points, then it shrinsk the text to about 10% of the original size and it's no good as I want to keep the length in. Anyone know any good techniques for fast work on this? Is there any kind of computer software that would help in this? Juanita Hodges 03:49, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

If you want to rewrite it using your own words, you need to use your own words. Changing words in a text and saying you wrote it is still plagiarism, in my definition of plagiarism. A.Z. 04:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. In the words of the old saying, "Stealing from one author is plagiarism, stealing from many is research". Even if you replaced every single word of the original text with a synonym, it's still the original author's word order and concepts you're presenting, just with different words. -- JackofOz 04:32, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Do you know a way to do this fast? It's really really really hard and takes forever. Juanita Hodges 04:52, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Also, I'm not so much into making it my own words, but just not the other person's. Juanita Hodges 06:18, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Maybe a spammer can give you some advice: they're always struggling to avoid having their pitches match a template. —Tamfang 07:02, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't undesrstand. Juanita Hodges 07:25, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

If you want to avoid committing plagiarism, you have to say it in your own words. That means you have to work for it.  --Lambiam 11:25, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Even if you change all the synonyms, it would still be a derivative work, and fall foul of copyright law. There are no shortcuts here. Exxolon 13:54, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

You may have wondered why spammers so often misspell words like "Viagra" and "Rolex": it's because even the crudest spam-filters will notice if they're spelled correctly. 419 scam mail doesn't contain such clear keywords, but it's still easy to catch automatically if many copies of it use the same sentence (like "I am the son of former President Sani Abacha" or "Do not feel sorry for me as I believe we will all die someday.") You're trying to avoid having your writing detected as a copy of something you found on the Web, I guess, so you can probably learn something from the tricks spammers use to avoid having their writing detected as copies of, well, itself. —Tamfang 01:08, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

If this is work for school, you are asking for help cheating. Rewording might make it harder for your teacher to catch you with Google, but it would not lessen the offense of plagiarism. If your teachers have suggested to you that handing in the work of others, simply reworded, as your own is acceptable, they have misled you—this is the sort of thing that gets students expelled from college, employees fired from their jobs, and writers' careers ruined. Up-front attribution would be required: "The following are the exact ideas of (AUTHOR) (TITLE), copied except for rewording." (A citation of the source that did not make the wholesale derivation of your work from it clear would be dishonest.) Wareh 14:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Natural language processing is a notoriously difficult area of computer science research. I don't think there's a piece of software that even comes close to what you want to do. In fact, many of the Human Interface Tasks on Amazon Mechanical Turk amount to "paraphrase this text", precisely because humans can do it better than algorithms. 128.186.40.148 17:48, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

• Hi there, Juanita Hodges, go take a look at Text_simplification and the related links from that article. Then take a look at The (futile?) quest for an automatic paraphrase engine. dr.ef.tymac 22:44, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

You can be kicked out of school for plagiarism, and asking a question on Wikipedia about the fastest way to do it, and then signing it with what appears to be your own name, is not a very intelligent thing to do, as when the teachers put your essays into their plagiarism checking software that scans the internet for matches, it'll find your name at the end of that question. If you are going to cheat, be happy with the cheating methods you are stuck with. If they take too long, do the research and do the essay yourself.--Manga 23:38, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Do native speakers of English understand following type of sentences easily?

In linguistics books one comes across following type of sentences: 1. Problems involved in this, my East Coast friends are difficult to talk to about. 2. John is tough to believe the university would fire. 3. The prisoners are alleged to have been ordered to pick up the money.

As a non native speaker of English I find the above type of sentences pretty hard to understand. Do native speakers understand these type of sentences easily? Thanks 196.12.53.9 10:35, 7 September 2007 (UTC)Vineet Chaitanya

3 is easy to understand and unambiguous, it might be slightly awkward but it's easy to work out what is being said. However 1 and 2 are horrible and either completely incorrect or very ambiguous and could be written much better. I can't work out what they are trying to say. Capuchin 10:40, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Sentence #2 is not so bad. It's not really correct, but I can imagine somebody saying it, and it would be understood. I agree with Capuchin, though, it doesn't sound quite right and you'd want to reword it. Sentence #1 doesn't really work. I think a similar construction could be OK in context, though. A big part of the difficulty is the very vague "problems involved in this." --Reuben 10:54, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I agree, 1 and 2 are horrible. My best guesses would be "It's difficult to talk to my East Coast friends about problems relating to this" and "It's hard to believe that the university would fire John". — Matt Eason ^{(Talk • Contribs)} 10:58, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Assuming I understand what you these sentences are trying to say correctly, here is how a native english speaker would possibly write these sentences.

