Language desk
< June 27	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 29 >

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 28

Homework help! Please help me write without close paraphrasing.

Please write these sentences without close paraphrasing:

Sorbothane was originally marketed by having a scientist drop a raw egg on to a sheet of sorbothane. The egg, of cource, would not break because the Sorbothane absorbed the shock of the impact.

These two beautiful sentences are from here. it is located at page. no. 331 under the heading sorbothane. What I wish for is to maintain the beauty of the sentence. I am amazed at the poetic sense in you. If I were to do that, it may lose its beauty. This is to be included in the article Sorbothane. You may place it at the right section of it.Vanischenu m^Talk 00:23, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We don't do homework, but, since you only want help with a couple sentences, I will do that much. Will this work ?

"An advertisement featured an egg allowed to fall onto a ~~suspended~~ film of Sorbothane, which cushioned the force of the fall, leaving the egg intact."

StuRat (talk) 01:10, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt if it was a suspended film. See this video. Bus stop (talk) 01:20, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, fixed. StuRat (talk) 01:26, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I like it. Can we include the scientist in it, which may give some kind of specialty to it. ~~I just want it to be nominated for WP Did you know. So putting all the things of credit into it may help it become (at least) nominated.~~ Sorry that I didn't mention about the scientist.Vanischenu m^Talk 01:33, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(I forgot for a moment that it is a product of a company and hence the striking. Appearing on our front page will be an advertising).Vanischenu m^Talk 01:45, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We can add the scientist back in, but, of course, this makes it closer to the original:

"An advertisement featured a scientist allowing an egg to fall onto a film of Sorbothane, which cushioned the force of the fall, thus leaving the egg intact."

Also note that if the thickness is too much to be described as a "film", you could call it a "layer", instead. You could also describe the egg as "unccoked", if being raw is important to the description. StuRat (talk) 02:31, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This video shows an egg demonstration with Sorbothane at about 2 minutes into the video. This video provides a similar demonstration. Bus stop (talk) 01:58, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for the kind and ready help from both of you. I put your sentence there. Also, I have given a link to one of the video at the external links section.Vanischenu m^Talk 02:42, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I will mark this Q resolved. I'm curious, though, what homework assignment was this, which involved editing a Wikipedia article ? StuRat (talk) 02:53, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if it had a negative effect. I wrote so just to mention that it takes some contributions from you (not answers from you). Suppose that it was a real homework, then you will have to help by contributing from your side. It was intended for not wasting the time of one who is more interested in providing guidelines and answer questions about grammar. I mean... it was not actually a question, so why waste others' time. The title reveals the nature of the thread. I would not have put it if this was a question about checking whether it is a close paraphrasing. So you may call it a close homeworking for a close paraphrasing! Vanischenu m^Talk 17:21, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? 86.160.223.189 (talk) 10:35, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

You know, I don't think that rewording two sentence avoids close paraphrase. To avoid close paraphrase you ought to assimilate information and opinion from multiple sources and rewrite original, fresh paragraphs. "Sorbothane was aggressively(?) marketed in the 19XXs, using print, yyyy and video advertising. This advertising stressed the shock absorbing qualities of sorbothane, using shock sensitive every day objects such as raw eggs." etc... There may be an irresistibly beautiful poetic in their marketing material, but we have to ask, "Is this single advertisement weighty enough to focus two sentence on?" Fifelfoo (talk) 03:08, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think this source is incorrect. I think an egg would break if dropped on Sorbothane. I haven't found an example of an egg dropped on Sorbothane. From what I can see, one of Sorbothane's properties is resistance to initial impact. That may result in breakage of an egg dropped on it. Bus stop (talk) 03:10, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have got another magazine (popular science) on it (link), which, says the same and also claims that sorbothane can absorb 95% of the impact like that book. The latter has been claimed by many authors. But PubMed says that it is incorrect. It says 10% of impact or more will be absorbed. (link). Look at the hammering of egg put in between two sorbothane materials! I think that they are quite exaggerated.Vanischenu m^Talk 17:21, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Materials are tested in controlled ways—not by the use of eggs and hammers yielded by humans. The results of tests can be translated into subjective language used by the layman. We should not be venturing into discussing advertising routines that can easily be misinterpreted. I think the language concerning eggs and Sorbothane should be removed from the article. It is too easily misunderstood. In fact we don't even know what it means. It is subjective. It is merely used for advertising purposes to capture the attention of would-be buyers. I think the mention of eggs in advertising should be removed from the Sorbothane article. There is no source other than this "Running Encyclopedia" making any reference to an egg being dropped onto a "sheet of Sorbothane". The "Running Encyclopedia" may be mistaken and furthermore it is unclear, in an objective way, what this would mean. I don't think its addition helps the article. Bus stop (talk) 18:51, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removed it. Thank you StuRat, and my apologies for getting overexcited on that so called beautiful sentences. You have been very kind to help me. Thank you Bus stop and Fifelfoo for your advices. This discussion has helped me learn many things. Thank you all.Vanischenu m^Talk 21:11, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While I agree that this test is useless in demonstrating the material properties, it could be included in a section on how the product was marketed. StuRat (talk) 06:15, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Furigana in newspapers (Japanese)

I just came across this again, at furigana:

In Japan, by law, newspapers using kanji outside the jōyō kanji list must annotate them with furigana.[1]

Although this is sourced in the article, I have read elsewhere that this is just a myth, and there no such legal requirement. Does anybody know definitely what the situation is?

