The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.
I have a religious key chain, and on one side of it is a message of what I deduced to be in the Coptic alphabet.
In Coptic, the message look like this:
——————————
Since my computer doesn't show Coptic letters, I took the Greek equivalent letters (found on the Coptic alphabet article) and ran a Google search on it. The exact phrase "φύλαξον με υπό την σκέπη σου" comes up with several hits, though what does this phrase mean? (A Google translate doesn't come up with anything intelligible).
On the other side on the keychain is an icon of Mary holding a baby Jesus. Around her is what looks like "MP' ϴƔ". What does this too mean?
Out of curiosity, how religious is your keychain? I had one that used to wake me up for early Mass -- too enthusiasic! So I traded it in for one that's content with a late-morning Sunday service. BrainyBabe (talk) 07:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The alphabet may be Coptic, but the language is definitely Greek. Φύλαξόν με ὑπὸ τὴν σκέπην σου means something like "Guard me under your protection". It's a line from a prayer (possibly more than one prayer) in the Orthodox liturgy, cf. [1]. As for "MP' ϴƔ", my best guess is that it's an abbreviation for Μήτηρ Θεοῦ, "Mother of God". —Angr07:43, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please explain how the American Heritage Dictionary is "somewhat spammy". --Anonymous, 11:22 UTC, March 13, 2009.
Did you click the link? Unless you have something like Adblock running, it's actually difficult to find the real content on that page because of all the flashing ads. —Angr11:44, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see. I was using a text-only browser. Thanks. --Anonymous, 19:19 UTC, March 13, 2009.
A word used in many languages, as evinced by this bilingual road sign that reads Does not apply to buses and taxis in Finnish and ... buses and dachshunds in Swedish. :) (a problem caused by the vowel ending in 'taxi' giving it the irregular plural 'taxin' in Swedish, something this translator apparently missed) --Pykk (talk) 20:47, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(Off topic) Now that is one weird plural. The Swedish wikipedia entry avoids the issue by writing "taxibilar" (taxi cars), and "taxiar" gets more google hits than "taxin" when used as the plural. "Taxin" of course gets a lot of hits because it is the singular determinate definite form, "the taxi". This blog entry shows that it is a source of confusion to Swedes, and some of the respondents agree with Pykk. --NorwegianBluetalk00:25, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A couple of problems with that. Cab has been around a long time. For example, they had Hansom cabs in England long before there were any meters in taxis. It was derived from the French cabriolet, which was ultimately derived from the Latin word for goat (as were caper, capricious, and caprice). Cabulator is a much later arrival on the scene, and was an add-on to cab. Similarly, taxi has been around a long time, and taximeter was a relatively recent by-product. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That link just gives me "We're sorry, this video is no longer available". But I've heard that deaf people can feel and enjoy the vibrations of music even though they can't hear the music directly. —Angr12:43, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are a lot of reasons why someone deaf or hard of hearing would go to a concert. They may enjoy feeling the vibrations of the music, as Angr points out. They may have some hearing, but not enough in the right ranges to understand the lyrics. They may be going out with their hearing friends. They may think the bass player is cute. So, pretty much all the same reasons most people go to concerts. While they may experience it differently than you or I would, there is still plenty in the experience for them to enjoy. - EronTalk14:52, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is ASL being signed, although it's being done very expressively in order to communicate the beat, musical expression, etc. Some of what she is signing isn't even "words" in the sense that one might understand, but is showing that certain types of noises are being made. It's easy to see, anyway, how a deaf person could get a lot out of a concert, especially one that's signed for them in this manner. Between watching the band (particularly, say, the drummers), and the lights, and people around you, and feeling the vibrations, you can pick up an awful lot. Not to mention that a good part of the attraction of concerts is the atmosphere. It certainly isn't only the hearing who can experience that. Maedin\talk18:14, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and don't forget that not all deaf people have always been deaf, meaning that the sounds of the instruments, and maybe even the singer, would already be familiar to them. This could be their favourite Pearl Jam song that they got to know before they lost their hearing. The signing allows them to recognise it as that favourite song, and as she is also providing the beat, the deaf person can pretty much jam along to whatever of the song they happen to remember. Just another idea. Maedin\talk18:27, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And also don't forget that "deaf" does not usually mean they can hear nothing at all. That's "stone deaf" or "totally deaf", but the great majority of deaf people, including many "profoundly deaf" people, can still hear something, which can be amplified with hearing aids. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:03, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi my partner loves Bali so what iam trying to do is translate Happy Birthday Colleen, into Balinese and have each letter coinside with it's balinese script, [[2]] , so any help will be greatly apprieciated R.121.216.203.216 (talk) 13:16, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You want to 1) translate the English phrase into the Balinese language, or 2) transliterate it into the Balinese script? If the latter, the Balinese script article is not enough, since the vowel diacritics are not given, but you can get them at the Omniglot page. Let's count: /ha-pi ba-tde ko-lī-n/. So you need seven consonants (one is a "conjunct" for td) plus four vowel diacritics (for i, e, o and ī). Knowing all these, you should now be ready to letter your birthday card. Happy birthday.--K.C. Tang (talk) 15:03, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I just transliterated it according to the vowel and consonant inventories of Balinese provided by the Omniglot page. Have I plundered again? Please correct me if I did, dear colleagues.--K.C. Tang (talk) 02:32, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Although the exact transliteration for English <th> sounds varies between languages, as far as I know in Malay languages the /t/ transliteration is standard, and I can't find any examples of /s/ (as in Japanese and others) or /f/, so I'd say you're probably correct with ba.t.de. 219.102.220.90 (talk) 04:01, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm trying to translate an article for a friend who is a freudian psychoanalyst. He uses the term "vida pulsional." The best translation I could come up with was something along the lines of "Life drive," "Eros," or "Libido," but he insists that he did not intend to mean the eros itself, but more the activity of the life drive. If context is required I'll drop it out there. Any ideas? --Shaggorama (talk) 16:58, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
InBeyond the Pleasure Principle SF hypothesizes about the death instinct / death drive / Thanatos which seems to translate as "pulsão de morte". Conversely,『pulsão de vida』(¿ and vida pulsional ?) would be the life drive (inclusive libido / Eros, but going beyond that). SF generally calls it "Lebenstrieb" in his treatise (the German version of which can be downloaded from Gutenberg). PS: I have no idea about the Portuguese language, so I may be wrong. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 17:13, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How is the word "mobile," like the hanging sculpture, pronounced?
