Misplaced Pages

:Reference desk/Language: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Reference desk Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 08:30, 19 July 2007 editAnonMoos (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers71,956 edits Latin phrase← Previous edit Latest revision as of 06:03, 17 January 2025 edit undoViennese Waltz (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers13,526 editsmNo edit summary 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Unicode|}}{{Misplaced Pages:Reference desk/headercfg}} <noinclude>{{pp-move-indef}}{{Misplaced Pages:Reference desk/header|WP:RD/L|WP:Refdesk/Lang|WP:Refdesk/Language}}
]
]
]
]
]
]</noinclude>


{{Wiktionary|Wiktionary:Information desk}}
{{shortcut|]|WP:RDL}}


= January 3 =
{{Misplaced Pages:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2007 July 13}}


== Why is it boxes and not boxen? ==
{{Misplaced Pages:Reference_desk/Archives/Language/2007 July 14}}


Why is it foxes and not foxen? ] (]) 05:45, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
{{Misplaced Pages:Reference_desk/Archives/Language/2007 July 15}}
:Why is it sheep and not sheeps? ] (]) 05:57, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
::{{small|Don't forget the related term "sheeps kin". ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 06:13, 3 January 2025 (UTC)}}
::I thought the plural of sheep was ]! ] (]) 06:52, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
:Possibly because "box" has its roots in Latin. ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 06:06, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
:Also, ] is a word, just uncommon. ] (]) 06:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
:: Because Vikings. ] (]) 07:35, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
:::As others have implied, "box" has always had an s-plural in English, and Vikings generally used the word "refr" for foxes. What's most surprising to me is actually that the old declensions "oxen" and "children" have survived. ] (]) 11:33, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
::::''Children'' is a pleonasm because ''childre'' (or ''childer'') was already plural. See ] and ]. ]&nbsp;] 12:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
:Someone wrong -- You can look at ] to see the declensions of a thousand years ago or more. The regular pattern of modern English inflection comes from the Old English masculine "a-stems". The only nouns with a non-"s" plural ending in modern English (leaving aside Classical borrowings such as "referenda" and unassimilated foreignisms) are oxen, children, brethren, and the rather archaic kine, which have an ending from the OE "weak" declension (though "child" and "brother" were not originally weak declension nouns). There are also the few remaining umlaut nouns, which do not have any plural ''endings'', and a few other forms which don't (or don't always) distinguish between singular and plural. In that context, there's no particular reason why "box" should be expected to be irregular. However, the form "boxen" has been occasionally used in certain types of computer slang: http://catb.org/jargon/html/B/boxen.html -- ] (]) 12:18, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
::Likewise, '']'', '']'' and '']'' are geeky plurals of '']'', '']'' and '']''. &nbsp;--] 15:25, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
:Nerd Wikipedians trying to be droll sometimes say "userboxen". ] (]) 05:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)


= January 4 =
=July 16=


== what does the "H" mean ? == == Pronunciation of "God b'wi you"? ==


How do you pronounce "God b'wi you"? For example in Shakespeare's Henry V, Act 4, Scene 3, Line 6 (Oxford Shakespeare). The pronunciation I hear in one recording is "God by you". Folger's Shakespeare has "God be wi’ you" in writing (you can find that text online at www.folger.edu). Does that indicate a different suggested pronunciation? How would you pronounce "wi'"? Are there other variants? (Either in the text of this play or anywhere else.) There's a "God be with you" entry in Wiktionary but none of these variants are recorded. ] (]) 08:32, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
Here's one for you. What does the "H" stand for /mean in the saying "Jesus H. Christ"?-shredder0288


:]'s ''Oxford Dictionary of Original Shakespearean Pronunciation'' has for ''be with ye/you''. ] (]) 08:47, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
:Oh ye of little faith. Believe that Misplaced Pages has an article on everything, and it will. Just click on ]. Happy reading. -- ] 04:59, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
::Thanks. This is the original pronunciation. How is it currently commonly pronounced on the stage? I mentioned one pronunciation I heard where "b'wi" is pronounced "by". Are there other options?
::His middle name was Henry. ] 07:15, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
::Regarding the original pronunciation note videos by ] (David Crystal's son) and those of A. Z. Foreman on his YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/@a.z.foreman74.
:::No, his middle name was Harold. Thus the Lord's Prayer - "Our father who art in heaven, Harold be thy name." --]] 16:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
::] (]) 12:05, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
::::I thought Harold was the angel's name, as in Hark, the Harold angels sing. —] 16:32, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
:I'd pronounce it "God be with you" but with the "th" sound missed off the end of "with." That might not be how they did it in the sixteenth century, but I'm pretty sure no sixteenth century people are coming to see the show. Incidentally, that's (the line didn't appear in the Branagh version). ] (]) 11:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)


== Correlation of early human migrations with languages ==
: ]. &mdash;] 23:07, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


Assuming that earliest speakers of every language family had spoke some other language during the ], were ] successfully correlated with the consequential emergence of respective language families on migration routes? I've read about ], but wonder about the overall sequence of emergence. ]<sup>]</sup> 12:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
== Grammar usage ==
:If I understand the question the answer is no. The migrations that you are talking about took place 100,000 to 25,000 years ago and well established language families only go back 10,000-15,000 years, often less. Even at that time depth the correlation between archeology and linguistics is often controversial. See ] for example. Studies such as show that while there is correlation between human genetic and linguistic history, there are enough exception to make any precise conclusions impossible without other evidence. ] (]) 02:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC)


:There have been scholarly (and less scholarly) attempts to identify language families and relationships predating those more firmly established: see for example ] and various other such proposals linked from it, but these are inevitably limited, largely because the ] is sufficiently rapid that all traces of features dating very far back have been erased by subsequent developments. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 07:01, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::Although I cannot evaluate the likelihood, I find it conceivable that a future all-out statistical analysis of all available source material will result in a reconstruction of ] that is widely accepted by scholars and much richer than what we have now. Perhaps this might even establish a connection between Proto-Afroasiatic and ] beyond the few known striking grammatical similarities. Then we may be speaking about close to 20 ]. But indeed, there can be no hope of reconstructions going substantially farther back, by the dearth of truly ancient sources and the relative scarcity of sources before the Modern Era. &nbsp;--] 21:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Reconstructions of Proto-Afroasiatic have been hindered by the fact that the only branches with significant ancient attestations are Semitic and Egyptian, and for most of its history, Egyptian writing almost completely ignored vowels... ] (]) 20:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC)


== Attaining cadre ==
Mr. & Mrs. Smith have a daughter, Mary. Mary marries Tom Hanover.
Which of the following is correct?


I hit "random article" for the first time in a while, and was directed to ], the first female professor in Nigeria (still alive at 98). In the infobox it says she's known for "eing the first Nigerian woman to attain professorial cadre", with the last two words piped to ].
Mary Hanover's maiden name is Smith.


Does anyone recognize this locution of "attaining professorial cadre", or for that matter using ''cadre'' as a mass noun in any context? Is it maybe a Nigerian regionalism? Should we be using it in Misplaced Pages? --] (]) 20:46, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
Mary Hanover's maiden name was Smith.
:That remark was added 7 years ago, and the user who posted it is still active. ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 22:56, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
:I think the collective sense is the older, just as for ''police'' and ''troop''.
:Here are uses of, specifically, ''teacher's cadre'':
:* "The smaller the city the more the teacher's cadre demand administrative support"<sup></sup>
:* "the cadre in which the teachers belong"<sup></sup>
:Other uses of the collective sense:
:* "The officers, non-commissioned officers, and corporals, constitute what is called the 'cadre.'&hairsp;"<sup></sup>
:* "any one individual's decision to join a cadre",<sup></sup>
:* "the cadre is appropriately composed in terms of skills and perspectives"<sup></sup>
:&nbsp;--] 23:43, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
:::None of those uses look like mass nouns to me; they all appear to be count nouns. --] (]) 01:02, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::Anyway, the phrasing is weird and probably just wrong (even in Nigerian English), so I've simplified it. ] (]) 00:07, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::: Thanks, I think that's best. I'm still curious about the phrase, though. {{ping|HandsomeBoy}} any comment? --] (]) 04:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::"Promotion (in)to professorial cadre"<sup></sup> is short for "promotion (in)to <u>the</u> professorial cadre".<sup></sup> &nbsp;--] 14:13, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Thanks, Lambiam, I can almost twist my brain into following that. So far it does appear to be a Nigerianism. My reaction till proved otherwise is that we probably shouldn't use it in English Misplaced Pages, given that (unlike Americanisms and Briticisms) it's not going to be recognizable in most of the Anglosphere. But it's reminiscent of the lakh / crore thing, on which I don't have a completely firm opinion and which still seems a bit unsettled en.wiki-wide. --] (]) 21:39, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::The term 'cadre' was/is (in my experience) extensively used in translations from Mandarin where in Communist China a distinct body or group, especially of military, governmental, or political personnel, is referred to: I have also seen it used in a similar fashion regarding communist regimes and parties elsewhere, so it has something of a Marxist flavour (I wonder if ] used it in his writings?), but also in non-communist contexts. I don't think it can be characterised as a 'Nigerianism'.
:::::The ] is of course relevant. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 08:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::: 94, I think maybe you came in late to the discussion. Of course the word "cadre" is not a Nigerianism. The locution in question is {{xtg|attain professorial cadre}}, which on its face appears to use the word as a ] meaning something like "status". Lambiam's search results suggest a different, slightly convoluted explanation, but all seem to come from Nigeria, which suggests to me that ''this usage'' of the word is a Nigerianism. --] (]) 20:55, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
* {{ping|Trovatore}} It's nice to see the article suggested to you, and I hope you enjoyed reading the article :). These little things motivate me to keep creating impactful articles. Regarding the usage of "cadre", I try to be creative and phrase content in a manner that is dissimilar with source references. I believe I didn't want to use the language from the source and "cadre" came to mind. It seemed like having the same meaning as my interpretation from the sources. From the discussion above, it looks like I was not entirely correct. I believe the article was created during a contest, so speed was also important to me. ] (]) 22:36, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
*:FWIW, I just did a Google search and I am seeing a lot across virtually all universities in Nigeria. So it might actually be a thing , , , , etc. ] (]) 23:07, 8 January 2025 (UTC)


= January 5 =
Thank you,


== Name of Nova Scotia? ==
M


Is there any historical explanation of why the name of the Canadian province of Nova Scotia uses Latin. Is it an oddity with no explanation? Do you know of any other European colony (especially of the form "new something") that uses a Latin name instead of an equivalent in a modern European language? ] (]) 13:57, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:This would be a great question for the ]. Both usages are current, but it seems that "was" is used more often. I am not sure which is preferred in edilect (]). ] 12:04, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


:The semi-Latin name ''Nova Zembla'' was until fairly recently<sup></sup> the most commonly used English exonym of ]. (It is still the preferred exonym in Dutch and Portuguese.) &nbsp;--] 14:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::It is still her ], so 'is' is correct. However, as it's a name she may no longer use, 'was' would also be idiomatic. — ] 12:05, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
::Is "Nova Zembla" semi-Latin or just a garbled version of the Russian? ] (]) 14:42, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::In this borrowing, ''Zembla'' is clearly a phonetic adaptation, but (although this would be hard to ''prove''), I find the most plausible explanation for the component ''Nova'' that it arose by alignment with the then many Latin geonyms found on maps and atlases starting with ''Nova''. In any case, the evidence is that ''Nova Zembla'' used to be seen as a Latin name, as from the use of the ] {{serif|Novam Zemblam}} , in 1570, and the ] {{serif|Novæ Zemblæ}} , in 1660. &nbsp;--] 20:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:It was named in 1621, when James I made ] lord of the area. This lordship was granted in the . ''Praefato Domino Willelmo Alexander ... nomine Novae Scotiae.'' Though he left his own name as William and didn't change it to Willelmo, he apparently took the instruction to call the place ''Nova Scotia'' very literally. ]&nbsp;] 14:38, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::Was Nova Scotia the only Scottish colony ever? Maybe it is a Scottish thing to use Latin? ] (]) 14:45, 5 January 2025 (UTC)


