Language desk
< November 5	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 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.

November 6

Something we'll only be able to guess

Who invented/started this language thing? Bonkers The Clown (talk) 07:58, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See origin of language. Please do a basic search for the answers to your questions before bringing them here. You will save yourself a lot of time.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:38, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They're not looking to save time...just for silly amusement that wastes other people's. --Onorem ♠Dil 08:41, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See the Charles Hockett article for an overview of many of the basic structural characteristics of human language; they obviously must have taken many generations to evolve. Some (including Jared Diamond) suspect that the onset of so-called "Behavioral modernity" ca. 75,000-50,000 years ago marks the final transition to fully-modern human language from forms of communication which were not fully-modern human language... AnonMoos (talk) 11:49, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is, of course, assumed. But I also believe it is correct, since there is no evidence of art or other highly complex technologies like hook or net fishing or weaving prior to that. μηδείς (talk) 20:04, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Translation

Hello, What "The Whipping Haus" does it means, please in french if it is possible or in simple english. Thanks Rabah201130 (talk) 11:28, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My French isn't particularly idiomatic, but la maison de flagellation is how I'd render it. Haus is German, rather than English, for a house. (I assume you're referring to the title of a song on this album.) Deor (talk) 13:25, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Or perhaps you could use fouettage. [1] Alansplodge (talk) 13:51, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The word "fouettage" is missing in my dictionnaries (Le Petit Robert (2004) and Le Petit Larousse (2001)). The word fouettement is present in both. However, fouettage is perfectly understandable by anyone. But, either La maison du fouettage or La maison du fouettement sounds very strange to my French ears. If there is a "sexual" connotation or an idea of punishment, La maison de la flagellation is a good translation. — AldoSyrt (talk) 09:48, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Phonology: unrounded back vowels

I'm looking for languages that have more than two phonemes being unrounded back monophthongs. Please ignore tones, stress, and nasalization. Please ingnore distinctions between short and long vowels. HOOTmag (talk) 13:48, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some forms of English if you count [ɑː] and the Liverpudlian pronunciation of /ʌ/... AnonMoos (talk) 15:56, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I'm talking about phonemes. Can you indicate your unrounded back phonemic monophthongs you're talking about? HOOTmag (talk) 16:37, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know what you're trying to say by that. I mean Lexical sets PALM and STRUT in some dialects of English with the "Liverpudlian" pronunciation of the STRUT vowel. AnonMoos (talk) 17:30, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please try to count the Liverpudlian unrounded back phonemic monophthongs. Are you sure there are more than two? HOOTmag (talk) 19:37, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect you might find it in some Altaic languages given their typical vowel harmony. Our article on Turkish phonology analyses /a/ as a low mid unrounded vowel, but if one goes by the three part high/non-high, front/non-front, round-non-round analysis, it has two unround back vowels. μηδείς (talk) 18:20, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The chart in this section Turkish_phonology#Vowel_harmony portrays the "cubic" vowel system analysis with undotted ı and a as unround back vowels. μηδείς (talk) 19:13, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I've been asking about languages having more than two unrounded back phonemic monophthongs. HOOTmag (talk) 19:37, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I took that as two or more for some reason. But again, I would search Uralic and Altaic and other Siberian languages, given that unrounded back vowels and vowel harmony are an areal commonplace. I have checked Chukchi and Kamchatkan, so you can skip those. The problem you'll run into is most Siberian vowel systems aren't terribly complex, so they may not have enough vowels in total to support such a rare three-vowel contrast. μηδείς (talk) 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've hoped somebody here is already aware of such a language, without having to search. Anyways, a broad diversity of unrounded back phonemic monophthongs, turns out to be rare among the human languages, as opposed to rounded front phonemic monophthongs, which are common is various well known languages, e.g. Danish that has four vowels of that sort. HOOTmag (talk) 20:48, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thai. --Theurgist (talk) 18:42, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, because I've requested to ignore the distinction between short and long vowels. Yes, Thai has also the /a/ vowel, but it's a central vowel (just as the schwa is a central vowel) rather than a back vowel. HOOTmag (talk) 19:37, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to FSI - Thai Reference Grammar, pp. 14-17, Thai has 9 vowel phonemes: 3 front (and unrounded), 3 back unrounded (including /a/), and 3 back rounded. --Theurgist (talk) 22:05, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you're claiming that by what you've read on p. 14. So, yes, "schematically", it's more convenient and more aesthetic to "define" the /a/ vowel as a back vowel, in order to have exactly 3 vowels in each category (front, back unrounded, back rounded). However, see ibid. p. 16, for more details: It turns out that the /a/ is described as a "central" vowel (ibid.), although it has some allophones: before an /j/ sound the /a/ tends to be more front than central, whereas before a /w/ sound the /a/ tends to be more back than central, whereas under most circumstances and all neutral environments, the /a/ is performed as a "central" vowel. HOOTmag (talk) 09:09, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article http://linguistics.berkeley.edu/~kjohnson/ling110/Lecture_Slides/3_Vowels/Vowels.pdf suggests Vietnamaese has three unrounded back vowels, although this may be allophonic. It disagrees with our articles which say all its back vowels are rounded. μηδείς (talk) 16:43, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, all of them are allophones of the same phoneme, because each one of them is the vowel of the same word (meaning: "fourth"), whereas I'm looking for three different phonemes. Btw, the article claims that no language is known to have a low front rounded vowel, whereas the truth is that Danish does have such a sound (among four front rounded monophthongs Danish has). HOOTmag (talk) 18:46, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You might try contacting Merritt Ruhlen. The second volume (apparently now abandoned) of his classification of world languages was supposed to give typological descriptions. μηδείς (talk) 02:18, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

