Language desk
< April 28	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 30 >

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.

April 29

Double loan words

What are some examples of loan words loaned back into their original language? ie: English -> Japanese -> English? Fifelfoo (talk) 12:48, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the oke part of karaoke comes from English orchestra. The French word tennis is borrowed from English tennis, which is from French tenez. The German word Quiche is from French quiche, which is from German Kuchen. Pais (talk) 12:57, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To use the Japanese example, we use the phrase capsule hotel to refer to hotels with tiny rooms, coming from the Japanese 'kapuseru hoteru' which is an example of wasei eigo, or 'English made in Japan'. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 13:16, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of gairaigo and wasei-eigo terms provides a lengthy list of Japanese terms which originate from European languages. Some have then been borrowed back into a European language, such as anime, and maybe salaryman. Astronaut (talk) 09:07, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are some interesting examples from Greek > Turkish > Greek, e.g. Ancient Greek límēn ('harbour') > Turk. liman > Mod.Gr. limáni. Greek > Latin > Italian > Greek would be cannē ('reed') > canna ('reed') > cannone ('tube, cannon') > kanóni. Greek > Latin > English > Greek would be poinē ('punishment') > poena > penalty > pénalti ('penalty shoot in football'). Germanic > Italian > Germanic would be G. bank ('bench') > Italian banca > G. bank ('financial institution'). Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:49, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Vampire" is another example. It comes from Serbian vampir wich has long-standing cognates in other Slavic languages: Croatian upir or upirina, Czech and Slovak upír, Polish upiór, East Slavic upyr, ultimately derived from Proto-Slavic *ǫpyrь or *ǫpirь. Since the 19th century, these Slavic languages have made reverse borrowings from West European languages: Croatian vampir, Czech vampýr, Slovak vampír, Polish wampir, East Slavic vampir. — Kpalion^(talk) 13:26, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Chinese for "lady", furen (夫人), was loaned into Mongolian and thence into Manchu as fujin, and then loaned back into Chinese during the Manchu Qing Dynasty as fujin (福晋), meaning "noble lady" or "princess" (as in wife of a prince). --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 13:46, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation of The Mall, London

Why The Mall, London pronounced so it rhymes with "pal" rather than "call?" This was emphasized by Brit on-air commentators today during the Royal wedding. Doesn't double "L" at the end of a word after "A" usually result in a vowel sound like "tall" "call" or "ball" rather than "Al," "Sal" or "gal?" Are other Brit malls similarly pronounced? Edison (talk) 14:44, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To British English ears, the usage of the word "mall" and the pronunciation maul (sorry, I don't do IPA), for shopping mall (or shopping centre), sounds American - although it is increasingly used in that sense. The Mall (and Pall Mall, which historically was pronounced pell mell) predate that usage. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:56, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, remember that pronunciation is primary and spelling is secondary. The question is not "Why is it pronounced mal if it's spelled as if it were pronounced maul", the question is "Why is it spelled Mall when it's pronounced mal?" Pais (talk) 15:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This blog goes into some detail on the question. In Britain, some people (including me) pronounce shopping mall as "maul" even though they call the street in London the "Mal". Other people (generally older, in my experience) say "mal" for both. Perhaps the "mal" pronunciation is due to its etymology, from Italian pallamaglio, which has the vowel /ä/ in modern standard Italian. (Or perhaps not.) Lfh (talk) 15:20, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I reckon that explains why Pall Mall (cigarette) was pronounced "pell mell" (during the time before TV was banned from advertising cigarettes). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:33, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Most ordinary Londoners (including my good self) pronounce The Mall and Pall Mall to rhyme with "pal" although I have heard the other pronunciation recently. Other British malls are usually pronounced "shopping centre". Alansplodge (talk) 16:29, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Shopping cen-tray"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:05, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you see an acute accent? No? Then why on Earth would it be pronounced as if it did? 82.24.248.137 (talk) 19:48, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs can contemplate that while sitting in his favourite cafe. :) But yes, the whole par-tay thing and its terrible spawn should all have been killed at birth. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 19:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC) [reply]

The confusing thing about the pronounciation of Mall in this context is the fact that it isn't pronounced like all, ball, call, fall, tall, or small. It's the same complaint that I have when people from the Southern U.S. refer to their mother's sister as a small colonial insect. Haunt, flaunt, gaunt, jaunt... the "u" is there for a reason... --Jayron32 20:06, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

well you wouldn't appreciate Scouse or Yorkshire aunties then! The phrase "eat up - you're at your auntie's" comes to mind! (auntie's here is pronounced "anti's")

Jayron, the "u" is indeed there for a reason. But not for the reason that "aunt" is pronounced to rhyme with haunt, flaunt, gaunt or jaunt - because no variety of English that I'm aware of pronounces it that way. It's "ahnt", not "awnt". -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 21:10, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You should come to Southern NH/Norther Massachusetts then. My native accent has those all rhyme. "Your aunt looks gaunt" would rhyme perfectly. --Jayron32 04:56, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How interesting. Tks for the enlightenment. I must come and visit and check out all those gaunt aunts. -- Jack of Oz [your turn]

Adjectives following nouns and pronouns in English

We need an encyclopedia big enough for our purposes.