::: There was also the ], i.e. New Caledonia.--] (]) 15:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::One could make a distinction between "My surname '''was''' Smith" and "My maiden name '''is''' Smith". But I agree with JK and GH that "was" is idiomatically ok for the second example.
::::And re-used for ] by ] in 1774. <span class="nowrap">]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></span> 18:25, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::If, prior to marriage, Mary had changed her surname legally to e.g. Coburg, then she could quite accurately say "My maiden name '''was''' <s>Hanover</s> Smith but now it '''is''' Coburg". Sounds odd, admittedly. -- ] 13:01, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
::::And Sir ] claimed ] (or Nova Albion) in the California area in 1579. <span class="nowrap">]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></span> 18:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::::After Mary <s>snuffs it</s> shuffles off this mortal coil, however, I'd say her maiden name ''was'' Smith. —] 15:18, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Back then (the 17th century) it was a European thing to use Latin in a lot of contexts, particularly in ]. Consider for example Isaac Newton's magnum opus, ]. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 18:10, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::She just began her new life with Tom and we're already planning for her death? For shame... ] 18:43, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
:There are the ] (Latin for ]). ] (]) 17:31, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::And Australia, from Terra Australis (Southland), for a while also known as New Holland. ] (]) 09:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
:] (Greek/Latin, location uncertain) and ] (in a former Russian colony or territory; I don't know whether the Russians named it, but the Alaskans did in 1996). <span class="nowrap">]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></span> 17:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
* Guys, I am grateful for all your answers. I just want to point out that my question was not about names in Latin (there are other exmples btw: Virginia, Georgia, Columbia/Colombia, Argentina, maybe Guinea, etc.) but specifically names in Latin where an equivalent in a modern European language seems to be more natural. I was simply curious as to why "Nova Scotia" instead of "New Scotland". All your examples are great but for very few of them (if any) an equivalent into a modern European language comes readily to mind. For example "New Caledonia" would have no "equivalent into a modern European language". Caledonia is itself a Latinism. So is "Batavia" say. There are many places in Europe with classical equivalents. Using one of those is not exactly the same thing as using a Latin translation of a modern name. Clearly it is not always clear cut. "Hispania" and "Austria" would be considered Latin translations of "Spain" and "Austria", but "Lusitania" and "Helvetia" would not be considered Latin translations of "Portugal" and "Switzerland". Does it depend on whether the Latin and the modern language equivalent are related etymologically? Of if that relation is commonly perceived? If the city of New York had been named instead "Novum Eboracum" would we be in one case or the other? I'll let you decide. The two names are linked but it is pretty involved. ] (]) 18:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
::'Caledonia' is no more of a Latinism than 'Scotia', and is sometimes used as a near synonym for 'Scotland' in modern ] (including ], not to be confused with ], or ] in which it's called ]). It would be rather confusing if we called two different places "New Scotland" – I suppose Cook could have named his discovery "New Pictland", but I'm not sure if that would have gone down well.
::You refer to 'modern European language', but these (particularly English) have long since absorbed a great deal of Latin, both in assimilated and 'classical' form, so to me your attempted distinctions appears meaningless. Others may differ. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 10:18, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:::"Austria" is a Latin coinage to begin with. Otherwise, there are a few languages which have calqued the native "Österreich" (Eastern Kingdom). Navajo has apparently the descriptive moniker "Homeland of the ]". ] (]) 12:47, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
::::And now I'm curious about place-names in sign languages. I dimly remember (or misremember) that the Trappist sign for Jerusalem means ‘Jew city’. ] (]) 22:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::As far as I know, they're generally spelled out letter by letter, unless they are famous enough to get their own sign. Some might be "compound-signed" from their constituent parts if they're transparent enough, I guess. ] (]) 23:42, 9 January 2025 (UTC)


= January 6 =
== types of actors in C 17th france ==


== Lowercase L that looks like capital I with an extra serif ==
Hi, I'm looking for a list of the strange synonyms for 'actor' that were used in 17th century Europe - can't remember if they were idioms or epithets, or descriptive terms for the different types of theatre in which the actor subtypes performed. Can anyone help me with this? I'm particularly hopinh for derogatory terms suggestive of overacting, pantomime, general hammishness.


I just came across on ]'s a lowercase ] that looks the like capital ] with an extra serif sticking to the left in the middle (kind of like {{angbr|1=<span style="font-family: serif;">I</span>}} superimposed with ] {{angbr|1=<span style="font-family: serif; font-variant-numeric: oldstyle-nums;">1</span>}}). See e.g. "looks", "Viola", "Winslet", etc. .
Thanks all, ] 12:53, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


Is this style of lowercase L something found in existing typefaces? The font is by ] and it appears to be the only typeface of theirs that has this type of L. ] (]) 05:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
:See ]... ] 15:05, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


:Beats me why they're calling those all one typeface instead of five. Anyway, in the "OG serif" incarnation, they got the weird arm on the lowercase L from ]. The ] also has one. ] (from ]) also has the nub (arm? Bar? Flag?) on lowercase L in many instances, but for some reason not all of them.
Thanks for that, but they're more characters than types of actor - I'm looking for a list of words like 'histrion', 'mummer', that kinda thing. The kind of words that might be scornfully uttered by someone religiously disposed to a mistrust of theatre. ] 00:26, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
:Edit: I think the nub is missing only in ], mainly <code>el</code>. And I think this is originally a ] thing. ] shows a similar but less distinct effect, due I think to the ]. The scribe first draws a minim, then extends it to write the lowercase L. ] has it, but only in the blackletter face (top right). I think the explanation is thus the same as ]. ]&nbsp;] 12:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
::The {{serif|⟨eſ&hairsp;⟩}} pairs in the Valerius Maximus incunable also have nubless {{serif|⟨ſ&hairsp;⟩}}es. &nbsp;--] 00:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
::Thanks, so there is precedent. ] (]) 09:17, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:::There's a Swedish publisher, Modernista, that uses an st ligature in their logotype. I believe they also use it constantly and consistently within the books themselves, as a brand identity, which of course could come across as pretty strained. ] (]) 12:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
::In that Caslon specimen the ⟨{{serif|b}}⟩ and ⟨{{serif|h}}⟩ also have nubs. The letter ⟨{{serif|k}}⟩ does not occur in the specimen's text, but we also find the Caslon black ⟨{{serif|k}}⟩ nubbed. &nbsp;--] 14:11, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:Unsatisfied, I dug up . {{tq|The lowercase letter /l shows the most distinctive feature of the letters. It has a small serif on the left side at x-height, called ergot or sécante in French. The serif is a remnant of the calligraphic style which had not appeared in any previous typefaces. This serif makes the Romain du Roi unique. The reason why the Romain du Roi /l possessed the serif is not clearly documented. One theory says that this serif was used to distinguish it more clearly from the capital letter /l, which has the same height. The other theory claims that Louis XIV wanted to have an unmistakable feature in the /l, because his name began with this letter.}} Yeah. Thing is, Romain du Roi put the bars on the top and bottom of the glyph gratuitously, so if it then needed disambiguating from capital i, that doesn't seem like a very rational thing to have done. ]&nbsp;] 17:28, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
::You might not be satisfied looking for rationality. I think the aim was modernity and it might have been intended to be transitional. The {{serif|/b}} and the {{serif|/d}} have their strong upper serifs so the {{serif|/l}} could not be without its own ( there still can be felt some of that era heavy ] dynamics - digging in up - in the double {{serif|/l}} as in "brilliant"). --] (]) 23:32, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
::Sweet, I've updated ] and ]. ] (]) 09:38, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
:::The source (written in a sans serif font) ]. Taken literally, it says that the Romain du Roi needed to distinguish <code>l</code> from <code>L</code>, but we know what it means. Thank you for actually improving Misplaced Pages, I'll consider doing that sometimes too. :) ]&nbsp;] 14:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
:It's a borrowing from calligraphy and tends to be called a "spur" in English (I'm getting this from ]'s book "Revival Type", page 86-7). It and the double-head serif on the el were fairly common in French typefaces until about the end of the nineteenth century. Swiss Typefaces, formerly BP Type, have several fonts influenced by it.
:But I'm not an expert on this. My impression is that the best sources are in French, Sebastién Morlighem's very good PhD thesis ''The 'modern face' in France and Great Britain, 1781-1825: typography as an ideal of progress'', on types appearing in its wake, lists various sources on page 35 including a book ''Le romain du roi: la typographie au service de l’État''. I need to cite that thesis in more articles. ] (]) 22:27, 14 January 2025 (UTC)


= January 7 =
Believe it or not, "hypocrite" used to be a standard word for 'actor' I believe the word itself derives from the name of an Ancient World actor-- Hypocras. 'Le chariot d'Hypocras' was a French periphrase referring to the acting profession. ] 12:40, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


== Examples of the use of "might" as a past tense? ==
I never knew that, thanks - although this would have it different about the etymology, I know etymologies are often quite iffy - thanks, too, for the word periphrase - didn't knew that one either.


The past form of "may", "might", is mostly used as a conditional: "He might have said that, then again might not have". Uses of "might" as a past tense meaning "was/were allowed to" seem to be much rarer: "He might not say that" is most often intended to mean (and understood to mean) "it is possible that he will not say that", not as "he was not allowed to say that".
== Anyone turned this up independantly? ==


But that usage is not completely unknown: for example Edna St Vincent Millay writes in her sonnet "Bluebeard": "This door you might not open and you did / So enter now, and see for what slight thing / You are betrayed".
I'm trying to find (Again) ], which I KNOW I found on some North Carolinian univeristy's page (It wasn't Chapel Hill/Ibiblio), however all I'm getting are noxious reprints on Google. The original is definitely out of copyright (17something!), but Wikisource's is this useless thing with maybe 8 paragraphs: ]. Thanx, ] 16:18, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
:Did you ask ] where he got the text to add to Wikisource? —] 16:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
::Have a look at . I know nothing about this book, but some of the text from your title (as read in ) matches. ] 16:54, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
:::I found this which may be helpful. ] 20:02, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


Do you have other examples of "might" being used as a past tense of "may"? I mean examples from the literature, jounalism, etc. not examples made up by Wiktionary editors, or other dictionaries, not because I don't trust Wiktionary editors or dictionary editors, but because I'd trust more examples that were not produced specifically for the purpose of illustrating a dictionary definition.
::I wasn't thinking of asking him too quickly given the very defective state I found it it @ WS, however I probably should since he couldn't fabricated that out of thin air. ] 21:12, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


I'm especially interested in examples where "might" is used as a past tense in affirmative constructions! The examples above are all with "might not". I have the feeling the use of "might" in a negative sentence would sound more natural than in an affirmative sentence (if there's any example of it at all). Do you agree?
:There are for sale at abebooks.com, though they spell it Pirates. And check for ISBN 1585745588. ] 18:29, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


] (]) 17:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
== what does he says? ==


:He appointed twelve that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach. {{Bibleverse|Mark|3:14|niv}} <span class="nowrap">]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></span> 17:13, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
At this audio at the minute 04:45 there is a word that I don't understand. He says something like "huge tanks of ??". Could a native speaker of English tell me what he says.
::Great. Thanks. Please keep all kinds of examples coming, but watch out especially for examples where "might" is used in a main (or independent) clause (rather than a subordinate clause such as "(in order) that they might..."). ] (]) 17:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:::In ] we find ''...after the dismissal of the Short Parliament, he declared it his opinion that at such a crisis the king might levy money without the Parliament''. --] (]) 18:23, 7 January 2025 (UTC)


:::Here's another one, not directly subordinate in a ''that'' clause, though still notionally subordinate to a verb of speaking within a multi-sentence passage of reported speech, in a 19th-century summary of a parliamentary debate {{tq|"Mr BUCKNILL (Surry, Epsom) said, Member after Member had spoken of a particular company and, if he might use the expression, it had really in this Debate been ridden to death "}}. ] ] 19:12, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
*]-]&nbsp;</sup>]] 20:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


:::I just went to Google News and searched on the phrase "he might have done". Here was one of the hits, : "A former Marine who trained Daniel Penny to apply a chokehold said Thursday that images and video suggest that he might have done so improperly when he killed a homeless man last year." And this headline : "Trump's Missing Phone Logs Mean We Don't Even Know Half the Illegal Shit He Might Have Done on 1/6". And this : "Although there is an area he might have done better." And : "But Peter persisted, and now he can reflect on the earlier disappointments and what he might have done differently". My native-speaker instinct insists that "might" is the only correct form in these cases and "may" is an error, although I know others use it. --] (]) 19:56, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
**Thanks!!
:::: To me "may have done" is usable if it is currently possible (that is, the speaker does not currently know it to be false) that it happened, whereas "might have done" is usable in that case and ''also'' in the counterfactual case (if this had happened, then that might have happened). Prescription alert: Saying "if this had happened, then that may have happened" is in my opinion an error.
:::: But that isn't what the OP is asking about. The OP is asking about using "might" as a past tense of "may", in the sense that "A might do B" means "A was morally allowed, or otherwise had the permission or authority, to do B". This sense does exist but has become somewhat rare. --] (]) 20:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Does this count: "{{tq|I did what I might.}}"<sup></sup>? &nbsp;--] 00:12, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Also: "{{tq|Then Titul took a knife from his belt and asked the Gaul if he could kill himself; and the Gaul tried, but he might not.}}"<sup></sup> &nbsp;--] 00:29, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Absolutely. Both are past tenses. The first example is a relative clause. The second example is an independent clause. And both are affirmative constructions. Thanks. ] (]) 01:01, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::Although the polarity is positive, the first of these uses sounds quite natural to me. The second use feels somewhat archaic, which, I think, was the intention of the author. &nbsp;--] 10:34, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::Both of these examples seem to lose the distinction between "may" and "can", though. --] (]) 19:36, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Like so many lexical terms, auxiliary ''may'' has several senses. These include "to be able to" (labelled '']'' on Wiktionary) and "to be allowed to". In both uses here we see the first sense. Note that ''can'' also has both senses ("Can you help me?" and "Can I smoke here?"). &nbsp;--] 00:19, 9 January 2025 (UTC)


= January 8 =
] --Anon, July 16, 22:16 (UTC).