I had always pronounced it "mo-BILE," but I'm wondering if that's completely wrong. My girlfriend pronounces it "mo-BEEL," and the dictionary doesn't provide a different pronunciation between that and the adjective, so giving me『mō'bəl,』(mo-bul) (which is how I would normally pronounce the adjective). That seems wrong to me, only because I don't think I've heard people refer to the hanging sculpture that way.
Both Merriam-Webster and Dictionary.com agree on MOE-beel (/ˈmoʊˌbil/). Dictionary.com also gives the pronunciation /ˈmoʊbəl/ (MOE-bul, which you mentioned), including for the art term, it would seem, and the "especially British" pronunciation /ˈmoʊˌbaɪl/ (MOE-bile, which I think is what you say, if you put the primary stress on the first syllable). So you're all right, which is often the case with English pronunciation.--elAprel (facta-facienda) 19:20, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm assuming that Sam meant "MO-bile" and "MO-beel" and was using block capitals to indicate contrast rather than accent. Personally I've always said "MO-bile" for both noun and adjective. My Random House Unabridged (1979), however, does not even list this -- it says it's MO-ble (MO-bul if you like) or, especially for the noun, MO-beel. The online American Heritage shows all three pronunciations without distinction. --Anonymous, 19:27 UTC, March 13, 2009.
Thanks (and sorry about the capitalization confusion — yes, the first syllable should be stressed). I think that you're right that mo-bile is chiefly British English — most of my words are a confusing mangled mess of both... I'm not even sure if I say "mo-bile phone" or "mo-ble" phone — actually I think I usually avoid that by saying "cellphone" here in the States... Thanks again! — Sam 63.138.152.238 (talk) 19:44, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The meaning is more specific: it means to criticize sharply. Is that what you want? --Anonymous, 20:02 UTC, March 14, 2009.
If something is troubling you in a serious, persistent way (ie, causing you guilt or worry), you might say "It's eating at me." --Fullobeans (talk) 22:09, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, they do say that. But when someone appears to be troubled, others ask "Is something eating you?", or "What's eating you?" - not "eating at you". An odd little distinctiion. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:39, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How does one say "we love Gwenno" in Welsh? (Gwenno being a young lady), diminutive/informal not formal if that's necessary please, and love not sexual or romantic love like between couples but friendly love between friends, if that matters please). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.189.101 (talk) 20:08, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How should I pronounce his surname? At first glance it looks orthographically German, in which case I imagine it would be /"vi:zl=/, but it seems that I more often hear something like /wI"zEl/ or /vI"zEl/. --Lazar Taxon (talk) 04:27, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've most often heard it pronounced like the animal IPA: [ˈviːzl̩] http://de.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiesel. The『ɛ』in our article is very short and usually gets swallowed in most regional accents. Pronunciation does depend a lot on location in Germany. If her family hails from Bavaria they are likely pronounce both the animal and the name differently. (w instead of v would indicate that her family is using an anglisized pronunciation) 76.97.245.5 (talk) 12:49, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Our article on Sighet states that some 80% of the township were Hungarian speakers (census 1910), 9% Rumanian and 6% German. Some 40% of the population were Jewish, belonging to either the Hungarian or German language group. The article on Elie (Elisha / Elizer) Wiesel mentions his father having been of Hungarian descent. As EW used Yiddish, both as a journalist and a writer, it may be assumed that this was the lingua franca in his shtetl. It seems unlikely that the last vowel is anything more than a schwa. Ooops: This [3] has a clearly pronounced (and stressed) -el at the end in the top example and a schwa at the bottom. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 15:17, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The numbers two and eleven as numerals in Chinese script
Can a user please let me know how to write the numbers two and eleven as numerals in Chinese script. In other words the equivalent of we would write as 2 and 11. Thank you. Simonschaim (talk) 14:13, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you mean the year 1850, you write 1850 or 一八五零; if you want to write a check to pay someone $1,850, you use the "financial" system. Hope it helps.--K.C. Tang (talk) 15:13, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You mean the year? Yes, some publishers prefer 〇to零, a matter of house style. 千八百五十or千八百五 are used in Classical Chinese, not in contemporary Chinese.--K.C. Tang (talk) 16:36, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
First of all thank you. My question is how in the year 1850 would one have written the numerals 2 and 11 in Chinese script? Thank you. Simonschaim (talk) 16:54, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, sorry for my poor understanding. Yes, the "financial" and "normal" systems were both in use in 1850, as they are today. You would've seen them written as 二 and 十一 respectively in non-financial contexts.--K.C. Tang (talk) 17:10, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can't quite think of the whimsical word for a happy coincidence, especially in science, such as the (possibly fictional) discovery of penicillin. A slice of moldy bread goes to the first person to answer correctly. :-) StuRat (talk) 15:06, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, serendipity, according to Merriam Websters is: "the faculty or phenomenon of finding valuable or agreeable things not sought for" so it's not exactly a happy coincidence.
Reverse dictionary ?
