Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2010 July 29

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Language desk
< July 28 << Jun | July | Aug >> July 30 >
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.


July 29[edit]

Official test for Russian[edit]

Is there a standard, broadly accepted test scheme for Russian, like the DELF/DALF exams for French? Cod Lover Oil (talk) 00:08, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is ТРКИ. ---Sluzzelin talk 00:16, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Macedonian and Bulgarian[edit]

Is there an article about the differences between Macedonian and Bulgarian similiar to Differences between standard Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian, Differences between Scottish Gaelic and Irish, Differences between Spanish and Portuguese and Differences between Norwegian Bokmål and Standard Danish? I'm particularly interested about orthographical differences. --151.51.156.20 (talk) 01:46, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did not find one in Category:Language comparison. -- Wavelength (talk) 04:29, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There was a 1950's book by Horace Lunt, a well known comparative Slavic scholar, which was kind of the first full English-language treatment of a separate Macedonian written language; of course it would not be up to date... AnonMoos (talk) 05:50, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note that the majority of the Bulgarian linguists regard Macedonian as a Bulgarian dialect or as an alternative literary standard of Bulgarian, which is strenuously objected by the Macedonians, whether linguists or not. For that reason it might be hard to find a Bulgarian-language source describing any differences between the two languages, and after a brief Google search the best I was able to find in either Macedonian or English was this page. But I guess anyone who has Bulgarian background, a rough idea of Macedonian and some common sense will tell you that Macedonian is obviously some sort of vernacular Bulgarian that has experienced strong Serbian influence and is written with Serbian letters.
About the phonologies of the two languages, this page might be of some help. I will now try to list some notable (predominantly orthographical) differences in a nutshell, as far as my knowledge and my Bulgarian background allow that.
The Bulgarian writing system is Russian-based, and the Macedonian is a Serbian-based one. Macedonian uses the letters ѓ, ќ, љ and њ to write the palatal sounds [ɟ], [c], [ʎ] and [ɲ] respectively. In literary Bulgarian, the former two are nonexistent, while the latter two are rendered by means of the letters л and н followed by one of е, и, ю, я and ьо, and can never occur word-finally or immediately before a consonant.
Bulgarian has the letters ю and я for the diphthongs [ju] and [ja], which are written in Macedonian as ју and ја. For the [j] sound in other positions, Macedonian always employs ј, while Bulgarian uses ь after consonants and й elsewhere. The Bulgarian alphabet lacks the grapheme ј.
Macedonian renders the affricate consonants [d͡z] and [d͡ʒ] with the letters ѕ and џ respectively. Bulgarian does that with the digraphs дз and дж. In both languages дз and дж are used to write the sequences of two separate sounds [d.z] and [d.ʒ] - compare Bulgarian джоб [d͡ʒɔp] as opposed to надживея [nad.ʒiˈvɛ.ja], or Macedonian џеб [d͡ʒɛp] as opposed to надживеам [nadˈʒi.vɛ.am].
Macedonian orthography is more of a pronunciation-based one than of a morphology-based one, unlike Bulgarian orthography. Thus, the prefix раз- + the root говор gives the noun разговор, but раз- + the root каз results in расказ. Also, the noun вест + the suffix -ник would give весник (note the absence of т). The corresponding Bulgarian cognates of those are разговор, разказ and вестник.
Phonologically, the stress in Bulgarian is variable, while in Macedonian the antepenultimate syllable of the word always receives the stress. (Exceptions could be certain foreignisms, examples of which are found in exuberant abundance in Macedonian.)
The yat vowel is rendered in Macedonian as е in all cases, while in Bulgarian it is generally я, except when unstressed, when followed by a soft syllable, or when followed by certain consonant sounds. Other simplifications of Proto-Slavic phonology have occurred in Macedonian, too.
The definite article in both languages is postfixed. But Macedonian exhibits three types of definite articles that reflect the position of the object described. Compare книгата, "the book"; книгава, "this book"; книгана, "that book". Standard Bulgarian only has книгата, "the book", though a definiteness structure similar to that of Macedonian exists in some Bulgarian vernaculars as well.
Macedonian is the only Slavic language to construct perfect verb forms with the auxiliary verb "to have", which is otherwise typical for Germanic and Romance languages, or Greek or Albanian. Bulgarian (as well as the rest of the Slavic languages) builds those forms by means of the verb "to be".
The vocabulary of the two languages may differ, as Bulgarian vocabulary contains some Russian borrowings, and Macedonian had (and has) been borrowing loanwords from Serbian and English.
