Language desk
< April 23	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	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.

April 24

French to Polish

Hello, I hope that I don't disturb you, I would like to know how one says the French : (fr)"Je ne sais plus où j'en suis"(emotion) in Polish, please ? This would be kind ...(Google having said the Polish for the French (fr)"Je ne sais pas où je suis", I have immediately dismissed the Google Translation.) 2A01:CB0C:C45:E000:9E:F21A:53A6:8916 (talk) 16:41, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The dreaded Google Translate translates "Już nie wiem skąd jestem z tego" as "I don't know where I'm from this anymore". Does the English correspond to the sense of the French sentence? I can't vouch for the Polish, though, regardless of the quality of the English. --Lambiam 20:22, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, more or less, I'd say. "I don't know anymore from where I am." more closer to the French syntax. Been a long time since I studied it, so I mixed up me y's and en's... 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 23:25, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The French phrase means, I think, I have lost my place, which in Polish is Straciłem swoje miejsce, unless there's a more idiomatic Polish way to say it. But the emotion might be better expressed in English as "I have lost my sense of purpose", for which Bing is giving me "Straciłem poczucie celu". Or is it more like "I am flustered"? Not sure whether the meaning you intend is more existential or more neurological. Perhaps you want to say "Jestem zdezorientowany", a straightforward translation of "I am disorientated" (je suis déboussoler). Oh and Polish cares whether the speaker is male or female, so a female speaker says "jestem zdezorientowana" instead. Card Zero (talk) 00:18, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's "Je suis déboussolé", sorry. Although the endings -er and -é are pronounced the same, the first one is an infinitive and the other a participle. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 02:56, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So I said "I disorientate"! I fear this is often the case. Or "I am disorientate" in fact. Card Zero (talk) 04:04, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am often disorientate, myself, or completeled lose... 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 10:50, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a few idiomatic Polish expressions that may express the same sentiment (with their more or less literal English transalations):

Już nie wiem, co dalej. (I don't know where to take it from here anymore.)
Już nie wiem, co ze sobą zrobić. / Już nie wiem, co ze sobą począć. (I don't know what to do with myself anymore.)
Już nie wiem, co myśleć. (I don't know what to think anymore.)
Już się całkiem pogubiłem (masc.) / pogubiłam (fem.). (I've got completely lost.)
Już mam mętlik w głowie. (I've got a mess in my head.)

— Kpalion^(talk) 11:38, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I understand now that the literal meaning of the French phrase is: "I no longer know where I am in it" – viz. in the tome the speaker is reading. The figurative use may correspond to the English idiomatic phrase lose one's bearings|I've lost my bearings. A somewhat prosaic Polish translation is Straciłem orientację – "I've lost the orientation". This phrase appears to be used.^[1] --Lambiam 19:44, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder whether to lose one's marbles might originate as a pun on lose one's bearings? The other kind of bearings. Card Zero (talk) 20:18, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, "props" as in hiphop slang is supposed to have been a shortening for "proper support", but could also have been a pun on the other kind of support. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 22:03, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Straciłem orientację is typically used in a more literal sense, like when the lights go out and you no longer can find your way around. The OP is clearly asking about emotional disorientation. — Kpalion^(talk) 23:00, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Benched footballers

When a footballer is benched, does it mean the footballer doesn't play the match as a starter or he sits on the bench for the whole game? Dr Salvus 18:48, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Usually, it means that, although normally a regular, the player does not start the game. He may come in later as a substitute. The term "benched" also often implies that is due to poor performance in previous game, and not because of tactical considerations. Xuxl (talk) 20:32, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pronouncing the first "e" of "exclude" and "expand".

As far as the first "e" of "exclude" is concerned, Wiktionary gives an Audio with the vowel of "set" - in General American accent, but then claims that it's pronounced like the vowel of "sit" - probably in British accent (as I guess).

The case of the first "e" of "expand" is analogous: Wiktionary gives an Audio with the vowel of "sit" - in British accent, but then claims that it's pronounced like the vowel of "set" - probably in General American accent (as I guess).

As a non native English speaker, here are my four questions:

Are there accents that don't correspond with what I have just mentioned on behalf of Wiktionary?
What about "expect"? Wiktionary gives an Audio with the vowel of "sit" - in General American accent, but claims that it may be pronounced with either the vowel of "sit" or of "set". Is that false in any of those (British/GA) accents?
Are there words beginning with "ex" (x pronounced /ks/), whose first vowel must be pronounced like the vowel of "set", so that whoever pronounces it like the vowel of "sit" - sounds non-native?
How about the opposite case? Are there words beginning with "ex" (x pronounced /ks/), whose first vowel must be pronounced like the vowel of "sit", so that whoever pronounces it like the vowel of "set" - sounds non-native?