Is there any online site where I can type in a definition and the computer will spit out the matching word ? For example, if I typed in "of or pertaining to horses", it would give me "equine". StuRat (talk) 16:47, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A good thesaurus can actually perform this function (myConcise Roget's gives "serendipity" under the entry "discovery", and "equine" under "horse"). The problem is there's no free on-line comprehensive thesaurus available ...--K.C. Tang (talk) 17:04, 15 March 2009 (UTC)17:03, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For the DRAE, I sometimes use this method: I google words of the definition with the added search string site:rae.es (site hosting the dictionary). It usually works. Pallida Mors21:50, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Word choice
Is there any difference between the word inter and the word bury? Do they essentially mean the very same thing … or is there any shade of difference in selecting one word over the other? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:23, 15 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]
One source defines interasTo place in a grave or tomb; bury whereas buryisto put in the ground and cover with earth so it's covering up part that perhaps makes the slight difference. But many places list them as synonyms. - Jarry1250(t, c)18:43, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I see one as a "subset" of the other, which makes them synonyms only in one direction. (Is that possible?) Bury is more generic than inter. Dogs bury bones, not inter them. Does that help? --DaHorsesMouth (talk) 19:29, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am referring to the specific act of what happens to a dead human corpse after the funeral (... as opposed to buried treasure or dog buries bone scenarios). Are the words "inter" and "bury" completely interchangeable? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 20:26, 15 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]
No, inter is used mostly for human beings, while bury can be used for all sorts of items, as DaHorsesMouth pointed out. Also, it's a fancier, more respectful word than bury. I'm sure morticians use it a lot when they present you with their bills. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:33, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's fancier, and could even border on euphemistic. People in the street refer to "burials", not "interments", and they're not being disrespectful. It's more a question of register. Passengers "get off" a bus, but signs advise them to be cautious when "alighting". You'll see "purchase" used instead of the more normal "buy". That sort of thing. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:08, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Inter" also seems to be used historically fairly often. One can avoid some unnecessary confusion that way. "His grandfather, a miner, was buried in New South Wales," for instance, could suggest either a pleasant funeral plot or a local tragedy. --Fullobeans (talk) 08:03, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not at all at all, Mr/Ms O'Beans (and cheers for St Paddy's day tomorrow, before I forget). In the absence of any explicit mention of a mining tragedy, that sentence would not be taken as such, but simply as the (fairly vague) location of his grave. It's a sentence that needs more information in any event, to make it comprehensible. If he died in some place outside NSW, that would be mentioned first, and then it's clear we're talking about a post-mortem journey for the burial. If he died in NSW, it would be "His grandfather ... died and was buried in NSW". A tragedy would be couched in terms such as "... died (buried alive) in an horrific mining tragedy in NSW". -- JackofOz (talk) 08:20, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh fine, perhaps I'm overreaching. But I am quite sure I've encountered ambiguous uses of the word "buried," probably on horribly written websites with lots of blinking GIFs. So I'll stand by my statement and say that, in the context of dismal prose (or newspaper headlines), "miner buried in NSW" could be read two ways. Happy St. Pat's back to you, by the way! Or, as it's known in these parts, Tomorrow-I-Can-Once-More-Ride-Public-Transportation-Without-Fear-of-Getting-Puked-On Day: a cause for riotous celebration if ever there was one. --Fullobeans (talk) 09:10, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Many books have been written about the funny meanings newspaper headlines can have when taken out their context. Headlines have to be read in their context to give them full meaning. As for the language used on websites - don't get me started. -- JackofOz (talk) 19:46, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's right. This may be etymologically dubious, but "inter" seems to be related to "terra", and there's not much terra at sea (apart from "terror on the high seas"). -- JackofOz (talk) 19:04, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And wouldn't you know it - here we have reference to Reuben Adams, Alonzo Crowell and Charlotte Mayhew all being "interred at sea". A slightly inappropriate use of the term, imo. -- JackofOz (talk) 19:46, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I find it interesting that when they put you in, you're interred (from terra), but when they take you out again, you're exhumed (from humus). —Angr07:09, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is a question of semantics and not a question for medical advice. Oftentimes, when a doctor is placing a patient on a new drug, the doctor will start out at a low dose and will slowly keep increasing the dose until the doctor "hits" the correct and appropriate (final) dose for maintenance. So, as an example, you start out at 100 mg, then up to 110 mg, then up to 120 mg, then up to 130 mg, and so forth. At 180 mg, the doctor determines that that is the ideal dosage ... so the patient stays at 180 mg of the drug. That description is what I know to be the case. Now, when reading the prescription literature, it says this (exact words, quoted, the bold-face was added in by me): "Treatment is usually started with lower doses that are increased a little at a time to prevent side effects. For adults and children over the age of 12, therapy is usually initiated at the anticipated full replacement dose. The dosage is adjusted by 12.5 to 25 mg increments." (end-quote) What on earth does that bold-face sentence mean? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:26, 15 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]
This is just a guess, but it may refer to treatments like hormone replacement therapy. The difference in terminology might indicate that the substances are administered to achieve a desired result, not to treat a condition. Or it might indicate that the substances are already present in the human body, but their levels are being adjusted. Again, I'm just speculating. --Fullobeans (talk) 21:18, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Yes, but I am just trying to understand what the brochure is trying to communicate to the reader. The pamphlet says: (Sentence A) "Treatment is usually started with lower doses that are increased a little at a time to prevent side effects. (Sentence B) For adults and children over the age of 12, therapy is usually initiated at the anticipated full replacement dose. (Sentence C) The dosage is adjusted by 12.5 to 25 mg increments." Now, let us refer to my above hypothetical example ... where the doctor starts at 100 mg and works up to the ideal level of 180 mg. To me, sentence A says: We start at 100 mg and work our way little by little up until we get to the full 180 mg. Sentence C says the same thing, but with specified increments. But, to me, Sentence B says: Right off the bat, we start at the 180 mg. So, am I reading things correctly? And, is not Sentence B a contradiction of Sentences A/C? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 22:16, 15 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]
