Language desk
< July 2	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 4 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

July 3

French Question

How do you say "How are you?" in French? Someone told me that it's comment ca va but I always heard it as comme ca va. --Confused Linguist 00:12, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

"Comment ça va?" or just "Ça va?", the second syllable of "comment" is not pronunced clearly (to English-speaking ears) so can readily understand why you heard it as "comme". DuncanHill 00:16, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kpalion has noticed in a previous question at Reference Desk/Language [Quote] that the translation depends upon the level of formality and how many people are addressed. It could be Comment allez-vous ? The liaison between comment and allez is mandatory and it sounds like Comment tallez-vous ? AldoSyrt 19:39, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment ends in a nasal vowel, not in a consonant as suggested (to English speakers) by the spelling–this is how -ent in French orthography is typically pronounced. — Zerida 03:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, now what does Comment allez-vous mean? --Confused Linguist03:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Simply "How are you?" When I talk to a friend of mine I say: Comment ça va ? or (in a more elevated language) Comment vas-tu ?, if I talk to my CEO or to the President of the French Republic, I say (formal language): Comment allez-vous ? AldoSyrt 07:26, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unless, of course, you are in French Polynesia, where you would use "Comment vas-tu?" The Jade Knight 09:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Confused: contemporary English is unlike the many languages which make a distinction between formality and familiarity when addressing a "you." Even Middle English and Old English did so. --Halcatalyst 03:54, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

get baked

Can someone tell me, what "to get baked" means? Thanks Jakob.scholbach 03:52, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to the urban dictionary, it means smoking more than the "normal" amount of the demon weed (marijuana). Don't ask me what the normal amount is (I didn't inhale, honest!). Clarityfiend 04:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ask Gingy? 194.168.231.2 12:04, 3 July 2007 (UTC)Wes[reply]

Article titles using non-english words

In my edits related to Chile I've noted that there are numerous articles about things which have non-English names. Examples, cueca, huaso, gringo, chupalla, Anticuchos, Asado, Cazuela, Charquican, Churrasco, Curanto, Empanada, etc. etc.

Some of these words have no precise English equivalent, while others may have exact or very close English words which mean the same thing. For example Asado is equivalent to Barbeque; Churrasco - Grilled beef (or meat), Empanada - turnover.

I wouldn't be surprized if there exist similar situations with other languages. My concern here is not specifically Spanish/English. What I'm wondering about is the appropriateness of naming articles in the English Wikipedia with foreign language names when there is an English word that might do. If there is no restriction, it would seem that Wikipedia may turn into a massive multi-language dictionary ... which could be either good or bad, depending on one's expectations but I'd like to know if there any is established policy or convention. --JAXHERE | ^Talk 18:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think most of those cases get away with it because those words have been imported to some extent in English. For instance, I would use the words empanada, calzone and turnover for three slightly different recipes. Foods in particular do lend themselves to word adoption from varioius cuisines. We picture something different with "wonton" than "dumpling". But, yes, we do have to limit ourselves to words in actual English circulation. — Laura Scudder ☎ 18:30, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MOS#Article_titles and WP:NAME might offer some advice. I agree with Laura Scudder. A turnover can be all sorts of delicacies: empanadas, knishes, calzoni etc. All with their own (variable) history, traditions, recipes etc and deserving their own article. ---Sluzzelin talk 18:55, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This being the language ref desk I'm surpriced no-one has commented on the over-americanised English spelling. :) DirkvdM 12:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from the help desk: The official designation in the manual of style is: whichever is more appropriate for the subject. For instance, Doctor Who would more appropriately use UK English, while Stargate SG-1 would use US English. In articles where nationality is not relevant (eg. Horse), then either one is appropriate so long as the spelling choice is consistant. However, it should not be corrected whole-cloth, as you describe. Edit wars over this are quite silly, and editors involved should be reminded to leave it be. -- Kesh 23:48, 26 June 2007 (UTC) -Czmtzc 14:11, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ehm, are you reacting to me? I was joking. Note the smiley. :) DirkvdM 06:56, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will you try to sneak "surpriced" past as another Imperial spelling? :-) --Reuben 01:23, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]