Language desk
< January 26	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 28 >

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.

January 27

How to flush in different languages

I want to beautify my toilet door a bit, and am therefore looking for as many as possible different ways to write the word flush (as in 'to flush the toilet') in a lot of languages.

I'm looking for French, Italian, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, Russian, Hebrew ... Any other languages are also welcome, no matter how obscure. Thank you 195.240.222.15 (talk) 09:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

German is a bit longer "Toilettenspülung betätigen". Swedish "spola". The Spanish for pull chain versions is "tirais de la cadena" (get someone to check that.) Dutch "toilet doospoelen" 76.97.245.5 (talk) 10:32, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You forgot the 'r' in "het toilet doorspoelen"--87.67.37.105 (talk) 17:24, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re the Spanish version: in the infinitive, that should be "tirar de la cadena"., and in the imperative in would be "tire de la cadena". --NorwegianBlue^talk 17:46, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Finnish, in the imperative: "huuhtele" or "vedä". The latter is used in colloquial speech to the almost complete exclusion of the first, but would be less than correct in a technical context. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rallette (talk • contribs) 12:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

French is "tirer la chasse d'eau" (although you can leave out the "d'eau"). I was trying to find a Latin word, and I'm sure someone has invented one, but there won't be a classical one since they didn't have flushing toilets yet... Adam Bishop (talk) 15:30, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Norwegian: Infinitive: "Trekke ned" (pull down), imperative "Trekk ned". --NorwegianBlue^talk 17:46, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Russian: "смывайте унитаз" (smyvayte unitaz). There are plenty of variations, though; it all depends on what exactly you want to convey (imperative command, polite suggestion, ironically stating the obvious, etc.).—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:56, January 27, 2009 (UTC)

I'm thinking there's a couple of ways to say it in Chinese: one way to say it is "冲厕所" (Mandarin Pinyin: chōng cè sǔo). ~A H 1^(TCU) 18:40, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Japanese it's 流す　（ながす　－　nagasu）.--KageTora (talk) 06:18, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In German, no one says "die Toilettenspülung betätigen". People just say "spülen" (which also means "rinse" in general as well as "to wash the dishes"). —An gr 06:55, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I have to disagree a bit. OP didn't ask for what people say, but what to write and in manuals and on labels that's what gets written. They also say Klo but label it WC. --76.97.245.5 (talk) 03:31, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Below he says he wants to paint this on the toilet doors in a bar, so the more colloquial "Spülen" is more appropriate than the more technical "die Toilettenspülung betätigen". —An gr 08:54, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to clarify what part of speech you're actually looking for: a noun or a verb, and if the latter, then do you want the infinitive or the imperative? People who answered so far have made different assumptions about this.
Anyway, if you want a Polish translation, then the device used for flushing is called "spłuczka". The verb to flush is "spuścić wodę", the imperative form of which is "spuść wodę". — Kpalion^(talk) 08:07, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic: نظّف (spelled the same way whether it's the dictionary form or the imperative form, though pronounced differently).--K.C. Tang (talk) 13:03, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Czech, the verb "to flush" is "spláchnout" in infinitive, and "spláchni" in imperative. The flushing device is "splachovadlo". — Emil J. 13:32, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All of this is already very helpful, thank you very much. My eventual goal is to paint all of this on the toilet doors in a bar, so people definitely don't forget to flush. 195.240.222.15 (talk) 00:03, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Italian: tirare l'acqua. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.51.146.234 (talk) 21:43, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See these pages.

FLUSH THE TOILET
Flush (Hover over the book icon "INDEX" at the right and click on "Translations: Modern".)

