Language desk
< August 4	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 6 >

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.

August 5

comment dit-on...?

How would one say, "this address book is the property of John Doe" in French? 02:24, 5 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.76.147.53 (talk)

"Ce carnet d'adresses appartient à John Doe". --Viennese Waltz ^talk 08:20, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hagrid's accent

On page 47 and 48 of HP1, Hagrid uses the word summat for "something", as in, "Got summat fer yeh here," and, "I'd not say no ter summat stronger if yeh've got it." I just don't see how any accent would produce such a substitution -- am I just missing out on the British English involved or is this some ridiculous thing Rowling thought up? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 03:34, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it is a version of somewhat, which archaically has been used as an equivalent of something. Looie496 (talk) 03:42, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Must be a West Country thing. Newfoundland English has a similar accent and they also say "summat". It's definitely a real word. Wiktionary even has a page! Adam Bishop (talk) 03:43, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's used in Northern England too. Wiktionary agrees it's from somewhat, but I always thought it was from Old English sum wiht, wiht being an OE word for "thing" and the source of the -ght part of words like aught and nought. +An gr 06:08, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The OED just lists it as a 19th-century variant form of "somewhat", but it's certainly still in use in the north of England and possibly elsewhere. Algebraist 07:37, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am from Barnsley and still sometimes say "summat" meaning "something" (but only after a few beers). Robinh (talk) 11:16, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I;ve noticed Ricky Gervais says it in Extras.--Cam (talk) 12:36, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The accent itself is, of course Scottish in this case - Robbie Coltrane being Scots. Gurumaister (talk) 12:46, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But Hagrid doesn't have a Scottish accent (and obviously Robbie Coltrane is not in the book). Adam Bishop (talk) 13:18, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And in the films Robbie Coltrane is clearly putting on a non-Scottish accent. (It sounds vaguely West Country to me, but I'm not real good at identifying English English accents.) +An gr 14:33, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely a West Country accent that Hagrid is using. FTR, I'm from the North West, and 'summat' is used quite a lot on the other side of the Pennines from me, most notably in Yorkshire. I didn't know the word was used as far south as the West Country, though. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 15:20, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was also thinking Yorkshire, as that word tended to show up in All Creatures Great and Small. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:44, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me guys but Hagrid's accent in the film is Scottish and it is nowhere near westcountry - I live there and would definitely know. In fact Robbie Coltrane isn't really using a voice much different from his own natural one - and it IS Scottish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.71.20.194 (talk) 19:08, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

EXCUSE ME. But I am Scottish and it is NOT a Scottish accent he uses in the film. It may not be, in your view, west country but it not Scottish either.

'Summat' meaning 'something' certainly appears in various localised British English non-educated registers. As far as its appearance in Hagrid's dialect goes, remember that the Harry Potter books take place in a fantasy world similar to but not actually the same as ours, that Hagrid is a half-giant rather than any variety of actual British human, and that Jo Rowling is a humanly fallible author who was not necessarily perfectly adept at inventing flawlessly plausible speech in what was her first published work. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, just because Robbie Coltrane uses a West Country accent for Hagrid, that doesn't mean that Jo Rowling had a West Country accent in mind for Hagrid when she wrote the books. Maybe she was intending him to sound like he was from Yorkshire (though then you'd expect other Yorkshirisms like t’ for "the", nowt for "nothing", and maybe spellings like coom oop indicating the absence of the foot-strut split). +An gr 17:10, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

