Language desk
< November 21	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 23 >

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 22

Russian "возвращение"

Hello! I'm from the Thai Wikipedia and I have a problem concerning the translation of the name of a Russian medal, Medal "For the Return of Crimea". My question is: what does the term "возвращение" (or "return") in the name of this medal actually mean?

Coming/going back (as in "the return to innocence", "the return of Jafar", "the return of Godzilla", etc)?
Giving/bringing/delivering/sending back (as in "the return of property")?
Or else?

Thanks a million! --หมวดซาโต้ (talk) 12:34, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think since it's "for" something, the second meaning (i.e. actively bringing Crimea back) is more likely. Cf. "за освобождение ..." ("for the liberation of ...") etc 78.53.241.150 (talk) 12:49, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It may be of interest that the de: version of the article uses the transitive (="bringing back", as opposed to the intransitive "coming back") meaning. --194.213.3.4 (talk) 13:20, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning number 2 above is closest. Thai ฟื้น, คืน and กลับคืน all have a similar sense to how "return" is used there.--William Thweatt ^Talk^Contribs 05:47, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Linguistic term to describe possessives, dependent clauses, and adverbial inflexions as one collective entity?

I don’t know a good way to describe 的得地. In informal writing, 的 does the job. In formal writing (literature), strict rules are held in place, each having a separate function. Is there a word to describe everything? 140.254.70.33 (talk) 19:55, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure exactly what you're asking (and I can't read the Chinese characters), but there's Adjunct (grammar)... -- AnonMoos (talk) 22:42, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose the OP is referring to the homophone particles 的, 得 and 地 in Mandarin Chinese, all of them pronounced de, each of which marks a different type of grammatical adjunct/modifier, and whether there might be a plausible linguistic analysis of these items as fundamentally the same, i.e. some kind of universal adjunct-marking particle. I haven't got an answer to the question, but it seems like an interesting one to consider. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:52, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]