My interpretation of sentence B is that "therapy" (i.e., the desired result of the treatment--lower cholesterol, increased RBC, whatever) initiates (i.e. "starts") once the expected full dosage is reached. Put another way: "We're going to slowly increase the dosage to help reduce side effects. Once we get to the expected full dosage, the expected results of using this drug should begin." So effectively, while you're getting the lower dosages, the drug really isn't doing anything for you, because the dosage isn't high enough (your cholesterol is still 300)...but your cholesterol should start to come down once we get to the dosage your doctor wants. IF that's the correct interpretation, then B does not contradict A or C. Brewfangrb (talk) 22:39, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to assume that therapy is identical to the application of some medication X. This need not be the case, indeed, medication is not a treatment per se. It is possible that medication is administered (at the increasing levels indicated) until some metric of analysing blood / liver functions / hormone levels (or whatever) shows the improvement aimed for. At this point some - unspecified - therapy is initiated to aid the patient in maintaining some functionality Y without the continuing application of drugs. As does F.0´Beans above, I am speculating. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 22:47, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. I indeed had not thought of that. I think of a very good example: Drug is administered to increase red blood cell count so a cancer patient can start or resume chemotherapy. Good answer.Brewfangrb (talk) 22:59, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmmmm. I see what you are saying. I was assuming (from my second post above) the following: in Sentence A, the word "treatment" means "these prescription drug pills" ... and in Sentence B, the word "therapy" also means "these prescription drug pills". Is that not a correct assumption? I still think so, and I am not 100% convinced of what Brewfangrb and Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM say ... due to the following. First, if we read Sentence B the way that you guys suggest ... why would Sentence C follow Sentence B? That seems odd. Second, all of these sentences / statements are coming directly from the prescription drug company's information packet for the patient / consumer. Thus, the pamphlet must only be referring to the drug/pill itself (i.e., their product) ... and not some other external therapy (over which they have no control and can make no claims). No? That is ... in a pamphlet about some cancer prescription pill, that drug company cannot be making claims about some other matter external to the pill (i.e., chemotherapy). No? (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:42, 16 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]
I still feel my original post is an accurate assessment of the verbiage in the pamphlet. That the "desired" level up to which the doctor is increasing the dosage is the level at which the drug becomes effective. It would be unusual for the drug maker to refer to an external treatment over which they have no control. But, I admitted that I had not thought of Cocktoo.ergo.ZooM's perspective--it's possible. Aricept is one drug that is designed to increase red blood count specifically so cancer patients can receive chemotherapy. The maker of Aricept may or may not make chemo drugs, but the drug is "marketed" to cancer patients with anemia. I hope I don't appear to be trying to make an argument for both sides...Brewfangrb (talk) 07:37, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do we know that "treatment" and "therapy" are the same thing, though? This is the same thing I was getting at in my previous response, which may or may not have been clear, so I apologize if I'm repeating myself. But the same drug could be used for different purposes. For instance, I have a friend who's participating in a study to help him quit smoking. He's given a daily dose of a common blood pressure medication which was found to have the unexpected side effect of reducing nicotine cravings. Now, I could be wrong, but I believe that's called "drug therapy," not "treatment," because it's not treating a specific medical condition. If, however, I were prescribed that same drug to help my hypertension, that might be called "treatment." If I continued taking that medication after my blood pressure dropped to a healthy level, as a preventative measure, that would then be called "therapy." Since treatment (according to my BS theory) aims to help the body surmount an obstacle, it may require sizable doses of medication, which are best worked up to gradually. Since therapy (maybe?) aims to treat symptoms or prevent recurrence of illness, the doses are lower, and a full dose can be safely administered immediately to most adults, though it may have to be tweaked to obtain the desired results (in 12.5 to 25 mg increments). That's just a thought; Brewfangrb's response also makes sense to me. --Fullobeans (talk) 07:54, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the input. Yes, but ... let's not forget the context here. These are 3 statements / sentences that are printed one right after another on a drug company's prescription information pamphlet for a patient. It would be assumed that the patient is taking this drug for one condition ... not that the patient is taking this drug as treatment for one condition and the same exact drug as therapy for another condition. Right? (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 15:19, 16 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]
Not necessarily. I doubt the company prints up two different brochures, one for therapeutic applications and one for treatment applications, especially since the difference between the two approaches can be summarized (though confusingly) in three sentences. The pharmaceutical company has no way of knowing what your specific condition is or how much of their medication you've been prescribed, but they do know that it's probably been prescribed to you according to one of two methods: the "treatment" method, which typically involves increasing doses, or the "therapy" method, which typically involves a steady dose. They can't really say much more than that on this topic, since the quantities and methods by which their drug is administered is at your doctor's discretion, not theirs. It's important for them to note that the difference exists, though, so you don't freak out about how you're on a huge dose while your sister's on a tiny dose, or how a tiny dose worked for her but you're inexplicably getting more and more of this stuff pumped into your system, etc. Or, according to Brewfangrb's theory, it's important for them to inform you that you're probably on a gradually increasing dose, so you shouldn't freak out if you don't see results right away. Either way, the therapy/treatment statement is probably intended to reduce the number of calls to the customer service department.--Fullobeans (talk) 21:02, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not aware of that use, in spite of what this article mantains. The mentioned article even speaks of the gnaborretni. In Spanish, it is customary (both in formal and informal backgrounds) to punctuate exclaimed questions with a combination of marks, such as in:
İstanbul seviyorum. Pronounced "Ee-stan-bool say-vee-yo-room" (someone else can put it in IPA). I share the sentiment --Xuxl (talk) 21:20, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is "choom" a word? My family has used it for years to mean what cats do when they get over energized and bounce off the walls of the house -- "chooming." They are prone to do this in the middle of the night. Oy veh! --Halcatalyst (talk) 02:22, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This link says it's an Australian word for "Englishman." Those wacky cats, getting English all over the walls. It's entirely possible that your family derived the word from another language, though. Do your parents have any non-English language background? If not, my guess would be that it's a made-up onomatopoeic word to describe that particular craziness, sort of like "zoom." --Fullobeans (talk) 07:27, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That must appear in some very obscure context, because I have never heard an Australian refer to an English person as a "choom". It's usually "pommie" or "pom". I've certainly heard "chum" pronounced that way in certain English dialects (as in, dialects used in England). -- JackofOz (talk) 08:27, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is also the possibility that sundry herbs and spices, utilised for the atmospheric enrichment of your humble abode, have a blissful nocturnal effect on the feline residents. See pakalolo and "choom gang" (of which a noted politician seems to have been an inhaling member in his class of ´79). --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 09:01, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The word "choom" (actually, "chooma") may be borrowed from Russian, probably via Yiddish. In Russian "chumnoi", "ochumelyi" means violently crazy; it may indeed be used to describe an "over energized" pet. In standard Russian "chuma" (чума, pronounced "choomah") means plague, as in bubonic plague. Overexcitation is one of the symptoms of plague in humans; that is the origin of the word. --Dr Dima (talk) 10:21, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
