Language desk
< August 14	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 16 >

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 15[edit]

Chinese[edit]

I know 楚 (Chu) is acceptable as a surname, but would it also be acceptable as part of a girl's given name? 92.80.6.159 (talk) 11:54, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Chinese given names can be any character, but are most commonly two characters long and has a good meaning. 楚 is an old word for "clear" and would be fine in a girls name, especially combined with another character. Chinese surnames however aren't usually associated with meanings. Mar de Sin ^{Speak up!} 15:02, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

French Phonology[edit]

I've a question about French pronunciation: are french names like Christian, Fabien, Adrien, Julien homophone (I mean completely indistinguishable) to Christiane, Fabienne, Adrienne/Adriane, Juliane? --151.51.38.184 (talk) 13:54, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, the pronunciation of the masculine names is distinct from the pronunciation of the feminine names. Those masculine names all end with a nasal vowel, whereas their feminine counterparts all end with a pronounced consonant 'n', or, in the most emphatic or formal pronunciations, with the consonant 'n' followed by a very brief schwa vowel, known as the e muet. Have a look at French phonology for more details. Marco polo (talk) 14:32, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a followup to the OP's inquiry, would the two phrases petit ami and petite amie be pronounced the same? I imagine they would be both pronounced [p(ə)titami], but perhaps there's something else going on distinguishing them. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 21:04, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pending the arrival of an actual French speaker (I passed a French exam some time ago, but have had little subsequent practice): in the first (masculine) version one would not pronounce the second "t" of "petit", hence something like "pe-tee am-ee"; in the second (feminine) version one would pronounce it and also perhaps emphasise that syllable slightly more, hence "pe-TEET am-ee." There might also be a slight additional closing sound on the "Am-ee" akin to the e-muet mentioned above, but I'm less sure about that. In general, subtleties of pronunciation are almost impossible to explain fully without recourse to IPA (International Phonetic Alphabet, not India Pale Ale!) or to sound tapes/files/whatever. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 02:53, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So then liason doesn't apply in petit ami? That doesn't sound right. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 04:01, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, 87.81 is wrong here. Both forms are pronounced the same. In French, neighboring vowel sounds from different syllables are not generally allowed by standard constructions, so there is always liason between two words if one ends with a vowel sound and the next starts with it. "Petit ami" and "Petite amie" would be pronounced identically, however if the second word started with a consonant then "Petit" and "Petite" would be pronounced differently. There are even situations where an extra "t" sounded is added between two words where neither form of the words has a t at all, such as in the construction "Parle-t-il?" (He spoke?). Native french speakers will often create liasons where non exist in other situations; "Moi aussi!" (Me too!) is often pronounced "moi-z-aussi" even though there is no consonant to "liason" with, strictly speaking, in the spelling of either word. Unlike the "parle-t-il" construction, this one is nonstandard and never written out; it may be a common usage, but it is not "official" french. --Jayron32 04:11, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See also Liaison (French) --Jayron32 04:11, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the timely corrections. Clearly my French is even rustier than I thought. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 23:04, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Jayron32's remark:

French phrases - like "moi aussi" which is pronounced "moi-z-aussi" by native French speakers, remind me parallel English phrases - like "sofa and table" which is pronounced "sofa rand table" by native British-English speakers, and they also remind me other English phrases - like "colonel" which is pronounced "kerlnel" (or even: "kernel"), rhotically, by US-English speakers.

HOOTmag (talk) 09:51, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's interesting. I've never heard anyone pronounce "colonel" starting with "kerl", rhotically or otherwise. It's always just "ker-nəl". -- JackofOz (talk) 21:12, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Both French and British English are my native tongues. Whereas there is indeed 'z' liaison with 'nous aussi' or 'vous aussi' (where the s becomes a z), 'moi aussi' and 'toi aussi' have no such liaison. As for the 'sofa and table' example, I've never added in an 'r' - I pronounce it 'sofa n table' (a a => a). Final point: I'm with Jack on 'colonel'. I'm sure someone can help out with the IPA. -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 21:28, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Admittedly, my French experience is with Quebecois french, but "moi-z-aussi" comes up in spoken language quite frequently in that dialect, though no one would actually write it out that way... --Jayron32 04:08, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's an example of an error due to hypercorrection or euphony, a phenomenon called pataquès, with 'moi z aussi' being an example of 'velours', where it is impossible even by spelling (see liaison errors). Some examples, such as 'vas-y' (gramatically an exception to the norm) have actually become obligatory though both in written and spoken French, where the imperative of 'aller' in the singular is usually 'va' ('va chercher tes devoirs'). -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 05:58, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What[edit]

What is "bar": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulture_fund?

