Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2009 August 31

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 31

College vs. University

If Americans call a university a college, what do they call a college (i.e. attended by 16 - 18 year olds)? --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 00:31, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I think it is usually part of "high school". It could be a "senior high school" if there is a separate institution for that age group. See Secondary education in the United States for details. (I am not American, so I don't have first hand knowledge of the terms. Those are the terms I have seen used, though, and which are mentioned in the relevant Wikipedia articles.) --Tango (talk) 00:43, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Americans are still in high school when they are 16 and 17, and start college/university at 17 or 18. (This is also true of Canada although the exact definition of college and university is slightly different. Except in Quebec, where kids that age can go to a cegep.) Adam Bishop (talk) 00:42, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

In the USA at least, a university is typically a collection of colleges. College or university, either way, it's typically after high school graduation. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 00:44, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Americans tend to call all colleges and universities "college" when they're describing an undergraduate course of study (so that one might distinguish "when I was in college" from "when I was in graduate school"). Speaking more technically, universities have graduate programs in addition to undergraduate programs, whereas most places with "college" rather than "university" in their names are undergraduate institutions only, granting bachelor's but not more advanced degrees. As Tango intimated, the school one attends before college is usually called a high school, or a prep school if it's a private rather than a government-run institution. Deor (talk) 01:06, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

(In the UK private sector, Public school follows Prep school at age 13) Dbfirs 20:49, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

In the United States, high schools usually begin between the 8th and 10th grades (approx. second to fourth forms in British-style systems) and graduate with the 12th grade (sixth form), most often being 4-year institutions (Grades 9-12). Almost no high school has a "13th grade", which is usually equated to the first (freshman) year in university, college or junior (community) college. However, while there's no precise equivalent to the traditional British Upper Sixth Form, many 12th-graders and a few 11th-graders will take Advanced Placement (AP) classes, considered to be the equivalent of freshman college classes. An AP class in a particular subject (e.g. Calculus) is graded both traditionally and by a common national examination administered by the College Entrance Examination Board; usually colleges look at both grades to decide whether to grant college credit for an AP course.

As for Americans calling universities "colleges", there is a strong countervailing urge for a college (e.g. Bryant College) to seek to change its name to "University". The right to do so is usually governed by state law and can vary greatly between states: some states apply strict rules about graduate schools or number of campuses, while others will allow any institution over a particular size or budget to call itself a university. And one must be cautious, because the formal name can matter; Dartmouth College in New Hampshire is a distinguished Ivy League institution that anyone else would consider to be a university (for example it has graduate schools), but which has not chosen to change its name. On the other hand Harvard College is the undergraduate college of the larger Harvard University and the City College of New York (both graduate and undergraduate) is one college in the City University of New York. —— Shakescene (talk) 02:22, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Ontario used to have a grade 13 (Ontario Academic Credit), but it was phased out a few years ago. Some of the Canadian colleges here like to change their names too - a college is almost always a community college, with only 3-year bachelor degree programs, so the colleges that are actually smaller campuses of a larger university have tended to change their name to "university college" or some combination (like University of St. Michael's College in Toronto). And no one ever says they went to "college" if they actually went to a 4-year university, that's a funny American quirk. Adam Bishop (talk) 02:50, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

We Americans like a little variety. We have school districts with 8-year grade schools (also called elementary schools) and 4-year high schools; others with 6-year grade school, 3-year junior high, and 3-year senior high.

As noted above, a few prestigious institutions continue to call themselves colleges when they've long been granting master's and doctoral degrees (the College of William and Mary, Boston College). On the other end of the spectrum, not a few institutions that began as secretarial schools have transformed themselves into universities, possibly for the cachet the name brings.

And then there's the community college, also called junior college, which typically grants associate degrees following the equivalent of two years' full-time study.

