Language desk
< October 30	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	November 1 >

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.

October 31[edit]

Cigarettes[edit]

"What's in a cigarette? Those which we call toxins, by any other word would be as deadly." Does that modified quote make sense and is gramatically correct? If so, what does it mean? Jamesino 01:35, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it's a play on Hamlet's "A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet" (paraphrasing here!). Insert a comma after word, because it's a clause by itself, and it's fine grammatically. --Wooty Woot? | contribs 01:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hamlet? I'm no Shakespearian scholar, but isn't that a Juliet quote? Hyenaste ^(tell) 01:49, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes it is WKQT. Whew, I thought I had been wrong all this time! Hyenaste ^(tell) 01:52, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That should be "remove the comma after toxins". The word order is a bit poetic (as you'd expect) but grammatically fine. Tesseran 01:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does the sentence make sense though? Or is it like...redundant? Jamesino 02:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If your point is that toxins are lethal—whether we call them poisons or something more obscure and exotic like nitromethane or o-Toluidine, they are still deadly chemicals—then yes, it makes sense. Hyenaste ^(tell) 03:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Those" doesn't sound right to me. I would replace it by "That", and replace "word" by "name" if you want to be closer to the original:

What's in a name? that which we call a rose / By any other name would smell as sweet;

--Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet (II, ii, 1-2)

--Lambiam ^Talk 06:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You ask not just about the grammar, but also if it makes sense. The problem with toxins is that anything is potentially a toxin. The poison article says 'Paracelsus, the father of toxicology states-- "Everything is poison, there is poison in everything. Only the dose makes a thing not a poison".' It would make more sense to speak of toxicity or toxic dose. Even water can kill you if you drink enough of it. So it is at the very least misleading to say that toxins are deadly. It completely misses the point of toxicity. So no, the phrase does not make sense. Not to scare you, but if you use this phrase in the US you should be careful not to get sued - tobacco companies certainly have the money for that. Also note that the toxin article says that "Toxic substances not of biological origin are more properly termed poisons" So are you talking about additives and are they biological in nature? Depending on how and where you are going to use this, be very careful what you say. DirkvdM 07:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a paraphrase, it's not a good one. The original is making the point that names are just labels - it doesn't matter what you call something, it's still the same thing. (The context being Romeo's family name) But the paraphrase is doing something altogether different by equating two names for different things. "Cigarrette" doesn't mean the same thing as "toxin", so it does actually matter what you call it. All in all, it doesn't make its point well, and it sounds very strained and even pretentious - if you paraphrase Shakespeare you should know the text, and if you know it, you shouldn't have a problem finding a more suitable quote. --BluePlatypus 14:40, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about "O Cigarettes, Cigarettes! Wherefore art thou deadly?" Jamesino 23:15, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for a word I can't remember[edit]

I'm trying to remember the word for the flat metal plate that can be installed on the outsides of doors to prevent the locks from being pried open. I've already looked at a bunch of lock security sites but they don't seem to even have them. I am pretty sure the word ends with 'al' and I think it might start with 'f'. I'm in Canada, and I guess the word could be local. I used and heard the word a bunch of times when I was on my Strata Council, but it's slipped my mind now. Anchoress 08:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You mean like a Security Door Reinforcer? or a latch guard? Maybe it is a regional word. --Andrew c 17:13, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's like a latch guard, only longer. But weirdly, we called it an astragal in our Council meetings, and that word (which I found thru one of the links, thanks) has a different meaning from what we give it. Don't know if it's my property manager's mistake, or if it's a regional thing. Anyways, right or wrong now he'll know what I'm talking about lol. Anchoress 17:50, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The doors have metal plates,

fitted to the inside of the exit alleys to the front gates,

Security's expensive,

it can cost a fortune if you buy your locks

(duh-doo-doo)

from the wrong place

(duh-doo-doo) (Sorry, was reminded of that song :)) --Wooty Woot? | contribs 04:05, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fetocide vs. feticide[edit]

