Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2013 December 17

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.

December 17

RS etymology for "Mulignan/Mulignon"

Can anyone give a reliable source listing the definition and etymology of the apparently Sicilian term mulignan/mulignon for a black person? The item has been added to our list of ethnic slurs but the only online sources seem to loop back to WP. μηδείς (talk) 01:12, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Obvsly.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 11:47, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Also [1] [2].--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 11:57, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, but what I am looking for is not the Italian definition, eggplant, but a reliable source that says the word is used as a derogatory term for black people. The word is used in the movie A Bronx Tale and on mafia shows like The Sopranos, but they aren't suitable sources. μηδείς (talk) 19:05, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I did a bit of web searching on this and did not find a single Italian-language source that used any variant of mulignan-a/o to refer to a black person. This seems to be a term used more or less exclusively by Italian Americans. Incidentally, this term means "eggplant" not only in Sicilian but also in Neapolitan, so it seems to be general to southern Italian dialects, which were of course the dialects spoken by most Italian immigrants to the United States. I know you are looking for a "reliable source" and this is OR, but maybe it will point you in the right direction. Marco polo (talk) 19:40, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. What's really needed is a source that says this word is used in English (by whatever subcommunity) as a derogatory term for blacks, not a source that says it is used in Italian or necessarily an Italian source. This is for the article list of ethnic slurs which includes terms like the (of Yiddish/German origin) schwartze because they are used and found in English language sources. Something like: "a word meaning eggplant in Sicilian which is used by Italian-Americnas as an insult to blacks" from a source better than Urban Dictionary. μηδείς (talk) 19:54, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

GoogleBooks gives some fictions where this word is explained [3][4][5][6]. Are they good enough?--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 20:11, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Also:Se infatti gli italiani chiamano i neri 'mulignan', accomunandoli appunto alle 'melanzane' per il colore della pelle, sono essi stessi definiti storicamente come 'guinea'.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 20:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Obviously, this form is not Sicilian but might be a borrowing into it and other dialects from Neapolitan. As I shallowly know Naples has no less bandit reputation than Sicily and Neapolitan is a source for many slang words in Italian.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 20:07, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. The works of fiction don't work, because they don't factually say that the word is used in any context outside the fictional work itslef. The Italian source you gave is gret, as it compares the term to "guinea". An English source would be better, so I'll leave this open. μηδείς (talk) 23:00, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

• The last of the several "fiction" sources Ljubslov gives is actually to a cromulent secondary reference. μηδείς (talk) 23:26, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

"Try and" vs. "Try to"

A little quirk of language has been sticking out like a sore thumb to me lately. People will often say or write things like "I'm going to try and see if..." or "I'm going to try and climb that mountain." The construction of "...try and..." is what bothers me. It seems like they should both be "...try to..." Am I right? And is there a word for this construction? Dismas|^(talk) 01:57, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't see how this is any different from "go and ask". See also serial verb construction. μηδείς (talk) 02:00, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Except "go and ask" are separate actions. You could say "I will go first, then I will ask them" which means the same thing as "I will go and ask them". The construction "try and..." doesn't mean "I will try first, and then I will ..." It means "try to..." which is why style guides recommend against using it in formal writing; though it's well understood in casual conversation. See [7] for any number of recommendations; most clearly say to use "try to..." if that is what you mean. Of course, if you really mean "and" then use it (for example "I'm going to try for a while and then give up"), but that isn't what people usually mean when they say "try and" or other constructions such as "be sure and...", etc. --Jayron32 05:13, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict; Jayron covers my point, but still tossing search results into the mix) The Internet Grammar of English from University College London calls the construction "False Coordination." When I search for "try and" and "false coordination" together, most things seem to refer to the UCL entry I linked to. Most of the search results I'm seeing are to forums, blogs, &c.; when I search <<"try and" (usage OR grammar site:.edu)>> what I'm seeing is that the construction is prescriptively to be avoided, especially in writing. I'd say it differs slightly from "go and" in that when one "goes and asks," they perform two distinct actions, while when they "go to ask," the asking is the motivation for their going. "Try and ask" and "try to ask" don't carry that same distinction, and the phrase "tries and asks" doesn't even sound right (to my ears anyway) because the actions can't be separated from each other. --some jerk on the Internet (talk) 05:21, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

