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

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded 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

Non-western signatures

In English, even when the text of a letter is printed in block letters, the signature is cursive. What happens in Chinese, Korean, Thai, etc.? Russian? Clarityfiend (talk) 04:55, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I assume that you are referring, both in "printed in block letters" and in "the signature", to handwritten documents. Using block letters in handwriting is distinctive in two aspects: (1) unlike in cursive writing, the letters of a word are not connected; (2) only majuscules (upper case) letters are used. Setting pinyin apart, written Chinese and Japanese do not use an alphabet and the characters are therefore not called "letters". There is no counterpart to the distinction between majuscules (A–B-C-...) and minuscules (a–b–c–...). Also, the characters making up a word are not connected, also not in handwriting. Nevertheless, there is something that is somewhat of a counterpart to cursive writing. Chinese characters (also used in the Japanese system) are composed of a sequence of strokes. In purposely "careful" penmanship, the brush or pen is lifted up at the end of one stroke and only put down on paper again at the beginning of the next stroke. This is what we see in the ancient seal script where the strokes are engraved, and also, e.g., in the modern fonts used in printed books. In handwriting, however, it is quite common that the pen is not carefully lifted from the end of one stroke to the beginning of the next; this is also called cursive script. This is, in fact, a hallmark of Chinese and Japanese calligraphy. Interestingly, the characters of the Japanese hiragana syllabary derive from cursive forms of kanji characters; for example, あ derives from 安. This is very similar how the Greek minuscules derive from the original majuscules; e.g., ξ comes from a quickly written Ξ. I have no idea if there is an equivalent of the request "please print" on official forms for East Asian writing. For signatures, a traditional form was the seal, often printed using a stamp. This is about the converse of a Western-style cursive signature. While in the West seals were used by rulers or their officers for official documents; signature seals were also commonly used (and are still used) by merchants and artists. Next to that there is the handwritten kaō, which serves as a signature. The situation for other non-alphabetic writing systems is obviously different, depending on their particulars, but some general commonalities can often be observed, such as no separate majuscule and minuscule forms, and no distinction between a disconnected and a connected style of writing. --Lambiam 13:04, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Russian handwriting is traditionally almost always in cursive: Russian cursive. Therefore, it would be uncommon for the text of the letter not to be in cursive. --Amble (talk) 15:29, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What I've noticed about the Greek alphabet is that the capital letters are often the same as the Roman counterparts while the lower case letters are different. 194.35.119.118 (talk) 17:28, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I expressed myself poorly. I was just wondering about signatures (or the equivalents) in other languages, not the upper/lower case aspect. Very informative anyway, despite my miscommunication. Thanks. So if a Russian composed and printed a letter in "Wordski", the signature would be written in cursive, correct? Clarityfiend (talk) 06:51, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Clarityfiend: This is rather late, but I'd recommend you take a look at commons:Category:Signatures of people from China to see what contemporary signatures look like. I would say it is analogous to a "cursive signature" in English, in the sense that a person's signature is likely to be more stylized than their normal handwriting, although there isn't really the distinction between "print" and "cursive" in modern penmanship that we might make in English. bibliomaniac 1 5 18:54, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Salting in ancient languages

What did the ancients (Romans, Greeks, Canaanites, etc) call the act of salting the earth or sowing salt, with the meaning of "symbolically consecrating or desecrating an enemy's land"? If not much is known of this, what would a reconstructed term look like (for example "saliō terram" for Latin or "γαῖα ἁλίζω" for Greek)? --72.234.12.37 (talk) 08:15, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Hebrew text of the Book of Judges 9:45 has וַיִּזְרָעֶ֖הָ מֶֽלַח, the Septuagint Greek translation καὶ ἔσπειρεν εἰς ἅλας ([...and he destroyed the city] and sowed it with salt). –Austronesier (talk) 09:16, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Latin SALIO meant "I jump", and was not derived from the word for "salt" (though confusingly, salt could be said to "jump" when it was thrown into the fire during rituals). To scatter salt (as agricultural crop seeds were scattered) would be SALEM SPARGERE; to plant salt in the ground would be SALEM SERERE (translating as simply as possible). AnonMoos (talk) 09:21, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is another Latin verb salio that does have the meaning "I salt". There is no evidence of salting the earth having actually been practiced in ancient times, so the ancients may not have had a term for it other than used in (translations of) Judges 9:45. The Vulgate has ut sal in ea dispergeret ("that he sprinkled salt in it"). The Hebrew literally means "and he scattered salt", using a verb commonly used for sowing (scattering seed), found e.g. also in Genesis 26:12: "Then Isaac sowed in that land". The use of the same verb for seed (fertility) and salt (infertility) may have served to underscore the antithesis. --Lambiam 11:19, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the verb SALIO with the meaning "I salt" is actually semi-obscure (at least in Classical Latin), since it's not listed in standard medium-sized Latin-English dictionaries. Without some surrounding explanatory context, someone who knew Latin would be more likely to understand it as meaning "I jump"... AnonMoos (talk) 15:08, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Since Latin SAL is usually a masculine noun, SALEM is actually a more standard accusative singular form than SAL (neuter) found in your quote above. AnonMoos (talk) 15:19, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; I too found this unusual, but according to the usage notes (and both Lewis & Short and Gaffiot) the singular is occasionally found neuter, I suspect in contexts where in English we couldn't say the salt but only use the article-less mass noun salt. --Lambiam 17:05, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The verb salio with a salty meaning is listed both in Lewis & Short^[1] and in Gaffiot.^[2] Gaffiot treats it as an alternative form of sallio; L&S do precisely the converse. --Lambiam 17:05, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lewis and Short is a compendious dictionary (including many rather obscure words), not a medium-size dictionary. AnonMoos (talk) 04:08, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Guy Fawkes