1 - "It is difficult to talk to my East Coast friends about these (sort of) problems."

2 - Is VERY amibigous - It could be "John found it tough to believe that the university would (could?) catch fire." or "John found it tough to believe that the university would fire him (her? someone?)" Assuming it was a difiicult-to-understand but correct sentence, I thought the meaning would be "John is tough (emotionally) to believe the university would fire (a gun or suchlike)." Quite when one would use such an unlikely sentence, I don't know. Skittle 21:49, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

3 - The original sentence is ok, but I'd write "Allegations were made that the prisoners were ordered to pick up the money." Exxolon 14:00, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Note that there's an ambiguity in 3, as to whether "pick up" means from the ground or has been used colloquially to mean "collect". --Dweller 14:25, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I guess this is a book on syntax with examples of dislocation and what not. Some of these phenomena might make sense only to people with certain dialects. --Kjoonlee 19:19, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I gathered that 2 meant "It is difficult to believe that John would be fired from the university" or "that the university would fire John". "tough to believe the university would fire" seems to make sense, then fire takes an object, which I expect in this case is John, and thus the subject is unstated, leaving it to be ambiguous or "I" (so perhaps "I have trouble believing the University would fire John"?) depending on what language it's translated from. Kuronue | Talk 21:50, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Sentence 2 is modeled on sentences like "John is a tough nut to crack" or "John takes a lot of patience to deal with". The reason that Sentence 2 doesn't work is that John is not the object of "believe". "John is tough to believe, because everyone knows he is a liar" is fine. (If you want to keep the word order, you could say "John is someone whom it's tough to believe the university would fire.") All these sentences should be grammatical and understandable. Tesseran

I agree with Capuchin that sentence three is the only one that a native English speaker could actually be expected to produce. Do these sentences have an asterisk ("*") in front of them, or are they part of a discussion of "transformational" syntax. These sentences look like the purported "underlying sentences" of "It is" constructions. Mike Dillon 23:53, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

The Communist Party of China and the human soul

The opening sentence of the English version (the "official" English version) of the "Decision Concerning the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution" is:

“ The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution now unfolding is a great revolution that touches people to their very souls and constitutes a new stage in the development of the socialist revolution in our country, a stage which is both broader and deeper. ”

I always thought it was strange to see the word "souls" here. The human soul (usually thought of as immaterial), a somewhat religious notion, seems very much out of place in the context of (materialist) Mao Zedong thought. Bourgeois mysticism! So, my question: does anybody know if the word that was used in the original Chinese text has the same connotations, or is it the translation? Skarioffszky 14:16, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm hoping that a Chinese speaker will come along, but on the Chinese Wikisource page, I found the following compound that may have been translated into English as "soul":

灵魂

According to online dictionaries, this word can also mean "spirit". I am not familiar with Chinese Communist metaphysics, but it seems possible to believe that people have a noncorporeal component without also believing in deities. This belief would conflict with radical philosophical materialism, but I'm not sure how committed Maoists were to such a philosophical stance. I'd be fascinated to hear from someone who is more knowledgeable about this. Marco polo 20:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

That being said, I'd say that the human soul is not a somewhat religious notion but a purely religious one. --Taraborn 21:59, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

The word "灵魂" is indeed used quite casually in modern Chinese, not necessarily with any religious connotations. You can just take that as a metaphor, to mean something like "essence". You can use the word "魂魄" if you want to refer specifically to the non-corporeal existence in traditional Chinese belief. Cheers.--K.C. Tang 06:57, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! Skarioffszky 08:53, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Prepositions Preceding Surnames: A Collective Term and Their Alphabetisation

Is there is a term for prepositions that precede some surnames? For example, von, van and de. Also, I understand that it customary not to involve these prepositions when alphabetizing a list of names. For example, T. S. von Sperl, when alphabetised, would appear: Sperl, T. S. von. Can anyone clarify this? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.210.112.48 (talk) 14:32, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

In Dutch, it is called a "tussenvoegsel". In the Netherlands names starting with "van", "van de" "van der", "van den", "de" etc. are filed under the following name proper when alphabetizing, but in Belgium they go under "v" (or "d"). Skarioffszky 15:00, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

