Language desk
< July 18	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 20 >

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 19

Visitor Center

what does the last name "Cervantes" mean

I think it might mean 'son of cerves' or 'son of...' if it follows the pattern of pervez/son of pedro, gonzales/son of gonzalo, sanchez/son of santos etc. could anybody help me out with this one?^MY♥_INchile 01:45, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to this site, it was "most probably a [patronymic] name from a medieval given name SERVANTO, arising of a result of a cross between the Latin SERVIENS meaning 'The servant of the Lord' and SERVANDUS 'He who shall be saved'. There seems to have been some further confusion in the spelling with the Spanish CIERVO (stag)". Further reading at that external link. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 08:52, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PYNAEI

Why do people say "picking your nose and eating it" when that is clearly wrong? Saying it like that makes it sound like the nose is being eaten. 124.176.160.46 (talk) 01:54, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pragmatics (I think) rather than syntax occasionally helps determine the referent of a pronoun in English. With this construction, the "it" of the second clause clearly refers to what was produced in the first clause rather than the noun that explicitly appears, since we all know you don't eat noses, but rather the contents of noses (myself excluded, naturally). A similar construction might be "open the bottle and drink it" or even "pour in the batter, bake for 10 minutes, and enjoy". Paul Davidson (talk) 09:39, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One of my favurites of this type is "take the cake out of the oven and stand for ten minutes". And there's the old joke about "drink 10ml of the prescription after a warm bath." Grutness...wha? 10:11, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

and if we go back to Paddington Bear there is an incident where he is helping Mr Brown with some household job. Mr Brown gives Paddington a hammer and says ". . .I'll hold the nail and when I nod my head you hit it." Richard Avery (talk) 14:48, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, "picking your nose and eating it" is wrong, on many levels. StuRat (talk) 00:21, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Icelandic question

Hi, what does Kubbur á hlaupum mean in Icelandic? Does it have anything to do with retro-gaming or cute hamsters? --Kjoonlee 02:40, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have you already tried icelandic-chinese / chinese-english dictionary?

Seems kubbur means 'chip', 'pug'?, 'block'

hlaupum could mean : running, run, jelly, gumdrop, gel, coagulation, barrel, avalanche, aspic

'a hlaupum' probably means running?

That should keep you guessing whilst you learn icelandic.87.102.86.73 (talk) 12:59, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It means "Kubbur on the run". Kubbur can be used as a nickname for something cute (my grandfather called me Kubbur when I was small) and is a plausible name for a hamster. Haukur (talk) 18:20, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The hamster connection seems plausible.. but is there a reason why you think it might be linked to retro gaming?? gives us a clue..87.102.86.73 (talk) 01:45, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah thanks. There was a video on YouTube, where a hamster was crawling around some retro-themed stages. It's been deleted now. :( --Kjoonlee 07:48, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a shame that it was deleted - my sympathies are with you.87.102.86.73 (talk) 10:41, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, you can see it here.[1] It's a version of the C64 game Monty on the Run starring a live hamster. The hamster is named Kubbur. Haukur (talk) 11:33, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Rubber" as slang?

What does "rubber" refer to in the context of this quote from the book I'm currently reading?

"Still, I confess that I miss my rubber. It is the first Saturday night for seven-and-twenty years that I have not had my rubber."

"I think you will find," said Sherlock Holmes, "that you will play for a higher stake to-night than you have ever done yet, and that the play will be more exciting."''

71.174.26.247 (talk) 08:50, 19 July 2008 (UTC)Kurage[reply]

It refers to a game of rubber bridge, or, according to Rubber (disambiguation), two 100-point games of contract bridge. —An gr 09:00, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong, wrong, wrong! The story was published in 1891. And contract bridge was invented in 1925 -- everyone knows that! :-) They didn't even have auction bridge in 1891. And since Merryweather says he's been playing for 27 years, it's not the original form of bridge (also called biritch, and later straight bridge or bridge-whist) either. The game he's obviously talking about is whist. --Anonymous, 14:03 UTC, July 19, 2008.