At feticide, an editor has changed "(sometimes referred to as fetocide)" to "(sometimes mistakenly spelt fetocide)". I pointed out that we had cited sources of medical professionals using that spelling, and for us to call it a mistake, would not only be POV pushing, but also be spitting in the face of Wikipedia:Manual of Style#National varieties of English. So I am here to ask for a third opinion at Talk:Feticide to weigh in on these matters. Is it ok to call common variant spellings used by professionals in the field of study in question a spelling mistake?--Andrew c 15:40, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am the other party in this, and it is clear to me that fetocide is a misspelling for linguistic reasons given at Talk:feticide. It is certainly not a matter of national varieties of English. It is an exaggeration to say there are "cited instances of medical professionals" using this spelling, and it does not appear in any dictionary.. at very best it is a recent and uncommon neologism. It is much more likely to be a mistake. Zargulon 16:08, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well there are 11,000 google hits for 'fetocide', including extracts from this clinical study, so I think it's fair to say that 'sometimes referred to as "fetocide"' is more accurate than 'sometimes mistakenly spelt as "fetocide"'. Also, the former is less POV. Anchoress 16:14, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That makes it a commonly misspelt word. There are 1,040,000 google hits for the misspelt "comittee". Zargulon 16:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You said right above that it was an 'exaggeration' that there are 'cited instances of medical professionals' using the spelling; there are clearly numerous instances. How about we find a compromise? If you can find a legitimate reference stating that it is a mis-spelling, you can say that in the article. If Andrew finds a legitimate reference (not necessarily a dictionary) stating that it is a variant, he can say that it is. Otherwise it stays out of the article. How do you two feel about that? Anchoress 16:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even if it is a common misspelling, the fact that it is a misspelling is conclusively proved by its absence from dictionaries, and strongly supported by the strict pattern of other -cide words. Zargulon 17:16, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with that. Sometimes a misspelled word becomes so prevalent that it eventually becomes an accepted variant, at least in some parts of the world. Appendectomy, license (noun), fetus, defense ... there are thousands of them. But I wouldn't accept fetocide, not just yet anyway. The fact that a medical professional misspells a word does not of itself give the alternative spelling legitimacy. JackofOz 19:55, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are other problems with that article. it's at Feticide, but it uses Foeticide throughout, making one wonder which version of English should be used throughout. As in, should it be "spelt" or "spelled"? User:Zoe|(talk) 21:08, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know there are different views on this, but I would argue for "spelled" and "misspelled" (or "mis-spelled"). Spelt is a grain. "Spelled" is sometimes pronounced "spelt", but even that might be a mis-pronunciation depending on where you're from. JackofOz 23:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To answer that concern, an editor who was drawn to the page due to my request changed the spelling in the article to 'foeticide' and proposed a move. Before today, feticide was used consistently throughout.--Andrew c 00:16, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhat widespread use doesn't automatically get you to "accepted variant." Ph.D.'s and academic journals don't automatically produce well-edited prose free of misspellings. Any word spelled feto- or foeto- (except for fetor, a rare word for "stench" related to "fetid") is a barbaric misspelling. At a certain point, of course, what started out as an ignorant misspelling may make it into the dictionary. Cultivated users of the English language (including any medical researchers, etc., who happen to have the extraneous qualification of being literate) will still look down on it. A good example of a misspelling that made it into the dictionary is parallelopiped. But this one hasn't made it into the dictionary. All that said, I don't mean this as a comment on what the Wikipedia article should say. Obviously, a neutral tone is appropriate to an encyclopedia. However, if what's written doesn't tell the reader that it ain't in dictionaries, and ain't gonna be soon, then I'd say some information is missing. Wareh 01:45, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When I page through the Google hits for "fetocide", they seem to almost all be citations from medical journals. This is hardly a singular misspelling. I fail to understand the opposition to mentioning this spelling. Rmhermen 02:22, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Google gives 79,000 hits for feticide, but only 11,000 for fetocide. Clearly the latter is not uncommon, but that alone doesn't make it a correct spelling. Apparently there is no lexicological reference we can use to support a claim that fetocide is an alternative spelling. Without such a reference, we'd be breaching the no original research rule. Millions of people use effect and affect interchangeably; or their, they're and there; or its and it's; or to, too and two; or your and you're - but despite the increasing incidence of such errors, they still all fall into the category of misspellings, not acceptable alternative spellings. Maybe in 20 years it will be different. Until then ... JackofOz 05:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The formation "fetocide" is an illiterate abomination, suggesting a non-existent Greek origin fetos instead of Latin fetus. I also find some hits for "fetacide", and they are not about the slaying of cheese. --Lambiam ^Talk 15:40, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or, it would suggest derivation from Latin fetus (2nd declension) rather than Latin fetus (4th declension). You might as well have "domocile" for "domicile." Interestingly enough, there is a 2nd declension Latin fetus, the adjective meaning "pregnant, fruitful, productive." So "fetocide" would refer rather to the killing of persons or things that are pregnant, fruitful, and productive. "Feticide," on the other hand, is the killing of the young, the brood, the fetus. Wareh 20:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, Lambiam is right and I'm wrong. -ocide is even pretty barbaric for Latin second declensions (though such barbarisms are not unexampled in the dictionary). It follows from general principles, but fungicide is a good example (not fungocide). Wareh 20:55, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