== Pronunciation of "breen" ==
=July 17=
==Latin phrase==
What does 'Quibus Societas Nobis Intemporaliter' mean in English? --<font color="green" face="Berling Antiqua">hello, i'm a ]</font> | ] 02:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


How do you pronounce the ''-breen'' that appears at the end of ] glacier names? I went through all the Svalbard -breen glacier articles on Misplaced Pages at Category:Glaciers_of_Spitsbergen, and not a single one provides IPA. ] (]) 02:32, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
:No great shakes with Latin, but it's something like "Who of the Society of the Lords of Time" = "], the ]". ] 09:22, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


:The ''-en'' ending is the ], and '']'' means "glacier", so, for example, ''Nansenbreen'' means "the Nansen glacier".
::I'm not too sure about that -- quibus is an ablative/dative plural, societas is nominative, nobis is the ablative/dative plural of the 1st. singular pronoun, and intemporaliter seems to be a negative adverb. It's rather enigmatic in isolation from a larger context, but my proposed rough translation would be: "by means of which, an alliance/partnership with us not for a short time". If ''nobis'' is in apposition with ''quibus'', the translation would need to be revised, but it's very difficult to know how without the larger context... ] 12:19, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
:The pronunciations in ] and ] would be slightly different, with also regional variations. I have no idea which variety of spoken Norwegian is prevalent among the roughly 2,500 Norvegicophone inhabitants of Svalbard.
:Extrapolating from the pronunciations of other words, I believe the pronunciation of ''-breen'' to be:
:* Nynorsk: /²brɛːn̩/
:* Bokmål:&nbsp; /bʁe̞ːn̩/
:For the meaning of the ] , see on Wiktionary ]. &nbsp;--] 10:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
:(Simultaneous editing) an example of Norwegian pronounciation, "Jostedaalsbreen" first mentioned around 0:06. Since Norwegian is a language of dialects I cannot rule out that there could be regional differences in pronounciation. -- ] (]) 10:24, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
::This agrees with my extrapolation of the Nynorsk pronunciation. &nbsp;--] 10:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
:::However, I believe the two ee in the middle are being distinguished in the pronounciation rather than just pronounced as a long vowel. -- ] (]) 11:40, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
::::The long vowel represents solely the <u>first</u> ⟨e⟩. The definitive suffix ''-en'' is represented by . The vertical understroke diacritic signifies that this is a ]. &nbsp;--] 15:46, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::Ok, that would make sense. Not an IPA expert here. -- ] (]) 16:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Regarding the dialect, I found this: https://munin.uit.no/handle/10037/14074. Excerpt from Google Translation: ''This is interesting because Svalbard has no local dialect. The language community on the archipelago is instead characterized by dialectal variation. The Norwegian population in Svalbard comes from all over Norway, and the average length of residence is short. ''. On Norwegian Misplaced Pages it stated that Nynorsk spellings have to be used for all town names in Svalbard but this probably has no bearing on the pronounciation practices. -- ] (]) 17:58, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
:Thank you all for your input! So it's a monosyllabic /²brɛːn̩/. ] (]) 21:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
::Is it really monosyllabic if a syllabic vowel is followed by a syllabic consonant? By the way, I believe the common Swedish curse word ''fan'' often is pronounced somewhat similarly. ] (]) 21:45, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
:::<u>By definition</u>, a syllabic consonant forms a syllable on its own. So we have two syllables, the first of which ends on a vowel. &nbsp;--] 00:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)


= January 9 =
:::It seems to be missing a verb... ] 14:56, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


== Is there a term which categorises these phrases? ==
::::A google of the phrase shews that it is used as a Username in certain forums. A bad Latin effort at "Doctor Who the Time Lord" seems just the sort of thing one would find in such a context. ] 08:31, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


Is there a lexicographic word or term to describe phrases such as "out and about", "bits and pieces", or "nooks and crannies"? There are many such phrases which conjoin words which are less often used separately. I am not thinking of "conjunction", but something which describes this particular quirk. For example, where I grew up, no-one would say "I was out in town yesterday" but "I was out and about the town". ] (]) 15:29, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::Except that there's no word in the phrase which remotely corresponds to either "Doctor" or "lord", and three of the words in the phrase are not in their typical dictionary-entry forms (but instead have particular inflections beyond the nominative singular)... ] 08:30, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


:I think a ], also called a set phrase, fixed expression, is the term you're looking for for the phrase. ] (for words not used outside set phrases) and ] (for phrases which have fixed order - you wouldn't say "about and out") may also be of interest. ] (]) 16:23, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
== What are some one-word synonyms for this phrase? ==
::All three examples above are irreversible binomials. &nbsp;--] 10:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)


: If you are thinking of expressions where a single meaning is carried by a conjunction of two near-synonyms, ] may be a fit. There is a narrow definition of that term where it covers only conjunctions of two terms that logically stand in a relation of subordination to each other, but there's also a wider usage where it's used for expressions like these, where the two terms are merely synonyms. ] ] 16:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
"...at an all time high." Got no help from Thesaurus sites.
::Such as "lively and quick". ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 18:04, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
::And also ]. ]&nbsp;] 18:42, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
: There's a similar concept in ]s. ] (]) 15:00, 12 January 2025 (UTC)


= January 11 =
Thank You,
Marcie


== Evening and night ==
:The synonyms branch depending on whether you are discussing a physical phenomenon (record breaking temperatures, water level, etc.) or an intangible (level of skill, emotion, etc.). I would suggest that "highest" and its synonyms would apply in most cases. ] 05:04, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


Does English refer a period from 22:00 to midnight as ''late evening''? Does English ever say "late-evening shows"? And is a period around 17:00 known as ''early evening'', and a period around midnight as ''early night''? And do English speskers ever say "late in the morning"? --] (]) 22:36, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
::"Unprecedented" is probably the best word for what Marcie wants. Of course, it doesn't necessarily imply an all-time high. But if the context is already established that something is rising, it will convey the meaning. "Global warming has caused unprecedented temperatures" would suggest that they are at an all-time high. "The ice age has caused unprecedented temperatures", on the other hand, would suggest an all-time low. In "the accident was caused by an unprecedented combination of circumstances", the word does not suggest anything numerical. But that's the sort of answer you get when you ask for a one-word synonym of a five-word phrase. --Anonymous, July 17, 2007, 04:27 (UTC).


:We say "late evening". The exact time is probably after ]. It could be hyphenated if you like, but isn't. We say "early evening" and "late morning". The phrase "late in the morning" is fine, and not at all awkward, but is not engraved into our English-speaking minds as an idiom like "]". Our article on ] defines the evening as 14:00 to 22:00, so later than that may be night, but in common usage the definition is flexible, and "night" and "evening" undoubtedly overlap. Night shift workers live in a state of confusion about whether it is currently night or morning, and which day it is. ]&nbsp;] 00:59, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
: Also, "unsurpassed" works. (] 05:31, 17 July 2007 (UTC))
::Style guides recommend hyphenation in attributive use to avoid the interpretation as "evening shows that are late". &nbsp;--] 09:58, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
:"Superlative" is another possibility. ] 07:54, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
:Here are a few examples of "late-evening show": , , . And here are a few examples of "late in the morning": , , . &nbsp;--] 09:48, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
:A "peak"? ] 12:42, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
:In American English "late evening" is not a specific period of time but just a way of saying late in the evening. The distinction between evening and night has less to do with the exact time, and more to do with whether one is out with friends or at home preparing for bed. I would never consider 22-24 late evening (that's night) but others might. There are no "late evening shows"; ] air at that time. "Early night" is not a common idiom. ] (]) 21:52, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
:Zenith - ] 12:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
::@]: In British English, "early night" is commonly used to signify going to bed earlier than usual, as in "I'm really tired so I'm going to have an early night." Similarly, "I had a late night last night" suggests having not gone to bed early enough. See . ] (]) 22:41, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
::: We can use "early night" in that sense in American English too (though "make it an early night" sounds a bit more idiomatic to me). But that doesn't seem to be the sense the OP was asking about. --] (]) 22:49, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
:<small>This reminds me a lot of when ] said he would smoke marijuana. --] (]) 22:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC) </small>


My home Internet connection has failed. I reported it to my ISP. I had an email from them yesterday (Sunday) at 5.34pm telling me they would be calling me "today" about the problem. It's now past 10.00am Monday. Still waiting. ] (]) 23:13, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
::"Peak" and "zenith" don't really work, because they imply that this is the highest point that will ever be reached. An "all-time high", if it was in the past, was a zenith or a peak. If it is in the present, however, whatever it is may go still higher in the future. "At an all-time high" really means "at its highest point up to now". ] 14:59, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
:OK, so they didn't do what they said they were going to do. Imagine my shock. What does it have to do with the question? --] (]) 23:17, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Speaking of "today" as a future time at 5.34pm. ] (]) 23:01, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
::Or they'll call at 23:59, "late today". &nbsp;--] 23:52, 12 January 2025 (UTC)


= January 12 =
:::I agree that "peak" doesn't work, but I say it's for the opposite reason -- it could refer to a "local maximum", which is merely the highest point within a particular time period. --Anon, July 17, 17:26 (UTC).


== Latin alphabet ==
::::In some context, simply the word "record" is used: "record temperature" to mean "all-time high temperature". Of course, there can be ambiguity in this, as a record temperature could mean all-time high or low. Then one must rely on other information. (Is it summer or winter?) — ] 23:11, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


Why did Khmer and Lao not switch to Latin alphabet during French colonization, unlike Vietnamese?
==Alphabetical Order==
--] (]) 13:43, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
What is the generally accepted order in which to alphabetize the following example?
:I assume you forgot a "not", and it might be since ] was a highly complex writing system only mastered by about 5% of the population. A Latin-based writing system would have been a lot more accessible at the time, both to French colonialists and the majority of the Vietnamese, themselves. ] (]) 13:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)


:40bus -- Khmer and Lao already had alphabets, since they had experienced significant Indic influence. The Vietnamese did not have an alphabet, since they experienced predominant Chinese influence. The ] and ] were used in what is now Vietnam, but Vietnamese-speakers did not adopt them. ] (]) 06:47, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
1. The Good Earth


= January 14 =
2. The Goodbye Girl


== Nuevo! ==
In other words, in #1 (The Good Earth) ... what character follows the "d" in "Good"? Is it the "blank" character? Or is the "blank" character simply ignored and you move on to the next character, "E"?


