Language desk
< January 5	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 7 >

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.

January 6

Latin translation ("Let the just proceed forth")

My school's senate is looking to adopt a Latin motto. We like "let the just proceed forth"; we used Google Translate to get a rudimentary translation but that's most likely not accurate. Really, what we're looking for is something that conveys justice or progress. Suggestions are welcome if anyone wishes to opine, but for now we're going with the aforesaid motto. If anyone could provide an accurate Latin translation, it would be much appreciated. Many thanks 71.213.60.86 (talk) 01:44, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, how about "Prodeant justi"? If the vexilla regis can do it, why not the just? Deor (talk) 01:51, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

However, the verb prodo seems to mean "to put something forward, bring something forth" etc., rather than "to move forward". For the latter meaning, probably progrediantur would be better. AnonMoos (talk) 05:43, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Prodeant is from prodire (pro+ire), not prodere (pro+dare). Deor's suggestion seems correct to me. Iblardi (talk) 10:25, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, guess I confused "prodant" and "prodeant"... AnonMoos (talk) 12:35, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's understandable. It happens a lot. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:29, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rhyming phrases

Hey there, I was wondering if anybody could come up with any two-word phrases that follow the pattern of "hoi polloi" or "Lean Cuisine"—where the first word is one syllable and the second word is two syllables, the second one stressed and rhyming with the first word. Thanks for your input! --Fbv65e del — t — c // 06:53, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whack attack. Jack Attack. I need sleep, or I'd probably come up with more. --Jayron32 07:27, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Steady with that last one, boy. :)

Great debate, jai alai, beat retreat, Mean Machine, Gair Affair.

I have to explain that last one. In the USA, a major new political scandal will tend to be referred to as "something-gate", after the Watergate scandal that resulted in Nixon's resignation in August 1974. In Australia, in April of that same year 1974, the scandal that involved Senator Vince Gair was referred to as the "Gair Affair", and ever since then, any new political scandal is called the "something Affair". -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 08:01, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So what will happen if the USA develops a political scandal involving water? JIP | Talk 09:23, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Watergate has already been done, and H2O-gate or Aqua-gate don't sound so catchy. We should leave this open to the inhabitants of our little problem-child country. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 09:33, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the Whitewater controversy was ever called Whitewatergate (was it?), so maybe there's an issue of avoidance where the morpheme "water" is concerned. Angr (talk) 14:05, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was generally just called "Whitewater". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:22, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly remember it being called Whitewatergate, at least on this side of the Pacific. And Google returns over 67k responses for that search. It also seems political scandals in Aus used to get called "something affairs". These days, in our seemingly increasing push to become the 51st state, ours seem to more and more be becoming 'gates' as well. Consider Utegate (which I must admit was at least a potentially semi-clever play on words). Admittedly at this stage it does seem to generally be the more minor ephemeral 'scandals' that make the press for a week or two that are '...gates', but it does appear to be becoming more common to immediately add that tag. --jjron (talk) 05:32, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Zapp Zarap --KnightMove (talk) 10:42, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

la-di-dah ---Sluzzelin talk 14:21, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Barely there.~~ --some jerk on the Internet (talk) 15:56, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Shake 'n Bake~~. --some jerk on the Internet (talk) 15:59, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Stow 'n go~~. --some jerk on the Internet (talk) 16:07, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Sam-I-Am~~. --some jerk on the Internet (talk) 16:08, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Toodle-oo.~~ --some jerk on the Internet (talk) 16:11, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Stan the Man~~. --some jerk on the Internet (talk) 16:17, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Green machine. --some jerk on the Internet (talk) 16:21, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Green machine" is the only one that fits the OP's specifications: (a) two words; (b) first word has one syllable; (c) second word has 2 syllables, and is stressed on the 2nd syllable. There are thousands of expressions that fit this general rhyming pattern (chew and spew), but the OP wants something quite specific. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 20:51, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. A textbook example of failure to read a question carefully on my part. --some jerk on the Internet (talk) 16:17, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Loup-garou. Steve Nieve. Card Zero (talk) 21:50, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The last 2 words of Quick Draw McGraw would work, but we never just say "Draw McGraw". -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 22:33, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