With regard to the West Country idea, it's perhaps worthwhile to note that Rowling was born and raised in Gloucestershire and is therefore doubtless familiar with those dialects. Our article West Country dialects says (unsourcedly) that "J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter fantasy novels feature Hagrid, a character who is supposed to have some kind of West Country accent". Deor (talk) 17:27, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've just spoken to a friend of mine from Devon who confirms that people there do say summat, so I've struck my comment above. +An gr 18:26, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think JKR was intending that Hagrid should be seen as an uneducated rustic who nevertheless had arcane knowledge and skill. She followed a well worn stereotype in giving him a "west country" accent and words that are not normally used by educated people. See Moonrakers. Richard Avery (talk) 18:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I am confused because I think Hagrid talks like a pirate, but 87.21, surely that is not Robbie Coltrane's actual accent? He doesn't sound anything like that normally. Adam Bishop (talk) 19:40, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can't see any 87.21 commenting above, Adam. If you meant myself, then (i) the stereotypical 'pirate' accent is West Country, largely because of Robert Newton's classic portrayal of Long John Silver, and perhaps because a number of actual British pirates likely were from Bristol and other West Country locales, such as the Forest of Dean on whose dialect Rowling says she based Hagrid's; (ii) Robbie Coltrane's 'natural' accent is indeed Scottish, but being an actor he is eminently capable of assuming others, just as the very Scottish David Tennant does when playing Doctor Who (except in one episode when the Doctor is passing for a Scot to ingratiate himself with Queen Victoria). 87.81.230.195 (talk) 23:50, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adam's "87.21" was, I think, a typo for "82.71". See the last unindented comment above. Deor (talk) 00:05, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, yes, I meant 82.71 (and probably looked too quickly and also saw 87.81). Adam Bishop (talk) 00:19, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation of Lithuanian surname

I need to transcribe ("transliterate" according to the phonology) into Hebrew the Lithuanian surname Macijauskas. Tentative transliterated version: מאצ'יאוסקאס. Either confirmation or IPA would help. -- Deborahjay (talk) 07:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In Lithuanian the letter ‹c› is pronounced [ts], so I would suggest a tsade without a geresh for the Hebrew transcription. To spell [tʃ], the Lithuanians use ‹č›. --Theurgist (talk) 09:58, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So does the ‹c› not change its pronunciation when preceding a vowel (or several)? My source text lacks diacritics so I'm relying on the name as it appears in the Lithuanian Wikipedia (per the link above), with that letter indeed a simple ‹c›. The particular individual, whose first name I don't know, was a commissar attached to the Soviet Red Army's 16th Rifle Division and survived the war. On another note: I'm inclined to drop the letter ‹א› from the Hebrew where the consonant sequence allows unambiguous syllabification. -- Deborahjay (talk) 10:59, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't speak Lithuanian, but this might be the guy from the list on the disambiguation page: Jonas Macijauskas (1900–1981) – Lietuvos sovietinis karinis veikėjas, generolas majoras. "sovietinis" and "generolas majoras" were the give-aways. From the article it appears that he held a political office in the Soviet Army, so commissar would fit. Then again, this might be some other Lithuanian Soviet soldier. Rimush (talk) 12:53, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't speak Lithuanian either, but I'm reasonably sure that "‹c› does not change its pronunciation when preceding a vowel", and that it is always pronounced as [ts]. No such user (talk) 13:47, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't speak Lithuanian either, but Lithuanian language#Phonology says that all sounds are palatalized before /i/ and /e/, which suggests [ma.t͡sʲi.jaus.kas] (with some pitch accent I don't know and which is irrelevant for transcription into Hebrew anyway). But the article gives no indication that palatalization is severe enough to cause a merger of /t͡s/ and /t͡ʃ/ in palatalizing environments, so I'd go with מציאוסקס (or with alephs for the a's in the first and last syllables if you feel they're necessary). +An gr 14:28, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's certainly not objective -- transliteration, by definition, is not an exact science, and certain types of spellings (like the one you suggested, Deborah) conforms to a yiddishized style, similar to one who transliterates Mendelson as מנדעלסאן. Granted you have no ע, which is also a Yiddish thing, but the Hebrew א does not lend anything but psychology to your word unless it possesses a vowel. So all three of them are superfluous. My name, as I spell it ראוזנבך, is pronounced in Hebrew "Ri-O-zen-bach" -- definitely not a pure transliteration. My family was not religious a few generations back and I didn't have any precedent and so made it up myself. So I'm not saying that your suggestion is wrong (except, of course, for the tz issue, which I cannot comment on because I do not know anything about how to pronounce the Lithuanian c. But putting that aside, your excessive use of the letter א gives it a very Eastern European flavor. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 02:38, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hague Convention Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents

Regarding the above, is it safe to use appostillisation and appostilling?--Forty two^{Thanks for all the fish!} 11:24, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When you say safe, what do you mean? It's hard to imagine a situation in which you could be hurt by using those words. Gdr 14:15, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At Sturgis, maybe. "Loan's paid off, man." "You got apostillation, dude?" --- OtherDave (talk) 18:28, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Podesay

