Language desk
< April 8	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 10 >

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.

April 9[edit]

Continental European writing with American spelling[edit]

Isn't it strange that continental European often use the American spelling instead of the British?217.168.0.113 (talk) 00:45, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually becoming increasingly common, probably because of American pop culture. Luckily, I've never seen a European write "I can haz cheezburger?" :). Joking aside, officially when anything in the EU is written in English, it is in British English, the obvious reason being, of course, that we are part of it, and the US isn't. --ChokinBako (talk) 01:33, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yet! —An gr 06:01, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's also Oxford spelling... AnonMoos (talk) 09:11, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I didn't realize/ise that we used both in the UK. I thought '-ise' was British and '-ize' was American..... After all, France is just a train-ride away!--ChokinBako (talk) 14:25, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

English language instruction these days may legitimately focus on international English rather than specific national variants. BrainyBabe (talk) 21:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL Catz[edit]

Has anyone noticed that the LOL cats people are developing their own dialect? For years internet spelling has been taking on its own form, with all sorts of abbreviations and, in many cases, more phonetically correct spelling, but recently I have noticed that now even the grammar is changing, as in the quote in my answer to the last question. Does anyone know where this comes from? I mean, does anyone actually talk like this? There must be some sort of original from where this comes, otherwise it just looks...well...like something a character from Sesame Street would say.--ChokinBako (talk) 01:44, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the grammar is changing as much as it is becoming obsolete. 'I can haz hugs tiem now plz?' You can still understand it even if there is no structure. 70.162.25.53 (talk) 03:44, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I think the point is that felines have a less than adequate grasp of the English language. Deor (talk) 03:47, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

