Language desk
< September 15	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 17 >

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.

September 16

The trouble with tribunes

Why are some newspapers named The Tribune? The Times, okay. The Post, sure. The Sun, maybe (illumination?). But why Tribune? Clarityfiend (talk) 07:16, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are you asking the meaning of Tribune? Something else the Romans did for us.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:28, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No. I'm not so lazy I can't look that up in a dictionary. No definition has any real connection to the news, so what's the link? Clarityfiend (talk) 08:12, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

News is only one purpose of a newspaper. A (peoples) tribune is a person (or office) that looks out for the interest of the people - just like a newspaper (should, or might like to claim). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 08:17, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clarityfiend -- In ancient Rome, the office of tribune was established as a concession from the ruling "patricians" to the "plebeians" (the majority of the population) in order to have someone in the government to look after the interests of the plebeians. The office of tribune was originally the only governing office open to plebeians. The connection with newspapers is a little metaphorical, but makes sense -- it's quite similar to "Guardian" as a newspaper name... AnonMoos (talk) 09:58, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In Massachusetts, a number of local newspapers have been called The [Town Name] Advocate. Same idea. Marco polo (talk) 13:18, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are such newspapers actually named after the office of tribune? I always assumed they were named after the (related) sense of the architectural structure of a tribune (architecture), i.e. in the sense of "speaker's podium" / "a place for free speech" etc. In many other languages there seem to be newspapers called after the structure, as in Spanish "Tribuna libre", Greek "To Vima, etc. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:44, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No refs seem likely for such a question, but I personally agree with Stephan Schulz' description above. Is not the architectural term itself a metaphor for the office? Similar to how 'the throne' or 'the crown' can be used metonymously to refer to a ruler. So I guess I'm saying your point is apt and interesting, but perhaps it highlights a distinction without a difference. SemanticMantis (talk) 14:00, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, the two senses of "tribune" in English are from two distinct (though related) Latin words, which just happen to have fallen together phonologically in English: Lat. tribunus for the person, and tribunal for the podium. In most other languages these two senses are clearly distinct words. My point was that cross-linguistically there seems to be a common (probably 19th-century) tradition of naming newspapers after the podium, but I can't think of any example of a newspaper unambiguously named after the office. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:07, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks for the clarification. I suppose it could also be that the office took its name from the podium! If you're right, then it's a bit odd that there aren't any English publications named lectern/podium/dais, etc, using any of the other near-synonyms for the speaking place. SemanticMantis (talk) 15:35, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The office did not take its name from the podium. See here. Marco polo (talk) 17:08, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For whatever it's worth, in French, the name for newspapers is "La tribune" (the podium) and not "Le tribun" (the Roman office). --Xuxl (talk) 17:12, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Side comment. In Australia there's a government body known as the Coal Industry Tribunal. Despite its name, it's headed by a single judge. For mysterious reasons the name "Coal Industry Unibunal" seems never to have been seriously considered. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:03, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Can't quite tell whether you are joking – you are aware that the "tri-" in either "tribunal" or "tribune" has nothing to do with "three" though, right? Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:09, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to remember reading that tribune comes from tribe which in turn comes from a tripartite division of some Italic people. —Tamfang (talk) 21:23, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. The word "tribe" is from the Latin tribus: "One of the three original tribes of Rome: Ramnes, Tities, Luceres". That lent itself to tribunal (L), which was borrowed by the Old French, and re-borrowed by the Middle-aged English. Somewhere along the line the connection to "three" was lost, but some of us have longer memories than that. "Tribune" and "tribute" also had the same origin. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:41, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ave answerers. I who am about to edit some more salute you. Ixnay on the yingday. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:52, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Using the ampersand rather than the word "and"

Although our article states that an ampersand "&" represents the conjunction word "and", it has historically been used to show a closer relationship between two people, such as two screenwriters sharing equal credit, citing the work of two co-authors, or in the legal name of a company. In the last few years, I have noticed the ampersand being used much more frequently in place of the word "and" in many situations where there is no close pairing of people, e.g. "There will be a dinner & concert next Tuesday". I believe this type of usage would be frowned upon by most Manuals of Style and is simply another example of increasingly informal writing or laziness, similar to using the at-sign "@" in place of the word "at" in situations where there is no quantity and cost relationship or invoice in sight. I would appreciate your thoughts. --Thomprod (talk) 16:00, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Such usages were historically always common wherever people were prone to using abbreviated forms, for example in private letter-writing throughout the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries. Just as Old and Middle English routinely used the Tironian et sign. So if the ampersand is coming back now in informal writing, that's pretty much a return to the way it used to be for centuries. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:07, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

