Language desk
< November 26	<< 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 27

Russian схватки

In Russian, 'contractions' mean схватки (singular схваткa), which is derived from the verb схватить 'to grasp, to grab, to catch'. Of course, the word is already fully conventionalized; however I wonder if Russian native speakers still associate the word схватки with another meaning. With other words, is the etymology still "transparent" in this word? Are women who are about to give birth "grasped" by the contractions? Or is the link to схваткa in the meaning 'battle, fight' more present? Alternatively, does anybody know which was the underlaying thought when the word схваткa came to its meaning? I mean, the "underlaying thought" of English contraction is the observation that the the uterine musculature is contracted, the "underlaying thought" of German Wehe or Italian doglie is that contractions are hurtful etc. Is it possible to "reconstruct" the underlaying thought of схватки in the meaning 'contractions'? Galtzaile (talk) 16:57, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not only in Russian, but in English too: you have seizure which can mean both "apprehension" and "convulsion". --82.166.199.42 (talk) 07:55, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Both of which have the idea of something "taking hold" of something else.[1] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:47, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The question seems to assume the noun in the sense associated with the labour of childbirth occurs only in its plural form. But in English one can refer to "the first contraction",^[2] and in Russian likewise to "первая схватка".^[3][4] --Lambiam 19:31, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vowel length

Why in Swedish, length is considered primary factor in differentiation of long and short vowels, but in English, quality is instead considered primary factor? For example, the Swedish pairs sil-sill are pronounced [siːl] and [sɪl], but English pairs heat-hit are pronounced [hiːt] and [hɪt] (in both languages, long [iː] contrast with short [ɪ]). However, English heat could also be transcribed [hit] and Swedish sill could also be transcribed [sil]. --40bus (talk) 19:38, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In some English accents the [i] of heat does not actually have a longer duration than the [ɪ] of hit. Have you heard Swedish sil and sill pronounced? The [ɪ] of sill^listen is more like the [iː] of heat than it is like the [ɪ] of hit in Received Pronunciation, but then sil^listen is like [siːːːl]. --Lambiam 21:08, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

40bus -- If you go to mid-height vowels, and especially low-height vowels, English vowels do not always occur in neat short vs. long pairs which are more or less similar in quality. For example, the vowel in the word "cat" is lacking a long counterpart of similar quality. The details vary between English dialects, of course, but there's a lack of simple short-long symmetry in most or all quasi-standard forms of spoken English. This is why the terms "lax" vs. "tense" or "checked" vs. "free" are often used instead of "short" vs. "long". AnonMoos (talk) 21:13, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

English is unusual that its vowel system is not symmetrical or neat. All other languages have symmetrical vowel system. --40bus (talk) 10:45, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure it it's "all other languages", and it might be more regular than first assumed when comparing to other European languages, but I guess the combination of the Great Vowel Shift and the huge Norman French impact really left its mark. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:56, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wakuran -- I'm not sure that either of those factors has much to do with why "short a" spontaneously fronted in early modern English, while "short u" de-rounded, but as Jayron32 is fond of explaining, language change has an unpredictable element. AnonMoos (talk) 13:15, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AnonMoos: Did "short a" really spontaneously front in early modern English? Modern English hat has the same vowel quality that Old English hæt had a thousand years ago. —Mahāgaja · talk 16:05, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Old English had a contrast between short [æ] and [a] vowels. This contrast merged in Middle English, and all sources I've seen do not reconstruct the merged vowel with an [æ] quality; one I happen to have conveniently at hand at the moment is "Historical Outlines of English Phonology and Morphology" by Samuel Moore. It varied by dialect and time-period, of course, but in some ways Middle English had a cross-linguistically less unusual vowel system than Modern English does... AnonMoos (talk) 01:12, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

40bus -- Edward Sapir had a saying "all grammars leak", which means if you look closely enough, many things in languages aren't quite as neat and symmetrical as they may superficially appear to be. AnonMoos (talk) 13:15, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]