You may also be interested in Category:Macedonian language, Spoken Macedonian, Macedonian orthography, Macedonian phonology, Macedonian grammar, Category:Macedonian grammar, as well as Bulgarian grammar, Category:Bulgarian grammar, Bulgarian dialects, Bulgarian lexis, Category:Dialects of the Bulgarian language, as well as Macedonian language naming dispute.
I sincerely hope this would be of any help, and I apologise for its being essentially original research. --Theurgist (talk) 12:19, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Allow me to add a few things about the orthographies. Bulgarian has the vowel ъ, which is the way of spelling [ɤ], a phoneme that is nonexistent in Slavic languages other than Bulgarian and Macedonian. The Macedonian alphabet does not contain the grapheme ъ; to spell [ɤ], Macedonian uses the apostrophe. In Macedonian cognates of Bulgarian words that feature the letter ъ, instead of ъ there could be an apostrophe, а [a], у [u], syllabic р [r̩], or other phonemes.
Also, Bulgarian щ represents the consonant cluster [ʃt]. To write that, Macedonian uses two separate graphemes: шт. Bulgarian щ often corresponds to ќ in Macedonian cognates: Bulg. къща and Maced. куќа; Bulg. хващам and Maced. фаќам; Bulg. dialectical щерка and Maced. ќерка.
The following letters are common for the alphabets of both languages: а, б, в, г, д, е, ж, з, и, к, л, м, н, о, п, р, с, т, у, ф, х, ц, ч, ш.
The following letters occur in Bulgarian, but not in Macedonian: й, щ, ъ, ь, ю, я.
The following letters occur in Macedonian, but not in Bulgarian: ѓ, ѕ, ј, љ, њ, ќ, џ.
The Bulgarian alphabet has 30 letters; the Macedonian one has 31. --Theurgist (talk) 15:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is no reason not to consider Macedonian an independent language based on the "army and navy" principle), and it is generally accepted as such in the linguistic community outside of Bulgaria. It's a distinct language just as much as Norwegian, Croatian and Slovak are. That said, I would add another detail about the differences. In Bulgarian, the Proto-Slavic big yer (hyper-short [u]) and the Proto-Slavic big yus (nasalized [o]) both result in /ɤ/ <ъ>: дъждь -> дъжд as well as мѫжь -> мъж. Macedonian keeps the two distinct, as the big yer gives /о/ <o>, whereas the big yus gives /a/ <a>: дъждь -> дожд, but мѫжь -> маж. Same thing with път, сън vs пат, сон. --91.148.159.4 (talk) 16:51, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In some respects Macedonian is closer to Serbo-Croatian than it is Bulgarian. For example, Macedonian has syllabic /r/, like SC, which Bulgarian doesn't. And like SC, Macedonian changes /tʃ/ ‹ч› to /ts/ ‹ц› before /r/, so: SC/Mac. црн (crn) "black" vs. Bulg. черен (čeren); SC/Mac. црвен (crven) "red" vs. Bulg. червен (červen); SC црв (crv) "worm" / Mac. црвец (crvec) vs. Bulg. червей (červej). Also, in the cases Theurgist mentioned where Bulgarian щ (št) corresponds to Macedonian ќ, Serbo-Croatian has ћ (ć), which is close to the Macedonian sound (the same in some dialects of Macedonian, in fact). The same goes for the voiced counterparts. So we have SC ноћ (noć) "night" / Mac. ноќ (noḱ) vs. Bulg. нощ (nošt) as well as SC међа (međa) "border" / Mac. меѓа (meǵa) vs. Bulg. межда (mežda). +Angr 17:17, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here are four external links.
—Wavelength (talk) 19:48, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, of these external links, the first one is a Bulgarian anti-Macedonian propaganda website, the second one a Macedonian pro-Macedonian propaganda website, the third one a Greek anti-Macedonian propaganda website, and the fourth one a neutral and interesting article. Alas, this is fairly representative of the proportions in which one gets each of these types of material when one googles something like "Macedonia" or "Macedonian language".--91.148.159.4 (talk) 21:17, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I found them by doing a Google search for macedonian bulgarian differences. I probably would have done better by searching for macedonian bulgarian language differences.—Wavelength (talk) 23:39, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, it's not your fault. Sadly, whatever you had searched for, the result would have been the same. Pretty much wherever Macedonia is mentioned, a Bulgarian or a Greek immediately turns up and declares that Macedonia is fake / doesn't exist / is Greek / is Bulgarian. That's partly because there are many more Bulgarians and Greeks on the web (and in the world) than there are Macedonians, and also because pretty much the entire populations of those countries passionately hold the same strong opinions about Macedonia.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 15:44, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The external link I included in my first post in this section is identical with the first external link in Wavelength's list. I missed to examine that website in detail, because I was too lazy to do that. Also, I may have caused some misunderstanding with my improper wording of a sentence above. In standard Bulgarian, in the sequences не and ни the consonant н is normally not realised as [ɲ], but rather as a plain [n]. --Theurgist (talk) 18:38, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did Confucius really say that?[edit]

