Language desk
< February 3	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 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.

February 4[edit]

How do you pronounce Carmen followup[edit]

The thread for the original question, how is "Carmen" pronounced (as in the name of the French opera about the Spanish character) in English has been archived.

As a side question, the issue of final nasals in Spanish was raised.

According to "Spanish" by John N. Green in Bernard Comrie's The World's Major Languages (1990, p 243); the letters eme, ene, and eñe all contrast intervocalically, while only [m] and [n] initially descend from Latin. In final position, only /-n/ occurrs, but the allophone eng, previously common in Anadalucia and (parts of) Latin America, is rapidly spreading through Spain, although it "remains sociolinguistically marked". It is believed by some this preludes nasalization as found in French and Portuguese, but still absent in Castilian. Green's article in Harris & Vincent's The Romance Languages (Oxford, p 83) says the same.

I was embarassed once when I went out to a fancy Spanish restaurant, and told my anglophone companions that if they wanted more bread, they should ask for [mah paŋ] (por favor). One of them then asked the waiter "How does one say "more bread" in Spanish, and, of course, he responded, in citation form: "[mas pan]." μηδείς (talk) 03:23, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why in they decided to make IPA is so narrow and complex in Spanish phonology. They included many tildes and I myself do think that Spanish has slight nasalization even in proper Castilian. Of course, the waiter wanted to teach clear pronunciation, but it's always different when natives talk to each other like replacing or completely dropping the "s" although I think this is a rather southern Spain and Latin America thing. --2.245.197.68 (talk) 03:46, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I recall during 2002 or so when Barry Bonds was intentionally walked to load the bases, and Benito Santiago proceeded to hit a grand slam. His post-game comment included, "I've been hitting behind this mang all year..." I don't know why Hispanics turn a trailing "n" into an "ng", but they do. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:24, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Voluntarily not trying to understand: adjective[edit]

Hello, I am looking for an adjective, which I think exists in English (I may be wrong, though), which means "refusing to try to understand". E.g. sentence "I talked to him for 12 minutes about this very simple concept, but he still didn't get it. I am now suspecting that he was just being _______", meaning "He was simply not trying to understand, in order to be annoying". --147.85.186.6 (talk) 20:17, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Contrary" works, and googling 'contrary synonym' gets: perverse, difficult, uncooperative, unhelpful, obstructive, recalcitrant, willful, stubborn, obstinate, pigheaded, intractable. There's also closed-minded. If any of those sounds close but not exact, google it for synonyms and you'll probably find what you want. μηδείς (talk) 20:22, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not a single adjective, but I would complete that sentence with "willfully ignorant". StuRat (talk) 20:44, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Or "deliberately obtuse", perhaps. Deor (talk) 20:58, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Contrarian? Mingmingla (talk) 21:07, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Obtuse is the word I could not remember! Thanks a lot. Interesting to read that it can also mean difficult to understand. Also interesting to see that obtuse is not necessarily deliberate, I thought it was. --147.85.186.6 (talk) 21:36, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But "willfully obtuse" or "deliberately obtuse" would work if you want to use that word. --65.94.50.4 (talk) 23:43, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When you have an acute need to approach your writing from a new angle, "obtuse" is often the right choice, perhaps with a congruent supplementary word like "deliberately", thus assuring that your reviews will all be complimentary. StuRat (talk) 04:19, 5 February 2015 (UTC) [reply]

Let us insure ourselves against the possibility of people confusing the words "ensure", "insure" and "assure". -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:22, 5 February 2015 (UTC) [reply]

Resolved

"playing dumb!" is how that sentence would end! (Based on your description). "I talked to him for 12 minutes about this very simple concept, but he still didn't get it. I am now suspecting that he was just playing dumb", though it doesn't make much sense to me. (i.e. I don't think that would ever be an accurate description.) Why would anyone talk to someone for 12 minutes if they didn't seem to understand something? It sounds far more likely that it's a really complicated subject like advanced physics or whatever, and there is just some kind of mental missing step or hurdle, something the listener genuinely didn't get. In my experience people rarely actually play dumb and it's far more likely that someone really is missing something. Nobody plays dumb to be annoying. That would get awkward really fast. In these cases simplification helps. Use simple sentences. Break things down. It might seem like you're being patronizing, but 90% you'll actually solve the communications impasse and end the frustration, or identify the communications gap between speaker and listener, at least if you're eliciting some feedback. "Well, look, do you know what a kumquat is?" and they will blush and admit they don't, even though you took it for granted that they did and you have been trying to explain your kumquat refrigerator pie recipe for 12 minutes. (they thought it's some fruit that is inside like apple pie, didn't have a mental picture of a kumquat, which is like a little baby orange around the size of a grape, or what you would do with it.) problem solved. 212.96.61.236 (talk) 00:30, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think in denial is language that in some situations might be applicable. Bus stop (talk) 01:14, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Contrarian doesn't mean the same thing as contrary, it more implies acting the devil's advocate. Playing dumb means he actually got what was being said. Willfully ignorant and deliberately obtuse are perfect two-word terms. There's also the "I don't hear you" move of the Vancome Lady. μηδείς (talk) 04:07, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I say "obstinate" and that's final. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:23, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Deliberately obtuse" is good; in some contexts, "disingenuous" would also work. AnonMoos (talk) 10:29, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I believe "Dumb Insolence" used to be a chargeable offense under Queen's Regulations (possibly back when they were King's Regulations). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 14:44, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]