Language desk
< June 18	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 20 >

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.

June 19[edit]

Translation Into Japanese[edit]

I was trying to translate this proverbial statement into Japanese, but it has a more complex make-up than I'm used to working with (I'm barely learning the language), so I was wondering if someone can help. The statement is: "A cloud does not know why it moves in just such a direction and at such a speed, it feels an impulsion . . . this is the place to go now. But the sky knows the reasons and the patterns behind all clouds, and you will know, too, when you lift yourself high enough to see beyond horizons." Filosojia X Non(Philosophia X Known) 04:13, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Announcing Eurovision results[edit]

A prologue first. I was taught that English sentences like the following require singular verbs, and I have always encountered them with singular verbs in my experience of reading and listening to English:

3 years is a long time.
100 miles is a long distance.
There is 500 euros in my wallet.

The verbs are singular rather than plural, although the subjects are technically plural nouns modified by cardinal numerals other than one. I was taught that is so because the subjects grammatically represent contractions of descriptive expressions, such as those that follow:

A period of 3 years is a long time.
A distance of 100 miles is a long distance.
There is the sum of 500 euros in my wallet.

Now about what Eurovision has to do with that. Each year, after the contest is over, a spokesperson from each country to have performed a song announces in English (or French) the results of their country's vote. The announcers must read out in ascending order what three countries have received most telephone votes from their own country, and those three songs get 8, 10, and 12 points respectively. Usually only two of the spokespeople are native English speakers, because English is the dominating first language in two European countries - Ireland and the UK.

So here's a video of this year's announcing the Irish votes. The announcer says the following (starting at 1:20; my bolding):

Eight points goes to Germany. Ten points goes to Belgium. And finally twelve points for Denmark.

On hearing that, I assumed the singular verbs were correct in that situation, since the phrase "ten points" was a short way of saying "the amount of ten points", which would definitely require a singular verb. I also assumed that all the other announcers used plural verbs instead because of some (wrongful) associations they were making between English and their own languages. But here's what the British spokesperson said on announcing the votes (at 1:20; again my bolding):

Our eight points go to Romania. Ten points go to Turkey. And finally our twelve points go to Greece.

Sorry for the lengthy post, but here comes the question, at last. Are the plural verbs in the last quote wrong, and if not, would a sentence like "3 years are a long time." be correct as well? Thanks. --Магьосник (talk) 01:59, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's a very interesting question. I'm sure we'll be discussing it at length for the next 24 hours or so. Despite being a native speaker, I can't give you a good reason way the examples above hold, but I can tell you that "Ten points go/goes to Belgium" both sound okay to me, but "Our 8 points *goes to Romania" would sound jarring to me. Plus, "3 years *are a long time" doesn't sound good at all. I'll throw this into the mix: At first I thought it had something to do with the possessive determiner (our), that being the only difference between the two types of examples, but I can say "My 5 bucks is on Argentina to win the World Cup," and quite a few other people can say that too (granted: some of those hits are nonsense).--el Aprel (^facta-_facienda) 02:25, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or a less idiomatic example with a possessive: "Did you pay your share of the charges for the trip?" "Yes, my twenty dollars is on the table."--el Aprel (^facta-_facienda) 02:38, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't it depend on the context whether the motions or state is separate or a unit?

Like--both forms are correct, unless, for example, the 8 points are to be received only by certain persons in a group--which numbers for plural; or like--3 years have 3x365 days (for more than one unit), but, 3 years is a long time (for one unit).

Some grammarians classify these circumstances as 'intuitiveness in context'? -Mr.Bitpart (talk) 15:55, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is some variation in the English language for the type of verb used with noun phrases denoting collections (Differences_between_American_and_British_English#Formal_and_notional_agreement). For example, American English uses singular verbs with most groups ("England wins the World Cup" - "England" referring to a single sports team), whereas British English uses the plural ("England win the World Cup" - referring to the multiple players on the team). You could be seeing the same thing, with the Irish announcer using "the grouping of points is a single object" thinking, and the English announcer using "there are multiple points being given" thinking. -- 174.24.195.56 (talk) 21:19, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If voting countries had the option of splitting 30 points between as many or as few countries as they liked, one might say "2 points go to Belgium, 3 points go to Poland, 8 points go to Turkey, and 17 points go to Romania". But since the only option is to give discrete blocks of 8, 10 and 12 points to three countries, each block could be regarded as singular, hence goes. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:57, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

... (a supplementary question) Why do they split 30 points rather than 15? Exactly the same results would be obtained if they awarded 4, 5 and 6 points. Dbfirs 22:12, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They don't. They also award 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1 points to progressively less favoured countries, but those are no longer announced so formally. Algebraist 22:26, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks, that explains it. I was misled by the conditional used by Jack of Oz above. As you will have gathered, I don't watch the contest. Dbfirs 07:31, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It occurred to me to check up on how the UK and Ireland had announced their votes in the recent years. Here are the results.

