Language desk
< August 19	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 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.

August 20

Almost-auto-antonyms?

Is there a name for a pair of similar-looking/sounding words that have opposite meanings? The only example that comes to mind right now is "unite" and "untie"; do you guys know of any others? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.5.84.167 (talk) 01:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Raise and raze. You've probably seen lists such as this. On a quick scan, the word pairs seem to be either about different but related concepts, or different but entirely unrelated concepts. Apart from the 2 pairs we've already mentioned, I couldn't see any that I'd classify as opposite in meaning. This class of word pairs probably contains too few members to qualify for its own name. -- JackofOz (talk) 02:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Accept and except are antonyms in certain contexts. -- JackofOz (talk) 06:28, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested in our list of self-contradicting words in English.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Depending on how similar the words need to be, delight/blight, ingenious/ingenous, credulous/credible, and even night/light may be other examples. --Bowlhover (talk) 10:51, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Letter frequencies in the Finnish language?

Hi,

what are the the frequencies of letters used in the Finnish language? Googling the subject did not turn up anything substantial...

Thanks!

Linus, 130.232.112.37 (talk) 09:45, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Letter frequency links to Letter frequencies (rankings for various languages) with Finnish language frequencies from two limited samples. Or you could run this frequency counter program on some Finnish text. I tried it on Consejo de Indias and got "aitenso" ... -84user (talk) 13:23, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Q

Is there an association, in the English language, of science with the letter Q, like in Q (James Bond) and the Library of Congress classification letter? If so, what's its roots? --Ayacop (talk) 10:43, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My recollection and our article agree that Q in Bond stands for quartermaster. Science is Q in the LoC system because they decided to put it 15th in their 21 basic categories. I don't think there's any connection. Algebraist 11:38, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Library of Congress Classification system was developed before WW2, while James Bond didn't have much cultural prominence until the 1960's -- and many engineering subjects fall under "T" anyway... AnonMoos (talk) 13:53, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I still haven't gotten over the fact that religion some how got assigned BS. Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 16:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BS is the Bible, actually. Algebraist 16:49, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! And the religious right hasn't been all over this, demanding this insult to be changed? — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 06:02, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plurals of Abstract nouns

I HAVE LEARNED THAT ABSTRACT NOUNS DON'T HAVE PLURALS THEN WHY DO WE WRITE 'JOYS' 'SORROWS' AND 'SUFFERINGS? CAN U PLEASE GUIDE ME TO UNDERSTAND ALL THIS? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waqaswaqas (talk • contribs) 11:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because what you learned is wrong. Hell, even 'nouns' is the plural of an abstract noun. Algebraist 11:32, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on how its being used, where its being used and who is using it. Because it sometimes classified as colliquial language, using terms like "the joys of living" may not be considered formal speech/writing. It's not nessessarily wrong, I would just avoid using it around English teachers. Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 17:06, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While that's true, it's nothing to do with the fact that 'joy' is abstract. Many abstract nouns take plurals without problems; there are four examples in this sentence. I think the problem is that some people regard 'joy' as a mass noun. Algebraist 17:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of non-abstract nouns that don't normally pluralize like water, dirt, gold, or ammonia. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 19:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And the reason they don't pluralize is that they're all mass nouns. Algebraist 01:49, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

True. Conversely, though, the reason they are called mass nouns is because they don't pluralize. It is a matter of definition. All we can say, really, is that some words in the language apparently don't pluralize (and we call them mass nouns), others do (and we call them count nouns), while usage with some varies grammatically and semantically (the water vs the waters; cake vs a cake/cakes). Bessel Dekker (talk) 02:22, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The use of the term fiance

According to most dictionaries I have read the term fiance is strictly used to designate a man engaged to a woman.

However the oxford free online dictionary defines it as:

fiancé /fionsay/

 • noun (fem. fiancée pronunc. same) a person to whom another is engaged to be married.

Can the word ever have this meaning or did the oxford get it wrong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.108.63.105 (talk) 11:28, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's no disagreement. A fiancé is a man engaged to be married, a fiancée is a woman engaged to be married. That's what the OED says, and I expect your other dictionaries say the same, they just have fiancée as a separate entry instead of a note under fiancé. Algebraist 11:35, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what you're saying but it's not quite what I'm getting at. The word 'person' is gender neutral. Therefore the term fiancé [according to the definition provided by the Oxford] may refer to a male or female. In other words under the definition provided by the Oxford it is technically correct for me [a male] to say I have a female fiancé. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.108.63.105 (talk) 13:05, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The OED is correct in that fiancé is often used for both men and women, while fiancée is only used for women. No strange linguistics required, I think; many people simply don't know the feminine form and use the shorter masculine. Matt Deres (talk) 13:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