French has la particule (in full, la particule onomastique), which covers de, des, de la, du, d', and also von, van, etc. (Some French people also refer to the Mac in Scottish and Irish names by the same term.) There's also the term particule nobiliaire (not all particules are to do with noblesse). If there's an English word, I don't know it, but I've heard English speakers say 'the particule ', using the French word and pronunciation. The French and the Germans almost invariably index names without the particule. The English used to, but I'd say it's becoming a little old fashioned. Xn4 21:36, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Related thread. A.Z. 21:41, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. The short answer is "nobiliary particle". -- JackofOz 02:12, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

It was a dark and stormy night

I'm not a native speaker of English and I don't fully understand why that excerpt is so bad or amusing for its style. Can somebody, please, tell me why? --Taraborn 17:43, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I've read again the article and now I think that maybe it's not that it is bad but that it has become something like a cliché. --Taraborn 18:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

The phrase alone is not all that horrible, but the full opening sentence as quoted in the article is quite a travesty. --LarryMac | Talk 18:12, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I see but, could you please elaborate a little? I don't get it much. --Taraborn 21:53, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

This, my answer to you, plucked from those kinder recesses of my soul, and recorded verily unto the unknowable recesses of Time Ineffable, when Men retire from their pursuits, and the Series of Tubes is darkened forever, might -- I have no little hope -- serve to elucidate the broad style of writing known as purple prose, which counts in its convivial company the aforementioned phrase entitling your gentle query. --Sean 00:45, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I think you should put that last answer up for the Bulwer-Lytton prize next year. Well done, Sean. That is about as ornate as English gets. Bielle 02:04, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that the language is so intricate and it runs on for a long time without a break. As Bille indicates above, there is an annual Bulwer-Lytton Prize for the writer who can come up with the most amusing intricately-written opening sentence. Corvus cornix 18:08, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Proper adjectives

Is there any language besides English that capitalizes so-called proper adjectives (like adjectives of nationality)? --Lazar Taxon 19:34, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

What does the English idiom game, set, and match mean?

Any help is much appreciated. Thanks, anon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.155.166.86 (talk) 21:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

It is from tennis, I believe, where, in a tournamnet, the winner is the one who takes the match (the best two out of three sets) and each set is won by the player who wins 6 games first a set of six games by at least two games, or the number of games then increases after 6 until one player wins by two games. So the winning game takes that game, the set and the whole match. It is an idiom for the unbeatable move, or the last word in an argument. Not being a tennis player myself, I am sure there are others who can explain in a tidier fashion. Bielle 21:21, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Bielle has got it spot on, except that (some irrelevant points) the term is not only used in tournaments, and matches can run to more than three sets. So long as a tennis match is being played, it's at least theoretically possible for either player (or either pair of players, in doubles) to win enough of the remaining points to win the match. The umpire says the words "Game, set and match to Miss X" when she wins the game which wins the set which wins the match. So it's all over and the other player can't come back. Xn4 21:56, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

It's also used metaphorically in non-tennis contexts. Such as, you're in a discussion with a friend about something you have opposing viewpoints about, and you come up with a convincing argument that puts his/her opinion to shame. You could end with "That's all there is to it. So I win - game, set and match". It's not too far removed in meaning from "Lock, stock and barrel" or "Hook, line and sinker". -- JackofOz 01:58, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Double Dactyls

I've been meaning to write a Double Dactyl poem to challenge myself, and since I feel in a creative mood I'm thinking of trying to form one today; my only problem is, I can't seem to think of any single-word double dactyls that haven't been used in poems I've just read. I feel that if I had the one-word portion of it, I could easily construe a poem around it, so my question is this: what are some good examples of single-word double dactyls? Preferably ones not listed either in the wiki or on this page [8], as I'm familiar with the poem examples on each and thus would tend towards a highly similar poem. Thanks for the help! Kuronue | Talk 21:45, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Heliophobia, Autosplenectomy, Hypervelocity, Octogenarian, Saudi Arabia, Ponderability. (in case you were also looking for famous double dactyl people to write about, which is what I thought at first: Booker T. Washington, Francis Ford Coppola, and Emily Dickinson.) ---Sluzzelin talk 23:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Nice! Saudi Arabia is two words, but the others I can use! Incidentally, I did think of one myself in the intrem, but it was the only one I could come up with off the top of my head: autofellatio Kuronue | Talk 04:54, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I invented polyprosodical for that very purpose (it describes the meter of William McGonagall's verses). —Tamfang 00:35, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Mean of "Macavity"

Author Tom Holland uses "Macavity" in his fine book* Rubicon to describe a characteristic of Crassus. I am unable to find a definition for this work in my simple library and the Wikipedia definitions (two), though excellent, are a questionable fit. I would apprecitate a confirmation or expansion of the Macavity definition.