From the Peking Duck article: "The oven is preheated by burning Gaoliang wood (Chinese: 秫秸; pinyin: shú jiē) at the base". Does anyone know what the Gaoliang, or Gaoliang wood, is? Is it from a particular tree species? Is it pre-treated in a certain way? Thanks in advance, --Dr Dima (talk) 03:38, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On the second page of my Google Image search for the expression, I found a picture of apparently a field of sorghum, and another picture of apparently a bowl of sorghum. -- Wavelength (talk) 06:08, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I really appreciate the rapid responses. Yes, I saw the sorghum article while doing search for Gaoliang; but I thought it was irrelevant as Sorghum sp. are grasses. Probably, sorghum straw is used to preheat the oven, and then hardwood is used for the cooking proper; that way the smoke from the burning straw is not a problem. --Dr Dima (talk) 09:56, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! In this essay (first non-italicised paragraph) there is a claim that the first ever American dissertation was a Harvard one on Hebrew. It also suggests that the first Congress wanted to make Hebrew the official US language. Is this actually true? :-) ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 09:41, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Edenics seems to suggest that Hebrew is the "original" human language. As such, the site can be assumed to have some vested interests in such claims. BTW, the USA has never declared English to be the official language, though quite a few individual states have passed such legislation. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 10:14, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is perfectly true that Hebrew played an extremely prominent role in higher education in New England during the 17th and 18th centuries... AnonMoos (talk) 11:20, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The essay linked to in the article Angr linked to has this sentence: "In the 18th century there were rumors that a few Brit-bashing superpatriots campaigned to have the new nation drop English in favor of Hebrew, French, or Greek, considered in the late 18th century to be the languages of God, rationality, and democracy, respectively." TomorrowTime (talk) 13:30, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In his book "The Jewish Connection", M.Hirsch Goldberg writes (pp.151-52) that "When Harvard was founded, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew were taught there, and Hebrew was given the most attention. All students were required to spend one day each week for three years on it, and those preparing for the ministry had to learn to read the Jewish scriptures in the original Hebrew." He continues that Yale, Columbia, Brown, Princeton, John Hopkins and the University of Pennsylvania also gave courses in Hebrew, and that the university seals of Yale, Columbia and Dartmouth incorporate Hebrew. "So prevalent was the study of Hebrew that a new textbook 'The Hebrew Sun Dial' was introduced to make it easier .... a Hebrew correspondance course was taught by a Yale professor." Simonschaim (talk) 14:48, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to me to be one of those joke phrases that when read fast sound like a different language. Here's a German one: "Mähen Äbte Heu? Nee, Äbte mähen nie Heu. Äbte beten. (Do abbots make hay? Nope, abbots never make hay. Abbots pray.) Many Germans will swear this couldn't be German and would usually bet it's some Asian dialect on the first take. It's obvious when they get to read the text themselves, but when it's read out loud the sounds are misleading. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 14:58, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Has anyone heard an interpretation of Habermas's work as a completion of the merging of anglo and saxon cultures? —Fred11420:12, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What does that mean? The Angles and Saxons were two of the three traditional components of the Germanic conquest of Britain (the third being the Jutes), but neither group was unified (in terms of the Heptarchy, the Angle kingdoms were Mercia, Northumbria, and East Anglia; the Saxon kingdoms were Wessex, Sussex, and Essex; while the Jutish kindom was Kent), and I'm not sure there was really any very great cultural differences between the two (as opposed to certain linguistic differences in their spoken dialects). AnonMoos (talk) 00:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Passover and Easter -- translations and etymologies
Co-Wikipedians (Wikipedian colleagues), can you please provide etymologies for as many as possible of these names for Passover and Easter in different languages?
Well, anything like "pascha" or "pesach" comes from the Hebrew, so that covers a great majority of them. The Arabic for Easter, Eid al-Qiyamah, literally means "Feast of the Resurrection". Adam Bishop (talk) 05:31, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Irish and Gaelic names also come from Pascha, with a very early change of ptoc. A lot of the Slavic names - the ones looking roughly like "velikden" or "veliknoch" - mean "great day" or "great night", respectively. The Germanic names like "Easter" and "Ostern" are supposed to come from the name of the pagan Germanic goddess of the dawn and are thus related to the word "east". —Angr07:05, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
South Slavic variants "uskrs"/"vaskrs" are related with verb "uskrsnuti", (now) meaning "resurrect". The etymology is uncertain; according to one web page, possible roots are obsolete verb "krsnuti" (revive) and『krês』(spark, fire). No such user (talk) 08:38, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The "languages" list on the sidebar at easter seems to be quite complete. Just click on the language links and copy out the words. Passover has a shorter list because many languages seem to have included it as part of their Easter page. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 14:35, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The OP isn't looking for a list of translations of "Easter" and "Passover". He asked about the etymologies of the various words listed. —Angr14:40, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That was not quite that obvious from the header. Here goes then:
Plattdüütsch : 3 terms Oostern, Paaschen or Paasch. The etymology of the modern term Oostern is derived from the German Ostern:
In the time of the Teutonic (Germanic?) tribes had a pagan Spring festival that was named after a goddess. Old English texts identify this goddess' name as Eostrae. This seems to be the same goddess as the vedic ursa, Ancient Greek Eos and Latin Aurora. That led to the conclusion that this goddess was the goddess of Light and that her festival had something to do with the increase of light in Spring. That's what Beda Venerabilis surmised in his eight century text "de temporum ratione" Jacob Grimm seconded this opinion whereas most other researchers deny the existence of such a goddess in the Germanic panthenon. (Original source: Duden)
Other sources think that the term "Oostern" is derived from medieval tradition of having Baptisms in the mornings. That is why the celebration of baptism was named after the germanic name for dawn.
Honorius Augustodunensis postulated in the 12th century that "Oostern" was derived from "Oosten" (east). This being the direction the light of dawn was seen in, which signified resurrection from the dead.
Yet another explanation derives the word "Oostern" from the Latin Christian name for the Easter week: albae paschales (white garments of the newly baptized ). The short form albae was translated to the Germanic language as eostarum.
Entymologist Jürgen Uloph says the Northgermanic languages have a family of words that would fit Oostern: ausa (pouring water) and austr (watering).The word Oostern originated in the baptism, where people got water poured over them. Baptism is the main part of mess for Easter night.
Passover: the Chinese name for the holiday (逾越節, yuyue jie)is literally the Festival of Passing Over. The Korean name is directly derived from the Chinese name. The Japanese name is entitled 過越 (sugikoshi), which also literally means "passing over." The Japanese name for the seder is the Passover Ceremony (過越祭), also alternately called the Ceremony of Unleavened [Bread] (除酵祭). Although I'm not certain, I'm pretty sure it's a safe bet that the Vietnamese name is also derived from the Chinese name, with the word order reversed.