70.162.25.53, 'obsolete'? You mean LOLCatese is becoming 'oblivious', or do you actually mean 'outdated and unused'? Or do you mean 'the grammar of English' is becoming obsolete (in the case of LOLCatese)?--ChokinBako (talk) 05:00, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For a laugh, check out lolcatbible.com. We were discussing it in my Linguistic Anthropology class. And in my opinion, I think that lolCatz are purposely using this different form of grammar (which has rules and ungrammaticality just like 'standard' English) to show humourous intent - indicating that the cat is the author of these statements (rather than the person we all know to be the real writer), or to comment intertexually on some other internet memes in a way that shows meta-awareness (that is, awareness about one's own choice of medium) - using a form of "txtspeak", alluding to memes like "i'm in ur X Ying ur Z" or "d00d", etc. СПУТНИК^{CCC P} 05:07, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We even have an article on that, too. How ridiculous is that? I mean, lolcats are funny once or twice... Adam Bishop (talk) 05:04, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that is what I mean, Sputnik, that it is meant to be humorous and, in many ways, based on a knowledge of internet txtspeak - but I was wondering where the weird grammar was starting to come from. I was wondering if there was already something in the real world that was the basis for this. Some TV personality, some cartoon character, some...something. And anyway, why would a cat want a cheeseburger? They hate gherkins just like everyone else!--ChokinBako (talk) 05:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it all started with "I can has cheezburger?" - a picture of a chubby gray cat with that caption. You can see it here I can has cheezburger? if you scroll down. After that it just took off, and different subgenres emerged, like the "Invisible X" picture, that started with "Invisible Bike" (I think you can find it on that site) labelling an appropriate picture and then expanded to other items, or like the "i'm in ur X Ying ur Z", which I believe started from "I'm in ur base, killing ur d00ds", which was a response on some online gaming community to "where r u?". The weird grammar is obviously a derivative of internet speak, with an overshadowing ideology of "how a cat would speak" - this accounts for some of the spelling (nuffin for nothing, hai for hi) and grammar (eated for ate, I iz for I am). The question of why it all started, and why it's so popular, is a good one. More investigation is necessary. СПУТНИК^{CCC P} 05:26, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The LoLCat Bible seems easy to read if I use a Jamaican accent, for some reason.--ChokinBako (talk) 05:28, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting - I never thought of that. Also, I didn't even bother to check if we had an article on it. СПУТНИК^{CCC P} 05:30, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My take on the reason it's sopopular is that it just looks and sounds so incredibly stupid. That's why I find them funny (the really good ones, at least), they can be hilariously done. The incoherence of the language is really only funny next to a picture of something stupid. That seems to be why it works. It wouldn't make sense with people. 81.96.161.104 (talk) 14:26, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, people are pretty stupid. 206.252.74.48 (talk) 16:58, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw a picture of a very fat woman with bulging eyes, and the caption was I can haz cheezburger? and it made me smile - just smile - but it just seems like two unrelated concepts juxtaposed when used with a cat, leading me to question the relative intelligence and/or amount of free time the creator has.--ChokinBako (talk) 22:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the record: I find Lolcats, whose site I visit daily, mildly-to-highly amusing, often delightfully clever, and above all a genuine viral phenomenon uniting users and viewers in a benign manner. I believe that those who don't appreciate it might best move on, and any disparaging remarks they make are fairly worthless. Take this from a '50s-born, college-educated language professional and devoted Wikipedian who's adopted and supports lolspeak as a fun and entertaining alternate dialect of web-English. -- Deborahjay (talk) 08:30, 11 April 2008 (UTC) – oh, and apologies for my soapboxish tone/content here; no offense intended! :-/ Deborahjay (talk) 13:08, 11 April 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Oh, don't get me wrong. while I have expressed my mild disdain for the concept (I dislike cats, for a start), my original question was how this dialect evolved (particularly the odd grammar), and if there was a real world base for it, like some character in popular culture. At least I'm making an effort to find out more about it. --ChokinBako (talk) 10:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, well, then: take a look at teh. I can provide anecdotal evidence (here, anyway, though not in mainspace) from my first IT job in 1983, having written a macro to run against all my draft texts: "CHANGE ALL teh/eht/eth/ TO the" (possibly the most prevalent of common typos). Many of the other abbreviations in "Lolspeak" appear familiar from the world of IM and SMS messaging. -- Deborahjay (talk) 12:24, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for teh response, but the typo aspect has already been answered, and was not the question. I am asking about where this odd grammar came from. Thanks anyway :) Oh, and I never took it as a soapbox-ish comment. It was far too politely worded to be that! We are here for discussion and for answers. Every little helps. And, as a language professional in his 30s, as you see from my profile, I am interested in the language aspect here, not the pictures. :)--ChokinBako (talk) 15:03, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, here's background on a key meme (mentioned above by User СПУТНИКCCCP) from the Urban Dictionary site, retrieved via Google ("ur d00dz"). And indeed, it's the language aspect of Lolspeak of which I wrote in my earlier comments, much as I have a layman's appreciation of images and translator's characteristic affinity for cats. -- Deborahjay (talk) 09:25, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite the answer to my never-ending quest. However, thanks. By the way, what is an airophile? Someone who likes 'air'?--ChokinBako (talk) 08:51, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Placename" or "place name"?[edit]

Which of the following is the correct form: "placename", "place name", or "place-name"? Thanks, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 06:40, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The OED uses "place name," but all but its two most recent citations use "place-name." You should be fine with either of those two. -Elmer Clark (talk) 09:18, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. The hyphen indicates that in English English (let's call a spade a spade) the two-part word was being construed as one and was moving toward union, "placename". I think that the two-word form "place name" is best and safest right now everywhere, but I wouldn't bat an eye at "placename", myself. I'm an American, though, and we don't hyphenate as many compound words as they do over there; we tend to collapse them into one word, like with "cross-bow" and "crossbow". --Milkbreath (talk) 10:58, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a Brit and I've never seen 'cross-bow', only 'crossbow'. There is a growing tendency these days in the UK to not use the hyphen in many words, but to merge them into one. Incidentally, you can hyphenate practically anything and it'll go past the spell-check, so it's best to use the unhyphenated form first and see if it's OK, then if not either hyphenate it or separate it.--ChokinBako (talk) 12:07, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Cross-bow" is the entry word in the OED and the only form it mentions. The recent citations all have the hyphen. I do believe you, though. --Milkbreath (talk) 16:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments. Black Falcon ^(Talk) 20:59, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For me, 'placename' is a bridge too far, I much prefer place name. If we write placename, why noy boatname, housename, businessname? Xn4 09:20, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there is a connection there. Why "houseboat" and not "housemusic"? Why "bootblack" and not "blackeye"? Why "fiddlesticks" and not "pickupsticks"? Who knows? But I can see how "placename" would offend the eye of some, hence the recommendation. --Milkbreath (talk) 10:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, Xn4, 'username' would be incorrect (and my spell-checker says it is!!!).--ChokinBako (talk) 13:38, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A search on amazon.com seems to show over 1,000 books with "placename" or "placenames" in the title. It may be that "place name" is more common, and "place-name" perhaps as well. For me I have no qualms at all about using "placename", and tend to prefer it, depending on the context. The OED, not to mention most magazines and newspapers I know of, still prefer "web site" over "website". The New Yorker magazine always makes sure to properly capitalize "Web" (it is a proper noun, no?) -- but to my eye a phrase like "check out my Web site for more information" looks archaic. I realize my opinion doesn't matter in what is right and wrong. But the OED and the New Yorker magazine are often very slow to accept changing usages, to say the least. Pfly (talk) 15:33, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Faroese or Swedish surname?[edit]