• Tom Holland, Rubicon, Anchor Books First Edition, March 2005 (paperback), Chapter 8: Triumvirate, page 223, line 4

Thank you.

22:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)Tyro Pi

I'm not familiar with Tom Holland's book, but supposedly it's an anachronistic reference to T. S. Eliot's Macavity, meaning a character pulling the threads and up to all sorts of mischief, but clever enough to always get away with it. Does he mention it in a special context, or is this Holland's overall characterization of Crassus? ---Sluzzelin talk 23:28, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I need to know what "apostel" is regarding certification of a birth certificate.

I've been told "apostel" refers to some sort of certification of birth certificates in Spanish. It is paperwork I need to bring my daughter back from Mexico. Please help me figure this out, I can't find any other help.

Thank you, Angela Thatcher —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.255.38.216 (talk) 23:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC) (Deleted email address to protect from spam.) Bielle 23:32, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Babelfish does not recognize the word "apostel" in Spanish. However, there is a word apostille, which is French and has to do with international certifications of various sorts. From what I can gather from the article, you will likely need professional help with this. There is a company on Google that advertises itself as apostilla.com, but I have no further information about it; I can't even say if it is legitimate or not. Perhaps there is a native speaker of Spanish who can be of more help. Bielle 23:41, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

If the birth certificate was issued in Mexico, then you will need to have the birth certificate notarized in Mexico and then sent, along with the notarization, to a Mexican government office that issues the apostille. You can download a document (in Spanish) that explains where to get an apostille in Mexico from this address. Your IP address indicates that you are in Oregon, United States. If the birth certificate was issued in Oregon, this website explains how to obtain an apostille for the Oregon birth certificate. If you need help with a Mexican birth certificate, you might try asking for help from the Mexican Consulate in Portland. Their phone number is 503-274-1442. It would help if you spoke Spanish. You need their office of "documentaciόn". The word for birth certificate is "acta de nacimiento". Marco polo 01:56, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Schedule conflicts!

Earlier today I got into a rather lively discussion with an American colleague of mine over the correct pronunciation of the word schedule. Being British, I favo(u)red "sh", while he believed "sk" to be correct. To "prove" our points, we came up with lists of root words with hard and soft "sch"s, with a pint of Guinness going to the winner.

{{Top}} may refer to:

• {{Collapse top}}
• {{Archive top}}
• {{Hidden archive top}}
• {{Afd top}}
• {{Discussion top}}
• {{Tfd top}}
• {{Top icon}}
• {{Top text}}
• {{Cfd top}}
• {{Rfd top}}
• {{Skip to top}}

Hard (Him):

• School
• Schem(e)-
• Schizo-
• Schooner
• Schism-
• Schrod (Didn't believe him at the time, but Google seems to confirm it)
• Schol(astic) (Probably matches School, but it passed)

| class="col-break " | Soft (me):

• Schmooze
• Schtick
• Schmaltz
• Schnapps
• Schlep
• Schnoz
• Schadenfreude
• Schiltrom (with Schlock still in reserve!)

As you can see, I won the prize, but was it because I was right, and soft sch-s are more common, or was it just a better vocabulary on my part? (Nice to have a win/win :).) And yes, we were both aware that the differences between American and British English meant that technically we're both "correct". Chalk it up to Anglo-American rivalry and a prior argument about the correct choice between caravan and travel trailer. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 23:19, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

All the <sch> = "sh" words you found (except "schiltrom", which I've never heard before so I have no idea about) are borrowings from German or Yiddish. The <sch> = "sk" words are mostly older borrowings, from Latin or Greek (the Latin words ultimately of Greek origin anyway). Since "schedule" is such a word, I award the prize to your friend. Or maybe I'm just biased because I'm an American :) --Miskwito 23:27, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

To be fair, prior to playing Medieval II: Total War, I'd never head of the schiltrom either. And double Bah! upon you for siding with the man clearly in the wrong! :) GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 23:32, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Where sch- has a sk- sound in English, it can also come from Dutch (e.g., schooner, schiedam, schipperke, schelm) or Italian (scherzo). Xn4 02:52, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

You're both wrong. They're both correct and acceptable, to different people. --Kjoonlee 12:02, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

...which I already mentioned that we're both aware of. Humo(u)r me. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 14:07, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

September 8

A Song that no one knows...