Easter: In Chinese, it is literally the Festival of the Resurrection (fuhuo jie 復活節), which is used for Korean and Japanese as well (Japanese uses 祭 instead of 節). It looks like the Vietnamese term might have been derived from 复生, which is synonymous with 復活 (this is pure speculation on my part). Generally speaking, in the region which has been termed the Sinographic Cultural Sphere (漢字文化圈, countries where Classical Chinese was used as the medium of written communication prior to the modern era), proper nouns are derived from the Chinese term.
Hope this helps.
Aas217 (talk) 16:18, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Japanese one for 'Passover' literally means 'passing over', as in 'going over [something]', while 'Easter' in Japanese literally means 'The Celebration of Coming-Back-To-Life'.--KageTora (talk) 22:03, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I think the Vietnamese comes from 来活 and maybe 生or圣. 活 is a rusheng, and h/ph is a common correspondence between Mandarin and Vietnamese. Steewi (talk) 00:00, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
lễ has nothing to do with 來, it clearly means holiday and is equivalent to 節. I think it is the Sino-Vietnamese reading of 禮. Aas217 (talk) 01:52, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the Japanese sugikoshi, I have little add to the above. It is a fairly recent expression introduced via translation. Early citations for sugikoshi and sugikoshi no iwai are 1888 and 1880, respectively. As for fukkatsusai, it is a combination of fukkatsu "revive, resurrection" and sai "festival". I see a citation from 1909, but that can probably be pushed back a few decades. You can probably find older obsolete expressions in the c. 16th century religious texts introduced to Japan by the Portuguese missionaries. A good place to begin is in volume 25 of the Nihon Shisō Taikei (1970, Iwanami Shoten). Bendono (talk) 14:44, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hungarian "húsvét", doesn't seem to have a definite known etymology.『hús』means "meat" and『vét』is commonly thought to derive from "vétel", meaning "to purchase". Hence "purchase (or receive) meat". Which allegedly would refer to the breaking of the fast at easter. --Pykk (talk) 13:14, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For Persian, Passover is "Pasha", and Easter is "Eid Pak", which seems to mean "feast of cleansing" or something. In Urdu the words are "Pesag" and a transliteration of plain old "Easter". Adam Bishop (talk) 14:01, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know that Quayle didn't really say "I was recently on a tour of Latin America, and the only regret I have was that I didn't study Latin harder in school so I could converse with those people" but it's a comment that often gets attributed to him on those list of quotations websites.
In an earlier generation, Ma Ferguson was often attributed with saying, "If English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me" (or according to Wikiquote, "If the King's English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for the children of Texas!")... -- AnonMoos (talk) 12:51, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In German, the digraph EI is red as [aɪ] (ah-ee), while IE is usually [iː] (ee). My question is: what's the reading of th trigraph EIE? Does it change from word to word? --151.51.6.83 (talk) 14:12, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's usually [aɪ.ə] (e.g. freie is two syllables: frei-e), though in some words it's [e.iː] (e.g. kreieren is three syllables: kre-ie-ren). —Angr14:20, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have heard on numerous documentaries that The Red Sea (of Moses) was actually a mistranslation of the original Hebrew 'Yam Sūph', which actually means 'The Reed Sea'. However, this was a mistranslation whisch occurred when it was translated into Greek. This continued into Latin, and so on into English. I find this curious, as 'red' looks like 'reed', plus, there is actually a Red Sea. Can anyone supply any information on this, such as why it was mistranslated, what is the Greek for 'red' and 'reed', and anything else which may be helpful?--KageTora (talk) 17:32, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It has nothing to do with the English words "red" and "reed" -- on some medieval maps in Latin, the red sea is colored in red or maroon, while other seas and oceans are blue... AnonMoos (talk) 18:55, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it wasn't called the Red Sea because some medieval mapmakers coloured it red. They coloured it red because it had long been known as the Red Sea. -- JackofOz (talk)
There are other places in the Bible where the Red Sea is mentioned...Joshua 2:10 for example, Rahab mentions the story, and 1 Kings 9:26 mentions the Red Sea as the same place we think of. If it's a misunderstanding, it's based on more than one passage. But is it really so hard to believe God parted the Red Sea, if you can accept all the other things that happen in the Bible? The more absurd it is, the more miraculous it is. What would be so great about parting the waters of some swamp? Adam Bishop (talk) 20:05, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Modern Greek has some neuter nouns which, in the singular, end in an iota preceded by a consonant. My guess is that none of these nouns existed with that ending in Classical times. For the word for "reed", the Bible uses κάλαμος (nominative singular) at Revelation 11:1. See http://multilingualbible.com/revelation/11-1.htm, which has several Greek versions.
Eritrea: Named by Italian colonizers, from the Latin name for the Red Sea, Mare Erythraeum ("Erythraean Sea"), which in turn derived from the ancient Greek name for the Red Sea: Ἐρυθρά Θάλασσα (Eruthra Thalassa).
According to the Bible, the Red Sea was divided so that the Israelites could cross to the other side, but it was brought together again and drowned the pursuing Egyptians. See http://nasb.scripturetext.com/exodus/14.htm.