A lot of areas of the Spanish Empire in America had a name in the pattern of "New XXX" where XXX is usually a Spanish province or city. Some examples are: ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]. I'm not able to recognize any pattern or obvious motivation for them to select precisely these names. Why call some place New Extremadura and not, for example, New Catalonia? Where they chosen randomly? Is there any reason behind them? Thank you? ] (]) 10:10, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
If the "blank" character counts, I assume the correct alphabetical order is The Good Earth ... and then The Goodbye Girl. If the blank character is simply ignored and you move on to the next character, "E", I assume the correct alphabetical order is The Goodbye Girl ... and then The Good Earth. Please advise. Thanks. (] 05:44, 17 July 2007 (UTC))


:I don't know the answer, but ] would probably have been the one who decided, or at least approved, some of ]. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 10:22, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
:See ]. ] 06:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


::It's not just the Spanish. An early name for the British part of Australia, and now one of its states, is ]. Apparently ] thought it looked like South Wales. Then just across the ocean is New Zealand. That one came from the Dutch. ] (]) 10:31, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
The short answer is that both ways are accepted. Dictionaries typically "alphabetize by letters" (i.e. #2 comes first): this is a great advantage when dealing with expressions that are spelled spelled either as one or as two words (like "back seat" and "backseat"), because it means that both forms sort together and so you don't have to guess which form the dictionary uses in order to look it up. But other types of lists, like indexes in books, often "alphabetize by words" (i.e. #1 comes first): this has the advantage of keeping together all phrases that begin with the same word (for example, if you also had "good apples" on the list, you would want it grouped with "good earth", not separated by "goodbye").
:::Not to forget New Amsterdam/New York and New Orleans. However, these things aren't consistent as the Spanish also copied names without the Nuevo/Nueva in front, like ] and ]. Would be interesting to see if this was a time-dependent pattern. As to the choice of names, this could well have to do with the individuals involved. E.g. a lot of the ]es came from Extremadura, including ] and ], and Castilia, Granada etc. aren't far from that area either. -- ] (]) 11:18, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
::::{{small|They decided to follow the rule, "Nuevo say neuvo again." ] (]) 21:04, 15 January 2025 (UTC)}}
:::: The English were in a habit of omitting 'new' too. In the US there's Durham, Manchester, Washington. In Australia there's Newcastle. What's notable is all of these are distinctly English names, very old ones with meanings that make sense only to historians. It's highly unlikely they arose the same way in AUS and the US. ~~----
::::::Indeed. In 1940, the Royal Navy was able to rename ] after British and American towns that share a common name. ] (]) 12:12, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
::: The whole Australian mainland was previously known as New Holland. Anything less like Holland it would be impossible to find, but there you go. But at least this recognises that the Dutch were the first Europeans definitely known to have landed on Australia, in ]. -- ] </sup></span>]] 19:12, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
:They probably weren't chosen randomly. Possible reasons include:
:* Naming after the namer's homeland. ] (Chile) was named by ], who was from Extremadura
:* Naming to honour a patron, e.g. New York was named after the Duke of York
:* Naming after a resemblance (New South Wales, as stated above).
:] (]) 11:15, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{small|Nuevo say nuevo again. ] (]) 21:04, 15 January 2025 (UTC)}}
::A variation - Within the town of ], Australia, is what is effectively now the suburb of ]. It apparently gained that name because when it was established, Moe had just become a ]. ] (]) 22:53, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Also the ], a 1965 merger of ] and ]. It was originally intended to be pronounced "New-ham" but is now universally called "Newum". ] (]) 12:04, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
::::It's not obvious to me how "Newum" would be pronounced. It could be "Nee-wum". ] (]) 23:04, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::/ˈnju(w)əm/ ] (]) 23:25, 16 January 2025 (UTC)


= January 17 =
Since your example was movie titles, I'll note that early editions of ]'s annual movie guidebook
alphabetized by words, but now they alphabetize by letters.
This makes some sense since titles like "Man Eater" and "Maneater" now sort together, but those are rare enough that
I still think the other way worked better.

--Anonymous, July 17, 2007: 17:40 (UTC).

==Telephone greetings==
Why do many languages have a greeting for answering a telephone which differs from another greeting? ] 06:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

:You might as well ask "Why did people start using ] and stuff with the advent of computers, and not before?" (i.e., in letters). It seems to be an outgrowth of the technology used for communication, I'd say. +] 06:29, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Before telephones, the word "hello" was often spelled "halloo", and it was used more for attracting people's attention from a distance than to start a close-up face-to-face conversation... ] 12:05, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
:According to the common story, Bell wanted to use "Ahoy" as the telephone greeting. ] 14:39, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
::Which is why in ] ] says 'Ahoy, Hoy?'. ]

:It's an interesting question. It shows that answering the phone is a different communication situation from greeting in other contexts. I wonder what effect seeing the identity of the caller on a mobile phone has: I know I often say 'hi John' etc. on a mobile, while I'd say 'hello' on my landline: knowing who the caller is changes the situation to something more like normal interaction. So may be greeting on the (landline) phone is different and often uses a different word because I don't know who it is I'm greeting (and I'm not expected to know either). ] 19:39, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
::Some people answer the landline saying "2242" or whatever, some say "Hallo", etc. - ] 11:09, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

:::2242?! ] 15:04, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

::::I answer the landline with the number, but the mobile I usually say "Hullo " ] 15:09, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

== Caucus of one ==

What type of phrase is this? How would you explain its meaning in the simplest terms possible? I wasn't able to find the phrase in Misplaced Pages. Am I correct in assuming it is a tongue-in-cheek reference to a politician taking a different position from the colleagues they would traditionally caucus with? Thanks. ] 09:46, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

:It's a play on ], a former recruiting slogan for the US army. A lot of people laughed at that slogan because it sounds more like they're recruiting ] than soldiers in an organized army where teamwork is important. So your "caucus of one" may refer both to the original slogan, and to its unintended connotations. --] 16:20, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

== Latin as a spoken language ==

Since ] was an Oxford scholar then he would have known Latin very well, perhaps as much as English. My understanding is that if a person knew Latin, that it not only was a language the Church used in it writings (i.e. Bible, documents), but that it would have been actually spoken among the European scholars of the Fourteenth Century - especially if that was the only language in common among themselves. Is that correct?--] <sup>]</sup> 13:25, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

:In the fourteenth century, Latin, or more precisely, ] or ], was certainly a spoken language used as a ] by Europeans who spoke different native languages. This was certainly true of 14th-century scholars, most of whom were also in some way connected with the Church, whose official language was also Latin. ] 15:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
::Latin continued to be a spoken language for centuries; it's how George I communicated with his Privy Council, when he did. ] <small>]</small> 16:50, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
::: ] was conducted in Latin and the pope recently lifted the restrictions on this - http://en.wikinews.org/Pope_to_lift_restrictions_on_Latin_Mass. ]
::::Latin was a pretty standard academic language into the 19th century (Newton and Gauss both wrote important works in Latin) and really only fell into decline in the 20th century. For Wycliffe, it's entirely possible that he may have actually spent more time speaking Latin than English. There were some missionary priests during the Elizabethan era who were educated on the continent and spoke more Latin than English (although that's also an extreme case). It explains some of the odd Latinisms in the Douay-Rheims translation of the bible. As an aside, the mass that Wycliffe would have celebrated was ''not'' the Tridentine mass, but more likely the ]. The Tridentine mass was codified by the ] in the 16th century, long after Wycliffe had died. ] 17:03, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
::::::And ]. ] <small>]</small> 17:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to presume that ] spoke and wrote then in the Renaissance Latin. Which Latin would Wycliffe have known, both?--] <sup>]</sup> 16:58, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
:Arg, people keep editing when I'm editing. Wycliffe would have known the Latin of his era. He would have had no problem reading classical latin, and over time, the structures of Latin became simpler (so it's much easier to read, say, any church document of the late middle ages than it is to read Virgil or Cicero. Caesar, on the other hand is pretty straightforward. What exactly are you trying to get at with this series of questions? I've grown intrigued (although if it turns out that this is some convoluted scheme to get out of a speeding ticket, I'm going to be PO'd). ] 17:03, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
::If you have the vocabulary; Wyclif's Latin might have included a lot of jargon, depending on the subject. But there's not really that much difference; more a matter of style, pronunciation, and choices of spelling than anything else. ] <small>]</small> 17:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Well -----> history has shown that Wycliffe and Petrarch never contacted each other, however lived in the same time periods. Hypothetically (keep in mind I am not saying it is so), what if Petrarch and Wycliffe met. Petrarch did not know English, Wycliffe did not know Italian nor French --> however they both knew the common language of Latin. Then (hypothetically) they could communicate. Now I know there might be some that will get excited about this "hypothetical example", however keep in mind I said hypothetical. In this example then, it looks like to me they could have easily communicated, since the common language is Latin (which they both knew). See, it had nothing to do with a speeding ticket, which obviously will be real easy to settle compared to this "hypothetical example" I just threw out. What do you think, is it not possible then with the common language being Latin they could have communicated with each other? Both Wycliffe and Petrarch knew Latin extremely well, so to me it seems possible (should they have ever met, which history said they did not).--] <sup>]</sup> 17:53, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Wycliffe's Latin would have been transitional between Medieval and Renaissance Latin. The distinction between the two is not much more than stylistic. I find it hard to imagine that Wycliffe would have spoken more Latin than English. I think that spoken Latin would have been reserved for formal occasions (e.g. lectures) or conversation with foreigners. Wycliffe was born and raised in England and spent virtually his whole life in England. Most of his colleagues at Oxford would have been English. It is hard to imagine that they would have used Latin for everyday conversation when they all spoke (Middle) English as their first language. On the other hand, it would not be surprising for Oxford scholars to mix Latin phrases into their English conversation. ] 17:55, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
So it looks like (bottomline) in my "hypothetical example" that Petrarch and Wycliffe '''could have easily communicated with each other''', since both had this common language of Latin. In my "hypothetical example" this would have been where they had ''conversations with foreigners'' , since each would have been a foreigner to the other - especially since neither had a common language with each other outside of Latin. I don't know about Wycliffe speaking Latin more than English, however Wycliffe knew Latin very well. Also Petrarch knew Latin very well, so bottomline I don't see that they would have had any problem communicating with each other (should they have ever met). Now according to history Wycliffe never left England and Petrarch never visited England, so this of course could not have happened ---> but in my "hypothetical example" they could have in fact communicated with each other very well.--] <sup>]</sup> 19:03, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

::::A small quibble: Wycliffe actually did leave England at least once, according to our biography, to attend a peace conference in Bruges, Flanders (present-day Belgium). However, Petrarch did not attend that conference, so far as we know. ] 19:54, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

You happened to have hit upon something '''very''' interesting. It looks like Wycliffe was at this conference in ]
on July 26, 1374. According to history, Petrarch died July 19 in his '''69'''th year - '''which just happens to be a week before!'''
If I am not mistaken, didn't Petrarch visit this area, perhaps more than once in his life? So while it may be "a small quibble" it is an important fact - if nothing else other than a pure coincidence. Now continuing with my "hypothetical example" - what if history had not recorded that Petrarch had not died then and he met up with Wycliffe there in Flanders (an area within a week's travel), could they have not '''easily communicated with each other'''. What if history said instead that Petrarch died in ], where coincidently Petrarch was buried for the second time in 1380. Again, I'm sure there will be some people that will get excited over this, however keep in mind this is just a "hypothetical example".
The point I am making is that ""hypothetically" Petrarch and Wycliffe could have easily communicated with each other - had they met. However history does not record such an event, so it is meaningless that ] came out in 1382 (which is the first English version of the New Testament).--] <sup>]</sup> 21:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

:"Easily" may be stretching it. They could have easily corresponded writing in Latin (although Petrarch probably would have written much more classically-influenced Latin), but if they were able to speak it fluently, and they may not have been, they may have had wildly different accents and may not have been able to completely understand each other. ] 01:52, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

::Doug, just so that I'm clear, are you saying that your example is hypothetical? :) -- ] 02:52, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely, since history has recorded that Petrarch died on the evening of July 19, 1374 (when he was '''69''' years old). He just happened to have been moved and buried '''again''' in 1380 at Arquà Petrarca (that's purely coincidential). Just because ] came out in 1382 - that would again be just coincidential! Bottomline, in my "hypothetical example", Petrarch and Wycliffe could have in fact communicated with each other - had they met, which history has recorded they did not. Just because the only time Wycliffe left England was to go to Flanders, which happened to be one week after Petrarch died - that has nothing to do with anything, it is just coincidential. Bruges just happens to be within a week's travel from where Petrarch died - again purely coincidential. Flanders just happens to be an area Petrarch previously visited - coincidential. Yes, let me make it perfectly clear, I am saying "hypothetical." It's got to be hypothetical, because history has recorded Petrarch died July 19, 1374. History also records that it was his daughter Francesca that found him at his desk with a pen in hand and Laura in his heart. History records that it was ] who was the executor of his estate - which of course has nothing to do with this at all. So I hope I have made myself clear on this: these 600 year old facts that just happen to look coincidential are just that - purely coincidential. The "hypothetical example" of Wycliffe and Petrarch being able to communicate with each other since they both knew Latin very well - is just a hypothetical example, nothing more. If you are thinking something different (whatever that may be) that would be up to you to conclude - my examples are just hypothetical and coincidential. History has recorded certain events and certain dates, so I will have to go with this "recorded history" since that certainly can not be wrong. Another coincidence is that nowhere in recorded history does it say Wyclif's Bible came out '''before''' 1380. Let's just say "interesting" - and certainly coincidential, nothing more than that. Since the consenses is that the "Babylonian Captivity" (Petrarch's coined phrase) of the Avignon papacy was for '''69''' years (1308 - 1377) would be coincidential. If I were you, I would not look into this and investigate it further - since all these are just merely coincidences - especially the events of Wycliffe after his trip to . It seems to me that Wycliffe and Petrarch were both opponents of the Avignon system and would have been considered ecclesiastical annoyances. It looks like to me they had very similar viewpoints they could have shared. History has recorded however that they never met - so obviously they could not have shared these.--] <sup>]</sup> 13:44, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