What does the work "podesay" mean? It's mentioned on this page. It sounds like it's a sort of textile, the link implying that it's measured in yards (in the same sentence as brocade). Cheers, matt (talk) 13:03, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering whether it's a mangled version of peau de soie. ---Sluzzelin talk 13:28, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Although the exact spelling in question is not recorded in the OED, I think it's probably a variant of paduasoy, which denotes a fabric somewhat different from peau de soie. The OED does record 17th-and-18th-century variants of paduasoy (e.g., pudisway and paddisway) indicating a pronunciation ending in /eɪ/, and peau de soie was not introduced until "the second half of the 19th century" (originally as a trade name). Deor (talk) 13:43, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gesta Herwardi or De Gestis Herwardi Saxonis

How should we refer to this manuscript within wikipedia?

I believe the only existing copy of De Gestis Herwardi Saxonis is actually Gesta Herwardi. Herwardi is sometimes spelt Herewardi. There are a few wikipedia articles referring to De Gestis Herewardi Saxonis

Other sources vary. For example Gesta Herwardi in

c1300(?a1150) Gesta Herwardi in RS 91.1 :: Gesta Herwardi, ed. C. T. Martin, RS 91.1 (1966). 339-404.

and Gesta Herewardi in

Lapidge, Michael (1999). [Google Books Anglo-Saxon England]. Vol. 28. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521652030. {{cite book}}: Check |url= value (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

but also De Gestis Herwardi Saxonis in

Bevis, Trevor (1981). Hereward and De Gestis Herwardi Saxonis. Westrydale Press.

and even Gesta Herwardi, De Gestis Herewardi and Gesta Herwardi Incliti Exulis et Militis in

Fairweather, Janet (2005). [Google Books Liber Eliensis: a history of the Isle of Ely from the seventh century to the twelfth]. The Boydell Press. ISBN 1843830159. {{cite book}}: Check |url= value (help)

Fairweather (2005) p. xlii, says

Gesta Herwardi Incliti Exulis et Militis, in Gaimar, Lestorie des Engles, ed. Sir Thomas Duffus Hardy and C. Trice Martin (Rolls Series xci. i, London 1888), pp. 339–404

There also exists a translation by W. D. Sweeting of a transcript by S. H. Miller of the Gesta Herwardi] typescript edition: Peterborough 1895),[Sweeting titles the translation De Gestis Herwardi Saxonis] and another by M. Swanton, printed in Medieval Outlaws: Ten Tales in Modern English ed. T. H. Ohlgren (Stroud 1998) and in Swanton's own Three Lives of the Last Englishmen (New York and London 1984). An OMT with translation, eds. P. G. Schmidt and J. Mann, is forthcoming.

Gesta Herwardi: in Fairweather (2005) pp. xlii, 2–3, 204–219, 223, 529
De Gestis Herewardi: in Fairweather (2005) pp. 209, 211, 215, 219

--Senra (talk) 21:18, 8 August 2010 (UTC) ~~{{unresolved}}~~ --Senra (talk) 09:09, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(some content copied and adapted from my talk page) My definite preference for how to deal with the various titles for different versions of the doings of Hereward the Wake would be to go with whatever title or description is given in recent academic publications: you found that Michael Lapidge, Malcolm Godden and Simon Keynes accepted, as editors, the use of "Gesta Herewardi" in a paper by Elisabeth van Houts, published in Anglo-Saxon England 28, 1999, and you really won't find a better set of authorities than that! Then, if you have to refer to individual versions, write something like "X's version of the "Gesta Herewardi"..." — "Gesta Herewardi" simply means "(the) deeds of Hereward", so really it's a "catch-all" description anyway. Medieval writers didn't necessarily give their work titles — this is the case with Hugh Candidus' history of Peterborough Abbey, for example, which begins instead with a description of what follows.