old polish words??[edit]

I am reaserching my Polish family history and my grandmother has the word 'freblanka' written as her occupation. I am told it may mean nursey teacher but cannot find a way of confirming this. Does anyone have any ideas please?

Sure -- look it up on the Internets! Now, I don't speak Polish. However, a search led me to this: Freblówka (Europa) (naz. F. Fröbl, pedagog niem., 1782- -1852) nauk., daw. typ przedszkola prowadzonego wg metod F. Fröbla, w którym zwracano uwagę na wszechstronny i harmonijny rozwój dziecka, zgodny z jego cechami indywidualnymi.

So I then figured out this refers to Friedrich Wilhelm August Froebel, German educator ("pedagog niem."). "Przedszkola" appears to mean nursery school, so, yeah, looks like you're right. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:52, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I might be mistaken, but I think "Przedszkola" is (partially through borrowing) cognate to preschool. Polish sound shifts include z's popping up a lot in unlikely places... 惑乱分からん 13:57, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was my guess but I didn't want to go so far. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 17:10, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

S letter[edit]

Do you have to have an (s) after the following words: Afterward, inward, toward?

You don't have to, but you can. dictionary.com definition Laurə n^whisper 16:42, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say it depends.

*Afterward, I was terrified.
Afterwards, I was terrified.
It came toward me.
It came towards me.
I was in the inward chamber.
*I was in the inwards chamber.

This is how I would "star" some sentences. The starred sentences are the ones I find awkward. --Kjoonlee 16:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check out what the Wiktionary has to say on the subject. Laurə n^whisper 17:07, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the United States, the preferred form of these words does not have a final 's'. (That said, a final 's' is not unusual in spoken American English.) In British usage, the final 's' is preferred for these words, except for "inward" (or any compound ending in -ward) used as an adjective, as Kjoonlee's last example shows. (The adjectival exception also applies to spoken American English.) Marco polo 17:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think "afterwards" is more common in the US than "afterward", which (unlike in British English) is also quite acceptable. Note that this is typically an adverb. In contrast, "toward" is more common there than the quite acceptable "towards". A simple rule that gives an acceptable form everywhere is: Use "-ward" for adjectives; "-wards" in other cases. --Lambiam ^Talk 18:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may be right that "afterwards" is more common in spoken American English than "afterward." However, in U.S. publications, "afterward" is the norm. In my day job, I am an editor in the United States, and every company where I have worked has preferred "-ward" without a final "s" in every case. Marco polo 16:31, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a remnant of the English case system, where you'd sometiems have the genitive "s" ending, so you can correctly use it wherever you'd have a genitive preposition, such as the ones given. Usually it's the ones where you can imagine an omitted 'to' or 'of', e.g. "Afterwards (of the event), I was" and "It came towards (the location of) me". But you don't say "tops", you say "on top of" or "to the top". Whereas in Norwegian, "to the top" can be both "til topps" ("to tops") and "til toppen" (and also "til toppa"). And you have similar things going on in Swedish and Danish as well. So it's not specific to English, but a shared trait of all the Germanic languages that have thrown out the case system. --BluePlatypus 18:53, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rhyme[edit]

