Language desk
< March 29	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 31 >

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.

March 30[edit]

Goal, aim[edit]

What is the difference between a goal and an aim? Thanks 84.13.173.45 (talk) 00:11, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's like the difference between a target and a trajectory, an end and a means, or a destination and a direction. But they can also be used synonymously, "Our aim/goal is to please". It depends on the context.Synchronism (talk) 00:19, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A business context is what I'm interested in. They may have more defined meaning than in general use. 84.13.180.45 (talk) 14:13, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In my company, at least, "aim" would be more qualitative (kind of like a mission statement or marketing plan), whereas a "goal" would be more quantitative (e.g. a unit sales goal). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:08, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the connotation of a "goal" is that it is somewhat more achievable than an "aim". If you have a goal, the idea is to meet it; but if you only have an aim, that's implicitly an acknowledgement that you may miss the target. Of course this can be used rhetorically: one can call an unachievable aim a "goal" in order signal commitment to it, e.g. the goal to end world hunger. — Carl (CBM · talk) 16:13, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In my understanding, a 'goal' is a quantified 'aim'. For example, a factory's aim might be to significantly reduce waste emissions over the next two years, while its goal might be to reduce them by 25% over 2009's figure by the end of 2012. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 12:04, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Coteries[edit]

What is the etymology of "coterie"?174.3.113.245 (talk) 06:46, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See:[1] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:02, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Definition[edit]

What is "gross breach of trust"?174.3.113.245 (talk) 07:46, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Position of trust. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:53, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

144 times. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:14, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rimshot! -- Flyguy649 ^talk 19:20, 30 March 2010 (UTC) [reply]

For those who don't speak English as a first language, Clarityfiend's making a pun on Gross (unit), a different definition that has nothing to do with this usage. Buddy431 (talk) 19:28, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the two meanings of "gross" have a common etymology.[2] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:30, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, they both come from the same Late Latin "grossus", probably not used for 1500 years or so. The meaning in this case (flagrant) was forked from another meaning (total) in Middle English, while Clarityfiend's usage came to us from the Old French; that is, they came to us through different languages from the same Latin root. So while the words might have a common etymology, so too do cows and humans share a common ancestor. None the less, I do not consider old Bessy my close family. Buddy431 (talk) 04:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you think of "gross" as "something big or heavy", the commonality is clear. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:21, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A "breach in trust" is an offense committed by someone in a position of trust. Depending on the context, it could have a legal meaning for an act carried out by someone in an "official" position of trust, or it could simply mean that someone, who should be someone that can be trusted, did something wrong. Gross in this context means "blatant" or "excessive". If my parents trust me to look after my little brother, and I give him to my drug dealing neighbor to look after while I go party, I could be said to have committed a "gross breach of trust".Buddy431 (talk) 19:28, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Must and can[edit]

I have been studying French, and in French there are two verbs devoir and pouvoir. These correspond (roughly) with English "must" and "can". But to say "to must" or "to can" is rediculous. So what part of speech are must and can in English? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.230.215.163 (talk) 23:56, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Modal verb. -- Wavelength (talk) 23:58, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another translation of devoir is "to have to". For example: "J'ai du manger le pamplemousse." translates to "I had to eat the grapefruit." caknuck _° needs to be running more often 03:12, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Might be your keyboard, but I'd just like to point out that it's j'ai dû -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 21:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong with to can ? "I'm going to can those peaches." :-) StuRat (talk) 14:29, 31 March 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Also see defective verb - English "can" and "must" are typical examples of verbs that are lacking an infinitive form (and a couple other forms, too). They are still verbs in every other respect, though. -- Ferkelparade π 16:39, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When I was first taught French back in the late '60s, our teacher explained 'devoir' as meaning 'to must' with the supplementary that although this literal usage did not actually exist in English, the concept was understandable and in context useful. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 12:00, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was taught that "devoir" (and its Spanish equivalent, "deber") and "pouvoir" (and Spanish "poder") mean "to have to" and "to be able to," respectively. 71.104.119.240 (talk) 05:42, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]