Language desk
< August 18	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 20 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

August 19[edit]

"Is-is"?[edit]

In the context of conspiracy theories, what is the definition of the term "is-is" and how is it different from just using the word "is" (in the same context)? 2601:646:8E01:7E0B:F88D:DE34:7772:8E5B (talk) 11:44, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? In the context of conspiracy theories, there is no such term as "is-is". Please give sources for your use of this term. --Viennese Waltz 11:51, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, he's referring obliquely to the Lewinsky scandal. During a deposition, Bill Clinton famously answered a question by asking the questioner to consider the nuance behind the meaning of "is". See This video and Impeachment of Bill Clinton where it is discussed. Just to clarify for the OP, Clinton was NOT asking for the definition of "is-is". He was asking the questioner to clarify what he meant by "is". --Jayron 32 11:59, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have never had sexual relations with that woman.

Banned user's contribution deleted Tevildo (talk) 19:23, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe nothing. Maybe he never had sexual relations with that woman, so he didn't lie because it was some other woman. Akld guy (talk) 07:50, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what agenda you're pushing here but the answer is in the article linked to by Jayron above. --Viennese Waltz 13:48, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Banned user's contribution deleted Tevildo (talk) 19:23, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't really the place to debate issues like that. If you have a question that is capable of being answered factually, go ahead and ask it. --Viennese Waltz 15:19, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Besides which, nine separate occasions does not qualify as a "one night stand". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:47, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you're interested in various meanings of "is", there's no need to get into conspiracy. All sorts of mathematicians and scientists and lawyers operate with different notions of "is" every day. E.g. "what do you mean by 'is' here?" is not at all a strange or invalid question. For some general reading, see e.g. equivalence class, equivalence relation, isomorphism, equality_(mathematics), and the disambiguate page equality. From a more linguistic point of view, see Copula_(linguistics)#Meanings, for a philosophical approach, see identity_(philosophy), SEP page on identity , and property_(philosophy). SemanticMantis (talk) 15:25, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is recognised semantically. The verb "to be" translates into Spanish and Portuguese by either ser (from Latin esse "to be") or estar (from Latin stare "to stand"). Ser indicates a more permanent state of being, thus

Ela é uma trabalhadora na estação (She is employed at the station) but
Ela está na estação para encontrar uma amiga (She is at the station to meet a friend).

80.44.89.199 (talk) 18:00, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I took the liberty of adjusting 199's indents for visual coherence. Italian also has that distinction in present (and future?) tense, though in others the two roots have become suppletive (as in French). —Tamfang (talk) 19:56, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Italian has it in every tense except the compound ones. Essere and stare have the same past participle (stato, for masculine singular), but they have different forms in the simple past, imperfect, present, and future (for third person indicative, those would be fu, era, è, sarà versus stette, stava, sta, starà). However the line between them is drawn in a slightly different place than in Spanish; for example, emotional states are usually rendered with essere, whereas in Spanish I think you would ordinarily use estar. --Trovatore (talk) 20:04, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. —Tamfang (talk) 01:39, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I thought this section was gonna be about The reason is is … and how the alien space bats got people to start saying that. —Tamfang (talk) 19:56, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody with a serious interested in the different uses of BE might try "Revisiting the typology of English copular clauses: Ascription and specification in categorizing and identifying clauses". -- Hoary (talk) 23:16, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dalian as a first name[edit]

What's the origin of Dalian Atkinson's first name? Is it somehow related to the Chinese city of Dalian? Pizza Margherita (talk) 15:51, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the answer to your question, but the Chinese city is pronounced "Dah-lian", not "Day-lian", so it seems unlikely he was named after the city. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 16:51, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BabyNamesPedia states (unsourced) that "Dalian is of English origin. Dalian is a derivative of the English Dale." Dale gives us "Dale is largely used in the English language and its origin is also English. It is from the element 'dael' which means dale, valley. The first name is derived from the surname denoting someone living in a dale or valley."

Alternatively, from nameslist.org we get "Dweller near the town crossing"; "At the cross". However, that site also states that "Dalian love adventure, excitement and freedom. Dalian are clever, quick-witted and unusually adaptable. Dalian are capable of doing anything they wish for", which is clearly equine dung, so a certain amount of caution is required with their etymology. I haven't found any scholarly articles that provide a well-researched derivation, nor any suggestions on how Mr Atkinson came by his name. Having said that, an etymology coming from English 'dale' seems more plausible than being named after a random Chinese city. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 08:42, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is a long and well-established tradition in black culture - both in the US and the UK - of inventing new and distinctive forenames rather than re-using names associated with the majority culture, and that may well be the case here. Relevant article here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:35, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the Chinese city was not commonly referred to using that spelling until 1981 - before that it was Luda (Luta), Dairen, Dalniy or Port Arthur. One part of the city was referred to as "Dalian" but was normally spelled "Ta-lien". Dalian Atkinson seems to have been named "Dalian" at birth, years before 1981, so he was almost certainly not named after the city. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 15:00, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wu and Bomoh?[edit]

