Language desk
< February 11	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 13 >

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.

February 12

Heckling in a movie theatre

This question had come up in the humanities reference desk. Is heckling applicable only for a live performance? The heckling article at least doesn't mention about movie theatres. I guess the purpose of heckling is to get the performer's attention, not just to impress/disgust the audience sitting nearby. Is booing a better word for "heckling" in a movie theatre? How have these words adapted to the movie and televsion media which are virtual performances, and distracting the "performers" is not possible? Jay (talk) 05:51, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't call it heckling, but talking back to the screen is more popular for some movies (like The Rocky Horror Picture Show) and in some locations, like urban centers ("Don't you open that door, girl !"). StuRat (talk) 06:22, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From the article on heckling it appears the heckle is to let the performer know your thoughts - like you say at a virtual performance that's futile. I can't say i've ever heard heckling at a cinema screen - i've heard 'witty' remarks, but really it's not like being at a comedy gig where you're going to get a retort/something extra from the performance so seems a bit pointles to me. Anyhoo from a language perspective I imagine people will still call it heckling even if it means that the word ends up having to have a further meaning added to its list. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 09:32, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Film critic Joe Queenan has a book called Confessions of a Cineplex Heckler [1]; if anyone would know about being rude in cinemas, it's him. --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 11:27, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would guess that often the heckler's main purpose is to draw attention to himself, in which case it wouldn't matter if Tom Cruise didn't respond. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 12:58, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is a good observation. I guess we should wait for dictionaries to get updated! Jay (talk) 11:13, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was frequently annoyed by Los Angeles-area movie viewers who felt it necessary to hiss the trailers of movies they obviously felt were beneath them. So, don't watch the movie, nobody wants to know if you think yourself superior to the upcoming films. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 06:52, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ch sound

Exactly how is that "ch" thingy pronounced in languages such as German or Czech? Vltava 68 12:53, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean orthographic "ch", predominantly as IPA [x] and [ç]. AnonMoos (talk) 13:14, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For Czech, see voiceless velar fricative. For German, it may also be a voiceless palatal fricative or a voiceless uvular fricative depending on context and dialect. — Emil J. 13:35, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Antihomophonym?

The Polish man applied polish to his shoes. Is there a name for a word like "polish" that retains a single spelling but has two different meaning which are also pronounced differently? Can anyone give me another example? I can think of many words that have multiple meanings but I can't think of any others that have both different meanings and distinctly different pronunciations like Polish/polish.--70.19.73.184 (talk) 14:22, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Homograph.~~ --Milkbreath (talk) 14:38, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Homographs can have the same pronunciation. Heteronym is what's wanted here. Algebraist 14:42, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The interesting feature about Polish/polish is that the difference is communicated visually by the capital letter. Are there any other close pairs for which this is true? BrainyBabe (talk) 15:29, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This page gives ares/Ares, august/August, bund/Bund, ewe/Ewe, junker/Junker, manes/Manes, tang/Tang. Algebraist 15:43, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are more at capitonym. Part 17 of the rec.puzzles archive at www.faqs.org (sorry, I can't post a direct link here) includes a classified list of homographs with 13 capitonyms on it. --Anonymous, 19:11 UTC, February 12, 2009.

I've always used homonyms for words with the same spelling and pronunciation (like bow [gesture of obeisance] and bow [front of a ship]), homographs for words with the same spelling but different pronunciations (like bow [either of the two above] and bow [device for shooting arrows]), and homophones for words with different spellings but the same pronunciation (like bow [front of a ship] and bough [limb of a tree]). My usage may be somewhat idiosyncratic, but the distinctions are useful. Deor (talk) 15:46, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Homograph refers to words that have the same spelling but different meaning (like buffalo the noun referring to the North American mammal and buffalo the verb meaning to bully). They may or may not have different pronunciation. Algebraist had it right. Livewireo (talk) 16:35, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would homographic heterophone/heterophonic homograph be too neologistic? — Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 20:33, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They have the advantage that the meaning is clear. They are a trifle silly though. Algebraist 01:12, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all the responses. Heteronym it is!--70.19.73.184 (talk) 01:04, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is a conceptual term ?

