Language desk
< November 24	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 26 >

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.

November 25[edit]

"Esboompjes" (Dutch)[edit]

Can a Dutch speaker confirm the translation for me (from here: [1]. A Google Translate version can be found here [2] but it doesn't translate 'Esboompjes'). Thanks, AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:15, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a Dutch speaker, but "Esboompjes" is "Ash trees". (Google Translate will translate just fine if you put a space after "Es".) --Itinerant1 (talk) 01:33, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense from the context, except that the article later contrasts them with 'adult trees' - I was wondering if it meant 'young Ash trees' or something of the sort. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:38, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First time it says "kleine Esboompjes" (literally, small ash trees), second time "volwassen bomen" (mature/full-grown trees). I don't know if "kleine" can mean "young" in Dutch, but, by the context, looks like it does.--Itinerant1 (talk) 03:49, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. and "boompjes" is a diminutive form of "bomen", so the first phrase is really "small ash saplings". And we do need a Dutch speaker to get all the nuances.--Itinerant1 (talk) 03:53, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's a diminutive, and would be understood to refer to immature trees. Ucucha (talk) 05:33, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As a native Dutch speaker, I can confirm that 'boompjes' is the diminutive form of 'bomen', trees, so 'kleine esboompjes' would be 'young ash trees' or 'ash sapplings'. 'Kleine' literally translates to 'small', but can be used as 'young' in cases like this one.212.123.1.140 (talk) 13:55, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - as I thought. I'll amend the relevant article to 'Ash saplings', and link here in the edit summary. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:33, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps rather archaic, but "ashplant" is the correct English word for a young ash tree, or a walking stick made from one. Alansplodge (talk) 16:52, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is missing in the sentence that has an Apostrophe of belonging?[edit]

I know that usually, the place with a apostrophe is a simbole of missing letter; so what is missing in the sentence that has an astrophe of belonging? In example, in a sentense that has an astrophe like it: "it's", it's say that's missing a letter i, and this astrophe instead of this letter. I hope that my question is clear... thank you in advence 109.253.237.20 (talk) 00:55, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apostrophes are not only used for contractions (as you say, for missing letters, as in "can't" where the apostrophe stands for "no" or "could've", where the apostrophe stands in for "ha"). They can also be used when spelling the posessive (That dog is Bill's, that is the Joneses' house) It doesn't stand in for any letters in that usage, it only indicates the posessive (to distinguish it from the plural. --Jayron32 01:04, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ok. when have it started the history of this using of indicates the posessive by apostrophe? and how they have been using, in the past, for posessive 109.253.237.20 (talk) 01:53, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Saxon genitive for a history of the 's usage in English. --Jayron32 02:00, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thank you a lot 109.253.237.20 (talk) 02:39, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some people in the eighteenth century probably thought that "John's house" was in some way a contraction of the ca. 1600 usage "John his house" -- an idea which is not actually historically correct, but which might have influenced early usage of apostrophes. However, the main reason for the apostrophe use is so that the plural and possessive look different in writing... AnonMoos (talk) 05:20, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have a dim memory that Ben Jonson (and no, I wasn't there at the time) got all in a dither about the title of Sejanus His Fall, not knowing whether to call it "Sejanus's Fall" or "Sejanus' Fall". Or something along those lines.--Shirt58 (talk) 05:38, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why would an Olympic Sprinter be writing about that? :) KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 11:00, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised I'm the first to mention that the possessive "its" does not have an apostrophe in standard English. "It's" can only mean "it is" or "it has". AndrewWTaylor (talk) 14:23, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

None of the pronominal possessives have an apostrophe -- his, hers, its, ours, yours, theirs, whose... AnonMoos (talk) 16:39, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

True - I just mentioned "its" because it was in the original question. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 17:09, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think none of us mentioned it because the OP specifically says that "it's is missing the letter 'i'", therefore displaying that (s)he already knows. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 17:20, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Children's alphabet[edit]

What is the alphabet called which children learn from? Kittybrewster ☎ 11:07, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There could be many different answers, depending on which language you are talking about, and which country. But in the UK I learnt the English alphabet with the help of books and wallcharts about a group of characters who lived in Letterland. They had adventures together, which somehow involved the pupil being asked to draw their shapes to help the story along. I forget why... But I remember enjoying reading the stories! (Or, more likely, seeing as I was still learning the alphabet, having them read to me...) Cucumber Mike (talk) 11:16, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not used now, but at one time an answer would have been the Initial teaching alphabet. --ColinFine (talk) 11:30, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(Edit Conflict)The Initial Teaching Alphabet was in vogue in the UK in the 1960s to 80s, but then went out of favour - I believe that it was found that any advantages were lost when the children converted to the standard Latin alphabet, and children were only able to read from school textbooks as everyday writing was uninteligable to them. The latest craze is Synthetic phonics, which sounds quite similar to the way I learned to read in the days of Janet and John. But I'm not an expert - maybe a professional could add something? Alansplodge (talk) 11:35, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another possible answer: Apple Pie ABC.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:56, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Y Y Y, a yawning yellow yak. Young Yolanda Yorgensen is yelling on his back.

ser and ir[edit]

hello. how did the preterite forms of ser and ir in Spanish converge? A similar phenomenon happens in all the Iberian Romance languages (Spanish, Portuguese, Catalan, Galician) but oddly in none of the others (French, Italian, Romanian). This article from its TOC seems to have the answer but the relevant page 231 is not available. Thanks 24.92.85.35 (talk) 17:13, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, that book is available at six libraries in Michigan. I'll see if I can inter library loan it. It's definitely after Spanish diverged from Latin though, since Latin esse and ire preterite forms are totally different. ~Alison C. (Crazytales) 17:59, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

French and Italian (not sure about Romanian) do not have verbs that appear to come from ire, or at least they are not common (aller in French, andare in Italian; if those come from ire then something needs explaining). So maybe that's connected somehow — maybe if French and Italian did use verbs deriving from ire, then they also would use preterites such as fu. --Trovatore (talk) 23:00, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in French the future and conditional forms do come from ire. French merged three Latin verbs: ambulare (allons, allais, etc.), ire (irais, irons, etc.), and vadere (vais, va, vas). Italian only uses forms from ambulare and vadere, and Spanish only ire and vadere. The ser/ir seems like an Iberian Romance innovation, but French does have a slight parallel, only not in the simple preterite, but in the passé composé. Je suis allé au magasin = J'ai été au magasin. And for the passé composé of the expression "ça va", "ça a été is the only option (there is no *"ça est allé"). Lesgles (talk) 02:45, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, thanks. But I'm not too convinced by the passé composé example, on the face of it. Can't one mean "I have gone to the store" and the other "I have been to the store", which are usually either both true or both false, but do not mean exactly the same thing? It's not clear to me that this is a use of the participle of être as a substitute for the participle of aller. --Trovatore (talk) 06:20, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Ça a été" meaning "ça s'est bien passé" strikes me as very informal, and as characteristic of European rather than Canadian usage in French. I might be wrong, but I would be surprised if this expression was not a fairly recent innovation. I had no idea that people who use this expression think of it as a past tense equivalent for "ça va," so that's interesting to hear. Also, "ça est allé" simply would not be used for an entirely different reason: most people don't say "ça est" at all (outside Belgium, I think). Only "C'est allé" would be possible in France or Canada, but I agree that even this is seldom if ever heard with the meaning "things went well."96.46.201.210 (talk) 07:35, 1 December 2011 (UTC) The TLFI gives an example of "ça a été" with this meaning from 1907, but not earlier.96.46.201.210 (talk) 08:27, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]