Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2014 September 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.

September 29

Ottoman

My mum has a box in her bedroom - it's my old toy box from when I was a kid. She calls it an Ottoman. I've always wondered why she used that word for it. Did the Turkish Empire invent boxes? I don't think so. So, why is it called this? KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 08:10, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Presumably a variant of Ottoman (furniture)... -- AnonMoos (talk) 08:44, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

(ec)If the top is padded or has a cushion so that it can be used as a seat it is correct to call it an Ottoman. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:55, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. It's not padded, though. As far as I am concerned, it's just an ex-toy box. I have no idea why she is calling it that. Thanks for the link, however. KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 10:47, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, as the article says, "many ottomans are hollow and used for storage". So maybe she learned the word by reference to one of those and assumed it included similar but non-padded storage units. As for the word why it's called an ottoman, the OED Online says it derives from 18th-century French and does indeed relate to the Turkish empire; presumably either they did invent the item of furniture or else some 18th-century French people either thought they did (compare List of names for turkeys for a similar example) or pretended, for marketing reasons, that they did. --65.94.51.64 (talk) 14:05, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Trying to get to the bottom of this. France was at war with the Ottoman Empire in the 18th century. That explanation would be like calling a handbag a Nazi or Taliban in today's world. Why would they name a piece of household furniture after an enemy? KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 14:49, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Franco-Ottoman alliance... -- AnonMoos (talk) 15:32, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Also, a more general point bearing on this question. We are used to 19th to 21st-century "Total Warfare", where we demonize the opposition, and it seems almost inconceivable that we would adopt the fashions, customs or products of an "enemy nation" (although see Lili Marlene).

However, in the 18th Century and earlier, when the concept of the Nation state was still solidifying, warfare was sometimes perceived as a conflict between rulers and their armies (or those of commercial enterprises, see The British East India Company and its substantial army and navy) over questions of geopolitical and economic power, which did not necessarily concern the ordinary civilian populace (as long as they didn't get in the way). Thus it was sometimes possible for private citizens of one country to correspond with and even visit those of another country "at war" with their own for purposes of (what we would call) tourism or scientific co-operation (not to mention spying), or to conduct trade (perhaps via intermediaries). In such circumstances, certain cultural and other aspects of a notional "enemy" might nonetheless become admired and adopted. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 17:41, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

At the turn of the 19th century, there was a fashion for oriental styling; for example, the Royal Pavilion at Brighton is a bizarre mix of Chinese and Moghul décor, see Orientalism, which perhaps explains why they became popular. If it's any consolation, your mother is not alone: Internet retailer Amazon.com also thinks an ottoman is an unpadded chest - see White Ottoman Storage Chest, Toy Chest or Bedding Box Cambridge. Alansplodge (talk) 20:21, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

To me an ottoman is anything that can be used as a foot rest. An unpadded toy chest could be used that way, by placing a cushion on top of it. StuRat (talk) 22:40, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

According to Etymology Online, an ottoman was originally a type of low-backed couch.[1] It's not clear how that sense evolved into meaning a footstool or hassock. What the OP describes kind of sounds like a foot locker, or a small trunk. But footrests often serve that purpose too. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:19, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

It's funny that the ottoman article cites the running gag of Dick Van Dyke stumbling over it. Played in slow motion, it's a very controlled tumble. At regular speed, it looks like a bad spill. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:22, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

To me an ottoman has to be padded for use as a seat, and have storage. An Ottoman, on the other hand, should live in oriental splendour eating rahat lakoum. DuncanHill (talk) 02:27, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

• I'd have to agree with some of the above. In my memory an ottoman is a cross between a hassock and a chest. That is, it needs to be both padded and have storage. --Jayron32 10:49, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for all the replies. I think I understand it now. I will just make one further remark. A 'hassock' is a term in my dialect (at least in the old days of UK Empire) meaning a woman's lady parts - being padded and having storage. This made me laugh, sorry. KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 15:05, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Best cultural reference is A A Milne.

A bear, however hard he tries,

Grows tubby without exercise.