"One hundred women are not worth a single testicle" is a favorite saying on the web that is attributed to Confucius. No one seems to know where it came from, though. Please help. Thanks. 67.243.7.245 (talk) 02:37, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a website that might have the collected works of Confucious? I wouldn't trust any unattributed quotes, as a lot of quotes attributed to famous people are something that simply "sound like" something they might say. For example, Yogi Berra might well have been quoting Confucious when he stated, "I never said half the things I said." ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:06, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Whoa, I can't imagine such a great philosopher saying something so sexist! Kayau Voting IS evil 04:05, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Aristotle said some rather dismissive things about women, but it was in the context of speculations in natural and/or political philosophy, not vulgar popular misogyny. There has been a whole genre of "Confucius say X" jokes in the U.S. (and probably elsewhere in the English-speaking world) for well over fifty years, but they are not authentic quotes, nor ever intended to be... AnonMoos (talk) 06:03, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I found several references quoting David G. Marr's Vietnamese Tradition on Trial, 1920-1945 (University of California Press, 1980, p193) where the version goes "A hundred daughters are not worth a single testicle" (my emphasis). This is a slightly different statement, though at least as depressing to this day. It is presented as a Vietnamese saying or "colloquial expression" without authorship. Some of the books quoting Marr call it a Vietnamese proverb. At least one of them does present it in the context of Confucianism. Marr quotes the saying together with others such as: "One boy and you can inscribe a descendant, ten girls and you can write nil." and "Heaven above and Earth below; men honoured and women demeaned". In Embodying Morality: Growing up in Rural Northern Vietnam (University of Hawaii Press, 2003, p178), the author Helle Rydstrøm talks about women expressing their "ideas about life and Confucian traditions" in songs and proverbs, and gives the example of 19th century women turning the testicle phrase into "a hundred boys are not worth a girl's earlobe". ---Sluzzelin talk 11:10, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Men honoured and women demeaned" is a traditional Chinese four-character proverb (though "demeaned" is probably not the best English word for translation): 男尊女卑 -- AnonMoos (talk) 12:58, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. the Japanese Wikipedia ja:男尊女卑 article is interwiki cross-linked to the English Wikipedia Male chauvinism article... AnonMoos (talk) 13:02, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The quotation about "100 daughters" sounds a bit too crass for Confucius. I doubt that the correct translation is "100 women". In this culture, sons are valued over daughters because 1) sons remain attached to the household and are expected to provide for their parents in old age, whereas daughters are not; 2) sons can provide descendants who will venerate their parents, and their father's ancestors, after their death. In this cultural context, the saying is crass and emphatically sexist but not necessarily as misogynistic as it sounds to Western ears. Marco polo (talk) 12:59, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(Oh, and though this question probably is better suited for the Humanities desk, I ask whoever removed the not-very-linguistic question on fortune cookies not to do this again, or at least to repost it at another desk and leave a link here. Thank you.) ---Sluzzelin talk 11:22, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've read the Analects, and I don't remember this in there- I think I would have noticed and been pissed off by it. That doesn't guarantee that Confucius didn't say it, but there are an awful lot of quotes out there falsely attributed to him that he didn't actually say. You can get a copy of the Analects at Project Gutenberg and read for yourself, if you like, although the translation is a little iffy and you might prefer a better translation that you'll undoubtedly find at your Friendly Neighborhood Public Library. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 19:50, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Useful links, many translations, on the Analects page. Pfly (talk) 06:56, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Phonetic Alphabet[edit]