I haven't been able to find anything about it. Thanks a lot for answers. --Waglione (talk) 16:30, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would think that would be a term which describes a concept, most likely an intangible concept, like "national patriotism". For example: "National patriotism is fine as a conceptual term, but how exactly do you plan to restore it, Senator ?". StuRat (talk) 16:34, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Right, the point i'm looking for is that "most likely an intangible concept". I think I need some Aesthetics or Epistemologic points of view. Uhmm :)) Help please:) --Waglione (talk) 16:45, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Guess a conceptual term is an idea-related abstract word or words related to any specific field of study or topic. Speaking through examples in aesthetics (art theory), terms like say, "facture" and "surface" are used in a conceptual or meta-material sense to describe the working of material or structures beyond their apparent/obvious materiality. The idea of "depth of surface" is not to do with the exact surface (say, canvas or paper, or other surface) but to do with language for thinking about the thing as concept. The thing-as-concept is usually expanded through contextualising it: in language, as signifier, in history and culture etc. In this way, these filled abstractions become conceptual terms, or load-bearing terms. Off top of my head don't know where to point you though, Julia Rossi (talk) 08:16, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could try Self-reference for starters. Julia Rossi (talk) 08:24, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much Julia. --Waglione (talk) 16:26, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! :) Julia Rossi (talk) 13:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

German Zwirn

I'm much more at home at a home improvement store than at a crafts store. In Germany I used a type of thread called "Zwirn" (de:Zwirn) to remove mirrors from walls. What would I send someone to go shopping for in the US if I wanted to describe how to do it? (I don't need the textbook term, but rather what Michaels or Wal-Mart might sell it as.) 76.97.245.5 (talk) 17:34, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not English but I found this maybe can help you. --Waglione (talk) 18:13, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Twine? —An gr 18:52, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, the stuff is much thinner than twine, but about twice as thick as ordinary sewing thread. It's stiff heavy-duty thread. Someone told me it was cotton, but it felt more like linen fibers. I'll try to get a picture.76.97.245.5 (talk) 19:51, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand how you use Zwirn/twine/string/yarn to remove mirrors from walls. —An gr 20:21, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've purchased "heavy duty thread", called just that, for repairing heavier fabrics. -- Coneslayer (talk) 20:37, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Got a picture To remove a mirror that has been stuck to the wall with those double sided adhesive pads: take a length of this stuff, feed it behind the mirror keeping hold of both ends, move it towards the other edge with "sawing" movements. The thread will rather cut your fingers than break. It won't damage the mirror, which would happen with pretty much any other method I've heard of. Coneslayer's "heavy duty thread" sounds good. I'll see whether I can find it here and whether it's similar. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 20:48, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How about dental floss?--TammyMoet (talk) 21:15, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Similar, but not quite the same. This stuff is even sturdier and won't fray into separate strands as most floss products do. I's also natural fiber (I think).76.97.245.5 (talk) 21:45, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

if it doesn't fray, are you sure its not monofilament of some sort, like maybe high test Monofilament fishing line? That may work well for your purposes? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:01, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The reason it doesn't fray is that it is so tightly twirled (plied?!). I took a bit apart. It's 3 thin strands of fiber - each individually twisted into a tight smooth ply (!?). These three strands are then so tightly twirled together that the thread is almost rigid. It doesn't fray like dental floss because broken fibers are held in place till the whole thread breaks. ("ply" doesn't work for me. I keep thinking of toilet tissue and Labrador puppies! :-) 76.97.245.5 (talk) 05:08, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could that be twisted yarn, perhaps? Lectonar (talk) 10:40, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not from what I found online, but I'll see if I can find it at the store.76.97.245.5 (talk) 22:40, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

spanish translation, sore

hey how can i say sore or soreness, as in my muscles are sore. is it, "mis músculos son doloridos"? that's what babelfish said. i speak spanish so i can tell already it should be están but doloridos doesnt sound right to me and if it is correct is there a different way of saying it. particularly in the chilean dialect?Troyster87 (talk) 21:36, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would go with "Me duele ..." followed by the part that feels sore. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 21:48, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i mean sore from working out not painTroyster87 (talk) 23:34, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean Delayed onset muscle soreness ? Then, that in Spain is colloquially called "agujetas" [2]. In Latin American countries it has other colloquial names, I think. --Taraborn (talk) 13:26, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you refer to a pain, simply say "me duelen los músculos" or "tengo los músculos dolidos". "Tengo agujetas" is good, colloquially,"officially" it is called "cansancio muscular". --El Mexicano (talk) 08:55, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Name [Why so many starting with J?]

