Language desk
< June 28	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 30 >

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.

June 29

Quick German sentence-translation

"Wir haben uns dann ausgezogen und ich bin in sie reingekommen." Any help, please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.9.226.195 (talk) 04:47, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Then we got undressed and I came in her". Seems to have been an unsatisfyingly brief encounter. +An gr 05:44, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe. Very nice. Thank you, sir! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.9.226.195 (talk) 07:03, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noghl

Does anybody know what that word would be in correct Arabic script? I was hoping to check if there is an article in the Farsi or any other Wikipedias. If anybody has the skills to add one if not that would be great. Thanks - Taxman ^Talk 17:22, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently it is "نقل". There is a Farsi article, fa:نقل. It's also an Arabic word, but it means "transport" (ar:نقل). Adam Bishop (talk) 19:19, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, thanks. - Taxman ^Talk 19:53, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a difference between farsi نقل and arabic نقل. If you look closely at the opening sentence of fa:نقل, you'll see the vowel mark for 'waw'. Arabic نقل ('transport') would have alef as its vowel mark. Probably, the Farsi word is not an Arabic loanword. --Soman (talk) 13:15, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bangkok, Thailand?

Americans, as we all know, love to disambiguate placenames by sticking a comma after them, followed by the appropriate state (Dallas, Texas; Des Moines, Iowa; etc).

They also – to everyone else's chagrin – do this to various other places around the world, such as Madrid, Spain or London, England.

But it seems that the rule doesn't apply to places in Asia, such as Tokyo, Japan; Delhi, India; or Baghdad, Iraq. Why might this be? 87.112.4.155 (talk) 20:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A wild guess, but maybe it's because due to America's history it's far more likely to have a town in America named after a European town (like for instance Paris, Texas) than after an Asian one (imagine, say, "Ulan Bator, Maine"?). If there is a possibility of a mix-up, you might as well be cautious. TomorrowTime (talk) 20:34, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are Delhi, Ontario and Calcutta, Ohio ... and Bagdad, Florida could cause some confusion. Gandalf61 (talk) 14:30, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's also a Bagdad, California. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 21:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This sage advice from a venerable Wikipedian may be worth repeating:

Concerning "Paris, France"
One reads at Wikipedia: "Charles Perrault was born in Paris, France to a wealthy bourgeois family." In some circles "Paris" just does mean "Paris-France." Paris, Kentucky is widely referred to as "Paris, Kentucky" if it is discussed at all. In my family, some of whom live in Louisville actually, anyone using the expression "Paris-France" hears a murmur of "not Paris, Kentucky" interpolated among his attentive listeners. Thus: "Charles Perrault was born in Paris France not Paris Kentucky to a wealthy bourgeois family."
I hope every reader will make the same mental interpolation whenever they read the words "Paris, France." Thus, though one dare not correct the usage, one may still derive some entertainment.