For further clarity, note that Fairweather's use of "Gesta Herwardi Incliti Exulis et Militis" ("The deeds of Hereward, the famous exile and knight"), cited above, is merely a citation of a particular version of the "Gesta Herewardi", written by Gaimar, and given a flowery title, either by Gaimar or later. And, the same applies to her use of "Gesta Herwardi", "De Gestis Herwardi", and "De Gestis Herwardi Saxonis": here, Fairweather is merely citing various modern (relatively, anyway) versions, editions, transcripts, and so-on, by using their titles, while indicating where they can be found. So, you might write "Gaimar's version of the "Gesta Herewardi", known as "Gesta Herwardi Incliti Exulis et Militis"...", and later abbreviate your references to that version down to "Gesta Herwardi", or just "Gaimar", etc. On the other hand, note that Hugh Candidus didn't "write a version of the "Gesta Herewardi"", so far as we know — rather, he simply used it, or indeed another source of similar information, in compiling his history of Peterborough Abbey; and, as I recall, he only included information directly relevant to the abbey. In any case, at the time of writing, I strongly believe that the attribution of an actual version of the "Gesta" (from the Book of Robert of Swaffham) to Hugh Candidus in the article "Gesta Herewardi" is an unsourced red herring, which needs addressing.

For variant spellings of proper nouns in this sort of context, I would reference the use of "Æðelþryð" vs. "Audrey", which is a modern form of the same name, and is a far more extreme example of the same phenomenon that has given rise to "Herewardi" vs. "Herwardi" (and, btw, the ending in -i is simply the Latinised genitive singular form of nominative -us, e.g. "Herewardus"). Hope that helps. Nortonius (talk) 19:47, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Thank you. I appreciate the time you have taken to explain this --Senra (talk) 10:46, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. :-) Nortonius (talk) 11:16, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hunting animals to extinction.

Is there a specific name for killing off animals with the intention of rendering the species extinct? Homicide is where one human kills another, fratricide is where a human kills his/her sibling, regicide is where a human kills his king, genocide is where a group of humans tries to exterminate another group of humans, but is there a specific name for a group of humans trying to kill off all black rats, or all house cats, or all blue whales? Googlemeister (talk) 18:22, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Planned extinction mentions "specicide". ---Sluzzelin talk 18:26, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, both specicide and speciecide appear to be used in various books [1][2] and articles [3][4], though the enclosing of the terms in quotation marks in a number of cases indicates that the authors feel that the terms are neologisms. Deor (talk) 18:37, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't speciecide refer to something like this? Clarityfiend (talk) 20:36, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. The choice would be between using the root speci- (which makes the existing 'specicide') or the whole word species (which makes the uber-sibillant monstrosity 'speciesicide') -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:29, 5 August 2010 (UTC) [reply]

How about "extinguishing"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:34, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For something a little more demotic, "wipe out" is often used to cover this meaning: If there's a species of animal that's causing problems nosing around your camera, we'll have it wiped out! But that isn't a "specific" term, I suppose. What about "extirpation"? LANTZY ^TALK 23:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would probably use "eradication" if I were writing about that myself. Looie496 (talk) 01:33, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The near-extinction of the American bison was a planned event that nearly succeeded. I expect those pursuing that end would have had a term for it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:41, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient writing in Britain