Why do so many given names start with "J"? That letter is one of the least used in the English language. JCI (talk) 21:49, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most names of English speakers are not English in origin. For example, many names beginning with J are of Hebrew origin, such as John, Jonathan, James, Jacob, Joshua, Joseph, and Joanna. Algebraist 21:58, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See List of Biblical names#J. -- Wavelength (talk) 22:24, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And many such names either start with a form of Yahweh, or are third person masculine ~~perfective~~ imperfective verbs; both of these start with י (yodh) in Hebrew, which usually comes through Greek and Latin to 'J' in English. --ColinFine (talk) 23:39, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note, too, that the [anglophonic] letter J doesn't exist in either Biblical Hebrew or Modern Hebrew. That letter in a (Americanized German-origin) surname like mine is transliterated with the letter gimel followed by the symbol geresh. -- Deborahjay (talk) 07:12, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but it's third person masculine imperfective verbs. Another source of y- in Hebrew was the fact that word-initial w- changed to y- in pre-Hebrew (e.g. Hebrew yayin shares a common origin with English wine, an "old eastern mediterranean" word). AnonMoos (talk) 00:30, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'Imperfective' it is, (corrected above). I often get this confused because that form often has future meaning, but in Russian and other Slavonic languages it is the perfective that often has future meaning. But are there any names with that 'y-' from 'w-'? If not, your observation doesn't seem to have anything to do with the question.

And I take issue with Deborah's assertion that 'J doesn't exist in ... Hebrew'. It's true in the literal sense that Hebrew uses the Hebrew alphabet and so no Roman letters exist in it; but a speaker of German or most East European languages would say that 'י' corresponds exactly to 'J', and so, loosely, that Hebrew has a J. What is true is that the sound denoted in English by 'J' does not occur in Hebrew, and so there is no method in its native orthography for writing it. --ColinFine (talk) 08:36, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! Sorry for my inadvertent anglocentric contention, above, and thanks to ColinFine for catching and correcting it! (Believe me, living with an anglophonic "J" initial in Israel for a quarter of a century can get tedious at times...)-- Deborahjay (talk) 17:11, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because 'J' is a consonant with a relatively unusual sound in English. It's also one of the most recent letters of the alphabet. In many (most?) European languages, it has the IPA /j/ value. English words with that sound ended up using 'y' instead. E.g. 'yes', 'year', 'youth' (c.f. German:'ja', 'jahr', 'jugend'). Names, however, didn't get the same treatment. They tended to keep the 'j' but change the pronunciation. Many if not most English names starting with 'j' were originally pronounced with a 'y' sound, not least the Hebrew examples above. To contribute a non-Hebrew one, there's 'Jasper'. (Although since it's a side-variant of 'Caspar', the English version 'j' is incidentally somewhat closer to the original-of-the-original than the German 'Jasper' or Danish 'Jesper') --130.237.179.182 (talk) 11:59, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, can anyone tell me when this 'J'-shift occured? Seems to have been later than The Great Vowel Shift, because stuff from the Renaissance often still write 'Iohn' rather than 'John', which I'm assuming meant that they were still being pronounced as /jo:/ at that time? --130.237.179.182 (talk) 12:02, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, the sound [dʒ] for words spelled with "j" was brought over with the Normans in 1066. (The French later smoothed it down to [ʒ], but it kept its sound in English.) So it always had that sound in English, even when "i" and "j" were considered variants of the same letter rather than distinct letters. Thus Renaissance spellings like "Iohn" weren't actually pronounced differently (at least with respect to that consonant) than they are today. —An gr 12:07, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that clears things up! Interesting though, because Germans and others were also writing 'J' as e.g. 'Iohannes'. Which kind of makes more sense, since it's easier to get from the 'io' diphthong to /jo/ than it is to get to /dʒ/. --130.237.179.182 (talk) 12:39, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the remark above about English words is missing the mark. There are few if any English words beginning with 'j' that go back to Old English: they nearly all come from French or Latin, post-conquest - many names, certainly, but also words like 'judge', 'jealous', 'joke'. (All the short words that strike one as probably English rather than French, like 'jug', 'job', 'jag' turn out to be rather modern). Generally words in 'y' go back to 'g' (or rather to yogh). Certainly for the three quoted above ('yes', 'year', 'youth') only one of the dozens of historical spellings listed by the OED begins with 'i' - and that is a dialect form 'iss', in which the 'i' is a vowel.

In German there is a remnant of the older confusion between 'I' and 'J': there are some place names which begin with 'J' pronounced as a vowel (i.e. a graphical variant of 'I') Unfortunately I can't recall any names.