--- OtherDave (talk) 15:27, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

IMO, one of the biggest differences between "college" and "university" in American English is that university implies (I want to say "requires") the existence of 4-year bachelor degrees. Many community colleges (colleges which are not universities) offer only (or at least primarily) 2-year associates degrees. The Jade Knight (talk) 16:41, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

And there's a difference between Boston College and Boston University. If Boston College ever decided to upgrade itself to a University, it would have to choose a different name. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 21:07, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Another quirk of the United States is the historical structure of state universities and colleges, many of them established with Federal aid under the Morrill Land-Grant Colleges Act of 1862. There were, historically, often two systems, one a university originally established to train lawyers, doctors, ministers, engineers and military officers, e.g. what are today the University of Rhode Island and the University of California, and one or more state teachers' training colleges or normal schools (often offering masters' degrees but no doctorates), such as the former Rhode Island College of Education, now Rhode Island College, and the former San Francisco State College (now San Francisco State University and part of California State University). In many states (e.g. Rhode Island, Arizona, Montana, Michigan), the "University of ——" refers to the first system, and "—— [State] College" or "—— State University" to all or part of the second, although the lines of demarcation have changed greatly over a century and a half. [Junior colleges or community colleges, which are never called universities and which only very rarely offer bachelor's or graduate degrees, are yet a third system, with a different history.] One should also be careful in looking at historical names: for example, several institutions, including Brown University, have called themselves "Rhode Island College" at one time or another, and the University of Rhode Island used to be Rhode Island State College.

And to reinforce what's been said above, a university (as in Britain) can include, or be comprised of several schools and colleges, e.g. Harvard College, Harvard Business School or the University of California, Berkeley College of Letters and Science. —— Shakescene (talk) 00:07, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Translation please

Illustre famille franque ayant parmi ses ascendants le mérovingien Clotaire Ier, fils de Clovis, roi de Neustrie (capitale Soissons) de 511 à 561 et, pendant trois ans, roi de tous les Francs de 558 à 561. Le plus connu de cette famille est Etichon, duc d'Alsace au cours de la deuxième moitié du VIIe siècle.

Etichon, aussi dénommé Hetti ou Adalric, avait épousé Bereswinde, belle-sœur de Sigebert III. De cette union naquit Sainte Odile la sainte patronne de l'Alsace. Parmi les ascendants de Sainte Odile :

branche maternelle: Frédégonde et Chilpéric Ier, fils de Clotaire Ier et d'Arégonde. branche paternelle: Ansbert Ferréol et Blithilde, fille de Clotaire Ier et de Wultrade / Vulderade La maison d'Autriche se rattache à cette lignée très prestigieuse des Étichonides[1].

This famous family of Franks (Frankish family) had, among its ancestors, the Merovingian (king) Clotire I, son of Clovis, king of Neustrie (capital Soissons) from 511 to 561 and, for three years, king of all the Franks from 558 to 561. The best known (member) of this family was Etichon, Duke of Alsace for the (over the course of the) second half of the seventh century.

Etichon, also called Hetti or Adalric, was married to Hereswinde, sister-in-law of Sigebert III. From this union was born Saint Odile, the patron saint of Alsace. Among the ancestors descendents of Saint Odile are:

On the maternal side: Fredegonde and Chilperic I, sons of Clotaire I and Aregonde;

On the paternal side: Ansbert Ferreol and Blithilde, daughter of Clotaire I and Wltrade/Vulderade

The Austrian house linked to this line is the most prestigious of the Etichonides.