UK
2009 (9:28): Our eight points go to Iceland. Our ten points go to Norway. And the United Kingdom gave twelve points to Turkey.
2008 (0:26): Eight points go to Turkey. Ten points go to Latvia. And twelve points go to Greece.
2007 (6:10): Our eight points go to Ukraine. Ten points to Greece. And our twelve points go to Turkey.
2006 (8:54): And Ireland, eight. Lithuania, ten. And our twelve points go to Finland.
Ireland
2009 (5:10): Eight points go to Norway. Ten points to our nearest neighbour, the United Kingdom. And finally we give twelve points to the beautiful Jóhanna and Iceland.
2008 (5:44): Eight points to the United Kingdom. Ten points to Poland. And finally twelve points to Latvia.
2007 (2:54): Eight points go to Ukraine. Ten points go to Latvia. And finally twelve points go to Lithuania.
2006 (5:06): We’re going to give eight points to the United Kingdom. Finland, ten points. And finally twelve points to Lithuania.

Looks like Derek Mooney was the only spokesperson in the last five years to regard the points as blocks of points. And he had the chance to do that in both 2009 and 2010, but did it in 2010 only. He was the Irish announcer in both years. --Магьосник (talk) 08:56, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note the original poster's example "There is 500 euros in my wallet" sounds wrong--it should be "There are 500 euros in my wallet", I believe. Why this sentence and not the others uses 'are' and not 'is' I don't know. Perhaps something to do with starting with "there". The sentence "500 euros is a lot to keep in my wallet." sounds fine. Then again, one would say "500 euros are in my wallet", not "500 euros is in my wallet." On third thought, maybe it's the lack of a contraction that sounds wrong to me. The sentence "There's 500 euros in my wallet." seems okay. How odd. Pfly (talk) 09:40, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

pronunciation of Yue ware[edit]

Anyone know? Only thing I've found is "you-eh", but "eh" doesn't normally occur at the ends of English words, and I think that's supposed to be a best approximation of the Mandarin, rather than the English pronunciation. — kwami (talk) 09:33, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

/jyɛ/ would be approximately right in IPA, I guess. In pinyin a 'u' following a 'y' is pronounced like German 'ü' (though in this case it's more of a glide than a full vowel as it precedes the 'ɛ'). Also, in English 'eh' occurs at the end of the word 'eh'. As for the tone, well, if you can give us the hanzi for it..... --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 10:34, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doh! I'm sorry. I meant the English pronunciation. (It's fourth tone, but we don't need that.) — kwami (talk) 19:02, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is this thread written in some special code known only to initiates? It seems to be about the "pronunciation of Yue ware", yet it starts off suggesting it's pronounced "you-eh", and that's where I parted company with any understanding of what it's really about. There are references to pinyin, hanzi and fourth tone, so I'm sort of guessing there's a Chinese connection somewhere, but that is not stated in so many words. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:47, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yue ware is probably relevant. Algebraist 21:52, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. Thanks, Algebraist. That would have been good to have up front. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 22:10, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would have thought the word Mandarin gave it away, Jack. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 00:36, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just goes to show that what seems so utterly obvious to one person that they don't think stopping to spell it out is necessary, may be somewhat obscure to someone else. It was fairly clear from the outset that this was about a Chinese word or words. But it was given in Roman type - "Yue ware" - rather than Chinese characters; asking for a pronunciation is unusual in such circumstances. Without the link, it was not apparent to those such as me who've never heard of Yue ware, that it referred to a type of ceramic and that there would probably be an article on it. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 04:07, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I picked up on it immediately from the word 'ware', which is very often used to denote ceramics and usually follows the place it is from. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 11:44, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, but the world is full of literalists like me. "Pronunciation of Yue ware" said to me that there were 2 romanised Chinese words whose pronunciations were being sought, and that impression was reinforced by "you-eh". I now know the only word Kwami was interested in was "Yue", but given my complete lack of context, that was far from obvious to me at the time. If the header had said "Pronunciation of Yue (in 'Yue ware')" or something, I might have got off on a better foot. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:35, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To go further on the “‘eh’ doesn't normally occur at the ends of English words”, the Canadian ‘eh’ is then an exception for such claim because the ‘eh’ is used as ‘tag question’ in Canadian colloquialism to roll back a declarative statement in to a semi-interrogation (where an answer is not always expected but an action or acceptance). Example:

You do smoke cigar, don’t you?

You smoke cigar, eh?

So a statement that is usually not of an imperative or interjection but of a declarative is simply tagged here for an interrogation by the Canadian specialty. But I do not know the exact expression of the phonetic realization; perhaps it must have a paralinguistic addition.