:I don't think it is coincidental at all, it's just a bunch of stuff that happened. I don't know what you're up to but it doesn't seem to be going anywhere. ] 20:09, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

== How do you write this in Korean? ==

Hi. I was wondering how your write this in Korean: <i>"Sorry, I meant to say, 'I am tired'."</i> --] 21:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

::There are a number of ways and expressions including the somewhat literal '죄송합니다. 피곤한다고 말씀을 하려고 했습니다.' ] 21:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
::'죄송합니다. 피곤하다고 말하려고 했었습니다.' would be more accurate and grammatically correct translation. :) <span style="background:#CDF;width:4em;font:.9em;text-align:center;">]</span> 03:52, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Nice, Mumun Man, you beat me here =) ] 00:32, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

:Whoa, it's just a whole bunch of question marks on this computer... --] 04:02, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

== Difference between ] and ] ==

What ist the difference between homophones and oronyms? Does homophone only refer to single words whereas oronym is more often used for longer phrases? -- ] 23:19, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

:I'd never heard of oronym before. Reading the article, I'm told "While they initially sound like ]s, reading the lyrics will reveal that this is not the case". I have serious doubts about this sentence. The thing about mondegreens is that the listener does <u>not</u> have the written words in front of them; all they know is the sounds they hear, which they mistakenly interpret as certain words when in fact they were intended to mean certain other words. What a person hears is not necessarily what a speaker says. ] relies on this principle. A mondegreen more often than not occurs when the listener mishears the ''sounds'' actually made by the speaker, but that is not a necessary condition for a mondegreen. If that were not so, the oft-quoted classic mondegreen “Gladly my cross I’d bear” vs. “Gladly, my cross-eyed bear” would not be a mondegreen at all.

: says oronyms refer to "phrases or sentences whose sound can be interpreted in more than one way as another valid phrase or sentence". The example they give is "The sons raise meat" vs. "The sun's rays meet". There’s no mishearing of the sounds involved here, merely a misinterpretation of the meaning. I’d suggest that oronyms are a sub-class of mondegreens. -- ] 02:47, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

::However, on reflection, another approach would be to strictly differentiate them as follows:
::*A mondegreen is a misinterpretation of a spoken phrase because of a mishearing of the sounds. (The speaker ''said'' A, but the hearer ''heard'' B.)
::*An oronym is a misinterpretation of a spoken phrase, not through any mishearing, but because the sounds correctly heard can validly represent another phrase. (The speaker ''said'' A, the hearer ''heard A'', but A represents more than one thing and the hearer's brain chose the wrong one.)

::That would require some re-writing of our mondegreen article, and the production of some suitable references, because currently we give certain examples of mondegreens that would not fit this definition of mondegreen, but would fit this definition of oronym. -- ] 05:22, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

:::It would also require redefining ''mondegreen''. It seems to me clear that the reason that many well-known mondegreens don't fit this delineation is simply that this is not what the words mean. Sure, it ''could'' be, in a world where all neologisms immediately mark off a space for their definition and older words accede, but it ain't. ] 17:46, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I find that there is no difference except that "oronym" ''isn't really a term'' (except in the meaning "mountain name" of course). We should turn this into a disambiguation page saying: (1) see ], (2) see ]. 17:59, 18 July 2007 (UTC)] <small>]</small>

== Islam's bugbear ==

What are the Arabic words for ''Crusade(r)(s)''? &mdash;] 23:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
:{{lang-ar|صليبي}}, {{ArabDIN|ṣalībī}}, is the general adjective. {{lang-ar|الحروب الصليبيون}}, {{ArabDIN|al-ḥurūbu 'ṣ-salībyūn}}, means 'the Crusades'. {{lang-ar|الصليبيون}}, {{ArabDIN|aṣ-ṣalībyūn}}, is 'the crusaders'. — ] 23:39, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

:Ultimately stemming from "{{lang-ar|صليب}}, {{ArabDIN|ṣalīb}}, "cross". Of course, that is a more recent invention, like the English word "crusade". Contemporaries usually called them "ifranj" or "faranji", "Franks" (since they often came from France), or "Rumi", "Romans" (as a general description of Westerners from the territory of the Western Roman Empire, or because the First Crusade was assumed to be an army from the Eastern Roman Empire), or, sometimes, simply one of the various words for Christian. ("Nazarenes" is a common one, if I remember correctly.) ] 01:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
::Yes, historically, {{lang|ar|الإفرنج}}, {{ArabDIN|al-’Ifranğ}}, would have been the word used. In modern Arabic, it simply means 'the Europeans', but its root meaning is 'the ]'. {{lang|ar|الروم}}, {{ArabDIN|ar-Rūm}}, would be the usual word to describe ] (]), so it's more likely to describe a Byzantine connexion. {{lang|ar|النصري}}, {{ArabDIN|an-Naṣirī}}, is an older word for Christians. I would say that this word more likely would have described Levantine Christians of the time. However, there may have been some amount of association. — ] 11:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

=July 18=

== Latin translation ==

Can you please translate into Latin 'Only God Can Judge Me' {{unsigned|Ijr1971}}

:''Ovaltinum plus bebite!''. But don't get a tattoo of that if you're under 30. Seriously. I don't know anyone with youthful tattoos who doesn't regret them, and a common pop-culture phrase like this -- in a language you don't speak, no less -- has "regret" written all over it. --] 15:00, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
::Let Ijr1971 (who I suspect is 35 or 36) make his own decisions. As we already discussed a few weeks ago when this question was asked about French, the translation depends on what precisely "can" means in this context. If you mean "Only God is permitted to judge me", the Latin is "Solo Deo licet me iudicare". (If you want it in all caps for your tattoo, change the u to a V: SOLO DEO LICET ME IVDICARE.)
::Alternatively, you could use an already existing Latin motto with a similar message, such as ]. —] 15:09, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Except for us in the UK, we have this around pound coins, not so cool... ]
::::And it's rather ironic for a ''tattoo''. &nbsp;--] 16:38, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

== where can i find this place? ==

is grammatically incorrect, but what should it be? in a quiz, the question is shown next to a picture of the place. {{unsigned|166.121.36.232}}

:Where can this place be found? ? ] 11:27, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

::It's not grammatically incorrect, but we don't know who "I" is. And places are not usually spoken of as "found". Why not just say "Where is this?"--]|] 13:03, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

== Definition of French word ==
{{resolved}}

The word commutative (used heavily in mathematics) has it's origins in French. The first usage as a math property was by François Servois in 1814. He said "Les fonctions qui, comme f et g, sont telles qu'elles donnent des résultats identiques, quel que soit l'ordre dans lequel on les applique au sujet, seront appelées ''commutatives entre elles''."

My question is, did he make the word up? If it existed in French already, what was its meaning outside of math?

I'm working on the ] page and trying to provide history for the property, so any information would be helpful and sources would be a plus! ] 15:50, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

:Google for a concept that has been in English since the 16th c. (]'s ''Governour''), reflecting Aristotle's discussion, in his '']'', of a kind of justice that restores and maintains the apportionment of just shares between parties involved in private ''transactions'' (compare the mathematical reference, somewhat different, to terms that may be ''interchanged''; search the article on '']'' for "rectification in transactions" for the relevant concept). The partition of justice by Aristotle and ] (who gives us the Latin term ''commutativa iustitia'') had its influence later on Kant's ''Rechtslehre'', and most of the Misplaced Pages articles (], ], ], etc.) seem to focus on the later philosophical & legal discussions. ] 17:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

::There was a pre-existing French word ''commuter'', meaning "to substitute or switch". This is a borrowing into French directly from the Latin ''commutare''. (There is another French word, ''commuer'', meaning "to change", that is derived from Latin ''commutare'' through Old French.) The suffix ''-ative'' is derived from the Latin ''-ativus'' and means "tending to, or serving to...". Very likely Servois drew on the French sense of ''commuter'' meaning "to substitute" and the existing philosophical term ''commutative'' meaning "shared". ] 17:32, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

:::I'd suggest that the root meaning of "exchange" is immediately felt, with different specific senses, in both the mathematical usage (terms are exchanged with one another) and the earlier use I've mentioned (concerning the exchanges and mutual dealings among people). There is at least one reference to "commutative justice" in 16th c. French, in Rabelais's '']''. ] 17:39, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

:Thanks for the input everyone, I think that should be enough to give a history of where the word came from, I'll get around to updating the page as soon as I can get some free time. ] 17:44, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

== Cheers! ==

Does "cheers!" mean something other than "thanks" somewhere? I've only encountered the meaning 'thanks' before, but some people seem to sign-off with it around here after answering a question or just saying something. Are they just saying thanks for the the opportunity to type, or does it have some other meaning? ] 16:52, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

:Its use to mean "thanks" is British. I've never heard it used that way in the United States. On the other hand, "cheers!" is used as a drinking toast in the United States. I suspect that that is its origin. In effect, the drinker wishes cheer to each of his companions. Its extension to mean "thanks" suggests that the speaker is offering a toast in thanks. ] 17:08, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

:''Cheers'' is used as a drinking toast in Britain, and I think this use predates its use to mean ''thanks''. It is also used sometimes to mean ''goodbye'', cf ''cheerio'' which can be used to mean ''goodbye'' or as a drinking toast. ] 17:12, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

::Excellent. I suspected something like this, but I never like to assume with language. That way lies the bulldog in ''Lady and the Tramp'' calling Tramp "a bit of alright"! So now I can relax a little, without imagining everyone is thanking people for asking questions (or being really insincere in a discussion!). Thanks guys. ] 18:58, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

:::I use it quite a bit here, but only as a sign-off. It's a common expression in Australia, where it sometimes means "thanks", but is more often used as a toast, and even more often as a farewell. Cheers. -- ] 23:07, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

== ] ==

Hello. Is Benvolio in Shakespeare's ] in any way related to ] in ] other than they both share the same -volio suffix? Thanks in advance. --] 17:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

:The names mean "good will" and "ill will" respectively. It has certainly been claimed that Malvolio was named "on analogy with, and in contrast to" Shakespeare's earlier character. It has also been pointed out that such names echo the conventions of ]s (second result ). ] 17:50, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

::Reminds me of ], or at least the construction of it. ] 01:32, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

== language of Jesus? ==

What name would Jesus have used to call himself in everyday conversation with friends, in his own language. How would it have been pronounced? Something like or did he use a name like Christ?--] 18:08, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
:] ישוע (Yeshua). (See the beginning of the ] article). ] 18:40, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
::Given that he lived in Palestine, rather than Babylon, wouldn't he have spoken Hebrew, rather than Aramaic? As an intelligent person living in an occupied country, I guess there's a reasonable chance he'd have had a smattering of Latin too, but that's just speculation. <small>]</small> --] 18:55, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Contrary to the Mel, Latin wasn't widely spoken in most of the Eastern Roman Empire. It is almost certain that Jesus spoke Aramaic (1st-century Galilean Aramaic to be precise) rather than Hebrew as his first language. Evidence for Hebrew use is mostly focused on Jerusalem and seems not to have been all that widespread (although some do read the evidence differently). However, Jesus' name is the Hebrew name ], a varient of ]. Its pronunciation would be more like {{IPA|}}. '']'' comes from the Greek Χριστος, which is a ] of the Aramaic/Hebrew ], meaning 'anointed'. Jesus probably would have known enough Greek to get by. — ] 19:17, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
::::And he certainly would have known Hebrew quite well, despite its not being his native language, since it was the ] of Judaism then as now. —] 19:38, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

== Latin translation please ==

Could I please get a translation of this:<blockquote>
Frigida Francifci tegit hic lapis offa Petrarcae<br />
Sufcipe, Virgo parens, animam: fate Virgine parce;<br />
Feffaque jam terris coeli requiefcat in arce.</blockquote>
Thanks, --] <sup>]</sup> 19:44, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

