Language desk
< August 26	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	Current desk >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded 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 27

Unfixed plurals

Are there languages that use a separate word to make something plural, rather than using an affix to do so? --66.190.69.246 (talk) 01:38, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, English has "cattle", which is a plural for terms like cow and steer, and has no singular form that I'm aware of. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:16, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, that’s not what I had in mind. I was thinking more of a determiner, I suppose. --66.190.69.246 (talk) 03:49, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See wikt:tachi for Japanese.—Wavelength (talk) 05:16, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See wikt:們 for the Han character.—Wavelength (talk) 05:30, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For certain French words, the only way you can tell the word is plural is by the preceding determiner (les or desz) - la chose/les choses, for example, where chose/choses are pronounced the same. In a longer sentence there could be other clues - "la chose que j'ai vue est..." and "les choses que j'ai vues sont". But not always - for example, "la chose que j'ai vue me faisait peur" and "les choses que j'ai vues me faisaient peur" are complete sentences and the only difference in speech would be "les". "Aux" would not always work, if there are no other words starting with vowels - "au niveau de" and "aux niveaux de" sound the same. Etymologically this is not the same as what you're asking, since "les" means something other than "plural marker", but I suppose modern French could be analyzed this way. Adam Bishop (talk) 10:27, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Haitian Creole#Plural of nouns says 'If a noun is definite, it is pluralized by adding yo at the end'. Haitian Creole Lexicon says that Jamaican Patois uses dem as a separate plural marker, though this isn't mentioned in Jamaican Patois. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 11:42, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I may be totally off base on this, so don't accept it unless a fluent speaker confirms it... but doesn't Chinese form plurals by restating the word rather than adding a suffix? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:44, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, no. If I'm not mistaken, though, Indonesian and Malay do restate the word to make a plural, although when written it's either with a hyphen or like this: "Singular word2". ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 14:06, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And most if not all languages leave it as it is if it's an uncountable noun. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 14:07, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are many Australian Aboriginal languages where word duplication* is used to indicate plurality or something closely associated. In the local Wiradjuri language of southern NSW, "wagga" means "crow", and Wagga Wagga means "place of crows", or "many crows", or "place of many crows". Hence the Latin version Corvopolitanus, which can be seen on at least one church dedication stone to my certain knowledge. See List of Australian repeated place names. (* I avoid the term "reduplication" as it's too tautologically tautological for my taste, suggesting as it does the use of the same word no less than four (4) times consecutively, something I've never, never, never, never seen, not even in the Never Never.) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 18:17, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What, never? --Orange Mike | Talk 23:50, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, never! -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 04:11, 30 August 2013 (UTC) [reply]

Well, hardly ever. Hrrumph! -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 09:12, 30 August 2013 (UTC) [reply]

Here's a list of 170 languages that code plurality with a plural word. It includes Hawaiian, Khmer, Maori, Tagalog and Yoruba... 184.147.119.141 (talk) 13:55, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That page uses separate symbols for "plural word" and "plural clitic", but I bet the line between those two categories is very fuzzy. Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:54, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shortest sentence

Is there any universally agreed upon "shortest sentence in the world"? And by sentence, I mean a word sentence, and not a jail term or something. :P And can stuff like "Me" or "I" be considered as proper sentences? ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 15:01, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As a standalone, and in English only, I would say "Go." If a response to a previous query is acceptable, then it is "I." That is, you say "Who is it?" and I respond with that one-letter sentence. No doubt a professional linguist would be able to say if there's a language in which a single letter functions as a complete verb (which you would need in order to initiate a conversation, as opposed to the answering of a question previously asked). In other words, the one-letter sentence in English (and, incidentally, Russian, "Я," 'ya' meaning "I") only counts as a full sentence in this limited context, while the imperative "Go" counts as a full standalone sentence in any context. ☯.Zen Swashbuckler.☠ 15:35, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Latin verb "ī" means "go" and is the second-person singular active imperative of "eō". See wikt:i#Latin. If the macron is omitted, then the Latin sentence "I" is also the shortest in the sense of having the narrowest letter.

—Wavelength (talk) 15:55, 27 August 2013 (UTC) and 15:57, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See also answer ellipsis for how Zenswashbuckler's "I." example works. Aware of the fact that you, Bonkers, specifically asked for a "word sentence", I nevertheless feel the compulsion to point you to a famous anecdote involving Oscar Wilde and his publisher. 'He was living in Paris and he cabled his publisher in Britain to see how his new book was doing. The message read: "?" The publisher cabled back: "!" ' (see Telegram_style#Antecedents, looks like a copyright violation though). ---Sluzzelin talk 15:58, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The ?/! story is more frequently told of Victor Hugo, but it's probably apocryphal in any case. John M Baker (talk) 16:25, 27 August 2013 (UTC) [reply]

I very much like "Upstick job arsewise" at that link. But, back on topic, surely some clever person here can postulate a completely empty sentence? 86.146.106.160 (talk) 00:23, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect quite a few of the regulars will know this one (or, to be honest, I don't have the precise wording of 1-3 on me at the moment, so I'm leaving them to our collective memories):

(4) This impossible context.
(5) .

From the same source:

"Or just four words?  Or three words?  Two words?  One?  "

Tevildo (talk) 01:00, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

People are looking for a no-words at all sentence?

Facepalm --Shirt58 (talk) 10:07, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Only tangentially related, but you can apparently tell an entire story with only a six word sentence. Matt Deres (talk) 13:00, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

some problem or any problem?

What's the right way to say it. Did you have any/some problems with your homework? Miss Bono^[zootalk] 18:06, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

They're both right, but they mean slightly different things. If I say "Did you have any problems with your homework?" the question is completely neutral about my expectations. If I say "Did you have some problems with your homework?" it means I think you probably did (maybe I looked over it and saw some answers were wrong, maybe I heard you groaning in frustration while doing your homework, etc.). Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:15, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Angr's comment is exactly correct. But another helpful way to look at it is that any and some are similar in meaning, but that while any contrasts with none, some contrasts with all. ::"Did you have any problems?" "No, I had none."

"Did you have a problem with the questions?" "Only with some of them." μηδείς (talk) 20:04, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :) Miss Bono^[zootalk] 20:11, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And if you're interested in the formal logical concepts that Medeis alludes to above, see Existential_quantification and universal quantification. SemanticMantis (talk) 16:46, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese question

Google Translate suggested that "コンザ村の子どもたち―ケニア・ナイロビ日本人学校教師の記録" translates to "Children of Konza Village-Record of a Japanese School Teacher in Nairobi, Kenya" - Is this correct?

It is a book title:

日高博子 (seems to be "Hiroko Hidaka"). 『コンザ村の子どもたち―ケニア・ナイロビ日本人学校教師の記録』. Holp Shuppan (ほるぷ出版). November 1984. ISBN-10: 4593534089. ISBN-13: 978-4593534081.

Keep in mind there is also a Japanese expatriate school called Nairobi Japanese School or ja:ナイロビ日本人学校. Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 19:37, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

She seemed to be a teacher at Nairobi Japanese School. Then, Record of a teacher at Nairobi Japanese School in Kenya? Yes, her name is Hiroko Hidala. [1] Oda Mari (talk) 17:30, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that sounds correct. Thank you WhisperToMe (talk) 04:14, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]