Language desk
< February 24	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 26 >

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.

February 25

indulgent

I've been listening to Simon Cowell on Idols for years, and he often describes performances/performers as indulgent. I know the meaning of the word - "to gratify the wishes of others" - but what does Simon mean? Is he referring to the singer playing to the judges or the audience? Is he referring to them singing a 'safe' song? Or is there some deeper meaning that I seem to be missing? Sandman30s (talk) 12:50, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you a personal friend of Mr. Cowell? First name terms? 84.13.26.33 (talk) 00:23, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

. . .or is Simon Cowell using English in an idiosyncratic way that makes his meaning hard to understand. 86.4.186.107 (talk) 12:56, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps he's using it to mean "self-indulgent"? (I've never seen any of his shows, so I don't know the contexts where he uses it.) +An gr 13:01, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unlike Angr, I have occasionally seen his shows, may God forgive me. And Angr is bang on in his guess: Cowell does indeed say indulgent when he actually means self-indulgent, one of his many, many irritating mannerisms. Maid Marion (talk) 14:17, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'indulgent is sometimes used to mean 'emotionally indulgent' - like a mother who coddles a spoiled, bratty child. He might be implying that someone ruins the music by allowing too much expressiveness - closer in that sense to 'effulgent'. --Ludwigs2 14:56, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Usage changes, and this seems like a reasonable adjustment of usage to me. The meaning is relatively clear (OP notwithstanding); he means self-indulgent. Just as "Irregardless" is a perfectly cromulent (if irritating) word.Aaronite (talk) 19:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If it irritates, then it's obviously not "perfectly" anything - except irritating. It's not in any dictionary I'm aware of. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:11, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If it irritates, perhaps it is perfectly irritating. Nonetheless, Merriam-Webster sees fit to put it in their online dictionary - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless --LarryMac | Talk 20:54, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mm, I did say it was perfectly irritating. M-W put it in only to shoot it down in flames - "nonstandard"; "still a long way from general acceptance". It's an example of a "word" not to use. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:01, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answers. Cromulent? I had to look that up... a slang word for "acceptable" - interesting, even if it was a little unnecessary. It's fine to say "perfectly fine". Sandman30s (talk) 07:00, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"It's a perfectly cromulent word" is a quote from the Simpsons, where the speaker was referring to the word embiggen. Since embiggen is also "not a real word" (at least, it wasn't until that episode aired), calling a word "perfectly cromulent" is an ironic way of seeming to say it's perfectly fine while tacitly acknowledging that, like embiggen, it's nothing of the sort. And cromulent itself is, of course, a perfectly cromulent word. (See Lisa the Iconoclast#Embiggen and cromulent.) If Aaronite had said "it's a perfectly fine word", that irony, and indeed the full range of connotation, would have been lost. +An gr 08:40, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

harbour-bar

In this sentence from Treasure Island -- "Underneath there was an old boat-cloak whitened with sea-salt on many a harbour-bar" -- does bar mean anything other than the counter in a pub? Many thanks for help. --Omidinist (talk) 15:37, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbar. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 15:42, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hope Tennyson wasn't talking about leaving the pub! :-) [1] Alansplodge (talk) 15:57, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tennyson is talking metaphorically about death (crossing the bar) and meeting God ("the Pilot"). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:15, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know - it was a joke - hence the smiley face Alansplodge (talk) 18:20, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This definitely has nothing to do with pubs. Many harbors have a bar of sand, gravel, or some other kind of sediment that partly block access to the sea and help to protect the harbor from large waves and swells. The town of Bar Harbor was named for such a harbor bar. Marco polo (talk) 16:58, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's a drinking song from the early 1900s that has several double-meaning terms. It's called "I've Been Floating Down the Old Green River" (Green River was a whisky brand) and one of the lines is "I got stuck on a bar". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:20, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Green River is also a soft drink developed before Prohibition. Rmhermen (talk) 04:19, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Standard american english

I would like to know the defintion of Standard American English. I have looked online and never seem to find a direct answer and also when to use it?? I did find out that it is using manners and being polite when writing or talking to others but want to know more!! Thank you 72.173.248.35 (talk) 19:14, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, it has nothing specifically to do with being polite or using manners. People who are being very impolite and ill-mannered can be using Standard American English. This is covered in Wikipedia at General American. Check it out and come back if you have any more questions. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:55, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Standard American English isn't necessarily synonymous with GA. GA is about pronunciation while Standard English is about grammar. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 23:59, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did wonder about that, but then Standard American English redirects to the link I provided. Maybe that should be reconsidered. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 00:15, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Standard American English" is the version of American English that is taught in schools and used in most written publications. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 00:37, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, "Standard American English" is primarily a form of the written language. Basically, it avoids slang, follows rules of prescriptive grammar (a few of which differ from those of British English), and uses American English spelling. You can be impolite using Standard American English (SAE), though profanities would not be standard. It works to your advantage to use SAE for formal, business, and professional communication in the United States. It probably works to your disadvantage when talking to friends. Marco polo (talk) 01:53, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just an observation: The WP article Standard Written English is one of the most unfocused grab-bags I've seen here (other than lists of the "in popular culture" type). Deor (talk) 02:21, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why do women say girlfriend?