Someone may be able to do a better job with the proper names especially. // BL \\ (talk) 02:13, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

The guy whom the French text calls "Clotaire Ier" can be found at Chlothar I, and "Etichon" is Adalrich, Duke of Alsace. Those articles should lead the OP to our articles on the other named persons. Deor (talk) 02:28, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Also, shouldn't ascendants de Sainte Odile be translated "ancestors of St. Odile" rather than "descendants of St. Odile"? Deor (talk) 03:27, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely; not only is the word mistranslated, but, as a consequence, nothing that follows makes sense. Perhaps it was just a typing error? :-)I have made the correction. Thank you. // BL \\ (talk) 03:39, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Interlude

A family of Franks. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 10:50, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

• 
• 
• 

But are they Franks or Franks? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 21:08, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Either way, they were hot dogs. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 23:58, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Called Dodger dogs, or 30.48cm longs at the ball park. DOR (HK) (talk) 09:34, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, the wondrous, poetic nature of the metric system. That's why we Americans love it. Good ol' Dodger Dogs... or Dome Dogs in Minnesota. Next year I guess they'll be Outdoors Dogs. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 09:39, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Hado of Vintzgau

Hado de Vintzgau est un noble du Moyen Âge.

Hado de Vintzgau est né vers 695. Il est décédé vers 754, vers l'âge de 59 ans.

Agilulf Ier de Vintzgau (25 ans), né vers 670, décédé vers 726 vers l'âge de 56 ans. Marié ( ) avec Gerniu de SUEVIE, née vers 700, décédée vers 743 à l'âge de peut-être 43 ans.

Hado ou Agilulf (?-?), fils de Théodon. Filiation incertaine (cf. Pierre Riché).

Fils de Théodon (?-† 724), fils de Agilulf.

Unions :

X ép. Gerniu de Suevie (?-?). Dont 2 enfants:

Gérold (v.725-† v.786), comte de Vintzgau, ép. Emma d'Alémanie. Ruadpert (?-† 785).

We do not have an article on Hado, but we do have one on his son Gerold: Gerold of Vinzgouw. For the text above, I would give the following basic translation:

Hado of Vintzgau is a noble of the Middle Ages.

Hado of Vintzgau was born circa 695. He died circa 726 at age 59.

Agilulf 1st of Vintzgau (25 years), born circa 670, died circa 726 at age 56

Married ( ) to Gerniu of Suebi, born circa 700 died circa 743 at the age of about 43 years.

Hado or Agiluf (?-?), son of Theodon. Parantage incertain (see Pierre Riche)

Son of Theodon (?-724), son of Agilulf

Mariages:

Married Gerniu of Suebi (?-?). Had 2 children:

Gerold (c. 725 - c. 786) count of Vintzgau, Married Emme of Alamanni

Ruadapert (?-785)

Some general notes. I do not know when the Germanic Tribes became the Stem Duchies of Germany, so there may be some difference on how to translate "Suevi" and "Alamanni". The Suebi transformed into the duchy of Swabia and the Alamanni were also incorporated into the Suebi/Swabbia. "Alamannia" is also the Modern French translation of "Germany", so it is a little unclear on whether it should be "Emma of the Alamanni Tribe" or "Emma of Germany". --Jayron32 12:30, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm fairly sure they just mean 'Swabian'. Those labels continued to be used in the Latin of medieval chronicles for quite some time after the 'tribal' meaning had faded. Although sometimes they confused Swabians with Swedes or even Sorbs. (and let's not even get started with Goths/Geats/Gauti/Getae/Gotlanders) Seems pretty clear in this case since "Vintzgau" sounds very Swabian. (gau being Frankish in origin) --Pykk (talk) 14:22, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Fly/Fliege