French grammarian's last words

In Julian Barnes' 1986 novel Staring at the Sun, the last words of a French grammarian are quoted, 'Je vas, ou je vais, mourir: l'un ou l'autre se dit". Can somebody explain what they mean and why they would be apposite for a grammarian ? Thanks GrahamHardy (talk) 14:10, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In French, the verb "Aller" or "to go" is conjugated as such: Je vais, tu vas, il/elle/on va, nous allons, vous allez, ils/elles vont. To put this into idiomatic English, what he's saying is "I go, or I goes, to die: either one is said". If the decedent was a grammarian, I read the quote as meant to be ironic: in his last sentence he either can't remember (or doesn't care) what the proper conjugation of one of the most common French verbs is. --Jayron32 14:42, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to have various versions quoted. "Je vais ou je vas mourir, l'un et l'autre se dit ou se disent" are the supposed last words of the Jesuit Dominique Bouhors, see http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominique_Bouhours. μηδείς (talk) 15:16, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Or fr:Dominique Bouhours. —Tamfang (talk) 17:53, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Always showing off, eh, Copperbeard? Thanks, I'll try to remember the code. μηδείς (talk) 18:13, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) These are reported to be the last words of Dominique Bouhours. Gandalf61 (talk) 15:31, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There was more variation in verb forms in Bouhours' time, so he was probably being sincere. From Féraud's dictonary (1787–88): "Ménage décide nettement qu'il faut dire je vais, et non pas je vas, et moins encore, je va, comme M. de Vaugelas soutenait que toute la Cour disait, ce qui n'était pas, ajoute Ménage. Je vas pourrait être souffert; mais je va est barbare, et il est étoné que Mr. de Vaugelas ait trouvé des sectateurs, et des sectateurs aussi célèbres que Mrs. de Port-Royal. — L'Ab. Girard pense qu'avec la prép. en, je vas vaut mieux que je vais: je m'en vas, je m'en y vas — Bouhours dit je vais ou je vas, et jamais je va. — L'Acad. ne dit que je vais: c'est le plus sûr et le plus autorisé par l'usage. — M. Moreau dit encore: je vas travailler à débrouiller le cahos où s'agiteront ces débris." [2]