English has only a limited hold on French masculine vs. feminine contrasts that would be pronounced the same in English. In the 18th century, some used "confidant" as a masculine and "confidante" as a feminine in English, but that went by the wayside long ago. Similarly, around the early 20th century, some tried to maintain an English spelling distinction between "blond" as masculine and "blonde" as feminine, but I bet that only a very tiny number worry about that nowadays. Maybe because "fiancé"/"fiancée" has an exotic-looking diacritical mark, and protoypically refers to a male-female couple relationship, the gender distinction has lasted longer within English spelling... AnonMoos (talk) 13:37, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I still distinguish confidant & confidante, and blond & blonde. DuncanHill (talk) 16:36, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So do I. What of it? Algebraist 16:55, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all for your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.108.63.105 (talk) 14:18, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right because fiancee is a form of fiance, the oed doesn't separate the two into different entries. The OED also says "Also fem. fiancée." Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 16:58, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In any case the part about "a man engaged to a woman" is now out of date. If two men are engaged to each other, the natural usage is that each is the other's fiancé. --Anonymous, 04:20 UTC, August 21, 2008.

translation from French to English

Resolved

Can a user please translate the following sentence: Parvis ou Estrade du Temple ou l'on dresse une grande Tente a la fete des Tabernacles, avec ses balustrades. Thank you. Simonschaim (talk) 13:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Refers to an area of the Temple where a big tent was erected for Sukkot... AnonMoos (talk) 13:43, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Building on AnonMoos' explanation, a parvis is usually a courtyard or portico. For example, the square in front of the west facade of Notre-Dame-de-Paris is la Place du Parvis Notre-Dame. — OtherDave (talk) 14:09, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Simonschaim (talk) 07:05, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cows

Is there a name for the 'love of cows' like in hinduism, or with some painters' fantasies? Maybe there is a name for the western civilization's love for cow meat? The obvious vaccaphilia gives me no significant Google hit. --Ayacop (talk) 14:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably because it combines a word which was not all that common in Classical Latin (bos was actually more frequently used) with a Greek root, and doesn't really follow the rules for compounding classical stems. A Greek root for "cattle" is bou-, but I'm not having better Google luck with that... AnonMoos (talk) 16:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Look up boviphobia, and find its antonym?) --Danh, 70.59.119.73 (talk) 00:02, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

English grammar

Is it okay to say 'the kitchen is cleaned' instead of 'the kitchen has been cleaned'? 'The software is upgraded' instead of 'The software in the state of having been upgraded' etc? ----Seans Potato Business 14:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd go with 'the kitchen is clean' and 'the software is fully upgraded'. Algebraist 14:42, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But is there anything wrong with 'the kitchen is cleaned', meaning that 'the kitchen is in the state of having been cleaned'? Does English have rules to govern this or is it kind of analogous to common law, where things change over time?

Is cleaned and is upgraded are present perfect tense. Used correctly there is nothing wrong with using them Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 15:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the present perfect tense would be "has cleaned" or "has upgraded". --Anonymous, 04:22 UTC, August 21, 2008.

Actually since it is a passive sentence the present perfect tense uses is not has. Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 03:51, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, the present tense of the passive is "is cleaned". (That is the usage seen in "Every evening the kitchen is cleaned between 7:30 and 8:00"; it is not the usage being asked about.) The present perfect passive would be "has been cleaned". --Anon, 09:50 UTC, August 22, 2008.

Thank you for pointing that out to me Anon. Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 15:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While there's nothing wrong with the construction grammatically, I would take 'the kitchen's cleaned' to imply that the cleaning of the kitchen has just finished, rather than having happened at some unknown point in the past. After all, kitchens tend to unclean themselves over time, so the information that they have been cleaned is not very useful in isolation. Algebraist 16:01, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. To clean is a verb taking an object so if you want to make kitchen the subject you must use the passive verb 'to be cleaned'. The kitchen has been cleaned is then the present perfect tense of the passive form. TheMathemagician (talk) 16:36, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The OP's question is really whether 'the kitchen is cleaned' is acceptable as another way to say 'the kitchen has been cleaned', and it isn't, not least because (as Algebraist says) a different time is implied. Also, frankly, 'the kitchen is cleaned' is awkward English and sounds very much like beginner's English. Strawless (talk) 16:53, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on the context. Say someone walking out of the kitchen with a mop and bucket saying "The kitchen is cleaned, now I'll start on the bath." I wouldn't hear anything wrong with that. Rmhermen (talk) 18:36, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still sounds awkward. "The kitchen has been cleaned..." or "The kitchen is clean..." would be a more likely choice of words. Bazza (talk) 13:18, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since it is a simple present (though in the passive), surely this could be a programmatic present, for want of a better term? Compare The train leaves at 6:13. It does so every day (or is meant to.) Similarly: The kitchen is cleaned at midnight every day, when most hotel guests are sound asleep. (Or are meant to.) Of course, this is no equivalent for The kitchen has been cleaned. The meaning seems to be different. Bessel Dekker (talk) 02:17, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish or Portuguese question

Resolved

What does this mean?

dj putinha e a maior chupetera da musica

I presume it's Spanish or Portuguese. Someone added it to the image of a topless female DJ I had uploaded. JIP | Talk 18:29, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know any Portuguese, but I can kinda guess what it says from Spanish. Obviously it's a crude comment, something like dj little whore is the best sucker (blowjob-giver?) in music.--El aprendelenguas (talk) 19:26, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings JIP,

It's definitely Portuguese, but as a native Spanish speaker, I'd have to agree with El aprendelenguas. An approximate translation would be "DJ whore gives the best blowjobs in music".

Cheers,

― Ann _{( user | talk )} 01:09, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]