In English and German, how come the verb 'to fly/fliegen' is the same as the insect 'fly/Fliege' and not something else that flies? - is this unique to Germanic languages? --AlexSuricata (talk) 02:35, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I suppose the real question is why the word "fly" was given to any organism that flies, because it would necessarily create a situation in which all the other flying organisms are not being called "fly," even though they do indeed fly. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 03:56, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Probably because it was such a commonly-seen flying insect, then as now. Kind of the sparrow of the insect world. Actually, my old Webster's says that "fly" (in either language) was originally any winged insect, and became specifically applied to the housefly. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 04:36, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, the animal 'fly' derives from using the verb 'fly' to denote "Originally 'any winged insect' (hence butterfly, etc.); long used by farmers and gardeners for any insect parasite." This explains 'dragon-fly', 'may-fly', etc., which were originally considered types of 'flies'. Once these more specific terms became common and expected, presumably 'fly' came to be used only for all the 'miscellaneous flies that aren't butterflies, mayflies, etc.', which in turn became the only meaning of 'fly' (it could no longer signify butterflies, etc.), and finally came to refer even more specifically to just 'the most common winged insects called 'flies' that look more or less alike'). This is just my speculation, but it's certainly an extremely common phenomenon for words to broaden or shrink in meaning, as people wrongly infer how broad a term is from its use in a limited number of circumstances. Meat no longer means "food", plant no longer means "seedling", etc. -Silence (talk) 04:42, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, qualifying prefixes. As with "housefly". Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 04:50, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, though if my basic theory were correct we'd expect house-fly to have been coined or popularized after fly narrowed in use, else presumably our present-day 'flies' would have been treated as non-flies for the same reason butter-flies and dragon-flies are. Although RHD approximately dates noun origins to pre-950 (fly), pre-1000 (butterfly), and 1425 (housefly), it also has 1625 (dragonfly), 1650 (mayfly), 1770 (sawfly), 1810 (damselfly), etc. The only explanation that comes to mind is that, despite housefly being coined early, its "house-" prefix made it seem to users to exclude any outdoor flies (at the time). The other fly-suffixed insects can more easily be stretched to fit all similar species, whereas 'housefly' seemed unfeasible as a generic term for everything we now colloquially call a 'fly' (which excludes many of the biological 'true flies', like mosquitoes). Only 'fly' was left, if you wanted to talk about some small unexceptional thing buzzing around your head, without taking the time to pin it down and analyze its morphology. -Silence (talk) 05:11, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Funny you should mention "mosquito", which is a Spanish word meaning "little fly". Mosca means "fly" in general. Moscón refers to a "meatfly" or "bluebottle". These words come from the Latin musca. However, "to fly" in Latin is volare, and volar in Spanish. It's in the Germanic roots that "fly" is used for both noun and verb. One German word for mosquito is... Moskito. The other is Stechmücke. The Stech part refers to "stick", in the sense of being pricked. Mücke by itself refers to a gnat or midge... or mosquito. I would guess it's from that same Latin root, musca. Hence the typical German self-descriptive approach to word formation: "stick gnat" or "stick midge". Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 10:38, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I'd be very surprised if a word like Mücke came from Latin; Old High German doesn't do much direct borrowing from Latin. The two terms may both derive from a Proto-Indo-European root *mu-, though. Mücke is more closely linked to the English word midge (and the derived term midget, "tiny gnat") than it is to anything Latin. -Silence (talk) 11:19, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

"Midge" comes from Anglo-Saxon mycge, and I wouldn't be surprised if they all go back to a common Proto-Indo-European root. I know there are some Latin words that found their way into German. The one I know about (or think I do) is Käse ("cheese") which is caseus in Latin, queso in Spanish. "Cheese" also comes from caseus by way of Anglo-Saxon. And if you leave cheese out in the open for too long, it could draw flies. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 11:40, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, if mycge/midge and mucka/Mücke go back to a common PIE root and are not borrowings, then they must also go back to a common (West) Proto-Germanic root at minimum. Musca is a more distant cognate. -Silence (talk) 13:57, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

According to the American Heritage Dictionary of Indo-European Roots, the PIE root is *mu-, which through Latin musca gives us mosquito, etc. (including, surprisingly, musket), through Germanic *mugjō gives us midge, and through Greek μυἳα gives us myiasis (don't look at the image at the top if you've just eaten). Deor (talk) 15:01, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

english-chinese

how do you say, "they don't have to be 6 of the same item" and "any 6 wines or spirits" in mandarin chinese? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.102.103.253 (talk) 05:18, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