:You can find a published translation of these oddly-rhyming lines (from which you can also correct the text which you've mistranscribed; see ]). The translation is pretty literal but omits "''cold'' bones" and "in ''the citadel of'' heaven." ] 19:51, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

::The translates it thus:
:::This stone covers the cold remains of Francesco Petrarca.
:::Embrace, oh Virgin Mother, his soul, and you who are born of the Virgin forgive it,
:::and already tired of the earth, may it rest in the high heavens.
::{{unsigned|82.112.135.118}}

(Edit conflict)
I think you've been looking at a Renaissance document that uses the ]. You want:
<blockquote>
Frigida Francisci tegit hic lapis ossa Petrarcae<br />
Suscipe, Virgo parens, animam: sate Virgine parce;<br />
Fessaque jam terris coeli requiescat in arce.</blockquote>
According to http://www.eapoe.org/WorkS/misc/pnkdia.htm, this is ]'s inscription on ]'s tomb. My rough-and-ready translation is:
<blockquote>
This stone covers the cold bones of Francesco Petrarch<br />
Virgin Mother, receive his soul: You Who were born to the Virgin, spare it;<br />
And let it, which was worn out by the world, now rest in the citadel of heaven.</blockquote>
And there's nothing odd about the rhyme if you use the Italianate pronunciation of Latin: all three lines end in the sequence {{IPA|}}. —] 20:06, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
:What I thought was slightly odd was precisely the fact that these classicizing hexameters rhyme (perfectly). That's something I usually associate with very unclassical, stress-based medieval forms of poetry. I don't know enough to suggest that there's anything objectively weird about the style of rhyming, though. ] 20:16, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
::In other words, what's odd (considering when it was written) is the rhythm, not the rhyme! :p BTW, the Google Books link you provided is apparently another instance of one that can't viewed from outside the U.S. I can't see the quote on that page, anyhow. —] 20:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Actually, I would have expected classicizing verse with no rhyme, given the return to antiquity professed by the humanists. ] 20:28, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the translations. The scanned in version I was going from was very blurry.--] <sup>]</sup> 20:18, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

== American Manual Alphabet ==

Why is it that in the ] the sign for R, a very common letter, is rather difficult to make (for me anyway) and looks somewhat like the letter X, while the sign for X, an uncommon letter, is easy to make and looks somewhat like a lower-case R? —] (]) 21:52, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

= July 19 =
== View Korean Text ==

How do I make my computer view Korean text? I tried it and all it shows are question marks--although it does translate on Babel fish still. --] 05:12, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
:You probably need a font that includes Korean characters installed on your computer. —] 05:46, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
:It depends on which operating system and web browser you're using. If you search for "Korean computer font" on Google, you should be able to find the right instructions for your setup. --] 06:36, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
:see also ] --] <small>]</small> 06:48, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

==Middle Icelandic==
this is from Loth, Agnete, ''Late medieval Icelandic romances'' (1962):
<blockquote>
Knutur tekur sier nu elld ok geck til dyngiu
krakunar. Ok rubbar henni upp allri. finnur hann
eggit. Ok lætur þat koma j posa kellingar. nidri under
dyngiunni fann hann iard hus. þar laa fyrir ormur
einn. hann bles þegar eitri. ok sakadi Knut ecke.
fyrer taufrum kellingar. Ormurinn flo ut um glugginn.
Gull mikit ok gersemar uar þar. hann fyllde
upp vgsa hornit. tok hann þat af gullinv sem honum
likade. Vennde hann sidan j burtu. kemur hann nv
til nöckuans. Og rær sidan at lande. Enn er kemur
aa uatnit. þaa kemur ormurinn upp ur vatninu. med
gapannda munni. Ok legzt at nöckuanum. ok lagde
bægslit upp aa bardit. Knutur þreif kylfvna ok keyrde
aa naser orminum. Enn hann dro nöckuann j kaf med
sier. En Knutur hliop aa bak drekanum. Ok spennte
vm halsinn. Ok foru þeir suo þangat til at skamt
uar til landz. tok hann þaa j posa kellingar. ok saade
yfer drekan. Og uard hann þaa suo matt dreginn at
hann söck j uatnit.
</blockquote>
This is Middle Icelandic in non-normalized spelling, and I find it a bit difficult to tackle with Old Icelandic dictionaries.
It's a fantastic tale of one Knut finding a dragon's hoard. He is attacked by the dragon on his way back in his boat and somehow wrestles with it.
Is somebody able to give a translation? In particular,
:''Knutur tekur sier nu elld ok geck til dyngiu krakunar. Ok rubbar henni upp allri.'' "Knut takes a brand(?) and goes to the ravens'(?) nest(?)"
:'' Ok legzt at nöckuanum. ok lagde baegslit upp aa bardit. '' "and it reached(?) the boat and lay its belly(?) on the prow(?)"
:''posa kellingar'' "the old woman's(?) bag(?)"
:''uard hann þaa suo matt dreginn at hann söck j uatnit.'' "in this way(?) it was dragged(?) to the water and sank"

In particular, I am intrigued by the word ''baegslit''. I cannot figure out what it is composed of. It occurs in the ] where it apparently refers to the dragon's underbelly. Maybe the author of this tale has taken the word from there, but figuring in a respactable text like the Völsunga saga, you'd expect it in the Old Norse dictionaries. ] <small>]</small> 07:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

:Oh, it is, and this is indeed a weird and wonderful word. Non-normalized texts are tricky, your translation is actually pretty close to the mark. ] 08:28, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 06:03, 17 January 2025

Welcome to the language section
of the Misplaced Pages reference desk. skip to bottom Select a section: Shortcut Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Misplaced Pages

   

How can I get my question answered?

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


Ready? Ask a new question!


How do I answer a question?

Main page: Misplaced Pages:Reference desk/Guidelines

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

January 3

Why is it boxes and not boxen?

Why is it foxes and not foxen? Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 05:45, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Why is it sheep and not sheeps? HiLo48 (talk) 05:57, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Don't forget the related term "sheeps kin". ←Baseball Bugs carrots06:13, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
I thought the plural of sheep was sheeple! Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 06:52, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Possibly because "box" has its roots in Latin.Baseball Bugs carrots06:06, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Also, foxen is a word, just uncommon. GalacticShoe (talk) 06:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Because Vikings. Maungapohatu (talk) 07:35, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
As others have implied, "box" has always had an s-plural in English, and Vikings generally used the word "refr" for foxes. What's most surprising to me is actually that the old declensions "oxen" and "children" have survived. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 11:33, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
Children is a pleonasm because childre (or childer) was already plural. See wikt:calveren and wikt:-ren.  Card Zero  (talk) 12:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Someone wrong -- You can look at Old English grammar#Noun classes to see the declensions of a thousand years ago or more. The regular pattern of modern English inflection comes from the Old English masculine "a-stems". The only nouns with a non-"s" plural ending in modern English (leaving aside Classical borrowings such as "referenda" and unassimilated foreignisms) are oxen, children, brethren, and the rather archaic kine, which have an ending from the OE "weak" declension (though "child" and "brother" were not originally weak declension nouns). There are also the few remaining umlaut nouns, which do not have any plural endings, and a few other forms which don't (or don't always) distinguish between singular and plural. In that context, there's no particular reason why "box" should be expected to be irregular. However, the form "boxen" has been occasionally used in certain types of computer slang: http://catb.org/jargon/html/B/boxen.html -- AnonMoos (talk) 12:18, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Likewise, VAXen, Unixen and Linuxen are geeky plurals of VAX, Unix and Linux.  --Lambiam 15:25, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Nerd Wikipedians trying to be droll sometimes say "userboxen". Cullen328 (talk) 05:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

January 4

Pronunciation of "God b'wi you"?

How do you pronounce "God b'wi you"? For example in Shakespeare's Henry V, Act 4, Scene 3, Line 6 (Oxford Shakespeare). The pronunciation I hear in one recording is "God by you". Folger's Shakespeare has "God be wi’ you" in writing (you can find that text online at www.folger.edu). Does that indicate a different suggested pronunciation? How would you pronounce "wi'"? Are there other variants? (Either in the text of this play or anywhere else.) There's a "God be with you" entry in Wiktionary but none of these variants are recorded. 178.51.8.23 (talk) 08:32, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

David Crystal's Oxford Dictionary of Original Shakespearean Pronunciation has for be with ye/you. Nardog (talk) 08:47, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks. This is the original pronunciation. How is it currently commonly pronounced on the stage? I mentioned one pronunciation I heard where "b'wi" is pronounced "by". Are there other options?
Regarding the original pronunciation note videos by Ben Crystal (David Crystal's son) and those of A. Z. Foreman on his YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/@a.z.foreman74.
178.51.8.23 (talk) 12:05, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
I'd pronounce it "God be with you" but with the "th" sound missed off the end of "with." That might not be how they did it in the sixteenth century, but I'm pretty sure no sixteenth century people are coming to see the show. Incidentally, that's what they did in the Olivier movie (the line didn't appear in the Branagh version). Chuntuk (talk) 11:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Correlation of early human migrations with languages

Assuming that earliest speakers of every language family had spoke some other language during the out of Africa expansion, were early human migrations successfully correlated with the consequential emergence of respective language families on migration routes? I've read about Linguistic homeland#Homelands of major language families, but wonder about the overall sequence of emergence. Brandmeister 12:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

If I understand the question the answer is no. The migrations that you are talking about took place 100,000 to 25,000 years ago and well established language families only go back 10,000-15,000 years, often less. Even at that time depth the correlation between archeology and linguistics is often controversial. See Proto-Indo-European homeland for example. Studies such as A global analysis of matches and mismatches between human genetic and linguistic histories show that while there is correlation between human genetic and linguistic history, there are enough exception to make any precise conclusions impossible without other evidence. Eluchil404 (talk) 02:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
There have been scholarly (and less scholarly) attempts to identify language families and relationships predating those more firmly established: see for example Nostratic and various other such proposals linked from it, but these are inevitably limited, largely because the evolution of languages is sufficiently rapid that all traces of features dating very far back have been erased by subsequent developments. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 07:01, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Although I cannot evaluate the likelihood, I find it conceivable that a future all-out statistical analysis of all available source material will result in a reconstruction of Proto-Afroasiatic that is widely accepted by scholars and much richer than what we have now. Perhaps this might even establish a connection between Proto-Afroasiatic and Proto-Indo-European beyond the few known striking grammatical similarities. Then we may be speaking about close to 20 kya. But indeed, there can be no hope of reconstructions going substantially farther back, by the dearth of truly ancient sources and the relative scarcity of sources before the Modern Era.  --Lambiam 21:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Reconstructions of Proto-Afroasiatic have been hindered by the fact that the only branches with significant ancient attestations are Semitic and Egyptian, and for most of its history, Egyptian writing almost completely ignored vowels... AnonMoos (talk) 20:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Attaining cadre

I hit "random article" for the first time in a while, and was directed to Adetoun Ogunsheye, the first female professor in Nigeria (still alive at 98). In the infobox it says she's known for "eing the first Nigerian woman to attain professorial cadre", with the last two words piped to professor.

