Language desk
< September 26	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 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.

September 27

Bukovinan or Bukovinian

Which is the correct attributive form? Does it change depending on whether the noun is a person vs. inanimate object, and if so, which is which? -- Deborahjay (talk) 10:15, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a Bukowina Institute in Augsburg, homepage [1] (German only, but there is an email address). Maybe they can suggest a "correct" term. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:39, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In German, maybe. English speakers usually decide for themselves how their adjectives will be. Google recognises both forms, but -inian outweighs -inan 10:1. Cf. Herzegovina > Herzegovinian/Herzegovinan, where the disparity is only c. 2:1. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:22, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cf. the ever-present duality of Argentine and Argentinian. "Argentinan" is conceivable, but I don't think anyone uses it. While Caroline is relatively rare for someone or something from (North or South) Carolina, and Carolinian is I think near-universal, "North Carolinan" just sounds wrong, perhaps by comparison with Californian, where the "i" is already present in California. On the other hand (with a different penultimate vowel), Arizonan sounds right and Arizonian, though possible, sounds odd. And I've never seen or heard (North or South) Dakotian or Minnesotian, nor (on the other hand) Canadan. (Different questions come up with the spelling and pronunciation of "Utahn" and "Utahan".) —— Shakescene (talk) 05:48, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's a duality there? "Argentine" relates to silver, "Argentinian" relates to Argentina. Fairly unambiguous. Now, "argentina" means "argentine" in English, so "Argentine Republic" is a valid translation of "República Argentina". It couldn't be right to say someone/thing from Argentine is "argentine" since that's not the noun that adjective is supposed to describe. The people aren't silver, they're of the country of silver. I think the relatively widespread use of "argentine" to describe things from Argentina is an example of linguistic interference, rather than lexical ambiguity. --Pykk (talk) 22:46, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because of the repetitious syllables in "Argentinian", I've usually preferred to use "Argentine" both as an adjective of nationality (of things or people) and to the people. And if you care to look at British coverage of the Falklands/Malvinas War of 1982, you'll see Argentine and Argentines used in the same way (e.g. in Max Hastings' history). For that matter look at Wikipedia's own article on the Battle of Goose Green, e.g.

Just after 2.30 am on 28 May, 2nd Para launched its attack on the Argentines to capture Goose Green 'before breakfast'. RI 12's A Company defended the Darwin Parks sector with two rifle platoons, and a mortar platoon. For ninety minutes the forward Argentine platoons were pounded with naval artillery. In the ensuing night battle about twelve Argentines were killed.

at Battle of Goose Green#The battle. Your reasoning is plausible, but it just doesn't reflect current usage. And I've never seen "Argentinan" (with only one "i" like a Cyclops). —— Shakescene (talk) 03:57, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As for Californian, there's an interesting phenomenon. While Californian is still used as an adjective in British publications for both people and things, as well as a noun for those who come from California, Californians themselves hardly ever use Californian in the first sense; they'll almost talk about a California sunrise, or a California road, or a California woman; and using Californian as an adjective in those contexts today just sounds rather odd. Californian is still used by Californians to describe themselves and others from the Golden State, as in "He was a Northern Californian who married Southern California girl." I think that dissimilation or an aversion to repetitive-sounding syllables may be at work here, just as it works against "Argentinian". —— Shakescene (talk) 04:06, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And how could I forget California wines, as opposed to Australian wines, Algerian wine, South African wines, French wines and Italian wines? —— Shakescene (talk) 21:36, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And as for referring to Argentina as "The Argentine", which had a vogue during the Falklands War, that's just completely wrong. -- JackofOz (talk) 12:12, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It may have had a renewed vogue during the Falklands/Malvinas conflict (trying to head off any NPOV arguments), but it's been around for more than a century, as I observed when researching the development of Argentinian railways, in which British financiers and engineers were heavily involved. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 15:17, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Grumble ... British toffee-nosed tosspots ... who also referred to Lebanon as "The Lebanon" ... mumble -- JackofOz (talk) 21:05, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In earlier days, some British referred, also, to "the Soviet" for the USSR or the Russian Soviet Federated Socialist Republic, although that could be confusing when soviets (such as the Supreme Soviet) were also in (highly-theoretical) control of the country. I tend to be of that English generation that still like to say the Ukraine, the Sudan, the Yemen and the Lebanon, as well as The Wash, the Netherlands and the Low Countries. And having spent/wasted countless hours on editing The Bronx, I'd advise against dropping the article in any but specialized cases like "Bronx County", "the County of Bronx" or the postal "Bronx, NY" (see Talk:The Bronx).—— Shakescene (talk) 21:36, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And then there's The Gambia (or The Republic of The Gambia, cf. The Borough of the Bronx.) —— Shakescene (talk) 10:17, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Taihenni arigatoo!

What exactly does taihenni arigatoo mean? From old Donald Duck pocket books in Finnish, showing Japanese characters, I've come to understand it means "thousands of thanks". Now, even though I've never studied Japanese, I've come across it often enough to know that arigatoo means "thanks", but I'm not sure what taihenni means. JIP | Talk 20:22, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, arigato comes not from a Japanese root, but from the Portuguese obrigado (thank you, or much obliged), picked up from the former Portuguese trading post at Nagasaki. —— Shakescene (talk) 23:57, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Extraordinary. What's the RS for this etymology?