If you look above at the question you asked a couple of days ago you ought to find the answer to your question--it looks identical to me, at least. Jwrosenzweig (talk) 07:17, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

its not read through it i need to know how to say it doesn't have to be the same —Preceding unsigned comment added by Troyhungs (talk • contribs) 21:30, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Say "Bù duǐ yī yàng de" or "boo dway yee yahng duh" with your voice falling from high to low on "boo", low on "dway", high on "yee", falling from high to low on "yahng", and somewhat low on "duh". The tone or pitch is crucial to making sense in Chinese. Marco polo (talk) 02:47, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

You can also say 任何红酒或者烈酒 (rènhé hóngjiǔ huòzhě lièjiǔ) or 凡是红酒或者烈酒 (fǎnshì hóngjiǔ huòzhě lièjiǔ): "any wine or liquor". If you want to be more specific, add 六瓶 (liù píng) before the type of wine: e.g., 任何六瓶红酒或者烈酒 (rènhé liù píng hóngjiǔ huòzhě lièjiǔ). Add 行 (xíng) of 可以 (kéyǐ) if you want it to be more of a complete sentence. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 13:50, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

(Marco polo, did you mean dei3 rather than dui3? Or have I mistranslated?) Steewi (talk) 00:57, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps 或者 can be replaced by 或 ? 66.65.140.115 (talk) 02:22, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

If this is being written (on a sign or something) it should be just 或. If it's spoken, 或者 would be more natural. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 02:24, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Note that 红酒 is "red wine". Grape wine in general is 葡萄酒. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 04:25, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not a native speaker, but in my experience I've often heard 红酒 generalized to all wines. I learned 葡萄酒 in school, but I've rarely heard it used in real life (although, keep in mind, I'm not a native speaker so I might be missing significant chunks of discourse). rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 18:25, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Could well be appeal to false authority here, but I am a native speaker.

It's true that 红酒 is often used, rather inaccurately, and fairly commonly in Hong Kong (the two sort of go together on such things) to mean any grape-based wine in certain contexts - as a sort of representative example. For example, a tax on wines might be (in common parlance) described as a tax on 红酒. However, I don't think anyone would ask for the restaurant's selection of "红酒", for example, if they in fact wanted to know about all wines.

However, the term, correctly used, means only red wine; white wine is 白葡萄酒. Given the OP's concern of avoiding all doubt with his or her customers, I think the more unambiguous term 葡萄酒 is preferrable. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 00:02, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

That's a good point, I agree. In informal speech I would be all for using them interchangeably, but in this context you're correct that the more specific term would be better. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 00:39, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

German word

I can't remember a German word. It' something related to stones/rocks/geology (a synonym of Stein, a kind of stone, some specific term, ...). It starts with a f sound (so it starts either with f, v or ph) and has a t sound in the middle or at the end. It's not Fels or a composite word starting with Fels. I red it somewhere in Internet and then I checked its meaning but now I only remember that's related to rocks. :-) --151.51.19.149 (talk) 10:12, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I'd start by going through the article names in the Minerals category on the German Wikipedia, and then its subcategories, the geology category, etc. I find this often works for me in a similar situation. It wouldn't be Fahlerz or Vaterit, by any chance? Hope you find your word!--Rallette (talk) 10:36, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

My first guess is Feldspar ("Feldspat" in German, and I'm reminded of the mnemonic for granite components "Feldspat, Quarz und Glimmer, die vergess' ich nimmer"). ---Sluzzelin talk 11:44, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps Google's search history feature can help you. Google stores all searches you ever did while logged in to e.g. Gmail. Login to e.g. Gmail, then go to http://www.google.com/history/

195.35.160.133 (talk) 11:04, 2 September 2009 (UTC) Martin.

Or perhaps Feuerstein (=flintstone)? 195.35.160.133 (talk) 12:00, 8 September 2009 (UTC) Martin.