According to the OED rubber has been a term in cards far longer at least since the 18th century. Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 19:44, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the 16th century it seems. The definition "In various games of skill or chance, a set of (usually) three games, the last of which is played to decide between the parties when each has gained one; hence, two games out of three won by the same side. Sometimes, a set of five games, or the winning of three of these by one side" seems to be first referenced as being used back in 1599. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omahapubliclibrary (talk • contribs) 19:47, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, a card game. Now it makes sense. :-) Thank you for the prompt reply! 71.174.26.247 (talk) 09:19, 19 July 2008 (UTC)Kurage[reply]

Note also where Holmes says that he brought along a pack of cards and hoped that he and Watson and Jones and Merryweather could have a rubber after all, since they made up were a partie carrée — a square party, i.e. four people, as needed for whist (or bridge). But this turned out to be impossible: "the enemy's preparations have gone so far that we cannot risk the presence of a light." --Anon, 14:03 UTC, July 19, 2008.

Yes, he is not talking about condoms. --ChokinBako (talk) 10:57, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But, taken out of context, it's rather funny if you imagine he is! Kreachure (talk) 15:18, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but Sherlock is from England. The English word does not include that meaning, merely the American and Canadian English versions do. --Cameron * 15:38, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I said out of context, damn you! :P Kreachure (talk) 18:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lol actually Oxford marks it as slang not american slang. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omahapubliclibrary (talk • contribs) 19:50, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wiktionary Worries

I just used Wiktionary for the first time and got a page saying the word I looked up had no entry for it. Fair enough, but the page[2] had a table below of different parts of speech, showing, in particular how the word 'cross' can be used in different ways. I was very surprised to see 'crosser' used in the Comparative box, where I would normally say 'more cross' (if I ever used the word 'cross', which I would not normally as it is not in my dialect). 'Crosser' just sounds ridiculous to me. Any ideas? --ChokinBako (talk) 10:55, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to get a fair number of hits on GoogleBooks. (I searched for the phrase "was crosser" because "crosser" by itself mostly got the last name.) A lot of the hits seem to be from the 19th and early 20th century, though I don't know if that tells us something about the nature of the word "crosser" or something about the nature of the books searched at GoogleBooks. —An gr 11:18, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quote from This interesting survey talks about comparison of monosyllabic adjectives:

Apart from tired, participles such as worn do not take endings, whatever the number of syllables. Most grammars say that right, wrong, real and like never take endings and one grammar (Huddleston & Pullum 2002: 1583) includes mono-syllabic adjectives such as cross, fake, ill, loath, prime and worth.

And later, just to illustrate that grammars are not definitive:

Huddleston and Pullum (2002: 1584) ‘allow’ synthetic comparison of demure but not of secure. I found four examples of inflected comparisons for secure, but none for demure and hardly any analytic forms of that word either.

To me, "crosser" sounds better than "more cross", though neither sounds very likely. But that's just my opinion (and presumably that of the Wiktionary editor). It is certainly not an opinion held widely or strongly enough to merit a dogmatic dictionary statement that implies "more cross" is incorrect. jnestorius^(talk) 13:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"More fun" seems to be preferred to "funner"... AnonMoos (talk) 16:00, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Technically crosser is a noun not a verb but it does exist. It means one who makes the sign of the cross (christian ritual); it can also mean a small lamp. Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 19:54, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you mean "a noun, not an adjective"? (Cross, crosser and crossest are adjectives). -- JackofOz (talk) 23:02, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, he means there is a noun form (one who crosses) whose existence is attested, by the OED for example. Algebraist 23:13, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The OED is where I got the noun definitions. Sorry I forgot to cite that. Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 02:02, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Obnoxious points aside this word really is confusing me. According to the OED it is not crosser but Dictionary.com lists it as the forms of cross while the M-W redirects crossest to cross. Thus the wiktionary actually conforms with other online dictionaries Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 02:37, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is not only a comparative form of the verb cross, but can also mean one who crosses, e.g. "double-crosser." Multiple usage may have effected the google hits. Also, remember that wiktionary is collaborative. Something that sounds strange to your ear may be common in other areas (also, wiktionary could just be wrong). There are 54 countries (plus 25 non-soveriegn states) that list English as an official language. Conseuqently, there are many dialects of English. --Shaggorama (talk) 15:15, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grossed out and weirded out