Ok, so the 'mistranslation' was basically the Greek translator not actually knowing anything about Middle Eastern geography besides the obvious things, like big seas (one which was called the Red Sea, for example) and not little ones (like 'Reed Sea')? That seems to make sense, and looks like it has nothing to do with a linguistic mistake, which is what I was thinking. The guy(s) just probably thought, 'Well, the only sea I know of round there is the one they call the Red Sea, so this Yam Suph thingummyjig is probably the local name for that'. I was aware of the fact it had nothing to do with the English 'red' and 'reed', as Ancient Greeks didn't speak Modern English (only in films), and was wondering whether it was a Greek word which was mistranslated into Latin (sounding like another Greek word), or, more likely a Hebrew word sounding like another Hebrew word mistranslated into Greek. Anyway, seems like it's cleared up. Thanks.--KageTora (talk) 20:46, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, this all seems to be a little confused -- the Hebrew Bible has only the single phrase Yam Suph ים סוף which is used in all contexts (the Exodus narrative, the body of water adjoining Solomon's port at Eilat or Ezion-Geber, etc.) The translators of the Septuagint naturally equated Yam Suph with the Greek toponym corresponding in meaning to the English term "Red Sea" (but also to the English term "Indian Ocean"). This Greek Ερυθρη Θαλασσα == Hebrew ים סוף equivalence was not based on translating the literal meaning of Hebrew SuphinYam Suph. It was only much later that relatively modern interpreters came up with the possibly literal translation "Sea of Reeds", which some of them then applied specifically to the Exodus account in opposition to the Gulf of Aqaba (a distinction which does not seem to exist in the terminology used in the Bible itself). AnonMoos (talk) 23:23, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The plant meaning of flag is used here. Various species of blade-leafed plants are called flag including some that are alternately called rushes. Rmhermen (talk) 05:12, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The term ףוס־םי ("Red Sea") is not an innovation by deuteronomistic tradents, since it already occurs in the Song of the Sea when Pharaoh and his army are described in Exod 15:4 as being destroyed. ףוס־םיב The meaning of the phrase in the Song of the Sea provides an important starting point for interpreting the development of this term in deuteronomistic tradition, and, indeed, there is a history of debate around this problem beginning even with the translation of the Hebrew. The translation "Red Sea" is based on the LXX, which translates the phrase with the Greek εν ερυθρᾳ θαλασση. A competing translation, "Reed Sea" is also common, going back to such early commentators as Jerome and Rashi, who reasoned that when the Hebrew word ףוס is used alone, it designates "reeds" or "rushes." The translation "Reed Sea" received support in more recent scholarship when the Hebrew ףוס was considered to be a loanword from Egyptian twf(y), meaning "reed" or "papyrus." The debate over translation has tended to focus on geography in order to determine the route of Israel's exodus, in which case it is argued that the Reed Sea designates a different body of water further north than the Red Sea (i.e., the Gulf of Suez). This debate is not particularly helpful for interpreting Exod 15:4, since the geography of the exodus does not appear to play an important role in the song. As a result, neither translation alone probes the significance of the phrase in its context within the Song of the Sea. Dozeman, T. B. (1996). God at War: Power in the Exodus Tradition. pp. 60-1. OCLC32349639
What determines the use of the terms "armada" or "marina" when talking about a navy in Spanish? I notice, for example, that the US Navy is called "la Armada de los EEUU", but the Royal Navy is called "la Marina Real". --Lazar Taxon (talk) 07:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well 'armada' can also mean 'fleet', so it's more in that direction, whereas 'marina' is also associated with 'Infantería de marina' (marines). Given that the US Navy and Marine Corps are separate today, it'd make sense to use the word 'armada' to avoid confusion. OTOH it could just be one of those random things. --Pykk (talk) 08:05, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Usually, Armada has the belligerent connotation the word Navy possesses, and it is the latter's most direct translation. On the other hand, the term Marina has not necessarily a military signification; take for instance Marina Mercante (Merchant Marine). Marina Real has the meaning of "all naval or marine resources at the service of His Majesty", and thus includes the Armed Fleet. Notice that Armada Real is partly a tautology: if we speak of the Spanish Navy, how can't it be Royal? Pallida Mors13:47, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ambiguously Middle Eastern/Indian/South Asian name?
A lot of Sri Lankans have Portuguese/Spanish names like Pereira/Perera, de Silva, Pinto and Fernando - but these were imported, not native names. I once had a doctor named Don (Donald) Lang, which sounds quintessentially Scottish, except that Don was of Chinese origin - and looked like it. -- JackofOz (talk) 07:57, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, they self-identify, if my partner is anything to go on. His father was a Burgher of Spanish origin, and his mother was Singhalese (albeit with some Portuguese ancestry). He has one of the above names, but any suggestion that he's a Burgher is met with strong denial. He's Singhalese, because he says so. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:22, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OR indicates that the Indian Bharat sounds identical to the English Barratt. My father was shocked to find an elderly Indian gentleman responding to being called "Mr Barratt" in his doctor's surgery (my maiden name being Barratt)! --TammyMoet (talk) 09:45, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It may do to a native English speaker but not a speaker of many Indian languages. The aspirated "bh" and the non-aspirated "b" are different phones. Also the "t" sound in the English word is likely to be pronounced as a palatal (hard) t by an English speaker - again this is a different phone in Hindi. -- Q Chris (talk) 10:54, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hassan is Arabic, Hebrew, and Irish. Butt lists a number of people with that surname, including both South Asians and Westerners. So does Thackeray, but that may have been introduced to India from Britain rather than being a coincidental homonym like the others. Grover and Gill are both Indian and Western. —Angr11:12, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to the already-mentioned Ray and Gore... Roy and the demonyms Surtee (cfSurtees) and Baruch/Broach come to mind. Assamese Singha and Singer are pretty close. Colah/Kolah, Mody and Sen might also find homonyms. Apparently unknown to the fascists, the Indian Thackeray is an anglicized form of Thakurai and variants. Indian Butt and Gill are (I think) anglicized forms of Bhatt(a) and Ghill(a). -- Fullstop (talk) 21:10, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Indian Gore I have known pronounced the last name as "Go-ray", rather than rhyming with "Bore" (no allusion intended :) ) Abecedare (talk) 21:24, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am inquiring about sentences that begin with the phrase "what about". Should these sentences be considered questions, thus ending with a question mark? Or should they be considered declarative sentences, thus ending with a period? Or exclamations? Or can it go either way, depending on the context and the author's intent?
Example 1:
Person A: "I can't remember any professors in college that I really liked."
Person B: "What about Professor Jones?"
Example 2:
Person A: "Wow, I had a great time at the Super Bowl!"
Person B: "Yeah and what about that party we went to afterwards!"
To me, the above two examples seem to call for a question mark (example 1) and an exclamation point (example 2). Is that correct?
And, generically ... what would be considered proper / appropriate for a more "neutral" / generic tone ... one that is not clearly a question or exclamation as above? Maybe these (below) are not the best examples, but I think they should get my point across.
Example 3:
Person A: "We had a lot of fun times when we visited Hawaii."
Person B: "What about all those great times we had in Europe." ( stated more as a "reminiscence" / "thinking out loud" ... and not really a direct question ... the "what about" here really means "and let's not forget" )
Example 4:
Person A: "It was sad to read about those murdered high school children at Columbine."
