Language desk
< December 18	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 21 >

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.

December 20

Pluralizing brain

Anyone know why we pluralize the word brain in the following instances?

The man took a bullet to the head, and his brains splattered on the wall behind him.
I know a guy who eats scrambled eggs mixed with cow brains.
Bob said, "I'm the brains of this operation."

The poor guy in the first example still only has one brain (despite its being out of his head), a single person presumably does not use more than one cow brain per meal (my great-grandmother used to do this), and the speaker in the third sentence only has one brain no matter how smart he thinks he is. -- BrianSmithson 01:30, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because "brain tissue," "edible brain tissue," and "thinking power/brainy person" are slightly different from "thinking organ?" --Kjoonlee 02:30, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Probably also related to the pluralization of intestines. "The dinosaur slashed Nedry's belly open and his intestines fell out." I think I'd write it that way even if only his small intestine fell out. --Kjoonlee 02:36, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe "brains" refers to a substance, whereas a "brain" is an object? Or, maybe "brains" in these usages refers to "bits of brain"? Marco polo 03:10, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Parallel examples: gut and guts, bowel and bowels. Are any unrelated to anatomy? See: [1] —Keenan Pepper 03:53, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Consider money and moneys, sea and seas, water and waters. There seems to be a tendency for mass nouns (mostly singulars) and plural count nouns to swap roles back and forth. Consider also data and agenda (both originally plural; some still use the former that way) and peas (originally a singular mass noun pease). --Anonymous, December 20, 04:49 (UTC)

I would expect the first instance would require an apostrophe...so it would become '...and his brains splattered on the wall.." as in and his brain was splatted on the wall. The second one I would imagine that it is a plural because the mixture may have more than one cow's brain in the concoption. Third example i'm not sure, unless it is a references to being 'leader' (so the leader is the one who operates the multiple brains wokring together). That is how I would interperate the 3 examples. ny156uk 15:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One of my fav examples of this is "person", with the plural "people". Sometimes, however, "people" is the singular and "peoples" is the plural, as in "Join the army, travel the world, meet many different indigenous peoples, then shoot them". StuRat 22:24, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Searching Shakespeare for "brain", I find "brain" and "brains" in about the ratio of two to one, with no immediately apparent system to which is used when. One exception: when they are to be "knocked out", it is always a person's "brains". This sentence is particularly interesting: "Hector have a great catch, if he knock out either of your brains: a' were as good crack a fusty nut with no kernel." (Troilus and Cressida II sc.1) Here Shakespeare uses the fact that the form is plural for achieving a humoristic effect. --Lambiam ^Talk 22:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, ny156uk: "'s" stands for "is" and "has", but I don't believe it ever stands for "was". And as a native speaker I'm sure that neither the number of cows nor the number of thinkers is relevant. Equally, StuRat, I don't believe that anybody would talk of 'shooting a people' (or 'shooting peoples'). The things you can do to a people generally are not things you do to the individuals that constitute that people. --ColinFine 00:03, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It struck me that the use may not be as random as I think. What if people once thought of the content of the skull as a pair of organs, as for lungs and kidneys. We still talk of a left brain and a right brain, quite comfortably omitting "side of the" which one would use for a single midline organ (left side/lobe of the prostate, right/lobe side of the thyroid - we do not say "the left thyroid", "the right prostate"). Or did the old anatomists consider the brain a single organ? --Seejyb 08:58, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sinophile