Taihen ni means "a lot". Taihen ni arigatō would mean "thanks a lot" if it were said -- but I don't think it is said, though in some lect it could be. Perhaps it's Finno-Japanese. (Taihen arigatō does occur in Japanese Japanese.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:12, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'Arigato' does NOT come from Portuguese 'obrigado'. I have heard many people say that it's quite interesting that these words sound so similar whilst having the same usage, but this is the first time I have ever heard anyone actually say the Japanese word comes from the Portuguese word! The Japanese word comes from the adjective 「有難い」(arigatai), meaning basically 'to be blessed [with sth]' or 'to be graced [with sth]' and has nothing whatsoever to do with the Portuguese word. The more formal phrase (and therefore the one in its most entirety) is 'arigatou gozaimasu/gozaimashita' which literally means 'I am blessed [by what you are doing/have done for me]'. --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 00:35, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. There is absolutely no credible linguistic connection. Wiktionary has a fairly detailed etymology here. 124.214.131.55 (talk)

While I'm not qualified to pronounce on what Wiktionary says, it does look very plausible (whereas derivation from obrigado seems most implausible). A great pity, then, that the Wiktionary etymology comes completely unsourced. -- Hoary (talk) 02:54, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would never, personally, have thought that an article laden with verifiable facts such as those presented in the article linked above (thank you, 124.214.131.55, for supplying it) would need sourcing. All of what is said in the article is common knowledge to almost every person with a professional interest in Japanese. the article presents the facts and gives links to certain words, just like any other article. Also, Wiktionary is a little different from Wikipedia in that it is primarily a dictionary, and a dictionary does not have to cite sources when defining what, for example, a tree is. FWIW, from a professional point of view, I can vouch that the information on the Wiktionary article is 100% correct. --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 03:30, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to be enlightened about (or disabused of) a common belief by those who know Japanese (I know some Portuguese, but no Asian languages). See also this brief discussion at the Wiktionary page: Wiktionary talk:Arigato —— Shakescene (talk) 03:59, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Taihennni/taihen arigato is a grammatically wrong phrase. Taihenni/taihen is an adverb and arigato is used as a noun/interjection today. Beside, the standard adverb is taihen. Taihen arigatai/very thankful is OK but taihen arigatou sounds strange amd incorrect. It's understandable though. This etymology dictionary page in Japanese says the same thing as the Wiktionary article and its talk page do. Oda Mari (talk) 05:23, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kagetora, you make some good points. However: Also, Wiktionary is a little different from Wikipedia in that it is primarily a dictionary, and a dictionary does not have to cite sources when defining what, for example, a tree is. True enough, but the question here is of etymology rather than meaning, and for etymology you can't depend on either native speaker acceptability judgments or corpora. Turning to English, if the OED presents an etymology then I don't normally demand further sources but instead take the OED's word for the matter -- because it's the OED. By contrast, Wiktionary is a wiki, which means that you can edit it -- and I know that a huge number of potential editors are as ignorant of the facts of Japanese historical linguistics as I am, and I also know of the enduring appeal of folk-etymology fiction. Not that what Wiktionary says was (even at first glance) remotely as implausible as the obrigado stuff. ¶ Sorry to have misrepresented taihen arigatou as acceptable; my non-native intuition is close to worthless, but I derive some consolation from inferring that that combination isn't quite as awful as taihen ni arigatou. -- Hoary (talk) 08:08, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! I remember "Hontōni arigatō/Truly thank you" is a common phrase. So I correct that the combination of taihen/awfully and arigato/thank you is strange and little in use by native speakers. Oda Mari (talk) 17:41, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As for etymology, here's a rather good quote from Pinker (who I happen to be reading at the moment): The ancestry of words is distinctive among areas of human curiosity, because it is marked by (1) an astonishing amount of knowledge, and (2) an astonishing amount of codswallop. There is something about word origins that encourages people to make things up. (This is from The Stuff of Thought, p.296 of the 2007 Penguin, or shortly under the subheading "Bling, blogs and blurbs" within chap. 6.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:00, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What would be the Latin translation of "Straight out of Compton"?

Obviously Compton couldn't be translated, unless you took its origin (according to ancestry.com, Old English cumb 'short, straight valley' + tun 'enclosure', 'settlement') and made it into Valley Town or something like that.

I don't know the answer, but I want to be a witness of whatever this is for. Isn't it just ex Compton or something like that? Seegoon (talk) 22:56, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds about right since ex nihilo means "out of nothing", then we just need to find the word that means "directly." It's probably something like directus, but I don't know Latin. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 23:59, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, you could use "directe" I guess. "Directe ex Compton" or if you'd like to Latinize Compton as "Compto", then "ex Comptone." Adam Bishop (talk) 00:55, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deus ex Comptone ? —— Shakescene (talk) 04:00, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deus ex Comptone would be "God from Compton". There would need to be a declension on "Compton", I'm guessing that's what you did there although I've forgotten what they all are by now. Z S 17:04, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are probably some classicists out there who know some highly idiomatic/authentic locution that Cicero or someone would've used to describe someone who was "straight out of xxx" (with xxx being some rural/uncultivate locale).... Unfortunately I don't know Latin well enough. --71.111.194.50 (talk) 17:52, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what does it even mean in English? That would help first. (And do we totally Romanize it to replace Compton with an ancient ghetto? Can we describe Julius Caesar as "straight outta Subura"?) Adam Bishop (talk) 20:41, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for that, guys. How about "My name is Snoop Dogg and I got it going on"?

Heh, well what is that supposed to mean in English? You could translate it literally into Latin (maybe), but if we try to use a similar Latin idiom, then does it really mean the same thing? Adam Bishop (talk) 02:35, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]