Language desk
< June 26	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 28 >

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.

June 27

Chinese posthumous names

Should 恭肅端順榮靖皇貴妃 be translated as Imperial Noble Consort Gongsuduanshunrongjing?--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 04:37, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the answer, but it looks like you have the wrong death date in the article, if she is a Ming Dynasty figure.--Cam (talk) 11:53, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No idea about the name, but 皇贵妃 is indeed elsewhere rendered as Imperial Noble Consort. Matttoothman (talk) 19:33, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why would you transliterate the whole list of attributions literally? It hardly helsp a reader to understand who is being referred to. Why is "Consort Wan" or "Consort Gongsu" not sufficient? Historical figures are always referred to by an abbreviation, and if it were necessary for some reason to spell out their full list of attributions, then surely they are separate "names". (There is a case for these to be translated, not transliterated - e.g. "the courteous, the serene, the upright, the obedient, the glorious and the peaceful imperial noble consort", or something).

The conventional "best practice" on Wikipedia is to treat each appellation as a separate name, with hyphenation for two-character appellations added as a phrase or at the same time - for examplem, Empress Dowager Cixi lists her full posthumous name as "Empress Xiao-Qin Ci-Xi Duan-You Kang-Yi Zhao-Yu Zhuang-Cheng Shou-Gong Qin-Xian Chong-Xi Pei-Tian Xing-Sheng Xian", which is both logical and clear. I recommend this practice. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 16:41, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

triple crown in volleyball

"World-class spiker Kim Yeon-koung stood out in the games with her triple-crown performance." What does triple-crown performance mean? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.240.243.100 (talk) 06:37, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From our WP dab page: "The term Triple Crown is often used to describe the act of winning or completing the three most difficult or prestigious events in a given field". In Kim's case it is probably referring to her having won Gold for Team, MVP and Best Scorer in the 2011–12 CEV Women's Champions League.--William Thweatt ^Talk^Contribs 07:08, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But perhaps the slightly jargony phrase should be removed from the article, or if it is judged to be widely used in the field, then it should be wikilinked to the definition. --ColinFine (talk) 09:11, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Name of this Italian sculptor's piece

Arnaldo Pomodoro's famous sculpture—you've seen it—in English it's "Sphere within a Sphere" or somesuch. Can anyone confirm the correct name of the sculpture in Italian? WP has "Sfera con Sfera", but many other sources have "Sfera con Stera". I fear citogenesis may have already occurred. Thanks! Matttoothman (talk) 13:33, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's called Sfera con sfera in this biography at the web site of his foundation.--Cam (talk) 14:48, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks.Matttoothman (talk) 14:56, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Catch-22s?

To know how to fix my internet connection, I need to access such and such web articles; but to access those web articles, I would need a working internet connection.

To tend to my injured feet, I need to walk to the pharmacy; but to walk to the pharmacy, I would need uninjured feet.

Etc.

Are these covered by the term "Catch-22", by some other term, or both?

82.230.229.84 (talk) 21:49, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't quite call them Catch-22s, since those are defined as situations that are unavoidably contradictory. In your scenarios, there are easy alternatives, e.g. getting someone to go to the pharmacy for you. Maybe they're Catch 2.2s. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:06, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I actually thought of those alternatives when writing them, and should have mentioned that I was supposing them excluded. Basically, can a situation which can only be resolved by not being therein properly be called a Catch-22, or does it have some other name? 82.230.229.84 (talk) 22:12, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The term paradox comes to mind...maybe vicious circularity, or infinite regress.--William Thweatt ^Talk^Contribs 22:35, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you do exclude all ways out of a predicament, that's a classic Catch-22. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:56, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both for your answers. 82.230.229.84 (talk) 00:09, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dictionary definition. In my opinion a "catch 22" situation contains an element of perversity especially of a bureaucratic nature. Bus stop (talk) 00:13, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

impasse? 86.160.217.54 (talk) 01:03, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the term "catch 22" is more applicable to the first example you provide above than to your second example because the Internet shares with bureaucracy the quality of pervasiveness, or ubiquity. Bus stop (talk) 02:27, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]