duck amuck, dead ahead, loose caboose, view askew, white delight, blue tattoo, ... There is something pleasant about these bouncing cretics. I knew someone who, for reasons unknown, always referred to Willy DeVille as "Will DeVille", and I thought it sounded gallant. ---Sluzzelin talk 04:10, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The rhythm reminds me of feinting, followed by the actual attack. Or maybe I just drank too much coffee again.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 13:48, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Biannual as a noun for a half-yearly journal?

Can you say 'a biannual' as we would say a weekly or fortnightly? mean, if you can use it as a noun, not as an adjective like in biannual journal. Which is the most common term for a journal that is published twice a year? Semi-annual, biannual, or something else? I --117.211.83.250 (talk) 10:07, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The term you're probably thinking of is biennial,[1] which actually means "evey two years". Similarly bimonthly properly mean "every two months",[2] but has become ambiguous due to the common usage of bimonthly to mean "twice a month". "Bi" doesn't mean "half", it means "two". "Semi" means "half". "Semi-monthly" and "semi-annually" are the correct and unambiguous way to say these things. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:29, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) I don't think "biannual" is commonly used as a noun to refer to a journal. In the OED, I can find such substantival uses for daily, weekly, bi-weekly/fortnightly, monthly, bi-monthly, and quarterly, but not for biannual or semi-annual. "Semi-annual journal" seems to be slightly more common than "biannual journal" on Google, and it won't get confused with biennial (every two years). Lesgles (talk) 10:32, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think biannual is a perfectly good noun to use for a publication produced twice a year, and I wouldn't confuse it with a biennial (usually a plant), but I agree with Lesgles (above) that it is not in very common use, though there are over 800,000 hits for "biannual publication" in Google. Wiktionary suggest semiannual as an alternative less likely to cause confusion. Dbfirs 11:05, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just to throw a monkey-wrench into Bugs's explanation, bi can sometimes mean "half" escpecially since half just means "two parts". Consider words like bifurcate, bisect, biramous, all mean something which is "halved" or "split in two". Certainly, "semi-" is a less ambiguous prefix (semi- never means "two"), but in a certain sense there are words meaning "half" of something which use "bi-". --Jayron32 19:06, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, to create 2 parts where there was one. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:55, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, the Wiktionary entry on biannual. --jjron (talk) 05:35, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

learning help

i have issues with rebuttals and objection handling and especially when people are sarcastic to me even kids when i know they're wrong , can anyone suggest me any site where i can download such speeches/discussions/arguments on some sensible matter so that i can download it in my ipod and learn from listening as i am a working mom and hardly find time to read. this is for my learning purpose.. any suggestions would help. thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.199.70.159 (talk) 12:09, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is this more suited to the Humanities desk? Though language is a part it seems that the questioner is asking about social skills and conflict handling. -- Q Chris (talk) 14:23, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you state the question more clearly ? To be specific:

1) Are you the one making the rebuttal, or did you make the statement and the others made the rebuttal ?

2) What problem are you having ? Is it that you are unable to come up with a rebuttal at all ?

3) Can you give specific examples ?