I seem to remember reading of an analogous statement, "Je meurs, ou je suis mourant" (I die, or I am dying). Perhaps one was inspired by the other. —Tamfang (talk) 17:53, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't that be "Je suis en train de mourir"? I would not be surprised if "je vas" is substandard or dialectal given the irregularity of the verb. But he also says "ou se disent", which indicates some sort of ambiguity on his part as he failed. Given he was known as a Jesuit Grammarian in an atheist France it seems perhaps his authority is being treated ironically/with mockery in what truly sounds like an apocryphal quote. μηδείς (talk) 19:32, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Je suis mourant" would mean "I am dying" with "dying" as an adjective; "Je suis en train de mourir" would mean "I am in the process of dying" (but not in 1702). AnonMoos (talk) 12:07, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Je m'en vais ou je m'en vas'... L'un et l'autre se dit ou se disent" is also credited to another grammarian: Vaugelas.

"Je m'en vais" is an old fashioned way to say: "I am dying".

As noted above, in those days (17th century), one could say either "je vais or "je vas". Nowadays the latter is dialectal (in French province Maine for example) or substandard (j'vas le dire à ma mère !).

And now the "morceau de bravoure" (purple passage ?). Is l'un et l'autre a singular form or a plural form? If it's singular one should say: se dit, if it's plural one should say: "se disent". According to the usual grammatical rules it should be plural (because of the et). But you are allowed to use the singular if you rely not on the syntax but on the meaning, it is called a syllepsis, in French une Syllepse (facultative) (French WP: Syllepse).

Grammarian humour or pedantry?

My reference : Le Bon usage — Grammaire française, Duculot publisher (1988), §426 to §429 (Accords sylleptiques). — AldoSyrt (talk) 20:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Je m'en vais is not really old fashioned, is it? I thought it just meant "I am going away"--and indeed it comes up as an alternative formulation on google of what Bouhors said. μηδείς (talk) 01:26, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's an old fashioned way to say you're dying though. Normally it just means you're leaving. Adam Bishop (talk) 01:39, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For a definition of s'en aller to mean "to die" see the Centre National de Ressources Textuelles et Lexicales (CNRTL) §III A 4, first and second dash. — AldoSyrt (talk) 09:27, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese translation

Can somebody translate "西周青銅器銘文多稱他為龔王[1]，有時又作恭王。周穆王之子" and "《國語·周語一》載，密康公跟隨共王遊於涇上時，有三女子自願獻身於密康公，密康公的母親叫他不能要這三女子，認為這樣的事情即使共王都受不起，何況一個小國的君主。密康公不聽，接納了三女。一年後被共王滅掉。"--KAVEBEAR (talk) 19:09, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Bronzeware inscriptions of the Western Zhou dynasty commonly refer to him as "King Gong", sometimes also as "King Gong" (different character). Son of King Mu of Zhou". "Book I, Zhou Yu of Guoyu (book) records, when Lord Kang of Mi was in the retinue of King Gong (a different character again) while touring Jingshang (or above the Jing river?), three women volunteered to give their bodies to Lord Kang of Mi. Lord Kang of Mi's mother told him he could not have the three women, and opined that that even King Gong could not accept such a thing, not to mention the ruler of a small state. Lord Kang of Mi did not listen to this, and accepted the three women. A year later, he was eliminated by King Gong". --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 21:34, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In case you are interested in the context, the second story records (what was said to be) the reason the state of Mi was destroyed by the King of Zhou. The Mi was a small state in modern-day Gansu which had existed from the Shang Dynasty period and possibly not really Han Chinese. King Gong of Zhou killed its lord, abolished the state and moved the people of Mi to what is now Xinmi, literally "new Mi", which is much closer to the Zhou heartland. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 21:44, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]