Hi all! Is Tufvesson a Faroese or Swedish surname? Thank you!--necronudist (talk) 08:37, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2p from Dweller

If unsure, perhaps you chaps could help with translating the following into Danish and posting on the Danish wikipedia somewhere, asking for them to reply at Necronudist's talk page?

Necronudist's question (slightly edited):

Someone has claimed that Axel Thufason came to Denmark from Føroyar and Tufvesson was his original Faroese surname. The English language Wikipedia (and other Danish sources) claim that he was of Swedish origins, but born in Copenhagen. Who's right? Any ultimate source? Plus: does anybody know if he or his family made the surname change official in the public registers? Thank you!

Thanks as ever. --Dweller (talk) 13:14, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it says a fair bit of info about him here. Maybe that helps. But, 'Tufvesson' looks Faroese to me. --ChokinBako (talk) 13:37, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So it sounds Faroese...interesting. Thank you Givnan! And thank you Dweller, too ;-) Hope someone will help with the translation... I didn't want to ask too much... --necronudist (talk) 13:59, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's Swedish, not Faroese. But note that the Faroese relatively recently gained a written language and prior to that had to Danicize their names in writing. Also note that in the 19th century some Swedes and Faroese had patronymics and no family names. Haukur (talk) 15:07, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Necronudist - could you not simplify your life and include both claims, assuming the Faroe advocate has a source? If they have no source, you can simply remove their claim as unsourced possible OR. --Dweller (talk) 15:12, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not so simple... I think the only way out is to know the truth, also if I understand that there are few chances to make it. As far as we know he can be of Finnish, Russian, Zimbabwean or Antarctic extraction, it's just a matter of finding another source :-) Maybe there's a Danish football expert out there who knows the truth and think that nobody care... --necronudist (talk) 15:45, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

codswallop[edit]

It seems that the term listed by Wikipedia is not a logical one. I have read this is a simple old english conjoining of the expression "walloping the cod" - meaning is obvious - has anyone else not heard of this more simple explanation?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.218.34.142 (talk) 15:55, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One should also consider the differences between a piece of cod and a codpiece. As to the walloping of the former or the latter, or, indeed, walloping the former with the latter or the latter with the former, I must remain silent, as the WP:thought police may decipher this to be piscine soap boxing and not soap walloping. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 17:09, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article in Wikipedia (as distinct from Wiktionary) is confusing. There is criticism of the nineteenth-century origin theory, since the word was attested much later than that era. No mention is made of such criticism regarding the Anglo-Saxon origin theory, while one would have thought that the Anglo-Saxons were vociferous long before the Victorians acquired a voice. Another criticism of the article might pertain to the Balderdash and Piffle sentence: the word was used in 1959, true, but the script writers claim [1] it had been in use for some time by then, so any suggestion that 1959 provided the first attested use, though perhaps true, is misleading. Finally, nothing is said about popular etymology, which does seem to rear its pretty head here. Bessel Dekker (talk) 21:50, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Phrase origination advice[edit]

My daughter came to me to say her teacher used the phrase, "clean your clock" to a student. I told her what it meant, but she was curious where it originated. I'm trying to turn this into a chance to learn. Anyone have any idea how to find the answer? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.123.223.100 (talk) 20:33, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's some information at a pretty reliable Web site. If your daughter is interested in the origins of words and phrases, she may want to browse around there, as well. Deor (talk) 20:53, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Wiktionary could help, too, if you need the etymology of other words. --^La Pianísta! 03:30, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]