Men never say boyfriend, and it's usually not needed in the conversation, as in, "my girlfriends and me went and saw 27 dresses." I doubt any guys would be involved, but even if they were, so what? Aaronite (talk) 19:41, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder about the same thing too. Men never say: "I went with a bunch of boyfriends to see the football game." Substituting with "guy friends" is more plausible but it's still rarely heard. --Kvasir (talk) 20:59, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A man's "boyfriend" has a homosexual connotation, while a woman's "girlfriend" doesn't. Men have "buddies" or "chums"; it strikes me that I can't think of a female equivalent off the top of my head. Go figure. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:07, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that i know, even bromance relationships can't escape rumours. I think the question here is why women feel they need to specify the gender of their friends. --Kvasir (talk) 22:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In England, men have "mates" rather than "buddies". (Does anyone now have "chums"?) Ghmyrtle (talk) 23:09, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not that I've heard of for a very long time, and then only in a certain social register. Any male who refers to his "chums" these days would be speaking intentionally jocularly, or would be considered some kind of time traveller from the 1910s. Or would be that nerdy obese kid with the high-pitched voice from The Simpsons. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 23:37, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You mean Martin Prince? I don't think he's supposed to be obese; all the boys in the Simpsons are kind of thick around the middle, but Martin is no fatter than Bart or Milhouse. Üter is the obese one. +An gr 23:49, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Martin. I retract my outrageous slur against him. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 00:13, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Language is weird. There isn't necessarily a reason for it, it just happens. --Tango (talk) 22:12, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is this an English language issue or an Anglo-American cultural issue?

Women talk of their "girlfriends" while men don't say "boyfriends"/"menfriends"

Women clubbing go to the toilet in pairs/groups which men don't

Women much more often hold hands/embrace/kiss their "girlfriends" than men (except on the sports field)

So broadly, women are less insistent than men on separating their "friend" behaviour from their "couple" behaviour. Sussexonian (talk) 22:31, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know it happens in other languages. It's not heard in Chinese, for example, where "boyfriend" and "girlfriend" carry rommantic connotations. So the expression used in the OP isn't a cultural thing. I'm not sure it's in other English dialects either.

But yeah, women go to toilets together across many cultures. --Kvasir (talk) 22:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

German does the same thing as English here, with the added difficulty that there are no words for "girlfriend" and "boyfriend" distinct from the words for "friend (female)" and "friend (masculine/generic)". If you use the words "Freundin" (feminine) and "Freund" (masculine) with a possessive pronoun or a noun in the genitive, they'll be interpreted as "girlfriend" and "boyfriend": "meine Freundin" = "my girlfriend", "Petras Freund" = "Petra's boyfriend", "die Freundin von meinem Onkel" = "my uncle's girlfriend". If you want to avoid romantic implications, you have to use paraphrases like "a friend of mine" or synonyms like "buddy, pal" or even "colleague". However, as in English, women can say "meine Freundin" to refer to a good female friend without any romantic implications, but a man would never refer to a male friend as "mein Freund" unless he was nonheterosexual and actually referring to his (romantic-relationship) boyfriend. +An gr 22:56, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Women going to the toilet with friends, and men not has a perfectly rational explanation. Men's toilets rarely do, but women's toilets often have queues. It's nice to have a friend to talk to while waiting for the loo. --Polysylabic Pseudonym (talk) 06:22, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In this specific situation, I'd say that specifying girlfriends here is making it clear that it wasn't a date with a boy. If she just said "I went to the movies with a friend," the implication is that it was a 'special friend'. If a man said the same thing, for some reason (convention, probably) it doesn't have that implication. Steewi (talk) 23:55, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The words manfriend and womanfriend are more accurate in reference to adults. -- Wavelength (talk) 00:35, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When a woman says "girlfriend(s)", typically she's referring to female friends that are especially close, kinda like sisters. The long-time WGN radio mid-morning "Kathy and Judy Show" was called by the name they called themselves, "The Girlfriends".[2] When either a man or woman says "boyfriend", it implies a dating relationship. Friend, pal, buddy/bud, chum/chummer - all can be used for same-sex or opposite sex in a platonic sense, and can also be used derisively for someone who is not at all a friend. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:28, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mosophiles

What is Mosophiles?174.3.99.176 (talk) 21:21, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The word gets very few google hits, and those it does get seem mostly to refer to microorganisms or snails. In the context you linked to, the only thing I can think of is that it's a sarcastic reference to Jews, suggesting that they love Moses rather than Jesus, but I have absolutely no idea if that's right. +An gr 21:34, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's a typo for "Moscophiles". See the first sentence of Ukrainian Russophiles, as well as the section Russophiles, Moscophiles or Russians?. Deor (talk) 21:38, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds way more plausible than my suggestion. +An gr 22:58, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Schmazi ?