There is no one clever enough to write the whole thing.

The adjectives big and clever come after the noun phrase that they qualify—in one case, the noun encyclopedia and in the other the pronoun no one.

Can someone state a simple rule that identifies those occasions in English where an adjective normally follows the noun phrase that it qualifies? Michael Hardy (talk) 17:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some criteria for post-positive adjectives are given at Postpositive Adjectives @ The Internet Grammar of English.

—Wavelength (talk) 18:32, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've added this sentence to the article titled post-positive adjective:

Some adjectives not always used post-positively are used so in some situations; for example: in "They need a house big enough for their family.", the adjective big follows the noun house.

That fact wasn't even mentioned in the article! The example sentence is quite a routine sort of sentence, yet post-positive use of ordinary adjectives in that way was not mentioned. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the first example, the adjective need not be post-positive. For example, you can say "We need a big enough encyclopedia for our purposes." In the second example, the adjective has to be post-positive because it modifies a pronoun (no one). For example, you would have to say "There is no one clever here." However, what I think is going on here is that these are predicative adjective phrases, which must follow the noun phrase or pronoun that they modify. In each of the cited cases, I think that there is an "understood" that is between the noun and the adjective modifying it, creating a kind of subordinate clause. Marco polo (talk) 19:35, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Colloquially, you can get away with "We need a big enough encyclopedia for our purposes". But analyse it for a moment. What's an "encyclopedia for our purposes"? That doesn't seem to make any sense. "For our purposes" is qualifying "big enough" and really ought to sit right next to it.

It's even worse when something like "We need an encyclopedia comprehensive enough that we can hand it out to every schoolchild" becomes "We need a comprehensive enough encyclopedia that we can hand it out to every schoolchild" - which is revolting and disgusting English. Better to play safe and keep things that belong together together.

There's a "that is" or "which is" understood in these types of sentences: "We need an encyclopedia [that is] big enough for our purposes". If all you're doing is re-arranging the words, the implied words remain: "We need a big enough encyclopedia [that is] for our purposes", and "We need a [that is] big enough encyclopedia for our purposes", and any other combination you now care to try, make zero sense. The only way that works is having 'encyclopedia' followed by the implied 'that is' followed by 'big enough' or whatever. I grant that, in conversation, it's not always possible to think this through quickly enough, and we then end up saying something else. But in writing, we have more time.

It's the same deal as "He only ate three peas but gorged himself on the rest of the banquet". If all he ate was three peas - which is what "he only ate three peas" is telling us - then that's all he ate, period. Better to put the 'only' next to the thing it's qualifying, then the sentence meets the logic test: "He ate only three peas but gorged himself on the rest of the banquet".

What's the big picture - misplaced modifier? -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 19:52, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Michael: in both your examples, it looks to me like the "post-positive" adjectives are actually reduced forms of relative clauses: "We need an encyclopedia [that is] big enough for our purposes", "there is no one [that is] clever enough to write the whole thing". (Oops, I see Jack already pointed this out.) rʨanaɢ (talk) 23:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese translation

I've come across the Japanese phrase 水差して悪いけど, and it doesn't make any sense in context if I translate it literally. I'm having trouble figuring out what it means, or in what contexts it's used in, so any help would be nice.--十八 22:27, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it means 'sorry to hazard a guess, but...'. 水差して refers to stabbing at water to catch fish, so it is like 'shot in the dark' (= wild guess) in English. I hope this makes sense. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 22:57, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT - I have asked the question here. I seem to be wrong at first glance, but we'll see. Good luck. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 01:23, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT2 - My colleagues suggest it means 'sorry to pour cold water on [what you were suggesting] but....' or 'sorry to be a killjoy'. I was wrong. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 01:35, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that looks like it's correct; I understand the context now.--十八 01:36, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another colourful expression current in London is "sorry to piss on your bonfire but...". Grandma wouldn't approve! Alansplodge (talk) 14:43, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]