Hi. Is there any evidence of any sort of writing in pre-Roman Britain? (I'm assuming it would only be primitive scratched inscriptions or similar.) If no such writing survives, is the view that it never existed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.26.135 (talk) 19:09, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe there is. See Anglo-Saxon runes and Elder Futhark. Rmhermen (talk) 19:16, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But surely those are not pre-Roman? (Isn't all that kind of writing, from runes to ogham, actually inspired by Roman writing?) Adam Bishop (talk) 19:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is use of Latin alphabets on some coins from pre-Roman Britain[5]. Our articles on runes seems to claim there exact origin is somewhat in doubt but in general writing systems are thought to have developed entirely independently only a few times. Rmhermen (talk) 19:56, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right, but considering the Anglo-Saxons were not in pre-Roman Britain (Roman Britain starting from AD43 onwards), the two links given above are still not relevant. Our article on ogham seems to suggest that Ogham was developed without influence from the Latin alphabet, but was developed in or around the 4th Century AD, making it well within the Roman era. As for any other writing systems, I have not heard of any. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 20:09, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article on the British Iron Age makes mention of coins and other artifacts that seem to require at least some form of writing system (even if only on the part of the elites who did the actual minting). You might find sources there that will point you in the right direction? ☯.Zen Swashbuckler.☠ 20:52, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe Pictish carvings are written language - there was a paper about this recently - see [6] and [7]. (Looks like these stones wouldn't be pre-Roman-conquest, but they would be on the other side of the Antonine Wall from the Romans.) Wurstgeist (talk) 21:15, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the replies. The inscriptions on the iron age coins are interesting; I hadn't thought of that. As far as I can tell though (and correct me if I'm wrong), these were Roman-inspired and only slightly predate the Roman arrival, so they're perhaps not quite what I had in mind. There is a nice picture at http://www.bbc.co.uk/ahistoryoftheworld/objects/xzvfJLCDS3Cud47dFY1IrQ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.26.135 (talk) 02:38, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There appears to be some uncertainty as to just how early Ogham began to be used, given that most early examples of its principal medium of wooden staves will have been subject to decay or deliberate destruction. Although the article suggests that Ogham was most likely derived via runes from Latin (or the related Venetic) script, it has become apparent in recent years that there was considerable continent-wide commerce and intercourse long before the Roman invasion of Britain, so writing systems and usage could have spread in advance of that forcible introduction. It is unfortunate that Druidism seems to have eschewed the use of writing in favour of memorising for philosophical reasons, even though many Druids (a social caste rather than just the priesthood recruited from within it) may have been literate in Latin and/or Greek, etc, before the Roman absorbtion of their territories. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 13:45, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had suggested Elder Futhark for just those reasons - some consider that its origin to pre-date the Roman invasion of Britain and it was perhaps widespread on the continent. Rmhermen (talk) 15:43, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Despite the absence of any writing, some British names of rivers and mountains come from pre-Celtic languages, for example Wye, Itchen, Humber, Colne and (but not sure) the Thames.

Continental Celtic inscriptions reflect the history of alphabet: Celtic languages used Etruscan (7th or 6th c. BC), Phoenician, Greek and Roman alphabet. Ogham alphabet remained insular. Although any idea would be stupid without artifacts, it is not impossible that relationship between Celtic peoples may have resulted in a knowledge of foreign alphabets in Britain. --Keguligh (talk) 22:54, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Caption translation for an image

Resolved

This image in Commons has a description that's only available in German. A translation in English would be appreciated, considering that the image is used in the Molotov cocktail article. bibliomaniac 1 5 23:54, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's done, done, done!! 83.81.60.233 (talk) 06:53, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a bunch. bibliomaniac 1 5 23:36, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Daft as a brush?

Just how daft would that be? I never understood that frase —Preceding unsigned comment added by JyzzCannon (talk • contribs) 23:55, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Go into your bathroom, and ask your hairbrush a very easy question, like "What does 1+1 equal?" or "Is it wise to put forks in electrical sockets?" No matter how easy you make the question, the brush will not be able to answer correctly. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:25, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, go ask your grandfather clock the same questions ... yet no one ever says "dumb as a grandfather clock". ---Sluzzelin talk 01:22, 6 August 2010 (UTC) Ha ha, just realized the grandfather clock could actually answer FisherQueen's first question correctly, depending on when you ask. Own goal. ---Sluzzelin talk 01:24, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just asked my hairbrush, "What's 1 minus 1?" and it said nothing. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:39, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a big difference between saying nothing and saying "nothing". See use-mention distinction. --Tango (talk) 02:21, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get back to you on that after I finish reading "Eats Shoots and Leaves". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:29, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See joke. 86.173.170.56 (talk) 11:38, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This OED entry doesn't exactly explain everything, but tries to trace the origins, and the attribute "which flops, unable to stand upright" obviously doesn't apply to every household item. ---Sluzzelin talk 01:49, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There appear to be four theories [8]. Also, according to this thread [9] on some forum somewhere, we used to have an article about it (see the post from "Orac"). We used to have an article on everything... (It appears to refer to the article Ken Platt, but Orac's post is two years older than the article so I don't know what's going on there.) Wurstgeist (talk) 02:09, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the Black Country the phrase is "saft as a brush", which seems to suggest an etymology of "soft".--TammyMoet (talk) 15:05, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]