Even if the statement has an element of truth, I still feel it can't be exactly correct, since many well-known personal names and place names contain non-jōyō kanji, and I find it hard to believe that these have to have furigana attached. 86.160.217.54 (talk) 01:00, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The original jōyō list was intended to be a guide (目安), not a strict rule. There are tons of very common characters (the ever-present and delicious 丼) not on the list; these would never have furigana in a publication intended for adults. The original goal was to restrict character usage in government publications so that less-literate people could fill out forms, etc. It was intended (arguably) to be an upper bound of literacy ("If you know these, you can read any general-purpose material") but in practice has become a lower bound, or threshold ("Until you know these, you can't read general-purpose material"). There is an element of truth here in that the Japanese government does monitor and catalog usage in a way that most governments don't, but the various lists they issue are different from a legal requirement or law and are not binding. I highly recommend J. M. Unger's Literacy and Script Reform in Occupation Japan or the lighter Ideogram (same author). Matttoothman (talk) 15:40, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Danish

What does Tronkræver mean?--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 03:43, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to be made up of two words "tron", meaning "throne" and "kræver", meaning "requires".--William Thweatt ^Talk^Contribs 03:54, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, apparently it literally means thronecraver. http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=crave μηδείς (talk) 04:07, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How would you spell Svend Tronkræver in Old Norse? --Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 04:19, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure about the epithet (maybe Tronkrafjar?) but Svend in Old Norse is "Sveinn". Adam Bishop (talk) 06:39, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, maybe "Sveinn Stóllkrafjar"? (I'm not very good with Old Norse, unfortunately.) Adam Bishop (talk) 09:28, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't pretender be a better translation? There are subtle differences between Norwegian and Danish, but as a Norwegian-speaker that is my immediate association when I read Tronkræver (not that such a word exists in Norwegian as far as I know). I'd translate "kræve" as "demand" here, as in "I demand the throne!" Jørgen (talk) 09:51, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I keep thinking of usurper, or at least would-be usurper. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 08:46, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Junk Dealer

Translating Grisham's Calico Joe, I've found the sentence as follows:

Hiller [a baseball pitcher] was a junk dealer whose fastball rarely topped eighty.

What does 'a junk dealer' mean in this context?

Please help.

--Analphil (talk) 05:10, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Metaphor: someone who sells useless goods — in this case, a pitcher whose pitching does not benefit the team. —Tamfang (talk) 06:00, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly, Tamfang. A baseball pitcher is said to throw junk when he makes use of a variety of off-speed, breaking pitches rather than fastballs (the "hard stuff")—see Glossary of baseball (J)#junk. Such pitchers aren't necessarily bad or ineffective; they just aren't as sexy as the impressive fireballers. What we have here is a transferred use of "junk dealer" (seller of cast-off goods) to refer to such a pitcher, a bit of wit that's by now lost most of its humor and become a cliche. Deor (talk) 09:14, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add: Saying that a pitcher "deals" a ball to a batter is almost certainly a metaphor from card playing and not from commerce, so "junk dealer" is something of a double metaphor. Deor (talk) 14:46, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A number of card-playing terms found their way into baseball's lexicon. Two of the most obvious in the early days were the terms "ace" (run scored) and "hand" (one's turn at bat). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:52, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with Tamfang. A junk dealer convinces people to buy trash--i.e., swing at bad pitches. μηδείς (talk) 21:55, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You and Deor have it right. The term "junkball pitcher" is sometimes used also. He's throwing "junk" to the batter instead of conventional blazing speed and wicked breaking stuff. Jamie Moyer comes to mind. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:52, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic translation "to witness"

Afternoon language desk. I'm always wary about asking for translations on here but Wikitionary hasn't helped me in this case. I've used Google to translate the verb "to witness (something)" into Arabic, though for whatever reason, I can't see the transliteration, which is what I really need. Can someone please translate "to witness" into Arabic BUT, to help me out more, can you give me the spelling in Latin text?

Many thanks

doktorb _words^deeds 11:23, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are a few possibilities, but the usual word is "شهد", "shahida". It has the sense of observing or seeing something in general, or testifying something (as in the shahada). Based on the same root, the nouns "shaahid" and "shaheed" mean "witness" and "martyr". (I should also mention that there is no "infinitive" exactly in Arabic, and "shahida" literally means "he saw".) Adam Bishop (talk) 11:48, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the Wiktionary entry for it, by the way, with a transliteration and further translations. Adam Bishop (talk) 12:05, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Very useful, Adam, thank you very much doktorb _words^deeds 12:19, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Bishop -- the verbal noun or masdar is a much closer equivalent to an infinitive of western languages than is the third person singular masculine perfect finite verb. The verbal noun of Stem I of consonantal root ش ه د is شهود šuhūd... AnonMoos (talk) 12:56, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Right, but we wouldn't say "shuhud" is the "base" form of the word. If we want the form from which we can make all the other forms, we start with "shahida". (Well, that's how I learned it, anyway.) Adam Bishop (talk) 21:31, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The base form is the abstract consonantal root š-h-d, while "šahida" (third person singular masculine perfect of Stem I) is the dictionary citation form. The masdar šuhūd is neither the base form nor the dictionary citation form, but probably corresponds most closely in meaning with the English words "to witness" as an infinitive... AnonMoos (talk) 02:31, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]