In his song Werner von Braun, Tom Lehrer says :

Call him a Nazi, he won't even frown

"Ha, Nazi schmazi," says Wernher von Braun

What does "schmazi" mean ?

Thanks in advance !

Remi Mathis (talk) 21:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See shm-reduplication. Its Yiddish origins make it particularly ironic in this conext. +An gr 21:27, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! It's the kind of expression which is hard to understand (and find on the Internet) when you're not an English-speaker native...

Remi Mathis (talk) 21:37, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder where the "schm-" comes from. The only online source for our article, the Zuckermann paper, only mentions in passing that it "is traceable back to Yiddish", but doesn't give any example, nor an explanation how it got into Yiddish in the first place. — Sebastian 22:32, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reduplication#English says that it began in New York City. -- Wavelength (talk) 22:45, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably borrowed from words like schmuck and schmutz and schmaltz; words starting in schm are rarely about nice, pleasant things in Yiddish. it might be that there's a common 'schm' root word that means something like 'oily' or 'greasy'. --Ludwigs2 23:11, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, "schmuck" originally meant "jewel", as Schmuck in German still does, and "schmaltz" does refer to grease. But I think it's just coincidence, from an etymological point of view, that these words begin with "schm-". I don't know whether shm-reduplication occurs within Yiddish itself, or only in English (originally English in contact with Yiddish). +An gr 23:30, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Leo Rosten's The Joys of Yiddish, which unfortunately is no longer in print, also unfortunately gives no conclusive etymology. He does note that a number of disparaging terms in Yiddish start with the "sh"/"sch" sound, and refers to this kind of reduplicative usage as "Yinglish", meaning it's a bit of both. In addition to the ones listed above, using the spelling Rosten prefers, there is also "shikker" (drunk/drunkard), "shiksa" (non-Jewish or non-pious woman), "shlemiel" (clumsy fool), "shlep" (to drag), "shlimazl" (born loser), "shlock" (cheaply made), "shlub" (inept, clumsy), "shlump" (slovenly or unpleasant), "shmatte" (shoddy), "shmeer" (bribe, among other things), "shmegegge" ("cross between a shlemiel and a shlemazl"), "shmendrick" (henpecked man), "shnorrer" (freeloader, moocher), "shtup" (screw), "shtuss" (nonsense, commotion), "shvitzer" (braggart). Replacing the rhyming part with the "sch" sound disparages the first part. The one I've probably heard most often is "fancy-shmancy". An example given in the book, which coincidentally was the title of one of Fran Drescher's books, is "cancer-s(c)hmancer", a much worse case than "virus-shmirus". Putting down a civic leader: "Mayor-shmayor". He gives a few more examples like that. Lehrer of course was being ironic, as Angr notes - it's highly unlikely a Nazi would use a Yiddish expression. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would certainly not consider "fancy schmancy" to be derogatory -- that might be a unique counterexample. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 01:00, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Fancy-shmancy" is a way of saying something is way too fancy or high-falutin'.[3] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:01, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probably only loosely related to Lehrer's source of inspiration (though who knows, and this makes the line even more biting and funny to me :-): In German the verb "schmatzen" means to make a smacking sound with one's lips, particularly while kissing or eating. "Schmatz!" is comic book onomatopoeia for that same sound, and "Schmatzi" looks like a likely cutesy handle of endearment, like Mausi or Froschi, or Schatzi without the letter "m". Schmatzi wouldn't quite rhyme with Nazi though. ---Sluzzelin talk 01:16, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It would, actually. Presumably the right way to say "Nazi" is "NAH-zee". However, in the USA at least, it's typically pronounced "NOT-see". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:19, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess what I meant is that, in German, "Schmatzi" would be pronounced with a shorter "a" than "Nazi". ---Sluzzelin talk 01:25, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I heard someone use "shvitzer" to mean a person who sweats a lot Rimush (talk) 15:19, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's what it means literally. Yiddish takes a lot of words from Hebrew, German, Russian and even English, and puts their own twist on them. As with the well-known "schmuck", which actually means "ornament" or "jewel" (as in "family jewels"?) and its G-rated euphemisms such as "schmo". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:55, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(OR here) The Polish equivalent is a sr-reduplication where the sr- or sra- prefix is obviously taken from the verb srać, "to shit". It's more offensive and less common than the shm-reduplication in English, but I suppose there must have been some linguistic exchange between Polish and Yiddish speakers here, although I can't tell who borrowed from whom. — Kpalion^(talk) 16:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the sch... comes from the German Scheiss? (Does Yiddisch have this word?) 195.35.160.133 (talk) 12:36, 2 March 2010 (UTC) Martin.[reply]