Hi! I have this really (seemingly simple) question that has stumped me for a while. I was surfing the web for a while when I found some music that I recognized as Starian (for those of you confused its from Pump it Up-like DDR-) as I was listening to the song, I realized that I had no idea what they were saying. I asked some of my friends (but not all) who are fluent in Chinese, Japanese, etc... to help me translate. They all said it sounded familiar but they didn't know what it said. My questions simply put: What are they saying?and What language is it?. Please help me out here! Link's below-

http://www.esnips.com/doc/0b5f037e-7f72-46c9-8470-7b677558179a/Starian

Thanks for your time!

♥ECH3LON♥ 00:35, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Google searching leads me to believe this is Korean. This link states as much. However, I have been unable to find a translation, only romanizations (like this).-Andrew c ^[talk] 01:44, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I can't hear anything. Am I alone? (Using Firefox on MacOS.) —Tamfang 09:42, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

It's in Korean. Artist: Duke, Title: Starian. You might want to search for "Duke Starian lyrics" or (in Korean) "듀크 스타리안 가사". --Kjoonlee 12:04, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I can't find the lyrics anywhere, and I can't make sense of the song. It's not too coherent. --Kjoonlee 12:32, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Rough lyrics based on a version found online then edited

저 회색 하늘이 너의 두눈에/ 비추어 도실 가르고 넌 현실 속에서/ 의식도 없이 내 앞에 다가와/ starian 내 모든 모든 기대가/(?) starian 천천히 나의 마음 속에 들어와/ 내 모든 것을 가져간/ starian 내 남은 것도 모두 네가 가져가/ (가둬둬 가둬둬) 가둬둬 가둬둬 날 가둬둬 제발 날 가둬둬

(unknown line)/ 다른 누구도 볼 수 없게/ 나만 새겨둬 꼭 새겨둬/ 나만 사랑 할 수 있게/ 너의 모습은 필요 없어/ 그저 니 마음이 필요 할 뿐/ 세상 누구와도 너를 포기 못해/ 너의 두 눈에 눈물이 흐른다 해도/

starian 내 모든 모든 기대가/ (?) starian 천천히 나의 마음 속에 들어와/ 내 모든 것을 가져간/ starian 내 남은 것도 모두 네가 가져가/

(가둬둬 가둬둬) 가둬둬 가둬둬 날 가둬둬 제발 날 가둬둬 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.202.87.23 (talk) 17:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

obo

What can the word 'obo' mean in the job offer if it is used in such a way "Compensation: obo"--80.252.131.163 15:47, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

It could stand for "Or Best Offer." See our article OBO. —Daniel Šebesta {chat | contribs} 15:59, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

... though it's more usual to see 'obo' in an advertisement to sell something. —Tamfang 18:19, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot.It's just it.--80.252.131.163 03:52, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

German Help

Hello,

I am studying German in school and am in my 3rd year (Junior). I am having some trouble with my German, mostly due to the whole Nominative, Dative, Accusative stuff (Direct and Indirect objects) and where to include them, how to figure out which one to use, etc. Due to this trouble, my sentence structure when I write is suffering. Is there any simple solution to help me? I had trouble with this in English class as well. Also, is there any easy way to memorize vocabulary? I find it quite tedious the way I currently do it, and if any of you have tips they would be greatly appreciated. I love learning the German language, and I hate being frustrated with it like I am if there could be a solution. Thank you very much!!!

MAP91 15:59, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I can answer one of your questions. I have learned several languages, including vocabulary. I never tried to memorize just a list of words. It's very useful to link the words with one another, to find synonyms and antonyms, hyponyms and hypernyms, to learn word-formation patterns (which rapidly widens your potentional vocabulary), to find etymologically related words in languages that you already know or other languages that you are studying, etc. —Daniel Šebesta {chat | contribs} 16:08, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

To be really basic about this, English has these cases (Nominative, Dative, Accusative) as well, but since they are not very noticeable. A place where they become more visible is in pronouns. I, he, she, we, they are pronouns in the Nominative case. This case is used mostly to say who did something (acting as subject of a verb). Me, him, her, us, them are mainly in the Accusative case. They tell you who or what an action was performed on (direct object of a verb). In German the accusative is also used with some prepositions especially to express motion towards a place or thing. The Dative is the case of the indirect object: to me, to him, her etc. However in English we don't need to use "to" when the sentence is unambiguous. The Dative is also used with some prepositions in German, especially to express the position or location of something.