(With apologies for my formatting - please feel free/obliged to rearrange for eye-pleasingness). Fouracross (talk) 11:31, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why the OP thinks of this as an American habit. Today's Main Page has the sentence, "A freight train carrying liquefied petroleum gas derails and explodes in Viareggio, Italy, killing at least 15 people and injuring more than 50 others" (emphasis added). Would a non-American writer have simply written "...in Viareggio, killing...", thus assuming that his readers know where Viareggio is? Or would a non-American have written "...in Viareggio (Italy), killing..."? Or "...in Viareggio, which is in Italy, killing..."? Or what? And why is writing it like this "to everyone else's chagrin"? +An gr 11:50, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The BBC, for examples, says "the northern Italian town of Viareggio" [1], which sounds much more euphonious to non-American ears. 209.251.196.62 (talk) 14:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because grammatically it makes the appearance that "Italy" is a part of the name of the city (which is not the case), and people are usually allergic to somebody coming and mangling the name of their city. Plus, the OP did not mention Viareggio, but well-known historical cities like Madrid and London. (That's not to say that Viareggio is not a historical city, but it is much less known.) Writing these as "Madrid, Spain" or "London, England" is taken as a sign of total ignorance or even an insult to national pride, because every educated person is supposed to know that Madrid is in Spain. As for Viareggio, the name is obviously Italian. If that is not sufficient, there are many other ways how to disambiguate it. To begin with, your typical news article will start with something like "(AFP/Rome)" right below the heading, which should be enough to set the reader to Italy. Failing that, you can always use "in Viareggio in Italy" or "in the Tuscan city of Viareggio" or something similar. Of course, that's only a problem for printed media; on Wikipedia, "in Viareggio" works just fine. — Emil J. 12:40, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see that it makes the appearance that "Italy" is a part of the name of the city; after all, it's separated from the name of the city by a comma. With American cities, the state is not part of the name of the city either. The name of the city where I grew up is "Austin", not "Austin, Texas"; if someone writes "Austin, Texas", it's only to disambiguate it so the reader knows that the Austin in Texas (as opposed to the ones in Minnesota, Quebec, or Western Australia) is meant. As you say, "in Viareggio in Italy" is an option, but I'm still skeptical that the "in Viareggio, Italy" locution is somehow typically American. I'm even more skeptical of the OP's basic premise that Americans are more likely to say or write "London, England" and "Madrid, Spain" than they are to say "Tokyo, Japan" and "Delhi, India". (But the OP isn't the first person to notice and comment on this habit: productions of Candide usually get a laugh when Cunegonde sings, "Here I am in Paris, France" in "Glitter and Be Gay", precisely because it seems so absurd that she would feel the need to disambiguate like that.) +An gr 13:05, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With American cities, the state is not part of the name of the city either. Sure. But only Americans are exposed to this idiosyncratic usage. Non-Americans are not, and therefore they may not understand the construction in such a way, since it's not otherwise used in English: you can't say "in kitchen, my apartment" or "in drawer, the writing table". Comma or no comma, it makes the appearance that both parts denote the same object because that's what apposition of two noun phrases normally means, for non-Americans: "in Viareggio, his birthplace". — Emil J. 13:47, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To judge from Adam Bishop's answers below, and some comments at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements)/Archive 5, it would appear that Canadians and Australians are also exposed to this not-so-idiosyncratic-after-all usage. +An gr 14:42, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It remains idiosyncratic, from the grammatical point of view, whether or not Canadians are exposed to it. In what other context would a comma be used in this way? It wouldn't. Thus, this usage is idiosyncratic. 209.251.196.62 (talk) 14:58, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've often – well, more than once – heard people from Texas say "Austin Texas" over and over (even after it has been clearly disambiguated in the conversation), making Austin my own favorite example of the pattern; so it's funny that Angr says otherwise. (I wasn't aware of the other Austins, and will forget them as soon as I close this page, though of course I'm far from surprised that they exist.) It seems that to many Americans the state name is like a surname, and perhaps some feel uncomfortable referring to a city by its first name alone if they're not on intimate terms! One occasionally hears the same pattern with British county names – "four thousand holes in Blackburn Lancashire" – but less often, I think, than with in ("Huddersfield in Yorkshire"). —Tamfang (talk) 15:50, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For me, the only one that's really like a surname is "Washington DC", which I would probably continue to say even after it was clear that I didn't mean Washington State. +An gr 16:13, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is definately a difference between American and European presentations of place names. The 'town name, state name' formula is quite typical American, and its usage is clearly seen amongst American wikipedians. To some extent is a practical response to the fact that there are 1,000s of cities in the US sharing names with other namesakes in other US states. But it is also part of notion of American exceptionalism. An American wikipedian often writes 'A. B. is a writer from Albany, New York', and would rarely write 'A. B. is a writer from Albany, United States'. The US state is but on par with non-US countries. I think there was a lengthy discussion on this at 'naming conventions' in the past. --Soman (talk) 13:30, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At Wikipedia, I wouldn't let "A. B. is a writer from Albany, New York" or even "A. B. is a writer from Albany, New York" stand. I'd edit it to either "A. B. is a writer from Albany, New York, USA" or "A. B. is an American writer from Albany, New York". I'd be interested in knowing whether Canadians follow the American or the European custom before asserting American exceptionalism. +An gr 13:46, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We would say Albany, New York; we might even just say "Albany" assuming that everyone already knows it is in New York. We also find it really irritating when Americans ignore our provinces, and instead say "Toronto, Canada". Adam Bishop (talk) 13:59, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But would you say "London, England" to disambiguate it from your own London? +An gr 14:13, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I would, but I'm from that London. Most Canadians would say "London, Ontario". Our own mighty Thames is also not the default for most Canadians. Sometimes people say "real London" and "fake London" (and "fake Thames"). Adam Bishop (talk) 14:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also Canadian, but I'm from Alberta, so here "London" means England unless you specify otherwise, since we're nowhere near London, Ontario. It's a matter of whether a place is important enough in a particular other place that you'd think of it without its "surname." And I concur with Adam's statement that it's irritating when our provinces get ignored and people say things like "Halifax, Canada," when we're used to hearing "Halifax, Nova Scotia." So that's not entirely an American thing. Cherry Red Toenails (talk) 00:43, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a look at the archives of Wikipedia's naming conventions, you'll see it made manifest over and over again – by many different people, from a number of different countries – that this comma usage is an American habit that really irritates other people. 209.251.196.62 (talk) 13:32, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's worth maintaining the irritation, then; it's good to know who the trivially irritable people are, especially when the source of the irritation is harmless. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 23:09, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You might find World city interesting. It suggests the first characteristic of a "world city" might be "International, first-name familiarity; whereby a city is recognized without the need for a political subdivision." The rule I generally apply, both on Wikipedia and elsewhere, is that capital cities and some other major cities (eg: Chicago, Barcelona, St. Petersburg, etc.) don't need need further qualification with their country and/or state; otherwise my use of further qualification would depend on the audience and context. Astronaut (talk) 09:49, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not to be pedantic, but "capital cities" does not imply first-name familiarity. I doubt that very many people know where Bismarck, Augusta, Montpelier, or Helena are, and the capital of South Carolina is likely to be confused with the federal capital's district. The same goes for national capitals, e.g. Funafuti, Nuuk, Moroni or Dili. Its not a matter of size either; Hargeisa, Kishinev (Chişinău), Astana, Naypyidaw, Yaoundé, Yamoussoukro and Antananarivo are all larger than Washington, DC.

First-name familiarity is in any case a subjective thing. When I hear "Dover", I think of white cliffs. And certain Irishmen were most certainly not thinking of the capital of Kentucky when they recently misspelled "Frankfurt" in a travel advert. -- Fullstop (talk) 12:34, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese question

What does "touitsu to seigi to jiyuu" translate to in English? What country's motto is it? --hello, i'm a member | talk to me! 22:09, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to ja:国と地域の標語の一覧 and en:List of national mottos, Tōitsu to seigi to jiyū (統一と正義と自由) is translation of West Germany's motto "Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit", in English "Unity and Justice and Freedom". --Kusunose 03:19, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's still the motto of united Germany too. It's even written around the edges of our €2 coins. It's the beginning of the third verse of the Deutschlandlied, which is the only verse that is considered the national anthem. +An gr 08:50, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]