Sinophile applies specifically to China, but I would like something more general. Is there a more general term for one who is greatly interested in Asian language, culture, people, society etc.? (Another quick question, when placing etc. at the end of a sentence, is it correct to add a questionmark after the period if it is a question?) Crisco 1492 07:50, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll answer your quick question - no the question mark replaces the period as well as showing that a question has been ask, the same also applies to an exclamation mark ! eg "Where am I?" and "You are in the way!" see Question mark for all the details (your question is answered in the first sentence!) 87.102.4.227 12:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So the period is omitted, it's not needed.87.102.4.227 12:01, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that is correct. You would write "Where am I, etc.?", not Where am I, etc?". The period has a different function than a period/full stop. Rmhermen 15:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eh ! Quote "The question mark (also known as an interrogation point, query, or eroteme) is a punctuation mark that replaces the full stop at the end of an interrogative sentence", a full stop is a period. In your example you have a period used at the end of an abbreviation. My example was correct.87.102.4.227 19:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Original question: "Another quick question, when placing etc. at the end of a sentence, is it correct to add a questionmark after the period if it is a question?" I hold that the correct punctuation is ", etc.?" You seem to have answered a different question. Rmhermen 21:41, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes I see - we should answer the question fully then:87.102.4.227 22:08, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to 'Quick question': The question mark does replace a period at the end of a sentence - but does not replace a period in an abbreviation at the end of a sentence. Therefor:

"When writing a book should I use a lot of metaphors etc.?" is correct
"When writing a book should I use a lot of metaphors?" is correct
"When writing a book should I use a lot of metaphors etc?" is incorrect
"When writing a book should I use a lot of metaphors.?" is incorrect

One possibility is "orientophile", but this term is not in common use; additionally orient refers to "...the Near, Middle, and Far East." so may be too broad a term (See orient). I imagine you are looking for 'south east asia' or 'east asia' specifically.87.102.4.227 12:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Orientalist" might be a suitable term, and wikipedia has an article asiaphile though I don't think this is in common use.87.102.4.227 14:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Only reason I ask about the "etc." is because neither way looks right to me. Gut instinct and whatnot. I As for 'Orientophile/orientalist." 87.102.4.227 and 87.102.4.227 are correct, I was meaning the east/south east asia. I was conisdering "Asiophile/asiaphile" but I was sure, because Asia covers not only the near east, middle east, and far east, but also Russia and nations formerly of the USSR. Thanks Crisco 1492 01:30, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, Asiaphile is definitely out. I don't want to use a word which is commonly mistaken for a fetish. I'd rather something more neutral. I'm trying more to specify my state of mind, such as why I thought "My Melody of Love" was with Chinese or Vietnames, and not personal preferences. Crisco 1492 01:35, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Orientalist' is quite an archaic term - to me it suggests somebody who likes collecting ming vases and chinese calligraphic works as well as being interested in persia/iran. I don't think the english language has a work that says 'I like/love east asia', in the same way 'trainspotter' is a term for people who just can't help liking trains.87.102.22.58 11:44, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So it would be best just to say "(blah blah blah) greatly interested in Asian cultures." Ya? Crisco 1492 02:47, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep.87.102.11.80 14:07, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orientalist, anyways, is someone who has a scholarly interest in the Orient, and is distinct from the question of liking/loving it... 218.166.60.70 09:13, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not to be a jerk, but shouldn't there be a comma between "metaphors" and "etc."? 66.57.225.77 06:40, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pea Soup - Fog

Does anybody know why fog is referred to as pea-soup/pea-souper? I'd never heard of it until a few days ago, is there any reason for it being called that? I can't see a rhyming slang reasoning and I would imagine pea-soup is green in colour. ny156uk 13:32, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry ignore me, I should've read the full pea soup article rather than just flicking through it!! ny156uk 13:33, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese/French

can someone tell me how to learn japanise and/or french? i'v tried the wiki links already.......and google serch but can't reach any good site [as well as free] for this .. so definitely need experts help.

plz ppl i nnd some real help here.......

hope i'll get the help very soon...thnx.

