Language desk
< August 6	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 8 >

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.

August 7[edit]

Every other odd item in a set: part of speech?[edit]

Which part of speech is every other in this noun phrase? Friends are arguing that it's an adjective, but it looks to me that 'odd' is functioning as an adjective, and 'every other' an adverbial phrase. Am I right? If not, why am I wrong? Preferably in grammatical terms, so I could at least research on the topic.

Thanks in advance. -- 124.171.138.193 (talk) 03:46, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Every other" does not have any special characteristic separate from its component words. There are three adjectives in "Every other odd item in a set" - every, other and odd.

Adverbial phrases act as if they're adverbs: they answer the questions how?, when?, where?, to what extent?, etc, and they're associated with verbs (hence the name ad-verb). There's no verb in the phrase in question, no adverb, and no adverbial phrase. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 07:52, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase is ungrammatical as far as I can see. What is it supposed to mean? Looie496 (talk) 02:46, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How can a phrase be expected to be grammatical? Few phrases make complete sense divorced from their contexts. That's why they're merely phrases, and not sentences. But I would say "other" means alternative (or alternate, for US-speakers), and it's referring to selecting every second odd number from some set of numbers. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 08:15, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, every odd item = 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19. Every other odd item in in bold. -- 124.171.138.193 (talk) 08:40, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or more generally, 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 11, 33, 35, 38, 42, 43, 57, 74, 82, 93, 101, 137, 208, 316, 318, 320, 322, 323, 324, 325, 328, 329, 330, 479, 614. I'm assuming here that "other" means you select the 2nd of each pair of odd numbers, not the 1st. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 11:32, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, JackofOz. The precise definition of an adverb was confused, I discussed adverbs/adjectives further with a friend and came to predicative sentences, to which I need to pose another question: In predicative sentences (or in other cases, if that's possible), how is it determined which part of speech is used?

It is sad, there's no doubting this is a predicative adjective.
It is swimming, it's a present participle verb, sure, but why?
It is interesting, the distinction is less clear. I know it's an adjective, because it takes very. But my judgment is based on intuition.

Swimming and interesting can also be adjectives, but are there any predefined rules to determine which? -- 124.171.138.193 (talk) 08:40, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Compare: "I love history because it is interesting", and "Murdoch's theory is interesting many scientists lately". Although both cases are based on something that interests (verb) someone, in the first case it's an adjective because it's used in exactly the same way as "the sheep is white". "Because it is interesting" can be rewritten as "because it is an interesting subject", but you can't do that with the 2nd sentence: "Murdoch's theory is an interesting subject many scientists lately" makes no sense. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 09:03, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I suppose that does clear up any confusion I had, but opens a few more questions... Are these phrases abbreviated forms of longer ones where an object is defined implicitly? Will words always, without regard to part of speech or word, follow the rule of its expanded phrase when used as an abbreviated predicate statement? Edit: This doesn't actually clear confusion, just makes things confusing. Analyzing this, you are suggesting we append a direct object to the predicative statement, and if it is ungrammatical as a verb then it is an adjective, and vice versa? -- 124.171.138.193 (talk) 09:55, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's a bad pun in here ... somewhere ... I think ...[edit]

The Pearls Before Swine (comic strip) comic for today, August 7th, presumably contains yet another really bad play on words, I think :-). It's banging around in the back of my head, but won't come out.

(After the link rolls over to Sunday's page, you'll probably have to click one of the links under that page's SEARCH graphic to get back to Saturday's strip.)

Need the help of more literate Wikipedians than I seem to be today. Thanks! DaHorsesMouth (talk) 17:51, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not necessary, but I've taken the liberty of changing the URL in DaHorsesMouth's query to a more permanent one (and have restored his/her sig). Deor (talk) 17:58, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't that just an Oliver Twist reference? Or am I missing something? TomorrowTime (talk) 18:52, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. The somewhat odd phrasing of both Rat's and Pig's remarks does suggest a more specific allusion than that, but I'm unable to identify the reference. Deor (talk) 19:42, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I want to think it's a ref to some old Beatles tune. There's also something (ooh, a clue perhaps) about Pig's eyes.

And, if any of that turns out to be true, it marks a sea change for Stephen Pastis -- up to this point his "bad pun" strips have had all the subtlety of a brick wall. DaHorsesMouth (talk) 21:16, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm old enough that current comics frequently make references to items of pop culture with which I'm unfamiliar. The only Beatles tune that seems relevant is their cover of "Please Mr. Postman", but aside from the title, there's no similarity in the lyrics. Deor (talk) 22:18, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking of the phrases "Please Mister Policeman" or "Please Mister Peace Man" along with "One day more", but I'm not coming up with the song. Unless that in fact is from Oliver Twist? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:12, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Behaviour[edit]

Why is it that this word almost invariably means bad behaviour? Kittybrewster ☎ 19:40, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? That's not my impression. Looie496 (talk) 21:05, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In family contexts, the topic of a child's behaviour is usually raised when said behaviour has not been up to scratch. I mean, a parent does not sit a child down whose behaviour has been exemplary, with "I want to have a serious talk to you about your behaviour lately. It's been perfect". Maybe they should acknowledge good behaviour more often, rather than just taking it for granted and only focussing on behaviour when it's been less than great. Is this the sort of thing you're talking about, Kitty? In other contexts, police talk of both good and bad crowd behaviour. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:17, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the phrase "your behavior" almost always has negative overtones - why would anyone want to single out some aspect of your behavior for conversation unless they wanted to change it? Occasionally you'll see it used positively: "Your behavior on the court today was impeccable; that's good sportsmanship", but that's usually to reinforce good behavior (a different kind of change). the word 'behavior' is by itself neutral. --Ludwigs2 21:51, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have found it used in divorce proceedings by the narcissist to belittle and reduce their opponent. Kittybrewster ☎ 21:57, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Blind men and an elephant and http://www.exemplarybehavior.com/. -- Wavelength (talk) 02:13, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See http://www.buzzle.com/articles/behavior-charts-for-kids.html and http://www.buzzle.com/articles/behavior-charts-for-teachers.html.