Person B: "Yeah and what about all their parents, too." ( the "what about" is not a question, as much as a replacement for perhaps "let's also consider" )
So, when the "what about" essentially means something like "let's not forget" or "let's consider" or something similar ... would the actual wording of "what about" force the sentence to still be a question with a question mark? Also, is there some "grammar" word to describe this "what about" (or its function) ... like adjective, adverb, participial phrase, that type of "grammar" thing? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:44, 18 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]
You do come up with some interesting and slightly mind-bending questions, Joseph. My take on this is that if "What about.." is clearly meant to be a question, even a rhetorical one where an answer is not expected, it needs a question mark. (Heckler at a political rally: "What about the workers?" - question mark. Politician's response: "What about the workers, indeed! Let me tell you what we have in mind for the workers ..." - exclamation mark.) If it clearly means "and let's not forget" or "let's also consider", without necessarily emphasising the merits of the subject, or if it's just a way of introducing a related (or maybe unrelated) topic, as in Example 3, then just use a full stop (period). The exclamation mark would appear when the subject is being emphasised in some way - "What about those Dodgers last night, eh!", "What about that party!", "What about the workers, indeed!". I fully expect some people to disagree with this analysis, and I'm not claiming it's the official line, but it's what I would do. (Happy St Joseph's Day, by the way.) -- JackofOz (talk) 01:52, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is the word still used
Given that the word "taliban" means "student". Do people discussing students in Pashto language now use a different word or do they risk being accused of terrorist activities? 76.97.245.5 (talk) 17:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I assume they would still use it. Is there a native Pashto word for student? "Talib" is actually Arabic (and we used that word all the time when I was learning Arabic). Adam Bishop (talk) 18:30, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Pashto word for "student" is šāgard 'shaagard' (for comparison, Tehrani šāgird). Add an -an suffix for the plural form, as in talib+an. ;) -- Fullstop (talk) 21:26, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that one of the problems deciphering intercepted communications in the area is that words like taliban and jihad have many meanings, depending on the context. StuRat (talk) 16:29, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea about Spanish, but in German the statement『X ist natürlich』 (literally, "person X is natural") means something like "X is a person who behaves in a natural way", where "natural" means unaffected / not artificial / artless / straight forward. Making such a statement about yourself may cause mild irritation, though. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 22:31, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
N ot so much as the connotation I think of first in English - that is, being naked. That would cause quite a bit of embarrassment if, say, you were opening the door for guests. :-)209.244.187.155 (talk) 21:18, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Currency symbol
Here in the UK, the £ symbol always comes before the amount (eg. £10 or £0.50); I have asked visitors to the US and my own experience leads me to believe that it can be either way round on the European continent and in the US. Sites like this seem to have confused answers. So let me be clearer a bit: if I went into a resturant, how would the menu items be notated: 1.40$, $1.40, that sort of thing (not just the US though, and I'm talking the major unit mainly ($ not cents)). And is one dying out or becoming more popular, and why? Thanks loyal refdeskers, - Jarry1250(t, c)21:33, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Did some more research, it does seem to depend on the language you're using - but if you were in, say, Mexico, surely you'd expect to see the currency written in a Spanish system, so would visitors write it differently to the locals (I can't really understand this point)? - Jarry1250(t, c)21:38, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would say "1.40$" in the United States is a mistake, and probably not a very commonly occurring one. "$1.40" is the usual format in the U.S. In Germany, "DM" was usually written after the number, perhaps because it was more an abbreviation for the name of the currency than a symbol representing it, i.e. you wrote "5 DM" the same way you said "fünf D-Mark". Now with the euro, I see it both before and after the number in German writing, but when I'm writing in English I always put the symbol before the number, on the analogy of $ and £. (Likewise I always spell "euro" with a small e, the same way that "dollar" and "pound" are spelled lower-case.) —Angr22:19, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. 1,50$ in French, $1.50 in English in the US, Canada, or Australia. When visiting New Zealand in the 1980s I saw other characters used in place of the decimal point as if it was just seen as a separator, like $1-50 and I think $1=50. In Mexico $ is pesos and I believe they write $1,50. In Portugal before the euro, the $ was used in place of the decimal point: one and a half escudos was 1$50, which you could also read as "1 escudo 50 (centavos)". --Anonymous, edited 03:35 UTC, March 19, 2009.
We have this article on it (Linguistic issues concerning the euro) I think it might shed some light on the Euro deal at least. Personally I like €4.50 better than 4.50€ even though my local currency is always written (as it doesnt have a sign) "45 kr" or "kronor". On food and stuff for sale the usual thing to point out öre is 4550krchandler·03:46, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In Japanese, the $ sign (as well as the little-known £ sign) would usually come first, as does the ￥ sign, but very often these signs are not even used, being replaced by ドル、ポンド、＆ 円 respectively, and these always come after the figure.--KageTora (talk) 09:35, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
March 19
Chinese translation request
Hey need some help with a Chinese translation. Short conversation from a Flickr image:
"A: Hello. Is it possible to publish Father Ye's photo on Wikipedia? B: Sure, as long as the author and source are speicfied."--K.C. Tang (talk) 06:45, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For the map legend of a guide booklet to a museum complex, I'm unsure what to call the restrooms for disabled visitors. (Yes, restrooms— I favor American English and consider "toilets" to be the plural of a plumbing appliance.) Space is quite limited. What's preferable:
"Handicapped accessible restrooms" is the proper way to say it, but this is often shortened to "handicapped restrooms," despite the fact that the restrooms themselves are without handicap. If you're really short on space, "handicapped" or "accessible" alone will, in context, get the point across. For instance, here is what pops up on a Google image search for the word "accessible." The term "disabled restroom," in my experience, isn't used, and may cause offense to some while convincing others that the restroom in question is out of order. --Fullobeans (talk) 08:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Simply "Restrooms for the handicapped"? Or... and just use the same ideograms that you are already using and add "restroom". E.g. Restroom matched by Restroom and Restroomor Restroom -- Fullstop (talk) 10:48, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I recommend the expression wheelchair accessible restrooms. By the way, do you want to use other languages in addition to English? -- Wavelength (talk) 13:28, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
——
——
-- AnonMoos (talk) 12:51, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Restroom matched by 
Restroom and 
Restroomor
Restroom -- Fullstop (talk) 10:48, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