Our Teddy Bear is short and fat

Which is not to be wondered at;

He gets what exercise he can

By falling off the ottoman,

But generally seems to lack

The energy to clamber back.

I was pleased to know that an ottoman could specifically be a toy-box. Itsmejudith (talk) 19:50, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Relatives

I have just found out that one of my cousins was born from a different father from my biological uncle. He was adopted. The mother is not a blood relative (though dearly loved). So, he's not my cousin, because we are not even biologically related. What is he? KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 17:45, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

If your biological uncle has adopted him, first cousin seems like a perfectly acceptable term to describe his familial relation to you. You could add adopted or adoptive to the term if you wished to refer to the precise relationship. It seems to me that words expressing familial relationships like mother, father, aunt, uncle and cousin do not of themselves take account of whether the relationship is one of blood or otherwise. Some signifying adjective or prefix like adoptive, biological or step- needs to be added to express this aspect of the relationship. — SMUconlaw (talk) 18:08, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Or first cousin by adoption, if you prefer. --65.94.51.64 (talk) 18:34, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Whether blood relative or adopted, he's your cousin, for practical purposes. If there's a need to get technical, then you can fall back on the details. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:24, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Siblings question

Inspired by the above relatives question, I decided to ask another question about relatives. I have a younger half-brother. We have the same mother but different fathers. In turn, he also has a half-brother, who is elder to us both. They have the same father but different mothers. Even though biologically my little brother is only a half-brother and his elder half-brother is no blood relation to me, I like to think of my half-brother as a brother and his half-brother as a half-brother to me. And in family meetings, I don't want to offend anyone, so I call them both simply my brothers. Is there an English term for "half-sibling of a half-sibling with no shared parents", which yet signifies familiarity and closeness? JIP | Talk 18:23, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

I reckon your getting into cultural territory here. My answer is, it depends on where you are and what part of society you're in. I certainly know some situations where the older sibling would simply be called a brother, and others where more precision would be demanded. HiLo48 (talk) 18:29, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

(ec) He could be your step-brother? That would be your step-father's son by a woman who is not your mother (where your step-father is the man your mother married who is not your father).

But, in most circumstances, you could just say "brother" and gloss over it without any issues. Kahastok talk 18:33, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Step-brother sounds otherwise good, but I don't think of his father as a step-father. Although my parents broke up when I was still a small child, my father never left me, and I am far more affected to him than to my half-brother's (or should that be half-brothers'?) father. JIP | Talk 18:43, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

It all comes down to whether you're being formal or technical, or if you're expressing the practical, real relationship you have with someone. That is, he may technically be a non-blood-related half-brother of a half-brother, but if your relationship is as if you are brothers, then you are. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:22, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

A friend of mine once referred to his "stepfather's son", and I said, "You must not have grown up together with him", and he said "You're right, I didn't; how did you know?" and I said "If you had, you would have called him your stepbrother." —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:03, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

The most difficult thing here is when others are certain of what you should say. It's entirely up to you and the other person directly involved. Whatever you agree on should be fine. HiLo48 (talk) 23:19, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

My half-brother has a half-brother who is my brother and my half-brother has a half-brother who is my half-brother's half-brother. Hope that helps. Itsmejudith (talk) 19:46, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

My two sons are biologically half-brothers. The elder one has another half-brother, and that half-brother has another half-brother. What that last person's relationship to my kids (or to my impending grand-daughter via my younger son) is, is a very interesting question. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:33, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Do the half-half-half-brothers share a recent direct ancestor? Relations are easiest to work out when you figure out which ancestor (grandparent/great-grandparent/etc.) they share in common. If they don't have any recent ancestors in common; if there is no one in that position, they are unrelated. It gets confusing when you try to just work it out abstractly. Map out the genealogy of each kid; find the common link. No link = no relationship. --Jayron32 14:38, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