English is somewhat exceptional in European languages in its apparent lack of cases, and once you get the hang of them in German you will find that many other European languages have similar case structures. Good luck! SaundersW 21:48, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

The English noun has two cases, the common (sometimes called the nominative), and the possessive (sometimes called the genitive). DuncanHill 23:27, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

After research no clear answer: "What's the difference between Professor, Teacher, instructor?"

Hello, This is my first time using this part of the site so be patient with me. Last week we recieved an assignment in class to write a 6-12 page paper (12-14 for me, that's what I get for being smart, LOL!)on this question; "What's the difference between Professor, Teacher, instructor?" I did a LOT of surfing, most of the best stuff was on "professor" and most of it located here. As far as "Teacher" and "Instructor" I got a lot of scocial info, such as the differences in how the word is used here,(US)as opposed to the UK or India. That information is great, don't get me wrong, but I'm looking for a more literal definition. I need for some one to explain the DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEM. That's what my Professor wants, and so.... The thing is no matter what the source is I run into the same problem; It redirects back to "Professor" every time I try to look up "Teacher" or "Instructor" Or, there is just really poor information. Something like "Teacher: One who teaches." It's a fair amount of information, GOOD information. I'd just like the specific info we need for this class. I'd like it to be there for my class mates and future surfers. Thanks Kurikeshi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kurikeshi (talk • contribs) 17:05, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

These words overlap in meaning. This varies a bit by country, but what you want is a good dictionary, with illustrative quotations, such as the OED. (Surfing the web will not help much with this sort of question.) In the UK, a professor (who is also a teacher and instructor) teaches in a university. An instructor is also a teacher, but usually of more practical subjects, such as a driving instructor. Most "teachers" teach in schools.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:12, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Generally, in the US (at least the bits of it I'm from), a teacher is someone who teaches, typically in a school or other academic setting; an instructor would be someone who instructs, typically in a non-academic setting; professor almost always means a college-level teacher. Example: kindergarten teacher, high-school teacher, swimming instructor, ballet instructor, college professor. Kuronue | Talk 05:55, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Further/farther

Is there any difference in meaning between the words further and farther? Wiktionary gives both the same definition, but it seems odd that two words would evolve to be similar, but not identical, to the other, especially as neither seems to be an Americanism/Britishism of the other. Laïka 19:20, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Farther is a measure of distance in space, like "I moved the book farther away." further is used to measure time or degree, like "for further information" or "moved the date further back (in time)" Make sense? Lauren^whisper 20:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

But some people use "further" with both meanings. --Anon, 21:42 UTC, September 8.

Spanish abuuu ;_;

What does "abuu..." mean in Spanish? At this youtube video, it is translated as *sad* but what does it "officially" mean? HYENASTE 20:58, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I've never heard this word before, and I didn't hear it in the Youtube video either, unless it's part of the unintelligible gibberish the child says after he's done, or it's in one of the over 3000 comments. If it does mean something, it's nothing more than Spanish babyspeak.--El aprendelenguas 21:21, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

It's in the intro written by the video's poster, which is in both English and Spanish:

this child is amazing. His name is Ryota, he is only 5 years old and he is an expert dancing Dance Dance Revolution!!! even better than me!! (shame on me, I'm 20 years old *sad*)

Miren a este engendro prodigio. Su nombre es Ryota, tiene 5 años y... ¡es un experto bailando Dance Dance Revolution! ¡Incluso mejor que yo! (que vergüenza... yo tengo 20 abuuu ;_;)

--Miskwito 21:24, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

From the context, it is probably an onomatopoeic representation of crying: it sounds similar to the English "boo hoo" (note that the translation is enclosed in *asterisks*, which normally represents an non-verbal communication in webslang (*cough*, *sigh* etc.), and ";_;" is an emoticon representing a crying face). Laïka 21:40, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, without watching the video, I can tell you that Ryota is a Japanese boy's name, and I'm sure you know that Dance Dance Revolution is a Japanese game. Maybe it's not a coincidence that the Japanese baby word for crying is 'buu' or even 'abuu'.--Manga 00:04, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

September 9

German manners

after recently returning from travelling in germany i noticed alot of the younger people would burp and then say what sounded like "schvelts" do you know what this means —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.153.64.107 (talk) 01:23, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

English translation from Japanese

What is the English translation for 'Tenko', as in the t.v series of that name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.72.28.30 (talk) 05:43, 9 September 2007 (UTC)