-- Wavelength (talk) 04:53, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Chitty" as slang for 'cheque'

What is this about? I have heard this as slang for cheque, I swear it, although no dictionary anywhere seems to have it. Wiktionary has no info.--J.b p.b 101 (talk) 10:13, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't seen the word as a synonym for cheque exactly, but I have seen it (also "chit") to mean a small note such as a sickness note (see Chit). That page also lists "voucher" as a possible meaning. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 10:20, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Kittybrewster ☎ 10:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(econ) If it fits voucher, bill, tab, invoice, order to pay, it could be synonymous with cheque/ck. I've heard it as "Can I have the check/bill/chit please" and "Can I have the chit for that?" (but it's starting to look weird). Haven't heard of "chitty" at all (outside of urban). Julia Rossi (talk) 10:30, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Chitty" has a kind of pompous public school imperial Brit ring to it. Not surprised you haven't come across it, --Richardrj ^talk ^email 10:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. At my school, we had to obtain a chitty from the Head Prefect to go into the village on half-holidays and Saturdays, until we reached the Sixth form. It was called an exeat, though. They were keen on Latin, almost as much as rugger. Pavel (talk) 14:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When I was at university we had to get an exeat if we were going to spend a night away from college. DuncanHill (talk) 15:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When I was an undergraduate this was required by regulations but not actually necessary. Algebraist 15:40, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If one got back in early enough in the morning, and spoke nicely to Jim the Porter one could sometimes get away with it. DuncanHill (talk) 15:45, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When I was an undergraduate, I lived by myself off campus and could come and go as I pleased. You were considered to be an adult at 18 and therefore responsible for your own actions. —An gr 21:43, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In my time (though not, I think, DuncanHill's), the purpose of these regulations was not to control the behaviour of students but to enforce the (rather arcane) rules on how much time you had to spend at the university to obtain a degree. Algebraist 21:51, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But that is controlling the behavior of students. All my university cared about was that you passed your courses. If you did, you got your degree; if you didn't, you didn't. Now, that was in the U.S., where university life is generally quite different from that in Britain. And there are American universities that put restrictions on the comings and goings of students. Dormitories usually do have rules about what time you have to be back, and the sex of your late-night and overnight visitors, and some universities require undergrads (or at least freshmen) to live on campus. But the big state university I went to had better things to do than pry into the private lives of 50,000 students. —An gr 22:24, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There was no restriction on the sex of one's overnight visitors (if they were not members of the college one did have to get a permission slip of some kind, but that was just so the college knew who to send the bill to if they broke things, and also so they could make extra breakfast and charge you for it). DuncanHill (talk) 15:42, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard the word chitty in the United States, except of course for Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. Marco polo (talk) 14:26, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chambers Online dictionary has: chit1 noun 1 a short note or voucher recording money owed or paid. 2 a receipt or similar document. Also called chitty (chitties).

ETYMOLOGY: 18c: from Hindi citthi.

So not just a cheque then: maybe also a receipt or invoice. --TammyMoet (talk) 15:24, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. If you want to hear it in use you can hear it in the Bond film, Octopussy. The scene in M's office after the auction. "Sign a chit for that 007, its Government property now." - X201 (talk) 15:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A chit is a receipt or voucher (or a young person, normally a girl) but it is something that is signed, so someone might refer to a cheque or a bill as one. I have heard people say this in southern UK 80.229.160.127 (talk) 23:12, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reference vs. References

I noticed some resume contains the term reference or references at the bottom of the resume. That section includes multiple references. I'm bit confused about appropriate headline whether it should be Reference or References. Are they both right? --202.168.229.245 (talk) 11:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, if the section contains multiple references then the heading should be References (or Referees, alternatively). --Richardrj ^talk ^email 11:39, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Referees sounds like references wearing horizontally striped black and white shirts. StuRat (talk) 14:08, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No. In common HR parlance, a referee is someone who gives a reference. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 14:19, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think referee vs. reference is another trans-Atlantic difference. In the United States, this usage of referee is unusual outside of academic settings. If you are listing more than one reference in the United States, the heading should be "References". Marco polo (talk) 14:29, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I am mentioning some headlines of resume below:

Career Objective

It contains two or three lines of objective

Education

School and College level of education

Language Competency

Multiple languages

Computer Skills

Multiple computer skills

Achievements

One achievement

Personal Data

Personal information

Interests

Multiple interests

References

References

I'm bit confused about the use of s. Some section does not contain s though there is multiple issues, such as, Language Competency. I have read some standard format of resume, but they skipped this type plural form (e.g. No s in reference section even after having multiple references). What can be the correct form?--202.168.229.245 (talk) 14:45, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We can't know which items you are having trouble with unless you tell us. "Such as" isn't much help because we are native speakers and are therefore looking at things differently. That said, "Competency" here is a "mass noun". It is easy to see how this word might give trouble, because it can be used as a count noun: "Language Competencies" is perfectly idiomatic. With "Competency", we're talking about a person's overall competency in foreign languages, even though they are being enumerated. The resume can be thought of as a form to be filled out. The headings are in the plural to accomodate multiple entries under them, and it doesn't seem strange to me to find only one entry under a plural heading. If the headings were singular, it would seem strange to find multiple entries under it. By that reasoning, you could put "References" even if there was only one, but "Reference" is better because it makes it look more like your resume is custom-made. (You really do need two or more references.)

You have only one "Career Objective" as far as this application goes. "Education" and "Data" are mass nouns all the way. "Interest" (singular) doesn't even work. A person has interests, meaning something like hobbies, but a person can't have an interest, unexplained, in that same sense; "Interest" as a heading would be at least unclear. --Milkbreath (talk) 15:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would go with Languages as a heading rather than Language Competency. The point of a resume is to be strong and brief. A single word is always better than an abstract phrase, especially in headings. Marco polo (talk) 17:44, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between ʌ and ə

On the Wikipedia:IPA for English page, it gives "bud" or "butt" as examples of how ʌ sounds, and "Rosa’s" or "above" for ə. It may just be my Midwestern U.S. accent, but the highlighted vowels in these examples all sound the same to me. In fact, I'd probably transcribe the vowel in all four example words as ə. Could someone help clarify for me what the difference is between these two sounds?

(As a side note, how do you all type IPA on Wikipedia? For the above, I just copy/pasted from the article, but do you really just have to learn the Alt codes on the character map?)Dgcopter (talk) 16:26, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On typing IPA: when editing a page, below the editing area and edit summary there is a list of symbols which can be entered by clicking, preceded by a choice menu (starting with "Insert"). Choose "IPA" in the menu, and you will have a bunch of IPA characters at your disposal. — Emil J. 16:34, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately that doesn't work on all browsers. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 08:51, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The difference between ʌ and ə is that ʌ is used for "stressed" syllables, and ə is used for "unstressed" syllables. The best example I can think of is the word "butter" as pronounced in non-rhotic accents, would be bʌtə. In the example you gave, "butt" is a one syllable word, so its vowel is always stressed. In "above" the stess is on the second syllable, and the first syllable is unstressed. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See IPA chart for English dialects. -- Wavelength (talk) 17:09, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The symbol ə represents a mid central vowel.

The symbol "ʌ" (turned v) represents an open-mid back unrounded vowel.

-- Wavelength (talk) 17:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's true that in American English, [ʌ] and [ə] are qualitatively practically identical. But in other dialects of English, they're more distinct. That's why most dictionaries use separate symbols for them. But Merriam-Webster, for example, uses the same symbol for both sounds, transcribing "buttock" as /ˈbətək/. —An gr 07:00, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That does surprise me, I must say. I've heard Americans say both "butt" and "buttock". The t sound of butt often becomes closer to a d sound in buttock. But regardless of the t/d change, the first syllable doesn't sound, to my ears, like /ˈbət/ or /ˈbəd/, but rather /ˈbʌt/ or /ˈbʌd/, as if they're saying "buddock" (/ˈbʌdək/). -- JackofOz (talk) 20:39, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, to many (probably even most) Americans, there's really no difference between [ʌ] and a stressed schwa. I think this is the reason why function words like what and of have [ʌ] in their stressed forms in AmEng: they're re-stressed from the (more commonly occurring) weak forms with [ə]. RP uses [ɜː] as its stressed form of [ə], e.g. in Winnie-the-Pooh, where Christopher Robin says, "He's Winnie-ther-Pooh. Don't you know what ther means?" If A. A. Milne had been an American, he would probably have written "thuh" rather than "ther". —An gr 21:05, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If the sounds are identical, we would not use two different IPA symbols for them. The point of the IPA is to (attempt to) create a system of transcription in which each character is understood internationally (ie, whatever dialect you happen to speak) as referring to a particular sound. In this context, statements like to many (probably even most) Americans, there's really no difference between [ʌ] and a stressed schwa make a mockery of the system. They are two distinct sounds; that's why there are two distinct symbols. Americans' limited range of vowel sounds does not change that.