Does anyone recognize this locution of "attaining professorial cadre", or for that matter using cadre as a mass noun in any context? Is it maybe a Nigerian regionalism? Should we be using it in Misplaced Pages? --Trovatore (talk) 20:46, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

That remark was added 7 years ago, and the user who posted it is still active. ←Baseball Bugs carrots22:56, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
I think the collective sense is the older, just as for police and troop.
Here are uses of, specifically, teacher's cadre:
  • "The smaller the city the more the teacher's cadre demand administrative support"
  • "the cadre in which the teachers belong"
Other uses of the collective sense:
  • "The officers, non-commissioned officers, and corporals, constitute what is called the 'cadre.' "
  • "any one individual's decision to join a cadre",
  • "the cadre is appropriately composed in terms of skills and perspectives"
 --Lambiam 23:43, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
None of those uses look like mass nouns to me; they all appear to be count nouns. --Trovatore (talk) 01:02, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Anyway, the phrasing is weird and probably just wrong (even in Nigerian English), so I've simplified it. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:07, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks, I think that's best. I'm still curious about the phrase, though. @HandsomeBoy: any comment? --Trovatore (talk) 04:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
"Promotion (in)to professorial cadre" is short for "promotion (in)to the professorial cadre".  --Lambiam 14:13, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks, Lambiam, I can almost twist my brain into following that. So far it does appear to be a Nigerianism. My reaction till proved otherwise is that we probably shouldn't use it in English Misplaced Pages, given that (unlike Americanisms and Briticisms) it's not going to be recognizable in most of the Anglosphere. But it's reminiscent of the lakh / crore thing, on which I don't have a completely firm opinion and which still seems a bit unsettled en.wiki-wide. --Trovatore (talk) 21:39, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
The term 'cadre' was/is (in my experience) extensively used in translations from Mandarin where in Communist China a distinct body or group, especially of military, governmental, or political personnel, is referred to: I have also seen it used in a similar fashion regarding communist regimes and parties elsewhere, so it has something of a Marxist flavour (I wonder if Karl Marx used it in his writings?), but also in non-communist contexts. I don't think it can be characterised as a 'Nigerianism'.
The Wiktionary entry is of course relevant. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 08:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
94, I think maybe you came in late to the discussion. Of course the word "cadre" is not a Nigerianism. The locution in question is attain professorial cadre, which on its face appears to use the word as a mass noun meaning something like "status". Lambiam's search results suggest a different, slightly convoluted explanation, but all seem to come from Nigeria, which suggests to me that this usage of the word is a Nigerianism. --Trovatore (talk) 20:55, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
  • @Trovatore: It's nice to see the article suggested to you, and I hope you enjoyed reading the article :). These little things motivate me to keep creating impactful articles. Regarding the usage of "cadre", I try to be creative and phrase content in a manner that is dissimilar with source references. I believe I didn't want to use the language from the source and "cadre" came to mind. It seemed like having the same meaning as my interpretation from the sources. From the discussion above, it looks like I was not entirely correct. I believe the article was created during a contest, so speed was also important to me. HandsomeBoy (talk) 22:36, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
    FWIW, I just did a Google search and I am seeing a lot across virtually all universities in Nigeria. So it might actually be a thing UniAbuja, RUN, KWASU, Unibadan, etc. HandsomeBoy (talk) 23:07, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

January 5

Name of Nova Scotia?

Is there any historical explanation of why the name of the Canadian province of Nova Scotia uses Latin. Is it an oddity with no explanation? Do you know of any other European colony (especially of the form "new something") that uses a Latin name instead of an equivalent in a modern European language? 178.51.8.23 (talk) 13:57, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

The semi-Latin name Nova Zembla was until fairly recently the most commonly used English exonym of Новая Земля. (It is still the preferred exonym in Dutch and Portuguese.)  --Lambiam 14:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Is "Nova Zembla" semi-Latin or just a garbled version of the Russian? 178.51.8.23 (talk) 14:42, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
In this borrowing, Zembla is clearly a phonetic adaptation, but (although this would be hard to prove), I find the most plausible explanation for the component Nova that it arose by alignment with the then many Latin geonyms found on maps and atlases starting with Nova. In any case, the evidence is that Nova Zembla used to be seen as a Latin name, as from the use of the accusative case Novam Zemblam here, in 1570, and the genitive case Novæ Zemblæ here, in 1660.  --Lambiam 20:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
It was named in 1621, when James I made William Alexander, 1st Earl of Stirling lord of the area. This lordship was granted in the royal charter, written in Latin. Praefato Domino Willelmo Alexander ... nomine Novae Scotiae. Though he left his own name as William and didn't change it to Willelmo, he apparently took the instruction to call the place Nova Scotia very literally.  Card Zero  (talk) 14:38, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Was Nova Scotia the only Scottish colony ever? Maybe it is a Scottish thing to use Latin? 178.51.8.23 (talk) 14:45, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
There was also the Darien scheme, i.e. New Caledonia.--2A04:4A43:909F:F990:E596:9C8F:DF47:1709 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
And re-used for New Caledonia by James Cook in 1774. -- Verbarson  edits 18:25, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
And Sir Francis Drake claimed New Albion (or Nova Albion) in the California area in 1579. -- Verbarson  edits 18:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Back then (the 17th century) it was a European thing to use Latin in a lot of contexts, particularly in law and academia. Consider for example Isaac Newton's magnum opus, Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 18:10, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
There are the Carolinas (Latin for Charles). Matt Deres (talk) 17:31, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
And Australia, from Terra Australis (Southland), for a while also known as New Holland. PiusImpavidus (talk) 09:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Thule (Greek/Latin, location uncertain) and Ultima Thule Peak (in a former Russian colony or territory; I don't know whether the Russians named it, but the Alaskans did in 1996). -- Verbarson  edits 17:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Guys, I am grateful for all your answers. I just want to point out that my question was not about names in Latin (there are other exmples btw: Virginia, Georgia, Columbia/Colombia, Argentina, maybe Guinea, etc.) but specifically names in Latin where an equivalent in a modern European language seems to be more natural. I was simply curious as to why "Nova Scotia" instead of "New Scotland". All your examples are great but for very few of them (if any) an equivalent into a modern European language comes readily to mind. For example "New Caledonia" would have no "equivalent into a modern European language". Caledonia is itself a Latinism. So is "Batavia" say. There are many places in Europe with classical equivalents. Using one of those is not exactly the same thing as using a Latin translation of a modern name. Clearly it is not always clear cut. "Hispania" and "Austria" would be considered Latin translations of "Spain" and "Austria", but "Lusitania" and "Helvetia" would not be considered Latin translations of "Portugal" and "Switzerland". Does it depend on whether the Latin and the modern language equivalent are related etymologically? Of if that relation is commonly perceived? If the city of New York had been named instead "Novum Eboracum" would we be in one case or the other? I'll let you decide. The two names are linked but it is pretty involved. 178.51.8.23 (talk) 18:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
'Caledonia' is no more of a Latinism than 'Scotia', and is sometimes used as a near synonym for 'Scotland' in modern British English (including Scots English, not to be confused with Scots, or Scottish Gaelic in which it's called Alba). It would be rather confusing if we called two different places "New Scotland" – I suppose Cook could have named his discovery "New Pictland", but I'm not sure if that would have gone down well.
You refer to 'modern European language', but these (particularly English) have long since absorbed a great deal of Latin, both in assimilated and 'classical' form, so to me your attempted distinctions appears meaningless. Others may differ. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 10:18, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
"Austria" is a Latin coinage to begin with. Otherwise, there are a few languages which have calqued the native "Österreich" (Eastern Kingdom). Navajo has apparently the descriptive moniker "Homeland of the leather pants". 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:47, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
And now I'm curious about place-names in sign languages. I dimly remember (or misremember) that the Trappist sign for Jerusalem means ‘Jew city’. —Tamfang (talk) 22:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
As far as I know, they're generally spelled out letter by letter, unless they are famous enough to get their own sign. Some might be "compound-signed" from their constituent parts if they're transparent enough, I guess. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 23:42, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

January 6

Lowercase L that looks like capital I with an extra serif

I just came across on Harper's Bazaar's website a lowercase L that looks the like capital I with an extra serif sticking to the left in the middle (kind of like ⟨I⟩ superimposed with text-figure ⟨1⟩). See e.g. "looks", "Viola", "Winslet", etc. here.

Is this style of lowercase L something found in existing typefaces? The font is SangBleu OG Serif by Swiss Typefaces and it appears to be the only typeface of theirs that has this type of L. Nardog (talk) 05:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Beats me why they're calling those all one typeface instead of five. Anyway, in the "OG serif" incarnation, they got the weird arm on the lowercase L from Romain du Roi. The long s also has one. This incunable (from incunable) also has the nub (arm? Bar? Flag?) on lowercase L in many instances, but for some reason not all of them.
Edit: I think the nub is missing only in ligatures, mainly el. And I think this is originally a blackletter thing. This handwritten bible shows a similar but less distinct effect, due I think to the minim (palaeography). The scribe first draws a minim, then extends it to write the lowercase L. Caslon's specimen has it, but only in the blackletter face (top right). I think the explanation is thus the same as the origin of the nub on long S.  Card Zero  (talk) 12:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
The ⟨eſ ⟩ pairs in the Valerius Maximus incunable also have nubless ⟨ſ ⟩es.  --Lambiam 00:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks, so there is precedent. Nardog (talk) 09:17, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
There's a Swedish publisher, Modernista, that uses an st ligature in their logotype. I believe they also use it constantly and consistently within the books themselves, as a brand identity, which of course could come across as pretty strained. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
In that Caslon specimen the ⟨b⟩ and ⟨h⟩ also have nubs. The letter ⟨k⟩ does not occur in the specimen's text, but here we also find the Caslon black ⟨k⟩ nubbed.  --Lambiam 14:11, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Unsatisfied, I dug up this brief discussion of Romain du Roi's lowercase L. The lowercase letter /l shows the most distinctive feature of the letters. It has a small serif on the left side at x-height, called ergot or sécante in French. The serif is a remnant of the calligraphic style which had not appeared in any previous typefaces. This serif makes the Romain du Roi unique. The reason why the Romain du Roi /l possessed the serif is not clearly documented. One theory says that this serif was used to distinguish it more clearly from the capital letter /l, which has the same height. The other theory claims that Louis XIV wanted to have an unmistakable feature in the /l, because his name began with this letter. Yeah. Thing is, Romain du Roi put the bars on the top and bottom of the glyph gratuitously, so if it then needed disambiguating from capital i, that doesn't seem like a very rational thing to have done.  Card Zero  (talk) 17:28, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
You might not be satisfied looking for rationality. I think the aim was modernity and it might have been intended to be transitional. The /b and the /d have their strong upper serifs so the /l could not be without its own ( there still can be felt some of that era heavy cavalry dynamics - digging in up - in the double /l as in "brilliant"). --Askedonty (talk) 23:32, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Sweet, I've updated Romain du Roi and L. Nardog (talk) 09:38, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
The source (written in a sans serif font) falls into the same trap that it's describing. Taken literally, it says that the Romain du Roi needed to distinguish l from L, but we know what it means. Thank you for actually improving Misplaced Pages, I'll consider doing that sometimes too. :)  Card Zero  (talk) 14:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
It's a borrowing from calligraphy and tends to be called a "spur" in English (I'm getting this from Paul Shaw's book "Revival Type", page 86-7). It and the double-head serif on the el were fairly common in French typefaces until about the end of the nineteenth century. Swiss Typefaces, formerly BP Type, have several fonts influenced by it.
But I'm not an expert on this. My impression is that the best sources are in French, Sebastién Morlighem's very good PhD thesis The 'modern face' in France and Great Britain, 1781-1825: typography as an ideal of progress, on types appearing in its wake, lists various sources on page 35 including a book Le romain du roi: la typographie au service de l’État. I need to cite that thesis in more articles. Blythwood (talk) 22:27, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

January 7

Examples of the use of "might" as a past tense?

The past form of "may", "might", is mostly used as a conditional: "He might have said that, then again might not have". Uses of "might" as a past tense meaning "was/were allowed to" seem to be much rarer: "He might not say that" is most often intended to mean (and understood to mean) "it is possible that he will not say that", not as "he was not allowed to say that".

But that usage is not completely unknown: for example Edna St Vincent Millay writes in her sonnet "Bluebeard": "This door you might not open and you did / So enter now, and see for what slight thing / You are betrayed".

Do you have other examples of "might" being used as a past tense of "may"? I mean examples from the literature, jounalism, etc. not examples made up by Wiktionary editors, or other dictionaries, not because I don't trust Wiktionary editors or dictionary editors, but because I'd trust more examples that were not produced specifically for the purpose of illustrating a dictionary definition.

I'm especially interested in examples where "might" is used as a past tense in affirmative constructions! The examples above are all with "might not". I have the feeling the use of "might" in a negative sentence would sound more natural than in an affirmative sentence (if there's any example of it at all). Do you agree?