147.236.152.145 (talk) 20:52, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

With regard to question 3: As far as I know, when the prefix ex- means "former" (as in ex-wife or ex-parrot), it's always pronounced /ɛks/. Deor (talk) 21:47, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And other cases in which ex is the stressed syllable (as in exit) are also always /ɛks/ or /ɛgz/. I think that in cases in which ex is an unstressed syllable (like those in your heading) /ɛks/, /ɛgz/, /ɪks/, and /ɪgz/ are in free variation among English speakers. Deor (talk) 01:12, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For wikt:exclude, the pronunciation key give the same vowel "ɪ" on two lines, for everyone except Australians. That is to say, if you dislike thinking of it as the i in "sit", you can think of it as the first e in "secure". (But wikt:secure says the vowel there is ə, the schwa.)
I suspect all of these examples could be pronounced with either vowel, ɛ or ɪ, and only the entry for "expect" gets it right. Card Zero (talk) 23:11, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t think this is a difference of dialects; I think it’s just a matter of stress and vowel reduction in English. In words where the first syllable is stressed, the reduction won’t happen: extra, exit (or secondary stress: expedition, escalation). When the first syllable is unstressed, the vowel will often be reduced in speech. —Amble (talk) 02:31, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Further complicating matters, there are dialects that don't reduce vowels the same way as others (Caribbean English is known for this), different vowel sounds are used for reduced vowels as well; the reduced vowel in "roses" on the "es" part is often more of an [ɪ̈] sound than the normal schwa [ə], and schwa itself can present in a number of different ways. --Jayron 32 12:35, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think those aspects matter, because they are all about the physical manner a given vowel is pronounced, whereas my original questions were not presented from a physical viewpoint but rather from a logical one. For example: my last question is about whether there is any variety in which, people who pronounce - the "e" of a given "ex" - as the vowel of "set" is pronounced in that variety, sound non-native in that variety. So this question is about identity of vowels (the vowel of "ex" and the vowel of "set"), i.e. about a logical property. The same is true for the other questions. Indeed, I have also mentioned the (physical) audio of wiktionary, but my questions use it as a tool for comparing sounds in a given variety, so any question relating to this audio is again presented from the logical viewpoint. What user:Amble has tried to claim is, that the answer of my questions is negative if the "ex" is not stressed (even not with a secondary stress). 147.236.152.145 (talk) 14:29, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't necessarily even consistent within a dialect, however. For example, some dialects have two different vowel sounds for trap and bath, some have the same vowel. Or cot and caught. Or Mary, merry and marry. The physical realization of vowel sounds (phonetics) does not necessarily vary in a consistent manner between dialects for the same phoneme. --Jayron 32 16:03, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As far as the first accents that you have mentioned (i.e. the British ones) that distinguish between the vowels of "trap/bath" (or the General American accent that distinguishes between the vowels of "clot/cloth") are concerned: I can't see how they are related to our topic. Please notice that my questions refer to the relation between the vowels of "sit/set/ex", and I suspect there's no dialect - that distinguishes between three different vowels for "sit/set/ex" - i.e. that doesn't allow to pronounce the vowel of "ex" like the vowel of "set" nor like the vowel of "sit".

As far as, the cot-caught merger - and the marry-merry merger - that you've mentioned, are concerned: Again I can't see how they are related to our issue. Please notice that I'd asked if interchanging the vowels of "sit" and "set" in a given "ex" may sound non-native in any dialect, and user:Amble gave a negative answer if the "ex" is not stressed. Isn't he correct? I suspect there's no dialect having a sit-set merger, but even if there had been such a dielect, then "interchanging" those "identical" vowels in that dialect couldn't have sounded non-native in that dialect, could it? So it was necessarily clear that my question was about dialects that well distinguish between those vowels, wasn't it? 147.236.152.145 (talk) 19:43, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are many such dialects, but the merger is called the pin-pen merger. --Jayron 32 17:29, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've never spoken about pin-pen merger, which is actually restricted to a vowel followed by a nasal consonant. Please notice that I've only referred to the vowel of "ex" - which is clearly followed by an oral consonant (being /k/ or /g/), and that's why I wrote sit-set merger - rather than pin-pen merger. Anyway, even if there had existed such a dielect with a sit-set merger - then interchanging those two identical vowels in that dialect couldn't have sounded non-native in that dialect, and that's why I indicated that my questions were about dialects that well distinguish between those two vowels. 147.236.152.145 (talk) 18:08, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. -_Jayron 32 18:10, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've just noticed that Newfoundland English has the sit-set merger. Anyway, it has nothing to do with my questions, as I indicated in the last sentence of my two previous responses. 147.236.152.145 (talk) 18:23, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. --Jayron 32 18:55, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]