Over the past decade or so I have noted that the November 5th celebration in the UK is referred to as Bonfire Night. In the commonwealth this is referred to as Guy Fawkes. Why is it that the UK no longer refers to this as Guy Fawkes night? Is this a politically correct thing? Thanks. -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.157.89.50 (talk) 10:16, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really think so. For a start, there is nothing politically incorrect about calling it Guy Fawkes Night. Most people just call it Bonfire Night because it's simpler and easier to understand. The reference to Guy Fawkes is somewhat historical and obscure, hence the reason why it is falling into disuse. --Viennese Waltz 10:32, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The designation may have been pretty old. In The Stations of the Sun, Ronald Hutton writes: "It was during the period 1625-40 that the date became 'Bonfire Night' in some areas, fires and burning tar barrels being paid for by parishes in London, Cambridge and Durham."^[3] This probably pre-dates the use of the term "Guy Fawkes Night". --Lambiam 11:35, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I always called it Guy Fawkes Night in my 1960s London childhood, but knew that Bonfire Night was an acceptable alternative. The custom of burning a "guy" effigy seems to be much less common now and "penny for the guy" has been entirely displaced by "trick or treat". Perhaps there's been a move away from the inherent anti-Catholicism of this event, but I can't find any reference to support this hunch. Alansplodge (talk) 13:03, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

One does (or did before Covid19) see a few kids guying in Sussex still. DuncanHill (talk) 13:41, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So, Brits no longer "remember, remember"?--Khajidha (talk) 14:26, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There were a lot of fireworks going off last night in the London suburbs, despite it being the first night of a total lockdown. However, some of the associated traditions seem to be falling away. At the Lewes Bonfire I expect they were burning Donald Trump again, as well as the pope. 15:41, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Nope, it was cancelled. --Viennese Waltz 15:50, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Damn! Oh well, here's the 2016 event anyhow. Alansplodge (talk) 16:12, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of which, I had a British co-worker before she quit the company. I asked her if November 5th was an official paid holiday in the UK. She replied that no, it isn't, it's a normal working day, people just celebrate on that day. I figure it's kind of like April 30 (which falls on Walpurgis Night) is not an official paid holiday here in Finland, but May 1 (which falls on May Day) is. JIP | Talk 00:13, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Observance of 5th November Act 1605 used to require special church services on Guy Fawkes Night. This was repealed by the Anniversary Days Observance Act 1859. DuncanHill (talk) 13:38, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The current custom, in London at least, is for people to have their firework parties either on the night itself, or just as likely, on the preceding or following Saturday or Sunday, or on any other night that takes their fancy. Public displays, often organised by local councils, are usually on the nearest weekend too. The result is a cacophony of explosions lasting for a week or more. If the date should happen to fall near the Hindu feast of Diwali, the banging and screeching can go on rather longer. Bad news for people with nervous pets; Classic FM runs a series of programmes of soothing classical music "dedicated to keeping you and your pet relaxed during fireworks season". [4] Alansplodge (talk) 13:43, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

At least here in Finland, New Year's fireworks are restricted to 6 PM on December 31 to 6 AM on January 1. Firing fireworks any earlier than 6 PM on December 31 or any later than 6 AM on January 1 is forbidden. There have been plans to outlaw private use of fireworks and leave it up to professionals. Espoo, the second biggest city in Finland and right next door to Helsinki, has used laser shows instead of fireworks for several years now. The capital city Helsinki still uses fireworks. This might be because Helsinki, even though a relatively new city by European standards, was already an important city when most of Espoo was pretty much countryside. JIP | Talk 22:32, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In Kimberley, South Africa al fireworks have been banned for many years now purely because of the humane aspect for pets. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.170.71.103 (talk) 11:58, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]