Hi all, Can some one plz tell me a noun that rhymes with jazz? jazz here is a name not the music type. As i want to say "Jazz the ...?". Thx

196.218.50.29 19:47, 31 October 2006 (UTC)Jasmine[reply]

Bass (fish)? 惑乱分からん 20:00, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spazz? --Wooty Woot? | contribs 20:01, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spazz is your best bet. The only other common words that rhyme with jazz are "as" and "has". Hyenaste ^(tell) 20:15, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thx but words that rhyme with jazz wasnt very helpful, also i found that spazz means stupid. I really dont think that my nickname should be jazz the stupid, right :) ?

Jasmine(Jazz)

Spazz means more like "crazy". --Wooty Woot? | contribs 22:07, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would say more like clumsy. User:Zoe|(talk) 03:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where I come from, spazz is generally understood to mean spastic. I'd go with razz if I were you! --Auximines 10:06, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jazzie the razzie, Jayzie the crazy, Jazzie the juicy, Jazz the lass, Jazzy the sassy, Jazz sexy-ass? =S 惑乱分からん 21:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

La Paz. :) JackofOz 23:33, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I used to know a guy who was proud to go by "Spazz." But the question, Jazz, is this — are you a spazz? If so, Jazz the Spazz, provided you don't have a complex about it. If not, keep lookin'. Wareh 01:48, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A little Vietnamese, please.[edit]

I was doing a bit of work on this article and I was translating some of the song titles. Most were fine, but for the Vietnamese "Búp Bê Không Tình Yêu" was difficult. What I got when looking up dictionaries was "Bud Carry Without Being in Love" which I'm sure is not that close, since Tình and Yêu both seem to mean 'love' (with the latter being a verb?). Búp was difficult as well. So can anyone help in translating the title? Thanks in advance --Bearbear 20:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Búp-bê" is actually one word meaning "doll". The word comes from French "poupée", so it's just a two-syllable wordt. In Vietnamese all syllables are written as separate words (because of the language's monosyllabic nature), so you can't just search every single syllable in a dictionary and expect to find anyting sensible. "Tình yêu" is something of the same, except that it's a compound word. Vietnamese uses duplication quite a lot, and just using two words for "love" means "love" again. So the entire title translates as "Doll without love". Greets, David

23:04, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a footnote, I think Chinese is similar, words often turn two-syllabic because of clarity, if you understand what I mean... 惑乱分からん 01:04, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, that was helpful and interesting! Vietnamese makes a lot of sense. I kind of thought it was strange that the two terms sounded so alike. --Bearbear 18:33, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edits[edit]

Should earth by caps, also is newscasts correct? or is news casts

This is for a publication.

Usually words like "Earth", "Moon", "Sun", of which there is only one, are capitalized. See for example how this is done in our article Earth. "Newscast", with plural "newscasts", is spelled as one word (just like "broadcast"). See for example the use in our article News broadcasting. --Lambiam ^Talk 21:37, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, there are many earths, many moons, and many suns, and in a general context you should not capitalise them. But if you're talking specifically about our planet and its satellite, and the centre of our solar system, then I agree, there is only one of each and they should be capitalised. JackofOz 23:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, and when I moon somebody on a sunny day then fall and get earth on my butt, that's no cause to make a capital case out of anything, either. :-) StuRat 04:23, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, flashing by night, mooning by day. I'm pleased that you display a well-balanced approach to this sort of thing, and that your time is fully occupied when you're not loitering around Wikipedia. At least it keeps you off the streets, and in the park where you seem to feel so much at home. :-) JackofOz 04:41, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kangofu[edit]

Would someone please give me the Japanese character for nurse/kangofu? To be clear, this is a nurse like in a hospital, not breastfeeding. Thanks! -THB 22:53, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Til next time, check out Jim Breen's dictionary Kanji is 看護婦 , Hiragana is かんごふ (Katakana is spelled the same as Hiragana, but I'm too lazy to write it out). 惑乱分からん 23:54, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't get that link to work right now. Thanks for translating. -THB 01:39, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]