One suggestion, wherever possible, is to say "I'll think about it and get back with you later", which will give you time to formulate a response. Some people lack the ability to formulate a cogent response on-the-spot, like the last President Bush. StuRat (talk) 21:35, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i too cannot quite figure out the question, but one reply that might work on occasion is: Richard Nixon called Pierre Trudeau "that asshole". Said Trudeau about Nixon, "I've been called worse things by better people." As a bonus, most of them won't have heard of Trudeau, and some won't have heard of Nixon. IBE (talk) 03:21, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An iTunes search for "dealing with difficult people" returns a wealth of free podcasts. I can't speak for the reliability of any of them as I haven't listened to them. You could try it with related terms as well, for example "handling rejection" also returned many results, but it was perhaps less relevant to what you're looking for. --jjron (talk) 05:42, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The development of Proto-Germanic -eu- in Dutch/Middle Low German

In (Middle) Low German there is a correlation between û (IPA [y]) and ê (/ei/) when they come from proto-germ. *eu. For example *deupaz exists as "dêp" and "dûp" (=/dyp/). Similarly, the imperative of "sên" (to see) can be se! or su! (=/sy/). (from *sehw)
My question is whether there is a similar alteration in Dutch and (and this is the part that's more important to me), whether there is a rule by which the occurrence of Y can be predicted. I remember vaguely that it depends on surrounding vowels, e.g. the presence of a U/W creates a form with Y/Ü. But I cannot make out a clear pattern.Dakhart (talk) 13:58, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The regular development of West-Germanic *eu/*iu is ê in Low Saxon and ie in German and Dutch (EN thief, NL dief, DE Dieb, NDS Deef). The [y] you mention is a result of i-umlaut of *eu. An *i in the syllable following the *eu would trigger umlaut: *steurijan would result in EN steer, NL stuiren, DE steuern, NDS stüren.

Dutch usually has this umlaut (*biuti -> EN booty, NL buit, DE Beute, NDS Büüt; *teugi -> NL tuig, DE Zeug, NDS Tüüg), but in some cases the umlaut stems from forms Dutch does not know. The plural *liudi resulted in DE Leute and NDS Lüüd, but NL lieden without umlaut, because Dutch prefers plural forms without umlaut (although a form with umlaut exist too: NL lui). The verb EN see, NL zien, DE sehen, NDS sehn does not show umlaut in its Dutch forms, because Dutch follows a verb inflection pattern different from German and Low Saxon. DE laufen -> er läuft, NDS lopen -> he löppt, NL lopen -> hij loopt. Dutch does not use umlaut in the forms of the 2nd and 3rd person, but derives these forms from the infinitive. --::Slomox:: >< 23:03, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

English genitive case of 'Chancellor'

Hi all,

Something I was thinking of while I was watching a news item on Sarko - when Cotam Unité goes somewhere, it's referred to as the "Presidential aircraft". When the British Prime Minister goes somewhere (including on a flying acne spot), it's the "Prime Ministerial aircraft". When Angela Merkel gets on board Konrad Adenauer, I have never heard it referred to as the "Chancellorial aircraft" - a word that sounds very odd to my ears. Is this the valid form of "Chancellor" incorporating the 'ial', or is there an alternative? Or did we just decide en masse that it sounds a bit odd so we stick to saying 'the plane/car/office of Chancellor Merkel' ? Many thanks for your thoughts --Saalstin (talk) 15:43, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the answer, but just a side comment: what you're looking for is an adjectival form, not genitive case. (Genitive case would just be "chancellor's".) rʨanaɢ (talk) 15:53, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find anything in the OED, so there probably isn't any such word. Or if there is, it isn't well established. We are comfortable with words because other people use them, not just because they're a regular derivation. — kwami (talk) 15:56, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Chancellorial" gets over 8000 Ghits, so the OED can put that in its pipe and smoke it. Angr (talk) 16:23, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The etymolgically correct form is "cancellarial", from the Latin "cancellarius". However, it's used very rarely. "Chancellor" is derived from the French derivitive of this word. "Chancellorial" is thus a bastardized formation. However, this has nothing to do with the validity of the word, which depends on actual usage. If "chancellorial" were to catch on (which it hasn't, yet), it would be the "correct" word, regardless of it's dubious parentage. Until then, rephrasing is the best option. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 16:41, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What about Chancorial? It's used in Parliament - see Relations Between the Executive, the Judiciary and Parliament (p2); "if it impacts on the role of the Judiuciary then it is a Lord Chancorial role". Also the press: "the Rt Hon Alistair Darling MP, the man with the best chancorial eyebrows since Denis Healey". Alansplodge (talk) 03:13, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