Does anyone know how to extract the tag question 'eh' or the interjections 'eh' (hey! hi!) in phonetic realization? -Mr.Bitpart (talk) 00:10, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well it's definitely not /ɛ/, more like /e/ or /ej/. Adam Bishop (talk) 23:58, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't even mention Canadian English and the 'eh' supposedly found there. Don't forget, 'eh' exists in practically every dialect of English, not just Canadian. Also, as you say "To go further on the “‘eh’ doesn't normally occur at the ends of English words”, the Canadian ‘eh’ is then an exception for such claim because the ‘eh’ is used as ‘tag question’ in Canadian colloquialism to roll back a declarative statement in to a semi-interrogation (where an answer is not always expected but an action or acceptance)." - well, fair enough, but the sentence was referring to the 'eh' not occurring at the end of words, meaning 'part of them', and had nothing to do with 'eh' coming at the end of a sentence. Anyway, in answer to your question, as Adam says, it's more like /e/ or /ej/ than /ɛ/. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 00:40, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do Canadians actually talk of "smoking cigar", rather than "smoking cigars"? Seems an odd sort of construction, akin to "giving head". -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 04:07, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No...I thought that was a typo or something. (Unless Mr.Bitpart is Quebecois, which would explain the /ɛ/, since the French version of "eh", "hein", does sound like that, but nasalized). Adam Bishop (talk) 04:43, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, what I meant was there's this rather uncommon word in English, "Yue", found for example in Yue ware (it's most established usage). It's originally a Mandarin word, but presumably in the phrase "Yue ware" you wouldn't give it a Mandarin pronunciation. So how is that phrase pronounced? There's no pronunciation for it in the OED. The only description I've found of "Yue" is as "you-eh", but that was for Yue as a personal name or dynasty or something, not "Yue ware", and I think it was also an attempt at conveying the Mandarin pronunciation, not the English. Given that we already have the Chinese in Yue ware, what should we add for English? "You-eh" would presumably be /ˈjuː.ɛ/, but AFAIK there are no regular words in English with /ɛ/ at the end (only exceptions are interjections like "eh" or "meh"). So I might expect it to be assimilated as "you-ay" or "you-ee" or something, but I haven't found that explicitly. Presumably someone who works with Chinese ceramics would know. — kwami (talk) 05:45, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you spell it correctly, you will find it in the OED, along with a pronunciation. See Yüeh (1). 124.214.131.55 (talk) 13:49, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The OED2 didn't have it, and I don't have access to OED3. Can you quote? — kwami (talk) 10:45, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure:

Yüeh (ˈjyə) [f. the name Yüeh Chou of a town (now called Shaoxing) in Zhejiang Province, China.]

A type of stoneware distinguished by a celadon glaze, first produced in the Six Dynasties period and perfected during the Tang dynasty. Freq. attrib., esp. as Yüeh ware.

Citations skipped, but the first given is 1887. 124.214.131.55 (talk) 14:17, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So it's giving an approximation of the Chinese pronunciation, not an anglicized pronunciation, which is what I think Kwami is after. My intuition says the anglicized pronunciation is either [ju.ˈeɪ] or the spelling pronunciation [juː], but I've never heard the word pronounced. Probably most English speakers who go around talking about Yue ware are familiar with Chinese to some extent and thus aim at a more or less authentic Chinese pronunciation rather than an anglicized one, though. +An gr 14:34, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Got a copy of Webster's 3rd, and there they do have [ju.ˈeɪ]. Called the Met; the people I got ahold of in the Asian art dept. didn't know. Brooklyn, the person I spoke to asked s.o. else and reported that they had told him [ˈjuː.ɛ], which isn't quite anglicized. — kwami (talk) 20:34, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does saying, "It still begs the question" another name for circular reasoning?[edit]

I made a video about something, but in it I said "It still begs the question". Then someone told me 'Begging the question is another name for circular reasoning, like, for example saying "God exists because the Bible says so. The Bible is true because it is the word of God".' He said I should have said, "But it still leads to the question" instead. Is this true? ScienceApe (talk) 13:29, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Begging the question. 92.15.4.168 (talk) 14:18, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To avoid this issue, it would be better to say "raises the question". --Anonymous, 02:30 UTC, June 20/10.

Yes, I would always do so, but the misunderstanding is so incredibly widespread that I have stopped correcting the error! Dbfirs 07:25, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is it really an error, that a lay phrase happens to coincide with a technical phrase? Especially when the lay phrase is perfectly clear, and the technical phrase is a really weird idiom? For example, see this Language Log post. 86.164.66.4 (talk) 20:35, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I haven’t read much about Aristotelian’s concepts of ‘begging the question’ and ‘circular reasoning’. As per my notes, the differences relay on the question of premises upon which a proposition is drown.

