Language desk
< April 3	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 5 >

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.

April 4[edit]

The Oath - Frank E. Peretti[edit]

I am having to write a paper for my night school class, based off of the book I have been reading, which is Frank E. Peretti's - "The Oath." In beginning my paper, I have tried to find and introduction to write, can you please help me further understand what a possible introduction, could be in this fictional book?

What exactly are you supposed to be writing about? Just a book report?? -Elmer Clark 04:59, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you need to get some basic info out of the way first, like the name of the book and author, year published, etc. Next you can briefly describe the genre of the book (sci-fi ?), setting (location, time), and perhaps a few main characters. That should about do it for the intro. StuRat 20:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Need an English word for this definition[edit]

Definition: Inappropriately dignified treatment of the commonplace. What is the word? NoClutter 02:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"An incongruous combination of high and low" could be bathos; a more artful use of a high style to treat a low subject could be parody. Wareh 03:19, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Affectation, grandiosity, pomposity, pretension, ostentation, portentousness. Any of these might fit the bill to a greater or lesser extent. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 11:29, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Exalt", "glorify", "aggrandize", "enshrine", "boost", "elevate", "lift", "promote", "raise", "upgrade", "uplift", "heighten", "idealize", "romanticize", "canonize", "deify", "acclaim", "extol", "laud", "praise". StuRat 19:56, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Those refer to "dignified treatment", but most don't cover "inappropriately" or "commonplace", StuRat. Jfarber 21:36, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Russian[edit]

I've been trying to find the translation of 'спрус'. Doing a google search in wikipedia, I deduced that it is a last name, Sprouse. Is this correct? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.231.151.161 (talk) 04:54, 4 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, you could transliterate "Cпрус" as "Sprouse" -- it'd be a little unconventional, but surnames don't always follow the rules of transliteration. It's probably not a Russian surname, more likely Sprouse is the original name, and it's transliterated into Russian, and not the other way around. --JayHenry 05:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think "Spruce" would better convey the pronunciation. For me, "Sprouse" rhymes with cows. —An gr 05:52, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, "Cпрус" would rhyme with Moose. But I doubt it's a Russian word or name at all. "Sprouse" is likely the real name, and "Cпрус" is just a Russian approximation, therefore, when translating back into the Roman Alphabet, you return to the original spelling. --JayHenry 05:56, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unless it's the name of a person whose family moved to Russia some generations ago and have become thoroughly Russianised but without going so far as to Russianise their name to, say, Спрусов. In such a case, Спрус should be transliterated according to whatever transliteration system you're using. Not sure how you'd know whether that's the case or not, though. Btw, there's no such word as спрус in the Oxford Russian-English dictionary - the closest words are спрут (octopus) and спрос (demand). JackofOz 06:42, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, Russian Wikipedia's article on Big Daddy transliterates the actors Dylan and Cole Sprouse to Дилан Спрус and Коул Спрус . And the article on West Virginia transliterates the state's highest point Spruce Knob to Спрус-Ноб. ---Sluzzelin talk 09:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some people pronounce "Sprouse" like "Spruce".[1]. Perhaps that also applies to the Sprouse brothers. --Lambiam ^Talk 10:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

French[edit]

How does this go in English ?

C'est dans un temple du Dieu de l'Evangile, c'est dans l'Eglise de ces religieux appelés Jacobins, que Mirabeau appelle tous les adeptes des Loges Parisiennes. C'est là qu'il s'établit avec ces mêmes hommes qui composaient son club Breton. La horde des Frères conjurés se hâte de le suivre. Dès cet instant, le temple n'est plus connu dans l'histoire de la révolution que sous le nom de Club; le nom de ces anciens Religieux, qui jadis faisaient retentir des louanges du Dieu vivant, passe à la horde même qui en fait l'école de ses blasphèmes & le centre de ses complots. Bientôt l'Europe entière ne connaît les chefs & les acteurs, les promoteurs, les admirateurs de la Révolution Française, que sous ce même nom de Jacobins. La malédiction une fois prononcée sur cette dénomination, il était juste en quelque sorte qu'elle dît à elle seule, tout ce qui existait de Sophistes de l' impiété, conjurés contre Dieu & son Christ, de sophistes de la rebellion, conjurés contre Dieu & les Rois, de sophistes de l' anarchie, conjurés contre toute société —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.157.226.53 (talk) 08:26, 4 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

If you don't need a polished translation: It is in a temple of the God of the Gospels, in the Church of these friars called Jacobins, that Mirabeau calls all the followers of the Parisian Loges together. It is there that he established himself with these very men who formed his Club Breton. The horde of the conspiring Brothers hastens to follow him. From this moment on, the temple is only known in the history of the revolution by the name of Club; the name of these former Friars, who formerly made the praise of the living God resound, passes on to the horde, which even turns it into the school of its blasphemies & the center of its complots. Soon, all of Europe only knows the leaders & the actors, the promoters, the admirors of the French revolution, by this same name of Jacobins. Once the curse had been pronounced on this appellation, it was in some sense fair that it only applied to itself, all of it consisting of Sophists of impiety, conspiring against God & his Christ, sophists of the rebellion, conspiring against God & the Kings, sophists of anarchy, conspiring against all of society. From Google Translate, with a few touch ups. --Lambiam ^Talk 12:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Linguistica.[edit]