"The bigger ___, the smaller ___" is IS necessary?

Sample sentence 1: The bigger they are, they harder they fall. Grammatically correct, yes? Sample sentence 2: The greater the factory production, the smaller the per unit environmental impacts.

Note the absence of a verb. Is that sentence correct? Or must it be "The greater the factory production is, the lesser the per unit environmental impacts are."

Sounds rather awkward... although I'd like to keep the "the ___, the (opposite) ___" structure if at all possible.

61.189.63.152 (talk) 14:04, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Sample 2 is correct. It still has a verb, it's just an implied verb (the "is" and "are" you noted). It's common to drop "is" forms in certain contexts, like at the end of clauses — "He's stronger than you" vs. "He's stronger than you are."

The only thing to worry about is tone and context. If you're writing something more formal than, say, a newspaper article, you might consider a formulation like "The more factories produce, the less each unit impacts the environment.", or even dropping the structure. -Silence (talk) 14:21, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

"The greater the scale of factory production, the smaller the environmental impact per unit."

Is this a little better inglis?83.100.250.79 (talk) 14:46, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

For +1 mark change to "smaller the extent of envirom..." ?83.100.250.79 (talk) 14:48, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

[ec] With questions like these, the bigger they are, the harder they fall. DOR (HK) (talk) 02:55, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

What's better: "a/the cow of David", or: "a/the cow of David's" ?

I ignore "David's cow" on purpose.

Would it be correct to say that "a/the cow of David's" means: a/the cow which exists among David's cows, whereas: "a/the cow of David" means: a/the cow belonging to David who doesn't necessarily have other cows?

HOOTmag (talk) 18:30, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

No, there is no such distinction. As to the question in the title, "of David's" would be the more usual and idiomatic form. "Of David" is mostly used when "of" indicates relationship (sister, friend, etc.) rather than ownership (house, cow, etc.) and even then is not common with the first name alone. --Anonymous, etied 19:33 UTC, August 31, 2009.

What do you mean by "the first name alone"? Do you really mean that "the legacy of David Bach" is better than "the legacy of David"? HOOTmag (talk) 19:50, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

• I'd say so, yes. On consideration, I think the reason is that people are more likely to use the 's possessive with a single word than with a multi-word expression. So they happily say "David's legacy" but may prefer the long form to "David Bach's legacy". Also, the "of" form sounds a bit more formal and this does not go with the use of a first name alone; "the legacy of Bach" is possible. --Anonymous, 20:00 UTC, September 1, 2009.

Actually, consider these two sentences: House of David; House of David's. The House of David would be a way to describe King David and his lineage; it's also the name of a barnstorming baseball team in the early 20th century. The house of David's would be where those guys lived. Make sense? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 23:57, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Thankxs. "where those guys lived", or simply: "where David lived". HOOTmag (talk) 07:05, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

If Tom struck the unfortunate beast with his car when the cow got onto the road, he's probably tell the cops, "I hit a cow of David's" if he weren't sure how many David owned. Had Tom known David had only one cow, Tom would probably say, "I hit David's cow" or, if a bit calmer, "I hit that cow of David's."

"I hit the cow of David" sounds like a bad parody of the Book of Kings.

--- OtherDave (talk) 01:10, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Just because "cows of David" rhymes with "house of David", but how about "a leg of John"? Can it be a proper use (though uncommon)? Must I really say always: "a leg of John's"? HOOTmag (talk) 07:05, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

A leg of John's. Here's another example of this usage: "I'm a Yankee Doodle Dandy / Yankee Doodle, do or die / A real live nephew of my Uncle Sam's / Born on the Fourth of July..." Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 07:23, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I've got a Yankee Doodle sweetheart / She's my Yankee Doodle joy / Yankee Doodle came to London / Just to ride the ponies / I'm a Yankee Doodle boy...

How does it go?