178.51.8.23 (talk) 17:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

He appointed twelve that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach. Mark 3:14 -- Verbarson  edits 17:13, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Great. Thanks. Please keep all kinds of examples coming, but watch out especially for examples where "might" is used in a main (or independent) clause (rather than a subordinate clause such as "(in order) that they might..."). 178.51.8.23 (talk) 17:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
In Francis Cottington, 1st Baron Cottington we find ...after the dismissal of the Short Parliament, he declared it his opinion that at such a crisis the king might levy money without the Parliament. --Trovatore (talk) 18:23, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Here's another one, not directly subordinate in a that clause, though still notionally subordinate to a verb of speaking within a multi-sentence passage of reported speech, in a 19th-century summary of a parliamentary debate "Mr BUCKNILL (Surry, Epsom) said, Member after Member had spoken of a particular company and, if he might use the expression, it had really in this Debate been ridden to death ". Fut.Perf. 19:12, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
I just went to Google News and searched on the phrase "he might have done". Here was one of the hits, in the New York Times: "A former Marine who trained Daniel Penny to apply a chokehold said Thursday that images and video suggest that he might have done so improperly when he killed a homeless man last year." And this headline from Vanity Fair: "Trump's Missing Phone Logs Mean We Don't Even Know Half the Illegal Shit He Might Have Done on 1/6". And this from the Seattle Times: "Although there is an area he might have done better." And from the BBC: "But Peter persisted, and now he can reflect on the earlier disappointments and what he might have done differently". My native-speaker instinct insists that "might" is the only correct form in these cases and "may" is an error, although I know others use it. --142.112.149.206 (talk) 19:56, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
To me "may have done" is usable if it is currently possible (that is, the speaker does not currently know it to be false) that it happened, whereas "might have done" is usable in that case and also in the counterfactual case (if this had happened, then that might have happened). Prescription alert: Saying "if this had happened, then that may have happened" is in my opinion an error.
But that isn't what the OP is asking about. The OP is asking about using "might" as a past tense of "may", in the sense that "A might do B" means "A was morally allowed, or otherwise had the permission or authority, to do B". This sense does exist but has become somewhat rare. --Trovatore (talk) 20:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Does this count: "I did what I might."?  --Lambiam 00:12, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Also: "Then Titul took a knife from his belt and asked the Gaul if he could kill himself; and the Gaul tried, but he might not."  --Lambiam 00:29, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Absolutely. Both are past tenses. The first example is a relative clause. The second example is an independent clause. And both are affirmative constructions. Thanks. 178.51.8.23 (talk) 01:01, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Although the polarity is positive, the first of these uses sounds quite natural to me. The second use feels somewhat archaic, which, I think, was the intention of the author.  --Lambiam 10:34, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Both of these examples seem to lose the distinction between "may" and "can", though. --Trovatore (talk) 19:36, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Like so many lexical terms, auxiliary may has several senses. These include "to be able to" (labelled obsolete on Wiktionary) and "to be allowed to". In both uses here we see the first sense. Note that can also has both senses ("Can you help me?" and "Can I smoke here?").  --Lambiam 00:19, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

January 8

Pronunciation of "breen"

How do you pronounce the -breen that appears at the end of Svalbard glacier names? I went through all the Svalbard -breen glacier articles on Misplaced Pages at Category:Glaciers_of_Spitsbergen, and not a single one provides IPA. 2601:644:4301:D1B0:B94F:4C6C:A635:20B6 (talk) 02:32, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

The -en ending is the Norwegian definite mascular singular suffix, and bre means "glacier", so, for example, Nansenbreen means "the Nansen glacier".
The pronunciations in Nynorsk and Bokmål would be slightly different, with also regional variations. I have no idea which variety of spoken Norwegian is prevalent among the roughly 2,500 Norvegicophone inhabitants of Svalbard.
Extrapolating from the pronunciations of other words, I believe the pronunciation of -breen to be:
  • Nynorsk: /²brɛːn̩/
  • Bokmål:  /bʁe̞ːn̩/
For the meaning of the toneme , see on Wiktionary Appendix:Norwegian Nynorsk pronunciation § Stress and tonemes.  --Lambiam 10:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
(Simultaneous editing) Here an example of Norwegian pronounciation, "Jostedaalsbreen" first mentioned around 0:06. Since Norwegian is a language of dialects I cannot rule out that there could be regional differences in pronounciation. -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 10:24, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
This agrees with my extrapolation of the Nynorsk pronunciation.  --Lambiam 10:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
However, I believe the two ee in the middle are being distinguished in the pronounciation rather than just pronounced as a long vowel. -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 11:40, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
The long vowel represents solely the first ⟨e⟩. The definitive suffix -en is represented by . The vertical understroke diacritic signifies that this is a syllabic consonant.  --Lambiam 15:46, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Ok, that would make sense. Not an IPA expert here. -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 16:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Regarding the dialect, I found this: https://munin.uit.no/handle/10037/14074. Excerpt from Google Translation: This is interesting because Svalbard has no local dialect. The language community on the archipelago is instead characterized by dialectal variation. The Norwegian population in Svalbard comes from all over Norway, and the average length of residence is short. . On Norwegian Misplaced Pages it stated that Nynorsk spellings have to be used for all town names in Svalbard but this probably has no bearing on the pronounciation practices. -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 17:58, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you all for your input! So it's a monosyllabic /²brɛːn̩/. 2601:644:4301:D1B0:B94F:4C6C:A635:20B6 (talk) 21:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Is it really monosyllabic if a syllabic vowel is followed by a syllabic consonant? By the way, I believe the common Swedish curse word fan often is pronounced somewhat similarly. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 21:45, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
By definition, a syllabic consonant forms a syllable on its own. So we have two syllables, the first of which ends on a vowel.  --Lambiam 00:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

January 9

Is there a term which categorises these phrases?

Is there a lexicographic word or term to describe phrases such as "out and about", "bits and pieces", or "nooks and crannies"? There are many such phrases which conjoin words which are less often used separately. I am not thinking of "conjunction", but something which describes this particular quirk. For example, where I grew up, no-one would say "I was out in town yesterday" but "I was out and about the town". 51.148.145.228 (talk) 15:29, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

I think a phraseme, also called a set phrase, fixed expression, is the term you're looking for for the phrase. Fossil word (for words not used outside set phrases) and Irreversible binomial (for phrases which have fixed order - you wouldn't say "about and out") may also be of interest. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 16:23, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
All three examples above are irreversible binomials.  --Lambiam 10:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
If you are thinking of expressions where a single meaning is carried by a conjunction of two near-synonyms, Hendiadys may be a fit. There is a narrow definition of that term where it covers only conjunctions of two terms that logically stand in a relation of subordination to each other, but there's also a wider usage where it's used for expressions like these, where the two terms are merely synonyms. Fut.Perf. 16:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Such as "lively and quick". ←Baseball Bugs carrots18:04, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
And also Pleonasm.  Card Zero  (talk) 18:42, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
There's a similar concept in Legal doublets. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 15:00, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

January 11

Evening and night

Does English refer a period from 22:00 to midnight as late evening? Does English ever say "late-evening shows"? And is a period around 17:00 known as early evening, and a period around midnight as early night? And do English speskers ever say "late in the morning"? --40bus (talk) 22:36, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

We say "late evening". The exact time is probably after dinner time. It could be hyphenated if you like, but isn't. We say "early evening" and "late morning". The phrase "late in the morning" is fine, and not at all awkward, but is not engraved into our English-speaking minds as an idiom like "early in the morning". Our article on Shift work defines the evening as 14:00 to 22:00, so later than that may be night, but in common usage the definition is flexible, and "night" and "evening" undoubtedly overlap. Night shift workers live in a state of confusion about whether it is currently night or morning, and which day it is.  Card Zero  (talk) 00:59, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
Style guides recommend hyphenation in attributive use to avoid the interpretation as "evening shows that are late".  --Lambiam 09:58, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
Here are a few examples of "late-evening show": , , . And here are a few examples of "late in the morning": , , .  --Lambiam 09:48, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
In American English "late evening" is not a specific period of time but just a way of saying late in the evening. The distinction between evening and night has less to do with the exact time, and more to do with whether one is out with friends or at home preparing for bed. I would never consider 22-24 late evening (that's night) but others might. There are no "late evening shows"; late-night shows air at that time. "Early night" is not a common idiom. Eluchil404 (talk) 21:52, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
@Eluchil404: In British English, "early night" is commonly used to signify going to bed earlier than usual, as in "I'm really tired so I'm going to have an early night." Similarly, "I had a late night last night" suggests having not gone to bed early enough. See . Bazza 7 (talk) 22:41, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
We can use "early night" in that sense in American English too (though "make it an early night" sounds a bit more idiomatic to me). But that doesn't seem to be the sense the OP was asking about. --Trovatore (talk) 22:49, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
This reminds me a lot of when Steve Martin said he would smoke marijuana. --Trovatore (talk) 22:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

My home Internet connection has failed. I reported it to my ISP. I had an email from them yesterday (Sunday) at 5.34pm telling me they would be calling me "today" about the problem. It's now past 10.00am Monday. Still waiting. HiLo48 (talk) 23:13, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

OK, so they didn't do what they said they were going to do. Imagine my shock. What does it have to do with the question? --Trovatore (talk) 23:17, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
Speaking of "today" as a future time at 5.34pm. HiLo48 (talk) 23:01, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
Or they'll call at 23:59, "late today".  --Lambiam 23:52, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

January 12

Latin alphabet

Why did Khmer and Lao not switch to Latin alphabet during French colonization, unlike Vietnamese? --40bus (talk) 13:43, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

I assume you forgot a "not", and it might be since Chữ Nôm was a highly complex writing system only mastered by about 5% of the population. A Latin-based writing system would have been a lot more accessible at the time, both to French colonialists and the majority of the Vietnamese, themselves. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 13:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
40bus -- Khmer and Lao already had alphabets, since they had experienced significant Indic influence. The Vietnamese did not have an alphabet, since they experienced predominant Chinese influence. The Cham alphabet and Tai Viet alphabet were used in what is now Vietnam, but Vietnamese-speakers did not adopt them. AnonMoos (talk) 06:47, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

January 14

Nuevo!

A lot of areas of the Spanish Empire in America had a name in the pattern of "New XXX" where XXX is usually a Spanish province or city. Some examples are: Nueva Andalucía, Nueva Castilla, Nueva España, Nueva Extremadura, Nuevas Filipinas, Nueva Granada, Nueva León, Nueva Navarra, Nuevo Santander, Nueva Toledo, Nueva Vizcaya. I'm not able to recognize any pattern or obvious motivation for them to select precisely these names. Why call some place New Extremadura and not, for example, New Catalonia? Where they chosen randomly? Is there any reason behind them? Thank you? 195.62.160.60 (talk) 10:10, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't know the answer, but Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor would probably have been the one who decided, or at least approved, some of these names. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.8.29.20 (talk) 10:22, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
It's not just the Spanish. An early name for the British part of Australia, and now one of its states, is New South Wales. Apparently Captain Cook thought it looked like South Wales. Then just across the ocean is New Zealand. That one came from the Dutch. HiLo48 (talk) 10:31, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
Not to forget New Amsterdam/New York and New Orleans. However, these things aren't consistent as the Spanish also copied names without the Nuevo/Nueva in front, like Córdoba and Valencia. Would be interesting to see if this was a time-dependent pattern. As to the choice of names, this could well have to do with the individuals involved. E.g. a lot of the Conquistadores came from Extremadura, including Hernán Cortés and Francisco Pizarro, and Castilia, Granada etc. aren't far from that area either. -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 11:18, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
They decided to follow the rule, "Nuevo say neuvo again." Clarityfiend (talk) 21:04, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
The English were in a habit of omitting 'new' too. In the US there's Durham, Manchester, Washington. In Australia there's Newcastle. What's notable is all of these are distinctly English names, very old ones with meanings that make sense only to historians. It's highly unlikely they arose the same way in AUS and the US. ~~----
Indeed. In 1940, the Royal Navy was able to rename fifty old US destroyers after British and American towns that share a common name. Alansplodge (talk) 12:12, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
The whole Australian mainland was previously known as New Holland. Anything less like Holland it would be impossible to find, but there you go. But at least this recognises that the Dutch were the first Europeans definitely known to have landed on Australia, in 1606. -- Jack of Oz 19:12, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
They probably weren't chosen randomly. Possible reasons include:
  • Naming after the namer's homeland. Nueva Extremadura (Chile) was named by Pedro de Valdivia, who was from Extremadura
  • Naming to honour a patron, e.g. New York was named after the Duke of York
  • Naming after a resemblance (New South Wales, as stated above).
AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 11:15, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Nuevo say nuevo again. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:04, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
A variation - Within the town of Moe, Victoria, Australia, is what is effectively now the suburb of Newborough. It apparently gained that name because when it was established, Moe had just become a borough. HiLo48 (talk) 22:53, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Also the London Borough of Newham, a 1965 merger of East Ham and West Ham. It was originally intended to be pronounced "New-ham" but is now universally called "Newum". Alansplodge (talk) 12:04, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
It's not obvious to me how "Newum" would be pronounced. It could be "Nee-wum". HiLo48 (talk) 23:04, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
/ˈnju(w)əm/ ColinFine (talk) 23:25, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

January 17

Categories:
Misplaced Pages:Reference desk/Language: Difference between revisions Add topic