Nel passaggio fra termini simili di varie lingue europee, si rileva abbastanza spesso uno scambio fra le lettere "B" e "V". (ora mi viene in mente il "basilico" in greco, oppure il termine marinaro "mettere le vele a riva" che vuol dire issare le vele ,vedi lo spagnolo "arriba"). Da cosa deriva questa intercambiabilità ? Graziepaolo de magistris 16:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

The /b/ sound is a plosive consonant, while the /v/ sound is a fricative consonant. It is very common for plosives to become fricatives through a process called lenition. It has happened in the history of both Greek and Spanish. —An gr 16:38, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Il suono di /b/ è una consonante occlusiva mentre il suono di /v/ è una consonante fricativa. E molto normale per occlusive di diventare fricative per un processo che si chiama lenizione. É successo così nella storia di entrambe la lingua greca e la lingua spagnola.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sluzzelin (talk • contribs) 16:52, 4 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Which is correct?[edit]

Which is more correct... "Turn for the worse" or "Turn for the worst"? We have been having a big debate for a few minutes now on which one is more grammatically correct. Thanks a million!!! --Zach 18:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've always heard it as "(taking a) turn for the worse". The Cambridge International Dictionary of Idioms (1998) agrees with me. Jfarber 18:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've googled both and Turn for the worse gets 24,500,000 hits while Turn for the worst gets 35,000,000, so it looks like more people are using the latter. Also used a dictionary for both:

Worse: more unpleasant, difficult or severe than before or than something else that is also bad.
Worst: of the lowest quality, or the most unpleasant, difficult or severe.

I'd have gone with worst as it is often used in similar examples: He is my worst enemy, the worst meal I've ever eaten, etc.

Worse is used more is sentences like If the rain gets any worse we'll have to stop walking. But this one throws me off again: The heat is much worse in the daytime. So, in conclusion, I don't know. Think outside the box 19:52, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have to search for the complete phrase. Searching without quotes around the phrase just finds pages that have the words "turn" and "worse" or "worst" in them. "Turn for the worse" gets 1,020,000 results [2] and "Turn for the worst" gets only 179,000, [3], a ratio of more than 5 to 1 in favor of the former. Nohat 20:17, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingly, equivalent Google News searches, which has results consisting mostly of professionally-edited sources, the ratio is even higher, at almost 20 to 1. This leads me to believe that the form "turn for the worst" is a low-frequency accidental permutation (an eggcorn) of the original idiom "turn for the worse". Nohat 20:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary: "take a turn for the better/worse". I've never heard "turn for the worst" and would personally regard it as a minor error, the kind of slip native speakers often make. It's rarer to use "turn for the better", which might more easily be altered to "turn for the best" by analogy with "hope for the best". However, Google produces a 20:1 trend favouring "better". While Google books is only 4:1, most "turn for the best" are false positives like "where to turn for the best advice". Compare also "if/when worse/worst come(s) to worst" where the Random House Dictionary of the English Language says "worst comes to worst" is the original while the Columbia Guide to Standard American English surmises "worse comes to worst" might be the original. jnestorius^(talk) 22:55, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Toponymic names in Irish?[edit]

How would you say in Irish that a person is from a particular location? I've looked up the word for "from" - which is as according to Wiktionary. I'm trying to figure out how to construct a name based on a person's origin (something that generally doesn't appear in Irish names, since most Irish surnames are patronymic in origin); so say if I wanted to translate the name "Michael of Derry" into Irish. Would that be "Mícheál as Doire"? If not, could you please explain? Thank you very much for your time. --Brasswatchman 21:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... The way to say "Michael is from Derry" is Is as Doire é Mícheál, but I've never encountered names of the "Robin of Locksley"/"Joseph of Arimathea" format in Irish. The closest I can think of is names like Mac Lachlainn "son of Scandinavia" and Breatnach "Welshman", but of course those are used for people whose ancestors were from outside Ireland, not from a town in Ireland. —An gr 04:59, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again for your help, Angr. A quick follow-up question: I'm assuming that the Breat part of Breatnach is related to Briton; so that should mean that nach is equivalent to "man" or "of somewhere," right? So maybe you could get away with Doirenach in the example I described? Thanks. --Brasswatchman 15:25, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the breatn- part is related to Briton, and -ach is a suffix (cf. Francach "Frenchman"). But it's not so productive that you can automatically add it to anything; I don't know how to say "Dubliner" in Irish, but I'm pretty certain it isn't "Baile Átha Cliathach". So I wouldn't assume that Doireach is Irish for Derryman without evidence. —An gr 15:33, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Oh, well. Thank you for your help again. I really appreciate it. --Brasswatchman 21:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]