Language desk
< November 18	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 20 >

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 19[edit]

Quick Grammar help[edit]

"Cornell has one of the most comprehensive student services programs anywhere." Is that sentence grammatically correct? Or should there not be a "s" on the end of "program"? Jamesino 03:53, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is correct as quoted. If you get rid of the s on the end of "programs," it will be incorrect. In "one of the programs," "of the programs" is a partitive phrase, expressing the larger whole (the group of plural programs) out of which Cornell's singular program is the one being considered. "Fred is one of the nicest PEOPLE (not person) I know." Wareh 04:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A vaguely related question: is it correct to use "only" in a sentence such as "Delta Air Lines is one of the only mainline carriers in the world to own their own flight school, called Delta Connection Academy"? I hear this increasingly often, and each time it strikes me as wrong, although it would be fine used like this: "The only mainline carriers in the world to own their own flight school are Acrobatics Aviation, Bugaboo Blazers, Crooked Connections, and Delta Air Lines." --Lambiam ^Talk 07:57, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in this case, my gripe would be that the possessive of "Delta Air Lines" is "its" rather than "their" since it is both singular and inanimate. I can't find anything wrong with the use of "only", though. What exactly is wrong with it? —K e akealani 08:06, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Using "its" makes it worse! You get the partitive phrase "of the only mainline carriers in the world to own its own flight school" with a disagreement between plural "carriers" and "its". What is wrong with it is that it feels wrong. If you replace "only" by "few", or add some definite number as in "the only four", the feeling of wrongness disappears. The fact that I encounter this usage implies that some other speakers have no such qualms. Apparently you are one of the only people belonging to that group. --Lambiam ^Talk 08:20, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you are going to use 'their', referring to the plurality of the carriers, then you would have to use ' schools ' to agree with it, otherwise the sentence would imply that they are all joint owners of a single school. However, I would stick with 'its'. Getting back to the 'only' question. I think you would need to quantify the 'only' a bit more. Maybe by saying 'one of the only mainline carriers known to have its own flight school', as in 'Fred is one of the only people I know who has ever climbed Mt. Fuji'. Just saying 'only' on its own gives the listener the feeling that an extra word has creeped into the sentence, or some others have escaped. I'm not sure if there is any right or wrong in it, it just sounds odd and lacking in something the way you said it. CCLemon-安部さん万歳！ 13:16, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First off, "only" is incorrect; something can't be "one of the only". If there's more than one, then that's "the few".

Next, "their"/"its" should agree with "are"/"is", i.e. with "Delta Air Lines". Thus:

Delta Air Lines are one of the few mainline carriers in the world to own their own flight school...

Or:

Delta Air Lines is one of the few mainline carriers in the world to own its own flight school...

The former would be correct in BE, where companies etc. are plural entities. EdC 14:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First, "incorrect" is incorrect. If the only four airlines that have a flight school are A, B, C, and D; then A is one of the only airlines that have one. It's logical and grammatical. The question is whether the expression makes sense as used.

The issue is the use of "only" to imply a small fraction -- people who say "one of the only" normally mean it to imply "one of the few". Now compare these cases:

The world has 1,000 airlines, 4 (A,B,C,D) with schools and 996 without.
The world has 8 airlines, 4 (A,B,C,D) with schools and 4 without.
The world has 5 airlines, 4 (A,B,C,D) with schools and 1 without.

In cases 1 and 2 you could easily say that A,B,C,D are the "only" airlines with schools. In case 3 you never would, even though it's logically correct; you'd be more likely to say that E is the "only" one without a school. So "only" does indeed suggest "relatively few". But I think that even people who say "one of the only" would be more likely to describe A as "one of the only" in case 1 than in case 2. It suggests a greater degree of rarity. In fact, it can pretty much be replaced by "one of the few". And clearly some people would prefer it to be.

Conclusion: make your own decision about using it. Accept that some people find nothing wrong with it.

--Anonymous, 21:11 UTC, November 19.

Some spirited discussion of "one of the only" at this blog. Two points incline me against those who sternly disapprove of this usage. (1) A very large number of items can still be the only ones of their class; in these cases "few" is misleading without fussy qualification ("relatively few," etc.). (2) It's hard to impeach the logic of this defense (to quote from a comment at the blog entry I linked):

if you can have "the only things saved from the house were the pen and the dog," then I don't see how you can't have "one of the only things saved from the house was the dog."

(See the full comment and compare a longer one in a similar vein.) On the other hand, the phrase surely can sometimes be a symptom of imprecise or inelegant thinking. It's also worth knowing that using it will lower your worth in the eyes of people who insist on "running the gantlet" and "interpretative." Wareh 21:30, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, Anonymous and I were typing some very overlapping thoughts at exactly the same time. Wareh 21:33, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A comma might help.martianlostinspace 16:39, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Latin translation of "database"[edit]

What would be a possible translation into Latin of the modern word "database"? Thanks for any ideas. ==Alex==

Librarium, perhaps.--Shantavira 15:16, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Database" doesn't appear to be in the glossary on Vicipaedia. -THB 19:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, but there will be a word, as the Vatican still use Latin, and have therefore have to create words like this. I know there are dictionarie spublished with this sort of thing in, but I don't knwo where you could find one on the internet. M a rtinp23 19:37, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is Vocabula computatralia which suggests datorum ordinatrum, data, or plicae datorum. Probably not very accurate though. Adam Bishop 20:59, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Vatican's Lexicon of new words has no entry for database – at least I can't find one, whether for database or base di dati or banca dati. --Lambiam ^Talk 21:11, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Datarium would be a neologism, but formed in analogy to other Latin words. --Lambiam ^Talk 21:19, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Modern" word? "Data" is Latin already, and "base" derives from Latin as well. So you're already using Latin, in a sense. Anyway, datorum ordinatrum seems popular enough. Personally I prefer the word the Icelanders constructed. (Gagnagrunnur) --BluePlatypus 04:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Datorum ordinatrum is in several online glossaries: [1] [2] -THB 04:38, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info! ==Alex==