True. That's why it's important to make a distinction between the technical and the practical. If your parents adopt a child, you're not blood-related. But as a practical matter, it's still your sibling. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:37, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Well, that's the nature vs. nurture debate writ large. The question "is someone your brother because they share genetic material with you" or "is someone your brother because they were raised in the same household by the same parents" can only be answered with "yes" to both. --Jayron32 02:22, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:26, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Gee, you guys want to come and visit an Australian Aboriginal community some time. Even in English, anyone out to about what you would call second cousin tends to be described as a brother, and anyone else around your age in that community is your cousin. It takes some getting used to, but I took it as a compliment when I began to be called "cuz" by some Aboriginal folks I knew. (My mostly Scottish ancestry means I'm very pale!) HiLo48 (talk) 03:45, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, Jayron, I've been away. Basically, there are three men (Man 1, 2 and 3) and two women (Woman 1 and 2) involved in this chain of parentage of 4 sons. My sons are the children of Woman 2 (my ex-wife) with Man 2 (her 1st husband) and Man 3 (me). My son's other half-brother's half-brother is the child of Woman 1 (my ex-wife's ex-husband's ex-wife) and Woman Man 1 (my ex-wife's ex-husband's ex-wife's ex-husband). There has never been any contact with these distant persons and there is no relationship, but I dread to think of the labelling issues were that not the case. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 03:53, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

In the fourth sentence, your second "Woman 1" should be "Man 1" (well explained though, and I would have corrected it myself, but that's a big no-no). ---Sluzzelin talk 04:08, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, and corrected. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 10:43, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Can "base" mean "backing track" in Spanish?

When you try to Google-translate "backing track" into Spanish you only get "pista de acompañamiento".

Yet you find on YouTube many videos from/for Spanish speakers where the word "base" seems to mean "backing track", e.g. "Base de Batería - Metal" which seems to be a "drum backing track for metal" (and many many many other examples).

So can Spanish "base" mean "backing track"?

Thanks.

Contact Basemetal here 19:55, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

• Base means foundation, but it also means basis and comes across to me as "the foundation of metal drumming" or more colloquially in English, the basics, or basis of metal drumming. The comment says "A drum track so you can practice with the [you tube] channel's videos or use as you like". I have no expertise in music, so it is quite possible basis has some other meaning here, like back track. μηδείς (talk) 01:09, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

My musician informant says it is indeed used that way. Be aware that out of context by itself base does not mean track. "Backing track" would be pista de base.μηδείς (talk) 01:33, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Medeis and thank your musician informant for me. At first I thought I'd try the Spanish Reference Desk. But that page hasn't been changed since October 2013. It is dead. It's passed on. That Reference Desk is no more. It has ceased to be. It's expired and gone to meet its maker. It's a stiff. Bereft of life. It rests in peace. It is an ex-Reference Desk. Contact Basemetal here 09:48, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

No it's not. Unlike the English Wikipedia, the Spanish Wikipedia has just a front-end at the main reference desk pages and actual questions go to week-specific subpages. The current subpage should be es:Wikipedia:Consultas/semana 40 2014 but for some reason, that page hasn't been created yet, so the most recent page is es:Wikipedia:Consultas/semana 39 2014. You are supposed to click the link that says Para hacer una consulta nueva, cliquea aquí to ask a new question. JIP | Talk 15:00, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you JIP. I'm glad to hear that. I won't have to go to Bolton for a refund. (Or was it Ipswich?). Since that page is only a front-end it would make sense to not let just any one edit it. That would prevent garbage of the kind you see there accumulating. When I saw that garbage (someone should really clean that up, it gives the wrong impression) and that the history showed the page hadn't been modified in a year I concluded (wrongly) "I'd better get out of here as fast as I can". Now that, thanks to you, I know, I'll go ask the same question (even though, thanks to Medeis, I've already got my answer) just to see what I get and how things work there. Contact Basemetal here 17:23, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Now we shall finally know, for the first time in almost half a century, whether Norwegian Blues really pine for the fjords and VOOM. Be sure to tell us if yours does. JIP | Talk 17:32, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Refunds are had at Notlob. μηδείς (talk) 01:09, 1 October 2014 (UTC)