HOOTmag (talk) 08:51, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Here's Jimmy Cagney singing it the "wrong" way (1942) [1] and Billy Murray singing it the "right" way (1905), barely audible, about 45 seconds in.[2] Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 09:26, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure it's really "wrong", and maybe that's why you've put it in scare quotes. What still bothers me is the relation between "a nephew of Uncle Sam" and "a nephew of yours". I guess nobody says "a nephew of you" (i.e. "of yours" is preferable); However, "a nephew of George" is probably not less acceptable (or even more acceptable) than "a nephew of George's". What's the difference?

The double genitive also applies to sentences like "He was a good friend of mine" (not "... of me"). -- JackofOz (talk) 08:26, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

a friend of mine / was afraid of me / when I drank little wine / he was angry with me. HOOTmag (talk) 08:51, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

OP, the second one in the title question is correct. For example, "That cow of David's sure is a big 'un!" DOR (HK) (talk) 09:37, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

What if we replace "cow" by "nephew/cousin" etc.? What will be better then? "David's" or "David"? HOOTmag (talk) 15:38, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

It would still be "after the nephew of David's". It's a use of the double genitive. That section of the article doesn't give much information, and could do with some beefing up. It seems to apply sometimes where the owner is a human ("that friend of mine"; "the cow of David's" - but not "Jesus was of the house of David's", just "of David" in that case), but not where it's an animal ("the breed of the dog", not the "the breed of the dog's"), or an inanimate ("the leg of the table", not "the leg of the table's"). -- JackofOz (talk) 21:36, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

When you search in Google you realize that "a nephew of George" is more acceptable than "a nephew of George's". HOOTmag (talk) 21:50, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Google can be used to justify just about anything, but it doesn't necessarily mean that it's generally considered acceptable by people who think and write about such things. According to Google, "your the best" is just dandy. But you won't find that approved of in any book of grammar. -- JackofOz (talk) 08:10, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

In the current thread, see "Anonynous"'s response (being the first response in this thread), at 19:33 UTC, August 31, 2009. HOOTmag (talk) 13:35, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Aroud the corner

What is the main definition of around the corner. At June 2009 news say gas price for 5/gallon is around the corner. this means on the way?--209.129.85.4 (talk) 19:30, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't mean anything more than you already know - it's a (hackneyed) journalistic phrase with no objective meaning beyond some nebulous and unspecified "soon". If the author really knew when the event would happen, even a range (in a month, in a year, by 2020) he'd say. He uses this phrase because he hasn't a clue. and doesn't want to look like a wally when his prediction turns out to be abjectly wrong. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 19:34, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes. --Sean 19:37, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

The above is correct, but let's explain the metaphor. The literal meaning is that it refers to a place on the next side of the same city block that you're on. For example, say you're on 2nd Avenue between 40th and 41st Streets. Then a place that's on 41st Street between 2nd and 3rd Avenues would be around the corner. You go around one corner (turn at the intersection of 2nd and 41st) and you're there. --Anonymous, 19:41 UTC, August 31, 2009.

"Prosperity is just around the corner" - a song and/or popular saying during the Great Depression. Overall it took over 15 years to turn that corner. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 00:20, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Noël Coward, in his inimitable perversity, wrote a song called There Are Bad Times Just Around the Corner, which Robbie Williams has more recently recorded. Bad times always seem to arrive even sooner than one fears, while good times take even longer than one dares hope. -- JackofOz (talk) 08:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I've seen the phrase attributed to President Herbert Hoover (in GCSE History class materials and in the writings of Bill Bryson, and now in Conservatism in the United States). AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 08:30, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

That sounds right. That goes down with famous gaffes like McCain saying the economy was fundamentally sound, about 3 days before the bottom fell out of it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 08:37, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

FDR took that "around the corner" as a warning, and did what he could to forestall it. —Tamfang (talk) 05:52, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

"Lisses"

I am attempting to translate a French article on an aircraft to English, and I ran into the word "lisses", which is normally an adjective meaning "smooth." In the aircraft (and boating) situation, it apparently refers to a longitudinal component of the fuselage. As my understanding of written French is workable, but not great, I have been unable to figure out what the English equivalent is. Does anybody have any ideas?