With a total of eight relevant Google hits, I highly doubt that the word would ever have been heard, and probably not understood, except by a minuscule fraction of native English speakers. The pronunciation certainly does not make the connection to chancellor obvious in the absence of abundant context. However, since it is the term used by the Lord Chancellor himself, it would seem to be the most "correct" form, at least to his ear. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 14:55, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic: Attijariwafa Bank

What does Attijariwafa mean in Arabic (or Moroccan Arabic)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.14.198.215 (talk) 16:54, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably connected with the word تجار "merchant, trader, businessman" with following adjectival (nisba) suffix, and the word وفاء with many meanings (including "faithfulness", "payment" etc.) -- though the exact nature of the grammatical construction, and where the hamza went, somewhat escapes me... AnonMoos (talk) 17:19, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please look at this page. Wafa is someone's name. Altogether they mean: Wafa Commercial Bank. --Omidinist (talk) 04:59, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

? There is nothing on that page that throws any light on the question, unless you mean that it was created from a merger of Banque Commerciale du Maroc and Wafabank. From what AnonMoos says it is possible that that "Attajari" bit comes from the Arabic name for the Banque Commerciale (though there is no evidence given for this on the pages); and it seems probable that the "Wafa" comes from "Wafabank", but there is no evidence on either page that "Wafa" is somebody's name. --ColinFine (talk) 13:12, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

However, the words in that order, and with the definite article prefixed where it is, don't really seem to conform to an ordinary basic standard Arabic grammatical construction... AnonMoos (talk) 10:04, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Steve McLaren

Former footballer and manager of British football (soccer) clubs, Steve McLaren usually sounds like this - [3]. He has recently gone back to managing the Dutch side FC Twente, where he is (in)famous for sounding like this [4] [5].

Do people here have a guess why his accent becomes so Dutch almost over night? Not just the accent but mannerisms, grammar/sentence structure? I know some people pick up these things but...so much? To this extent? It's very bizarre.

Any info or explanation would be good - stabs in the dark would be handy too :) doktorb _words^deeds 17:38, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is quite common. For example look what happened to Madonna's Detroit/Italian-American accent when she married Guy Ritchie and moved to England. Such behavior may or may not be intentional; people do sometimes change accents depending on their social situation. I mostly speak with what most would consider an "neutral" American accent, but when I am back home in New Hampshire around my family and friends I grew up with, the New England accent returns with a vengence. My wife yells at me, saying "You don't talk like that". I did for eighteen years, however. I never intentionally switch between the two, but depending on social situation (who I am with), my speech can change considerably. This is actually quite normal behavior, linguists and behavioral scientists call it Style-shifting, and people mostly do it subconsiously. They aren't necessarily being "fake" or putting on an affectation, it is just a natural way people work: their behavior reflects their social environment. It doesn't happen to the same degree in all people; some people may be more resilient in maintaining a consistent speech pattern, while others are more naturally adaptable in assuming different dialects depending on the social environment. --Jayron32 18:57, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many Australians spend significant chunks of their lives in places where different English accents are used. (That's everywhere else.) The impact varies markedly. Some retain their pure Australian accent, some change dramatically. Some know they have changed. Some don't. Some do it deliberately. A close relative who spent a lot of time in the USA said she had to deliberately speak with an American accent at times simply so the natives could understand her. I've tried on several occasions to order a Coke in the USA, and failed. Haven't figured out what goes on with that one. HiLo48 (talk) 23:00, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But all those other examples are of people who moved to other English-speaking countries. It is unusual for a native English speaker to pick up a foreign accent when living in a non-English speaking country. I've lived in Germany for 15 years and I know Americans and Brits who have lived here far longer than I have, and none of us has picked up even a trace of a German accent. At least this fellow can still pronounce his th's, so he doesn't sound too Dutch. Angr (talk) 23:57, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many if not most Dutch speakers also speak quite good if Dutch-accented English (I used to visit the Netherlands and Flanders regularly), and this is likely to be even more the case in a semi-international milieu like professional football which is strongly British-influenced, so it's not unlikely that Steve McLaren is effectively immersed in a Dutch-accented English-speaking environment, rather than himself speaking Dutch day-to-day (whether or not he's actually learned the latter), and be consciously and/or unconsciously adapting to that.

