Language desk
< June 1	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 3 >

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 2[edit]

A quick lesson in grammar[edit]

Hair is a noun. Someone who has lots of hair is 'hairy', which is an adjective. Similarly...

Pus is a noun. Someone who is coverd in pus is what? Please tell me he's a pussy :) 208.96.96.207 16:24, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No can do. Probably pus-ridden (and really disgusting). Clarityfiend 16:58, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, I believe you can call him pussy, but pronounced differently than the way you're thinking. Clarityfiend 17:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fortunately we already have words for that. You could call him purulent or pustulent. Adam Bishop 22:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to say you misspelled pustulant, but pustulent actually gets more Google hits, so now I'm not so sure. I suggest pustulate, pustular, or pustulous instead (which are all in SOED, unlike either pustulent or pustulant). Or purulent, that's definitely a good one. —Keenan Pepper 00:34, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Several dictionaries do list pustulant: [1]. --Lambiam ^Talk 01:11, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You will also find "pussy" in dictionaries as an adjective meaning "containing or resembling pus", although this is not exactly the definition the original poster wanted a word for. Of course this "pussy" is pronounced differently from the "pussy" that means a cat. --Anonymous, June 4, 2007, 03:22 (UTC).

I would pronounce them the same. --194.176.105.39 10:52, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The poster might like a similar question: If quizzes are quizzical, what are tests? Black Carrot 18:10, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bringardner and Baumgartner?[edit]

What do they mean? These are surnames. They are not in a typical dictionary. 69.218.238.123 17:58, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

as far as I know, Baum means tree and Gärtner, gardener.--RiseRover|^talk 19:12, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Birnengärtner is German for "pear farmer". --Lambiam ^Talk 22:19, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

known and unknown[edit]

The original sentence is in Spanish. I will translate it into English because this is an English Wikipedia. This is the sentence: I don't know a lawyer that likes to argue. Is the lawyer known or unknown? If the lawyer is known, then I use the indictative form, like. If the lawyer is unknown, then I use the subjunctive form of like. 69.218.238.123 18:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does like even have a subjunctive form? I thought that it was just the same as the indicitive form... --Falconus^{p t c} 19:02, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The question is about Spanish grammar, not English. He said he's only asking using English words because this is the English Wikipedia. I don't know the intricacies of Spanish grammar well enough to answer definitively, but I can take an educated guess. My guess is that if you mean "There is a certain lawyer I don't know, and he likes to argue", then "likes" is in the indicative, while if you mean "I don't know a single lawyer who likes to argue" or "I've never met a lawyer who likes to argue", then "likes" is in the subjunctive. (And if the sentence is also true, the speaker must have led a very sheltered existence, since there can't be very many lawyers who don't like to argue!) —An gr 21:32, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. Sorry. --Falconus^{p t c} 21:56, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why doesn't the English language have a subjunctive mood for like? A.Z. 21:59, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

English does have a subjunctive mood, which can also apply to the verb to like; see Subjunctive mood#The subjunctive in English. However, this mood is more dead than alive in spoken English, and would not be used in this case even in formal written English. Why do languages have the properties they have? Because if they had different properties, they would be different languages. --Lambiam ^Talk 22:12, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link. I wanted to know about particular historical reasons that made English not have a subjunctive mood, or, rather, have a dead subjunctive mood, while people that don't speak English as their mother language speak languages that have an alive subjunctive mood. A.Z. 22:24, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In most forms the English subjunctive is indistinguishable from the indicative, by loss of unstressed endings. We lost most of our noun cases the same way. —Tamfang 23:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is the question? The original posting is a statement about Spanish grammar. --Lambiam ^Talk 22:12, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The question is this: is the lawyer known or unknown? 69.216.16.151 22:31, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, then the answer is: he or she is not known. More precisely, you don't know any of all these lawyers who like to argue that you've never met; they are all unknown. --Lambiam ^Talk 00:12, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, unknown would imply there is such a lawyer: this is a case of non-referring language: there is (in the speaker's mind) no such lawyer, no correlate in the real world. This is a different difference (!?) from known vs. unknown. Drmaik 13:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

German to English[edit]

I would like to know what "theatralischer Alice Cooper auf der Tour mit Deep Purple" means in English. I think it means something Alice Cooper on the tour with Deep Purple but I'm not sure what a theatrelischer is.

The translation would be applied to this picture on Commons: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Alice_Cooper_2006.jpg

The best translation of theatralisch is probably "theatrical." You might render this as "the theatrical Alice Cooper on tour with Deep Purple," or "showman Alice Cooper on tour with Deep Purple." Carom 21:47, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Carom ! Guroadrunner 11:35, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Half as cheap[edit]

I came across America's Dumbest ... or some such similar (and, yes, awesome) program earlier, and I came across a phrase I don't understand, I think because either I am being thick, or the grammar is so appalling it's long passed out of intelligibility.

It was "Two years ago this was half as cheap". What the heck does "half as cheap" mean? Two years ago it cost twice as much as it does today, or two years ago it cost half as much as it did today? Is this a common phrase in the US? Neil (►) 22:45, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, this is not a common phrase in the U.S. I don't think it really means anything. I imagine that either it was said by someone who is not very good at expressing ideas, or it was an attempt at humor by being intentionally stupid. --Tugbug 23:15, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe they meant it cost half as much as the current price. Not normal usage, but not so hard for a native speaker to grasp. --Nricardo 23:23, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, but it makes as much logical sense as turning the team around 360 degrees. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 04:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't turning everything around full circle just what a Wirbelwind does? :-P — Sebastian 18:06, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am a native speaker of English. This is why I don't understand this awful bit of language - it could have either meaning. Neil (►) 09:03, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The good news: now it is twice as cheap as it was two years ago! --Lambiam ^Talk 17:27, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's likely that whoever said it started out to formulate the sentence one way and then changed templates. —Tamfang 23:52, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]