Are there any sources etymologically connecting Chinese Wu with Malay Bomoh? 巫's (Wu's) original pronunciation was something along the lines of *Mo and it's a cognate with Tibetan "Ba." Plus, the meanings are very similar. But I can't actually find any sources connecting the two beyond (maybe) this (rather unhelpful) snippet preview. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:18, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Connected how? As a borrowing from one language to the other or as cognates (which would assume a genetic relationship between Austronesian and Sino-Tibetan)? If the latter you may wanna take a look at the work of Laurent Sagart and see if he includes these words in his comparisons. Note however that Sagart's proposal is controversial. Contact Basemetal here 18:40, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What say you?[edit]

I cringe when I hear the expression "what say you?", which is becoming common in the media; it doesn't seem like a proper English sentence to me. What say you? --2606:A000:4C0C:E200:296A:CC64:7945:8C5F (talk) 17:36, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The moronic Stuart Varney, of whom my doddering father is inexplicably fond, says this all the time. It's perfectly grammatical but seems unfamiliar because modern colloquial English uses do-support ("What do you say?") in such questions. (You may also want to take a look at Object-verb-subject.) Deor (talk) 18:56, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to look at the latter article, but I don't think it'll be much help :-). It seems to be about languages that use OVS for statements, not for questions. English uses VSO for questions ("Ate he the apple?"), though as you mention in today's English this is almost always do-ified into "did he eat the apple", which is still VSO, except now the V is "did".

There's some mention of this at verb-subject-object#Inversion into VSO. See the third and fourth paragraphs of that section.

There seems to be something else going on in "what say you?" as opposed to the ungrammatical "*say you what?". Someone (maybe Medeis?) should be able to come up with a link for that.

In any case, the bottom line is that, as Deor says, it's a perfectly grammatical construction, but more than a bit old-fashioned. Contemporary use is for effect, I think, and is mostly limited to a few fixed phrases. You could equally grammatically say "when comes he?" instead of "when is he coming?", but hardly anyone does. --Trovatore (talk) 19:10, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) If "becoming more common" you mean "been part of English since before English was English", you'd be correct. As noted in this thread, the use of Periphrasis in English is actually a more modern innovation than constructions without it. What that means is that the phrase "What do you say?" is not as old in English as the phrase "What say you." The thread I linked gives examples from Old English whereby the construction "Hwæt sægst ðū" (what sayest thou in modern orthography) is expected; it also quotes William Shakespeare's Othello "What say'st thou?". It has some great graphs which show the google ngrams results for similar constructions; and also brings in the prevalence of the phrasing in common law court systems. --Jayron 32 19:03, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See also the King James Bible, for example, the Gospel according to John, chapter 8, verse 5: "Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?". Alansplodge (talk) 10:43, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Not merely linguistic conservatism. It's reactionary grammar. It pleases me. Jim.henderson (talk) 19:08, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ITYM "it likes me". --Trovatore (talk) 21:10, 19 August 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Thank you for your quick responses and sources. Apparently, according to Jayron's source, this construct was common in the late 17th/18th centuries (cf Ngram: "What think you"). --2606:A000:4C0C:E200:296A:CC64:7945:8C5F (talk) 21:37, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"What say you, members of the jury, is the prisoner guilty or not guilty?" Akld guy (talk) 03:20, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The meaning is clear, and it's shorter than "What do you say", so that may explain why it is becoming more popular again. (Especially when texting, brevity is critical.) StuRat (talk) 03:51, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Moving in the other direction, a German lady of my acquaintance used to say "What are you a - doing of?" which sounded Irish to me. That may sound counter - intuitive, but she would also say, when upbraiding someone who was particularly unobservant, "What do you think this is? Scotch mist?". Are these commonly - used constructions? 81.151.129.213 (talk) 14:32, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I will not put. --Winston Churchill 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:296A:CC64:7945:8C5F (talk) 16:04, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

... which link goes to some length to show that the attribution to Churchill is almost certainly spurious. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:46, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What's more, the remark attributed to Churchill usually has the opposite sense. —Tamfang (talk) 02:10, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The "Scotch mist" idiom was once common (in London at any rate) but I haven't heard anybody say it in decades. The "adoing of" construction sounds even more archaic; I found it in Kipps (1905) by H G Wells [1] and The Mystery of the Spiteful Letters (1946) by Enid Blyton, [2] but both using it in reported speech of people using a rural English dialect. Kipps is set in Sussex on the south coast, while Blyton's adventures are generally set in an imagined southern English idyll, often equated with Dorset. Alansplodge (talk) 00:30, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]