According to the corpus of google ngram, & usage has been increasing since 1950, and by 2000 had reached the same incidence as 1800 [1]. (Unfortunately I can get it to search for solo ampersands, but it won't look for e.g. 'beans & cornbread') SemanticMantis (talk) 16:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Beans & cornbread" sits a little easier with me, because that combination is often referred to as a single dish. --Thomprod (talk) 17:48, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For use in Wikipedia articles, see WP:&.—Wavelength (talk) 16:58, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There have certainly been some instances where "&" is used to indicate a closer relationship than "and". In screen credits under the WGA screenwriting credit system, "&" indicates writers working together rather than successively. On this web site (search on the page for "Ampersand") "&" is used consistently for "and" when it is part of a name, allowing "and" to be used unambiguously in lists of names—for example, "the Hammersmith & City and East London Lines". And of course "&" is often used within an abbreviation. But I don't think it's possible to infer from this that "&" necessarily implies anything different than "and" does; it's just that some people choose to use it that way. --65.94.51.64 (talk) 23:31, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When I see one of those older large brick stores with the sign painted on the side, it must have both an ampersand and a "Corp./Co." or it just doesn't seem historic. "Wilbur & Sons Kettle Corp." or "Davis & Wright Typewriter Co.", something like that. Outside of branding and computer coding, though, I find the thing hideous. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:42, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Contemporary references to Gilbert and Sullivan seem to be fairly flexible with it. "Gilbert and Sullivan" and "Gilbert & Sullivan" were both used frequently. I guess you could call that "corporate branding" of a sort. One twist on the ampersand used to be used a lot in hand-written letters and notes, and may well still be: It's kind of a cursive version of an ampersand, looking like a plus sign with a loop in it, drawn without lifting the pen from the page. Easier than writing "and", especially if you're suffering the onset of writer's cramp. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:24, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I follow the Wikipedia style (mentioned above). I use "&" to mean "and" only in the places I would abbreviate words, e.g. "There will be a dinner & concert next Tue.". Bryan Henderson (giraffedata) (talk) 23:48, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pendo and pendeo

What is the relationship between these two verbs? It seems that pendo refers to weighing something, pendeo refers to the thing so weighed (or hung). They are identical in the infinitive and perfect, though not otherwise and pendeo seems to lack a particle. The words we get from them in English is not instructive. Additionally, etymonline says pensare is a frequentative of pendere, which surprises me. What's the nature of the verbs? ÷seresin 22:20, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You don't say what language; I'm assuming Latin. You can take a look at wikt:pendo#Latin and wikt:pendeo#Latin. I'm not sure they exactly clear things up, but see what you can make of it. --Trovatore (talk) 22:27, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, by the way, I don't think they're "identical in the infinitive". If I've understood correctly, the infinitive of pendo is pendere (third conjugation) whereas the infinitive of pendeo is pendēre (second conjugation). --Trovatore (talk) 22:30, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[See also wikt:pesi#Esperanto ("to weigh", transitive) and wikt:pezi#Esperanto ("to weigh", intransitive).

—Wavelength (talk) 22:52, 16 September 2014 (UTC)][reply]

Cassell's New Latin Dictionary (5th edition, 1968) defines them this way:

pendeo

(1) to hang suspended; transferred: (a) to hang upon, (b) to originate from, (c) to hang upon the lips of anyone, listen attentively
(2) to hang loose or free, hover, hang poised; transferred: (a) to be suspended, discontinued, (of persons) to hang about, (b) to be in suspense, be uncertain, undecided

pendo

(1) transitive: to cause to hang down, hence to weigh, especially to pay; transferred: (a) to weigh, consider, judge, (b) to value, esteem, (c) [with poenas, supplicia] to pay a penalty, suffer punishment
(2) intransitive: to weigh

So it appears that pendeo is always intransitive while pendo is mostly transitive. (Some of the definitions of pendeo, like "hang upon", look transitive, but the Latin examples shown use prepositions.)

--65.94.51.64 (talk) 23:44, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So pendeo is pendo's pendant! ---Sluzzelin talk 00:41, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]