It's intriguing that French (and hence English) and Portuguese have maintained the original 'I' (later 'J') in many words but changed the pronunciation, whereas Italian has changed the pronunciation in a similar way but not retained the spelling (eg 'Giulia'). --ColinFine (talk) 17:18, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Italian does have some words beginning with an I followed by a vowel. See w:it:Iacobus, w:it:Iefte, w:it:Ieri e oggi, w:it:Iesse, w:it:Iodio, w:it:Ione, w:it:Ionosfera, and w:it:Iuventas.

-- Wavelength (talk) 23:19, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- Yes, I think all three examples I mentioned were originally spelled with a 'g' in Old English (year-gear). But didn't O.E. 'g' (preceding a soft vowel) have a /j/ sound rather than today's /dʒ/? The spelling changed for the words to 'y', with preserved pronunciation, but the same didn't seem to happen for names. I'm thinking about 'George', which is German 'Jürgen/Jörg' and Swedish 'Göran'. --130.237.179.182 (talk) 14:24, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Italian uses j in some words. I've seen a few, but the only one I can bring to mind right now is Italo Tajo. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:25, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@130.237: yes, 'g' preceding a front vowel was /j/. But Angr has already told us that 'j' for /dʒ/ came over with the Normans in the 11th century. Thus there is no evidence for a /j/ to /dʒ/ shift within English at any period, and all your /j/ words are irrelevant. --ColinFine (talk) 23:50, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone else cringe at the moment in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade when our hero remembers that, in Latin, Jehovah is spelled with <I> not <J>? If the puzzle is in Latin, <I> and <J> ought not to be separate choices at all. —Tamfang (talk) 17:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

<j> is used for /j/ in Latin, Germanic languages (other than English), Slavic languages, Esperanto, and i think formerly in Italian. My hist.ling. teacher called it jod when he was talking about Latin or German, and jay when he was talking about English or French. —Tamfang (talk) 17:44, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have to take this opportunity to mention my software development laboratory project at university. Of all of our group members, only one had a given name not beginning with J, and his nickname was Jan. Both the project manager and the representative of the customer had given names beginning with J. JIP | Talk 20:39, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was once on a software project where my three superiors were all named Jim. One of them once said to me, "Your mission, Mister Phelps—" to which I had to say "that's all we need, another Jim!" —Tamfang (talk) 18:33, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question about a Russian song

I have a song by a beautiful singer called Саша, called 'Єто Просто Доҗдь', but she pronounces it 'Єто Простон Доҗдь'. Is it common in Russian to add a 'n' before a 'd'? If so, is there any other time that this occurs? I have not encountered it before.--KageTora (talk) 22:07, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you mean 'Это'. 'Є' is used in Ukranian, but not Russian. (But I don't know the answer to your question) --ColinFine (talk) 23:42, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I couldn't find the 'Э' in the Cyrillic section of the edit bit in Wikipedia, so I used 'Є'.--KageTora (talk) 08:38, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's third from the end of the main alphabet (before ю and я). --ColinFine (talk) 08:42, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since we're mentioning typography, it's Ukrainian, not Ukranian. :) -- JackofOz (talk) 09:28, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Russian)) you mean "Это просто дождь". http://mirpesen.com/ru/sasha/jeto-prosto-dozhd.html If you'l have any questions about Russian language or music you can ask me))--Slav9ln (talk) 10:20, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, he did have a question, which no one has answered yet, namely why did the singer pronounce an "n" sound on the end of просто? —An gr 10:31, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've just listened to the song to answer you question. No sound "n" must be used there. Maybe in some parts of the song it's possible to hear it and I think it is coonected with the manner of singing: she makes an inhalation or exhalation while singing and the result is this "n".--Slav9ln (talk) 10:45, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I listened and did hear a slight 'n' sound. But hardly strong enough to be written. It's simply a case of the 'o' being colored by the following 'd'. If she was speaking rather than singing, there wouldn't be a continuous air-flow and it wouldn't be there. As it stands, it's pretty hard to get from the 'o' to 'd' while exhaling without creating a slight 'n' (nasal stop) in-between. --130.237.179.182 (talk) 12:18, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that makes sense. Also, what does the title mean? Google Translator gives me 'Это just Доҗдь' which is not very helpful.--KageTora (talk) 15:30, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Google Translator gives me "This is just rain". One problem might be that you used the non-Russian character җ instead of the Russian ж. (They're very similar, but not identical!) —An gr 15:36, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'This is just rain'? Ok, I seem to have entered my Ukrainian version from above, rather than the Russian version. OK. everything comes together now. Cheers, folks!--KageTora (talk) 15:34, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]