What is "Iceberg claim"?174.3.103.39 (talk) 16:42, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For "bar", the passage says:

Under the doctrine of champerty, it was illegal in England and the United States to purchase a debt with the sole intent of litigating it. The distinction was made that if the debt was purchased to effect a recovery or facilitate investment, the doctrine was not a bar.

The meaning is that it's something that prevents something else. That is, if you wanted to purchase a debt, you were barred (prevented) by law if you had "the sole intent of litigating it", but you weren't barred if your intent was "to effect a recovery or facilitate investment".

For "claim", the passage is referring to a piece of land where someone has claimed the mineral rights, and apparently they chose to give it the name Iceberg. --Anonymous, 17:06 UTC, August 16, 2009. (edited for clarity later)

Finnish pronunciation[edit]

The discussions about hiatus and glottal stops in the Äöü(ß) question made me realize that I probably am mispronouncing certain names and words of Finnish origin. How is the double ä in e.g. Pääjärvi supposed to be pronounced? I have always thought of it as two distinct äs, sort of similar to how Swedish can (in pronunciation) double the vowels in e.g. Ja! or Nä! to emphasize. In those cases, there is no glottal stop, just a change in tone to make it two identical vowel sounds. Are the Finnish double äs like that, or are they just a long ä? The same question applies to e.g. Maamme as well, though I can't think of any names containing double as that I'd commonly find myself trying to say. Is there a general rule for doubled vowels in Finnish? Thanks. /Coffeeshivers (talk) 17:37, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Doubled vowels are just longer. See Finnish phonology#Length. —JAO • T • C 18:06, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's the term for using something outside its purpose?[edit]

Moved from Humanities Desk

There is a term in English for when you use an object for something else than its original purpose, like if you take off your shoe to hammer in a nail. Help? Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 07:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This may not be exactly it, but I would call that "improvising". Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 08:11, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, but there's a real word for it, -ism or -oscopy or -tude... you get the idea. Mother of invention thing. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 08:37, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Improvisation? AlexTiefling (talk) 11:27, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Surrogacy? Fribbler (talk) 12:13, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Idiocy? Googlemeister (talk) 15:04, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jury rig, perhaps? 195.35.160.133 (talk) 15:39, 11 August 2009 (UTC) Martin.[reply]

Maybe this should be moved to the language desk where it will get more attention? -- Alexandr Dmitri (Александр Дмитрий) (talk) 15:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Repurposing? Clarityfiend (talk) 21:54, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Makeshift? Also "press into service." Off-label also has the implication that you're looking for. Yes, this should be moved to the Language desk. How do you do it? Bus stop (talk) 21:57, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moved. BrainyBabe (talk) 18:04, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kludge? --Jayron32 04:01, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"February 2009 anti-clerical demonstration in Hong Kong"[edit]

Can someone tell me what zh:維護公民社會價值，反對宗教右翼霸權大遊行 is about? I came upon it from Commons:Category:February 2009 anti-clerical demonstration in Hong Kong, but there's nothing that I can find about it here or on Google. I'm curious what happened, but most importantly — is the category name correct? Would this event be considered notable under en:WP policies? Nyttend (talk) 19:31, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the number of sources and photos, it's clearly notable. 65.96.130.162 (talk) 05:57, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was basically a march to protest the alleged influence of certain socially conservative religious organisations. (The organisations in question are mostly Christian, it seems — the Evangelical Free Church of China and The Society For Truth And Light are mentioned). There seem to be a whole host of social issues which link into this — legal recognition (in some circumstances) for same sex relationships, censorship of pornography on the internet, sex education, the legal status of prostitution, and so forth. I'm not clear on which, if any, particularly stood out — it seems to have been more a general declaration of values than a narrowly-targeted action. I'm not sure whether "anti-clerical" is the best term or not, although there was certainly an anti-religious aspect — the religious right in general are labeled "intolerant", "fanatical", "Taliban", and so forth. -- 203.97.105.173 (talk) 10:16, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and the group which seems to have arranged it has a webpage with a short English section. Might help. -- 203.97.105.173 (talk) 10:21, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-clerical is clearly wrong; I would more easily classify it as anti-bigotry, anti-prejudice, anti-discrimination or anti-fundamentalism. DOR (HK) (talk) 06:46, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Asfashf "hipped-gabled"[edit]

What is "hipped-gabled"?174.3.103.39 (talk) 22:53, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Hip roof , Gable and compare with Irimoya, also see Gablet roof which are similar.

It might also refer to the variable pitch of that style of roof - specifically the shallow pitched eaves, but I'm not sure.83.100.250.79 (talk) 23:11, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is "Asfashf".83.100.250.79 (talk) 23:01, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]