124.43.25.100 (talk) 10:54, 29 July 2010 (UTC)Where can I find the Phonetic Alphabet (I am not sure about the correct name)where a for alfred, c for charles, d for david,..........l for london, m for mary, k for kelvin, x for xray, y for yellow and z for zebra. thank you.124.43.25.100 (talk) 10:54, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Spelling alphabet. Rimush (talk) 11:00, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that America uses different words in theirs from those we British use. Gurumaister (talk) 18:47, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think America is still part of NATO, but perhaps they have local variations? Dbfirs 19:53, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
But a way more interesting (but less accurate) one is here[1]. Richard Avery (talk) 15:36, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Internet word frequency data[edit]

Where can I find English-language word frequency data for publicly accessible Internet textual communications, (a) aggregated for all users for all years of use, and (b) segregated by age, sex, and nationality of users, and by year of use?—Wavelength (talk) 17:11, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

With a few exceptions like dating websites, I'm unclear on how "publicly accessible Internet textual communications" are sortable by "age, sex, and nationality of users" without serious violations of most major Internet-friendly countries' civil liberties and privacy laws. The first place I'd advise you to look for (b) is deep inside the NSA... ☯.ZenSwashbuckler.☠ 18:07, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Many people publicize that information on their user profiles. -- Wavelength (talk) 18:23, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Our article Most common words in English has a frequency list that claims to include online usage, but it's not exclusively online, so it's not quite what you're looking for. I agree that your idea of segregation by demographics is not going to happen, except possibly for apparent physical location. Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:20, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The lack of the word lol makes me think internet use was not used much. Googlemeister (talk) 21:16, 29 July 2010 (UTC) [reply]
Try Text corpus or do a web search on "corpora". Zoonoses (talk) 19:28, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Sentimentality is unearned emotion"/James Joyce[edit]

Irish author James Joyce described sentimentality as "unearned emotion." My understanding of this definition may be slightly off. This is how I see it: Let's say that I am a young scientist and that I respect and owe much professional thanks towards Albert Einstein. Perhaps I feel that throwing Einstein's name around as a personal role model of mine would make me uncomfortable; he is a man of extreme high caliber. Then according to Joyce, my usage of the word 'sentimental' is, in a way, admitting that I am undeserving of using other words to describe my respect. According to Joyce, being "sentimental" towards him would be saying that I haven't deserved the right emotions to feel towards such a high caliber of person. Is this correct? There is always the chance that I have thought too much into the quotation and have arrived at a very silly place with it.

The reason I ask is because I was watching an interview conducted by actor Kevin Pollack in which he was interviewing "The Late Late Show" host Craig Ferguson. Pollack had asked Ferguson about the day that Johnny Carson died and how Craig had handled his own show that night. Ferguson replied that he started off by quoting this phrase from Joyce. Please correct me if I am wrong about my assumption of the definition. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.70.139.87 (talk) 19:15, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that 'sentimentality' is what you are feeling for Albert Einstein; 'respect' or 'admiration' or 'hero-worship' (depending on your feelings) is probably closer. My desktop dictionary say 'excessive tenderness.' When I hear 'sentimentality,' I think of Hallmark greeting cards with poetry on them, Footprints (poem), pictures of eagles flying superimposed with inspirational quotes... attempts to force deep feelings, that work mainly on the weak-minded and easily impressed. Even when I'm weeping at a heartwarming commercial, I roll my eyes at myself when I'm taken in my sentimentality. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:04, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
FisherQueen, there's no need to be hard on yourself or ashamed for being moved to tears by something of rather less moment than the loss of a loved one. If something has that effect on you at that moment in your life's journey, then it has that effect. Get into it, really enjoy it. It doesn't mean you or any of your co-lachrymists are weak-minded or easily impressed. I'm not easily impressed, yet I often weep at the answers I see on the ref desks. It's the only thing that keeps me sane.  :) -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 00:09, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Language/2010_July_29&oldid=1138613719"