Today, I am interested in the slang construction "[x]ed out" where x = an adjective (i.e., I'm not talking about "freaked out"). Are there more examples, and what are their earliest usages?--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 15:07, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OED cites the eariest reference to freaked out as occuring in 1966 (it also notes that it is often connected to drugs). Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 19:58, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's not what I'm asking about. Freak is a noun (or a verb).--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 20:08, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops silly me. Can you give a specific example? Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 20:18, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um, the two in the section heading. But I would like to know if there are more.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 20:24, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hum it looks like both entered english slang around the late 60s early 70s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omahapubliclibrary (talk • contribs) 22:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I trawled through this list of "X out" expressions and the only one with adjective X I spotted was "to tough it out" There are others like "blank out" or "black out" where the root could be seen as a verb/noun or an adjective. Feel free to re-trawl for any I missed. jnestorius^(talk) 23:24, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very, very useful link; thank you. I couldn't find any phrases that fit my criteria, which leads to me believe that this sort of construction is rare indeed.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 23:31, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your question is not entirely clear. Are you looking for a past participle adjective that is derived from an adjective. (That is gross and weird are adjectives which have been converted into a verb with out => gross out, weird out. And these verbs are then used in the past participle (passive) form.) And you are not interested in nouns like freak, bum which are converted to verbs with out (freak out, bum out) which are then used in the past participle form? It is fairly easy to find nouns converted to verbs, but it may be harder to find adjectives converted to verbs. – ishwar (speak) 02:56, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for not being clear. Definitely only looking for adjectives that have been converted into a verb which, as we have established, are harder to find.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 05:41, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Here are some. They are rather informal: dried out, sexied out, dizzied out, poshed out, queered out, goofied out. Actually, I think that this is pretty productive, so anyone can create several new examples that may not be attested in a corpus (e.g. a google search). For example, I'll creatively generate a new one: mousy (she's looking very mousy today) => mousied out (how'd he get all mousied out today?). – ishwar (speak) 15:04, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nicely done--with the exception of "dried out," which comes from the verb "to dry". These are obscure (and amusing) phrases, to be sure, but they each each generate a significant number of ghits. I suppose this guy, then, is all fatted out:--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 15:15, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think dry is originally an adjective. But that is based on etymology, maybe in a speaker's mind the word dry is in both categories. Anyway, if a word is underlying an adjective, it must be converted into a verb to get the past participle form. That is adj => vb => vb-past.part. If it's a verb underlying, then it would be just vb => vb-past.part. And noun: n => vb => vb-past.part.. – ishwar (speak) 19:23, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

cousin éloigné?

What would the equivalent of "cousin once removed" (see recent misc.refdesk question ) be in French. Please I don't want a literal translation, I want to know the French term for the concept if there is one. Thank you. 190.190.224.115 (talk) 19:55, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this helps. -- Wavelength (talk) 20:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All right! I guess it would be "Cousins germains éloigné au 1e degré" then. Thank you. 190.190.224.115 (talk) 20:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't cousin au premier degré do the trick? Xn4 (talk) 01:42, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What word?

The sentence 'That story might illicit the response...' is clearly wrong because illicit is an adjective meaning illegal. However, I am sure that there is a word that sounds like it that will make the sentence correct. I think, in this context, 'warrant' would be a good synonym of the word I'm thinking of. Any ideas? 92.2.122.213 (talk) 23:42, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Elicit. Algebraist 23:43, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]