Le fuselage est constitué de cadres en bois reliés par des lisses.

Thanks,

Falconus^{p t c} 19:34, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

What I got for that sentence is "The fuselage is made of wooden frames connected by ___". --Falconus^{p t c} 19:36, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I looked up "lisse" in my French-English dictionary: nothing relevant. It occurred to me that a lengthwise component of a wing is called a spar and I though thte same might apply to a fuselage. I looked up "spar" in the English-to-French side of the dictionary and it gave the French translation in an aeronautical context as "longeron". I looked this up in the French-to-English side and there was no entry for it! However, it occurred to me that I have seen the word used in English too. In the Random House Unabridged, I found "longeron" in English defined as "a main longitudinal brace or support on an airplane" (while it says that a "spar" would only be found in the wing). I then googled on "fuselage" and "wooden frames connected by" and got exactly one hit, referring to a specific aircraft, where the frames were connected by longerons.

Conclusion: "longeron" is a possibility, but not necessarily the correct answer. The item Falconus is talking about might be referring to a different kind of construction that does not use longerons. Still, something has to hold the frames at the correct spacing, since we're clearly not talking about monocoque construction; and my guess therefore is that longerons are what we're talking about.

--Anonymous, 19:55 UTC, August 31, 2009.

Oh, but I didn't look in the French wiktionary. Its entry for "lisse" does includes the relevant sense: "2. Raidisseur épousant le profil longitudinal d'une structure." Rough translation: "Stiffener following the lengthwise profile of a structure." So we are indeed talking about a longeron.

--Anonymous, 20:02 UTC, August 31, 2009.

My French-English dictionary has "ribband" as the equivalent of this meaning of "lisse". Ribband is principally used in naval contexts, but I think it corresponds to what is in the original French text. --Xuxl (talk) 20:04, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah, okay. I actually found the article on longerons, but it didn't occur to me that that's what it was talking about. Merci beaucoup! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Falconus (talk • contribs) 00:10, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

¶ Just for the record, although I doubt it adds anything new, here's the most relevant definition of lisse from the 2004 Petit Larousse Illustré:

2. LISSE n.f. 1. MAR. a. Membrure longitudinale qui maintient en place les couples d'un bateau. b. Pièce plate ou tube métallique placés à la partie supérieure d'un pavois ou d'une rambarde et servant de main courante ou d'appui.

—— Shakescene (talk) 19:07, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

The translation is now up :-)! It definitely needs some work, and I am dubious about the use of "plywood" in an airplane, but that was the only definition I was given. Is there another meaning for "contre-plaqué"? The original page is here. Thanks, Falconus^{p t c} 01:12, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Also, glass epoxy landing gear seems a little fishy... Any suggestions? Thanks, Falconus^{p t c} 01:20, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

The Spruce Goose was made of plywood. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 01:23, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

There's one sentence in there that's still in French and doesn't fit the context where it comes up. Also, I said (as per the RHU) that a longeron was a longitudinal member -- perhaps it would be better to say "spar" when you're talking about the wings and tailplane. --Anonyumous, 22:41 UTC, September 2/009.

¶ Just for the record, although I doubt it adds anything new, here's the relevant definition of lisse from the 2004 Petit Larousse Illustré:

2. LISSE n.f. 1. MAR. a. Membrure longitudinale qui maintient en place les couples d'un bateau. b. Pièce plate ou tube métallique placés à la partie supérieure d'un pavois ou d'une rambarde et servant de main courante ou d'appui.

—— Shakescene (talk) 19:07, 5 September 2009 (UTC)