As Obpersonal corroboration: I myself was raised in an English environment, but moved to Scotland (Fife) in my late teens and lived there for most of seven years. I consciously began to use Scots-English vocabulary and grammar when speaking to Scots in Scotland, but did not realise that I was also unconsciously acquiring a distinct Scottish accent regardless of who I was speaking to; I only found this out when I moved back to England and relatives mentioned it to me – as a rough calibration, the politician David Steel (a Fifer) sounded neutral/baseline to me, and I hadn't even realised that he was Scottish rather than English. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.78.41 (talk) 00:42, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

He probably reads the Daily Telegraph and knows that Mimicking a foreign accent helps you communicate according to research by the University of Manchester and Radboud University, published in the journal Psychological Science. Alansplodge (talk) 03:03, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've lived in Sweden, which has a similar level of English-speaking among the general population (i.e. a lot). I can confirm that, almost involuntarily, within a very short time of being there I started to speak with a Swedish accent. If you have something you want to say to someone, you want to be understood, and you (or, at least, I) will try to make it as easy as possible for the listener. Therefore I was using words I would not normally use (such as 'apartment', when I would normally say 'flat', since 'flat' can also mean 'not hilly') and using slightly non-standard grammar (things like 'I have no clue about that' - closer to the direct Swedish translation than 'I have no idea'). Basically, once you use a word or phrase once and find you get blank looks, you want to find a better way to say it so you're understood next time. There was no intention from me to change my accent, or to 'put on a silly voice' when talking to the foreigners, it just happened. But it was certainly effective! - Cucumber Mike (talk) 07:28, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's true that I mostly speak German to Germans; the few Germans I regularly speak English to are ones whose English is so good I don't have to be accommodating with mine. At least, not much: I grew up in Texas but have pretty much stopped saying y'all since coming here, because I know Germans might not understand it, or at least will find it highly amusing. And not only the Germans - if my English has changed at all, it's become slightly British-influenced because I have so many British acquaintances here from both work and church. For example, I've picked up the saying "I can't be arsed" - pronouncing the last word [ɑɹst] with my fully rhotic accent - even though I otherwise never use the word arse, but only ass. But *"I can't be assed" isn't an expression in any variety of English, so I have to use the British word. And as for "flat" vs. "apartment", I've done exactly the opposite from Cucumber Mike: I've started saying "flat" rather than "apartment" because "flat" is the word both my British friends and my German friends use (the latter having been taught it in school). Angr (talk) 09:10, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In France everyone says "flat" to me in English, even though I say "apartment" (in my non-British English) and they say "appartement" in French. Adam Bishop (talk) 22:59, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I heard an interview McClaren gave to BBC Radio 5Live about 3 months ago, in which he said he did it for two main reasons: one, he was bored with saying the same thing to the same people so he thought he'd say it differently, and two, he thought he'd try and kid the English press that he'd completely assimilated in Holland. So it was fully intentional on McClaren's part. Speaking personally, when I moved from the Black Country to South Yorkshire, it took me no time at all to pick up quite a strong accent despite having a very strong accent of my own. I had a friend who did the opposite journey and he too changed accents. So it does happen, and I suspect it's a subconscious attempt to fit in. --TammyMoet (talk) 09:26, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]