—Wavelength (talk) 03:48, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's the same with "attitude". Alansplodge (talk) 12:08, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See http://refbible.com/b/behavior.htm, http://refbible.com/b/behaviour.htm, http://refbible.com/a/attitude.htm, and http://refbible.com/a/attitudes.htm. -- Wavelength (talk) 15:09, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If one spends much time with negative news and negative entertainment and negative people, one is more likely to encounter those words used in negative contexts. Someone who spends much time with positive news and positive entertainment and positive people is more likely to encounter those words used in positive contexts.—Wavelength (talk) 15:58, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See National Day of Encouragement and Praise in the Classroom. -- Wavelength (talk) 16:31, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Corrective feedback (permanent link here). -- Wavelength (talk) 16:57, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The attitude of an inanimate object is its physical position, and its behavior is its physical movement or change of state. The attitude of an animate being is his/her/its mental position (in relation to someone or something), and his/her/its behavior is his/her/its physical activity. Behavior#Psychology (permanent link here) says that behavior can be acceptable or unacceptable.Wavelength (talk) 22:26, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How about an early parole from prison, on account of "good behavior"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:59, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ella Fitzgerald sings "Why Can't You Behave?" at Ella Fitzgerald - Why can't you behave? Lyrics.Wavelength (talk) 14:55, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Translation from Japanese[edit]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEJJFuSmGpE

This video's subtitles are missing what Dento and Prof. Araragi say. Could someone translate those parts? Thanks! --138.110.206.99 (talk) 20:25, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think you would be better off finding a Pokemon fan forum for these requests. I don't think there are any Pokemon fans among the regulars here (at least, none who also understand Japanese). You could try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pokémon. Also, please don't troll the Science desk. -- BenRG (talk) 22:34, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bravery vs courage[edit]

What is the difference? Kittybrewster ☎ 21:58, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the same thing as, respectively, between the words:

lucky and fortunate
earthly and terrestrial
motherly and maternal

bravery is Germanic whereas courage is Latinate. The former word has a smell, the latter one a scent. 92.230.232.141 (talk) 22:13, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, they mean the same thing. It's a characteristic feature of the English language that we have a lot of synonyms due to our mixture of Germanic and Latin origins. --Tango (talk) 22:19, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Wiktionary (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/brave), brave (and the German term brav) is a French derivative and goes back to a word in the Gaulish language. Related terms exist in Irish and Breton. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 23:43, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that bravery is a property of behavior, but courage is a property of one's state of mind. Bravery is physical, courage is mental. Looie496 (talk) 02:38, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Courage, mon brave!" Attributed to Voltaire. Alansplodge (talk) 12:05, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would dispute that definition. I don't see how an action alone could ever be considered "brave", without consideration of the situation and subject's state of mind. For example, take the action of entering a burning building. When someone with full knowledge of the situation and potential consequences to themselves takes the decision to do this it could be described as brave. If they are mentally impaired (perhaps due to age, a medical condition or intoxication) they may not be aware of the danger. Even if they are fully cogent they may be unaware of the fire. In such circumstances it wouldn't really be meaningful to say he was brave. I agree with the previous statements that bravery and courage are essentially synonymous.

However, even perfect synonyms can cause different reactions based on the subjectivity of the listener/reader. For myself, I would say that the word "courageous" is more evocative of heroism than "brave". As I said, though, that is a subjective reaction and will vary from person to person – some people will see it the other way around. AJ Cham 15:52, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See http://www.onelook.com/?w=bravery&ls=a and http://www.onelook.com/?w=courage&ls=a. Wavelength (talk) 19:24, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help coming up with a short phrase for a company value?[edit]

The Chinese company I work for has asked that their catchy Chinese values be translated into English. The first 3 went ok: "Champion employees", "Embrace customers", "Quality, always", but the fourth is a bit tricky. Essentially, it means that the company always keeps its promises, meets all its deadlines, fulfills all its commitments. If it was a person, you'd say "he's a man of his word" or "his word is as good as gold" or what have you. That's the idea they want to convey. This is concise and lovely in Chinese, but I'm having a hard time thinking of an equally concise English equivalent. "Fulfill Commitments" is not very stirring! 174.34.144.211 (talk) 23:32, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, "dependable" is the word that occurs to me. Looie496 (talk) 02:41, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also reliable and trustworthy. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:12, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Integrity? 129.67.37.143 (talk) 11:08, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Common law principle underpinning insurance contracts is "Uberrima fides" usually translated as "Utmost Good Faith". The motto of the London Stock Exchange is "Dictum meum pactum", or "My word is my bond". Alansplodge (talk) 11:56, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I rather like 129.67's suggestion; "Integrity, always" would pair nicely with "Quality, always". Dependable, reliable, and even trustworthy are somewhat ambiguous—they could refer either to the company or to its products (the latter of which readings would make the fourth "value" seem redundant with "Quality, always"). Something like "Be accountable" might also work. Deor (talk) 17:08, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How about "deliver on promises"? --71.185.169.212 (talk) 01:29, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]