So does it mean that it is of ‘begging the question’ if the premises postulate an axiom that is more or less of deductive fallacies, and it is of ‘circular reasoning’ if the premises postulate an axiom upon mere circular premises (rather than more or less of deductive fallacies)? -Mr.Bitpart (talk) 19:03, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Garden or yard[edit]

Does "yard" mean the same as garden in American-english, or is there a difference in meaning? Thanks 92.15.4.168 (talk) 13:51, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which definition do you mean? If you mean "the open area at the front and/or back of a house", then "yard" is the common American English term. If you mean "a place where plants are grown", an American would definitely call that a "garden". Xenon54 (talk) 13:59, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would an open area with just a grass lawn be a "yard"? 92.15.4.168 (talk) 14:16, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. When an American says 'garden,' she is usually thinking specifically of an area where plants, like flowers or vegetables, are cultivated. When thinking of an open, grassy space near the house, then 'yard' is the word we'd use. The sentence, "We have a large vegetable garden in our back yard, and a small flower garden in our front yard" makes perfect sense to an American. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 14:18, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I composed the following expression from a series of cognate words.

curtilage-girded curtained garth courtyard orchard garden horticulture

Here are links to their Wiktionary entries.

wikt:curtilage wikt:girded wikt:curtained wikt:garth wikt:courtyard wikt:orchard wikt:garden wikt:horticulture.

Here are links to their nearest entries in Online Etymology Dictionary.

curtilage, gird, curtain, garth, courtyard, orchard, garden, horticulture

—Wavelength (talk) 15:19, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In UK English a yard tends to have no grass or other plants in it, and to require very little maintenance (and possibly to be used as a dumping ground). It has a slightly negative connotation. A garden usually has plants in it, but that could the space is completely turfed over. Gardens are regarded as places to be, whereas yards are regarded as places to put things. --TammyMoet (talk) 15:34, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was confused by many English books in my youth, because when I read the word 'garden,' I pictured a carefully manicured, tended, cultivated place, which didn't always create an accurate picture in my head. In the US, yards are places to be, and gardens are places to look at. :) I tried to think of what I would call an open space with no grass, possibly to be used as a dumping ground- "lot" is what came to my mind. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:48, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still bemused by these shopping malls and down-market housing estates called "Bellevue Gardens", "Waverley Gardens", etc, where one will look in vain for a single blade of grass, let alone anything resembling a "garden". -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:40, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The distinction between a garden and a yard is not necessarily absolute. See www.ehow.com/about_5100601_alternatives-grass-lawns.html (Alternatives to Grass Lawns | eHow.com; blacklisted). Another related page is Turn Your Lawn From Grass You Mow To Food You Grow.—Wavelength (talk) 16:58, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some expressions derived from yard are barnyard, churchyard, classification yard, fiddle yard, livery yard, lumber yard, mating yard, rail yard, shipyard, tiltyard, wrecking yard, and yarding.—Wavelength (talk) 17:19, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[I am correcting my spelling of "expressions".—Wavelength (talk) 05:50, 20 June 2010 (UTC)][reply]

In UK English, "yard" now often implies a builder's yard or scrapyard - though a generation or two ago it was commonplace for houses to have a "yard", at least partly paved or concreted, rather than a "garden". A paved area in a garden is now usually called a patio. Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:33, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One gardening show is Gardening by the Yard.—Wavelength (talk) 17:55, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK a "yard" would have a hard surface, usually of concrete or tarmac. 92.15.4.168 (talk) 20:42, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Down Pat[edit]

Riddle me this Language reference deskers. Does anyone know of the origin of the idiom 'down pat' as in 'I've got this skill pretty much down pat.'--Jabberwalkee (talk) 18:12, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My short etymological dictionary doesn't have it, but I found this thread on a forum which cites The Dictionary of Etymology: The Origins of American English Words, Robert K. Barnhart (HarperCollins, 1995). "1578, perhaps a special use of pat (a light tap), in the sense of hitting the mark; and thus 'opportunely,' ready for any occasion." Only a perhaps though. Ka renjc 20:48, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Someone might want to add this to the Wiktionary article. I'm not familiar with how one is supposed to format things on Wiktionary, so... Vimescarrot (talk) 20:55, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that they don't have the alternative form "off pat" either. I've added this to Wiktionary. I'm not convinced by the etymology, but I can't find a better explanation. Dbfirs 21:37, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's also used in "a pat phrase". Which is a pat phrase. 213.122.18.200 (talk) 12:21, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Down pat" derives from the earlier use of "pat" to mean "In a manner that exactly fits the purpose or occasion; appositely, opportunely, readily, promptly." As to that use's etymology, OED says: "Apparently < either PAT n.1 or PAT v.1: perhaps immediately from the verb stem, as in the expressions to fall crash, come pop, go bang, etc. A frequent early use was to hit pat, as if to hit with a pat, i.e. with a flat blow; hence with fall, lie, come, etc." John M Baker (talk) 18:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]