Did you check out wikibooks? [2] [3]. Skarioffszky 18:31, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good idea to define your short-term needs: are you looking to acquire a reading knowledge, or conversational ability? Also, think of how you learn best: can you study effectively with a self-paced course based on written and/or audiovisual materials, or would you benefit from finding a structured class or even a private tutor? Focus on these factors when evaluating the alternatives. Good luck! -- Deborahjay 18:58, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend you to do one language at a time, since either one is a large investment of effort to get beyond the level of absolute beginner. If you hope to be able to speak the language (and be understood), then for French you will absolutely need someone who can speak French well − preferably a native − to assist you with the pronunciation. If you hope to be able to read the language, then the Japanese writing system is a huge stumbling block; it will take you many years to master it. The language by itself is not particularly complicated, but probably nevertheless difficult since the grammar and the words may both be completely unfamiliar. French is more complicated, but should have many words you recognize from English, and the grammar also has several similar features. --Lambiam ^Talk 22:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say http://www.about.com is rather good for a free website aimed at non-professionals, both http://japanese.about.com and http://french.about.com. Note that these sites probably are supplements to traditional education, rather than alternatives to it. 惑乱分からん 22:26, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

first of all ....thnx ,you ppl are gr8 as i'v expected..actually i need some sites or may be pdf links or maybe audio sessions

to learn the spelings and stuff.....and i think i'll go for the french first.so u ppl done a gr8 job ,thnx again and if there is any more link u can share i'll be thankful. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Iamsandeep (talk • contribs) 10:57, 22 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Donner..?

What are the origins of the word, in scottish, of donner. Such as "I'm going a donner up the town for a while".

Donner as in walk. Christopher

Actually, Christopher, donner means 'to stun' or 'to daze'. The verb 'to stroll' is daunder. I'm sorry, I do not know the etymology of either of these words, but you might try an online Scots dictionary for possible roots. Clio the Muse 23:16, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A 'donner' is a kebab, isn't it? At least it is in my neck of the woods (northern England). --Kurt Shaped Box 23:36, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aye, at least around these parts here in the lowlands. I thought 'donner' referred to the fact that the meat is farmed deer (venison), as opposed to other kebabs which are made of other meats. Robovski 00:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, 'donner meat' is mutton. --Kurt Shaped Box 01:01, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Donner Kebab comes from Turkish Döner Kebab/kebap. 惑乱分からん 01:04, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Returning to the original point, donner is a verb in the Scots dialect that has nothing at all to do with döner kebabs, Turkish or otherwise. Clio the Muse 01:19, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I always make reservations at restaurants as the Donner Party, that way they always give us a table when we start to look hungry. :-) StuRat 01:22, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Dictionary of the Scots Language is most informative; in it, dander is the lemma that fits Christopher's example. ("Donner" is only recorded as a spelling for the "daze, stupefy" meaning—interesting examples s.v. + suppl..) Wareh 04:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Donar see Thor. A word used as an expletive in non-English germanic languages to indicate a severe beating, "like thunder". A driver cuts in to your lane without indicating, and you almost smash in to his car. You say "If I get hold of you, I'll donner you." It's not quite kill, but definitely more colourful and severe than stun or daze. --Seejyb 05:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Donner means thunder in German, but it isn't used like that, in that language. Possibly as a mild expletive. The explanation looks strange. 惑乱分からん 12:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Namibian German - then it seems to be a local use. It is considered rude. --Seejyb 19:12, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Finally I know the origins of the Afrikaans slang word "donder" :) Over here, it means 'beat someone up', so just before I get dondered I can attempt to confuse the donderer with Norse etymology... Sandman30s 07:59, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not Norse, it comes from original Proto-Germanic þundar, or something. Initial þ remained in English, turned to t in mainland Scandinavian, and turned to d in continental West Germanic. The modern Scandinavian word "dunder" (thunder/ rumble) is a borrowing from Middle Low German, if I'm not mistaken. 惑乱分からん 14:12, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting. Is the Scottish daunder/donner, as "take a stroll", in active use? I see the last quote in Wareh's references is quite aged, and I have not seen any etymology anywhere. As for other use, implying physical assault, the Namibian use is then a borrowing from a local language, rather than German as such. I rashly assumed it was the reverse; that the younger language was borrowing from the older. It is definitely part of SA English, presumably by the same route. --Seejyb 21:54, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Seejab: daunder is still an active verb, though it tends to be used by older people. Clio the Muse 22:03, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, alright, I guess the verb "donner" might somehow be from German in Namibia, but given what I know about German, it just stroke me as weird... =S 惑乱分からん 22:16, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]