The trying and the accomplishing, Jayron, are also two different things. Compare "go and look for" and "go to look for". One may not be appropriate for a formal register, but what's used in a formal register isn't necessarily any more logical (ain't), it's just more formal. This has been discussed at least once before, in case anyone wants to try and find it in the archives. μηδείς (talk) 05:24, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, Medeis, when I said "style guides recommend against using it in formal writing; though it's well understood in casual conversation" what I meant by that was that style guides recommend against using it in formal writing; though it's well understood in casual conversation. It depends on for what purpose and in what register one is speaking or writing. In formal register, don't use it. If you're hanging out with friends at the bar taking in the ball game, and if that sort of construction is comfortable in that social setting, use it. --Jayron32 05:42, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm with Dismas on this. Every time I hear the combination "try and" it's obvious from context that it means exactly the same as "try to". The speakers simply don't think about the literal meaning at all. "Try and" simply means "try to". Literally wrong, but so is much of the English language. HiLo48 (talk) 05:41, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

To me "Let's try and see" means "Let's attempt it and then verify whether it worked". For example, installing more insulation in your house to try to lower heating bills would involve the install and then checking the bills for an extended period. Of course, many people will misuse the phrase as a synonym for "try to.". StuRat (talk) 09:02, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

That works in contexts such as: "Maybe our insulation needs replacing. Let's try that, and see if it reduces our heating bills". But the OP is talking about where people say the following sentences interchangeably: "I'm going to try to lose some weight", and "I'm going to try and lose some weight". -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 11:51, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

"Let's try and see" is not valid analogy to "try and do it". The implied meaning is "let's try it and see what happens". That's not what "try and do it!" means, or even your ophthalmologist saying "try and see." μηδείς (talk) 18:58, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

That's pretty much as I explained it to StuRat. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:18, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I did redundantly answer that, which is annoying, I'll grant. Please let me blame it on my eyesight. I hope (notice, I didn't say hopefully) the reinforcement was useful in any case. μηδείς (talk) 22:53, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

We all live in hope. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:01, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Hindi name

How to write the name Khusaleshwor in Devanagari? खुशहालीश्वर? --Soman (talk) 02:31, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

खुशहालेश्वर is also a possibility. 14.139.82.7 (talk) 07:28, 17 December 2013 (UTC)Vineet Chaitanya

Is the following sentence acceptable/grammatical?

The postman delivered her a parcel. Thanks. 14.139.82.7 (talk) 07:22, 17 December 2013 (UTC)Vineet Chaitanya

As a British English speaker it sounds alright, but "The postman delivered a parcel to her" sounds a little bit better if you're looking for an alternative. 81.138.15.171 (talk) 08:44, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Agreed, the OP's version sounded awkward. StuRat (talk) 08:57, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Not to me. I find it quite unexceptionable. --ColinFine (talk) 10:54, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

It sounds a bit rural to me. Possibly Southern US. Dismas|^(talk) 12:01, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

• Deliver has many senses. Three senses where "delivered her" would be normal would be: "The ward politician delivered her many votes from his district", "The abolitionist smuggled her north and delivered her from slavery", and "They called a veterinarian to tend the mare and he successfully delivered her a healthy foal." The parcel sentence sounds marked, since the normal order is "deliver (direct object) to (indirect object)". Yet it is perfectly understandable. It is grammatical, if not idiomatic. You could easily picture it as the caption of a cartoon where a mail carrier hands a woman whom he has just helped through labor her newborn child. See this list of senses of "deliver" with examples. μηδείς (talk) 18:52, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

In your idiolect, Medeis. In mine it is just as idiomatic as "He sent her a parcel". (Only the first of your examples has the same structure. The second has "her" as direct object, and the third has it as indirect object, but as a benefactive). --ColinFine (talk) 19:55, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I was aware that the sequences of "delivered her" reflected different cases. (As for my idiolect, do rici na bal. But I suspect you meant dialect. :) The OP would not have brought the question up if he hadn't felt the phrase was questionable. He did. I gave a perfectly valid explanation with sources and examples of why he might get that impression. μηδείς (talk) 20:06, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

In BrE, your third example would generally be expressed as "he delivered her of a foal" (or "delivered her foal", transitive). "He delivered her a foal", to me, implies the vet's action was the same as the postman's in the OP's example. Tevildo (talk) 20:05, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Galoshes

Is the singular of galoshes galosh? Are galoshed or begaloshed valid adjectives meaning "wearing galoshes"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.156.136.229 (talk) 19:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Try google and wiktionary for the singular. I would use begaloshed if I had a reason, but that's OR and I am peculiar. μηδείς (talk) 19:58, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

It's really not that hard to get the reference for the OP... Peculiar indeed. The singular is galosh. Dismas|^(talk) 22:21, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I gave him two, you gave him one--and one I had already mentioned. μηδείς (talk) 22:55, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

He's talking about providing a link. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:00, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Given the OP is here in NYC I suppose I should stop by and do the link clicking for him directly. μηδείς (talk) 00:16, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that would be a lovely Christmas gesture. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 07:17, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Lol. μηδείς (talk) 17:31, 18 December 2013 (UTC)