As Wavelength points out above, "ʌ" represents an open-mid back unrounded vowel, while "ə" represents a mid central vowel. They're not even formed in the same part of the mouth. They're certainly discrete sounds. Malcolm XIV (talk) 14:19, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"If the sounds are identical, we would not use two different IPA symbols for them." Sure we would. The IPA is flexible enough to allow for phonologically informed transcriptions. A sound that is best transcribed [k] in one language may be best transcribed [ɡ̊] in another, even though the two sounds are identical. Likewise, we can use the same IPA symbol for two different sounds, such as the [i] of French and the [i] of English or, in this case, the [ʌ] of RP and the [ʌ] of American English. IPA symbols, especially the ones for vowels but to a lesser extent also the ones for consonants, do not represent unique sounds with precise acoustic and articulatory properties, but rather constellations of sounds with roughly similar acoustic and articulatory properties. The choice of symbols used to represent the sounds is made as much on the basis of the relative positions of the sounds with respect to the other sounds in the language under discussion, and on the basis of the phonological patterning of the sounds in that language, as on the basis of the ideal cardinal vowel points or precise places of articulation of consonants. —An gr 14:45, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Latin ad, ex

Hi, I know that the latin prepositions ad and ex are sometimes shortened to a and e (as in E pluribus unum). However, none of my sources give any conditions under which these words are shortened. (It seems to me that ad is shortened more often than ex.) Are the shortened versions used in a later dialect of Latin? Are they shortened when preceeding certain vowels or consonants? Do Latin-speakers just shorten them whenever they're in a hurry to say something? Jonathan ^talk 20:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In pre-vulgar Latin, ab can shorten to a, not ad, but as Latin transitioned into some Romance languages (e.g. Spanish, French), ad became a. However, let me re-emphasize, a ≠ ad in classical Latin, but rather a = ab. As for the shortening rule (as I learned it, at least), ab and ex are appropriate for all environments, but ab can optionally shorten to a before consonants (sort of comparable to the English a and an). Ex can be a little more complicated. Jenny's First Year Latin, as I recall, lays out a specific list consonants where e is appropriate, but the rule is practically the same as a: shortening optional before consonants. Hope that helps a little...wait, I just remember I have Gildersleeve's Latin Grammar, so I'll look it up now....--el Aprel (^facta-_facienda) 22:56, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Gildersleeves has the answer. In 417.1,6, he states, "The form before vowels and h is always ab; before consonants usually a though ab is not uncommon before consonants other than the labials b, f, p, v, and is frequent before l, n, r, s and i (j); abs is found only before te and in the combination absque. Cicero uses abs te in his early writings, but prefers a te in his later ones." Later Gildersleeves mentions, "E is used before consonants only, ex before both vowels and consonants." In the first chapter, Gildersleeves explains that the rules are different for preposition+verb combinations (e.g. aufero), but for all other constructions in classical Latin, these rules hold up.--el Aprel (^facta-_facienda) 23:13, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! I'm sorry for mixing up ab [from] and ad [to] (It was the Romance a that threw me off XP). It just bugs me when the dictionary shows two alternate forms of something and doesn't say when to use one over the other! Jonathan ^talk 21:18, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

añorar

How would you translate 'añorar' into English? From the RAE I got 'to recall with regret the loss of something very dear' but I can't think of a concise 1 word English translation (if there is one). 72.200.101.17 (talk) 21:46, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To miss or to yearn. Grsz ¹¹ 21:53, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pine (for)? --Milkbreath (talk) 23:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"That parrot's not dead, he's just añoraring for his friends in the fjords." :-) StuRat (talk) 16:25, 28 January 2009 (UTC) [reply]

¡Este loro no está muerto! Está... descansando. Bonito plumaje el noruego azul, ¿eh? Probablemente, añora los fiordos. --NoruegoAzul^talk 19:07, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]