Language desk
< May 15	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 17 >

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.

May 16[edit]

A record-breaking seven parties[edit]

Background: I had a brief dispute with a native English speaker at Talk:Serbian parliamentary election, 2016#Election(s) about the indefinite article in sentence In contrast to the 2014 elections, a record-breaking seven non-minority lists passed the 5% threshold. I don't see an appropriate singular noun to which the article can be plausibly attached; wikt:record-breaking is a compound adjective, so "a" is hardly an antecedent of record, and it's even harder an antecedent of seven lists. OK, I gather that the phrase a record-breaking seven lists is formulaic, but then, is there a grammatical sense in it, or is it just... because? No such user (talk) 15:01, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is certainly correct English - the whole phrase would sound completely wrong without that indefinite article. My understanding is that there is an implied "number" - it refers to "a record breaking number of lists" which happens to be seven in this case. The record inn question is the number of lists which qualified for representation. 81.132.106.10 (talk) 15:31, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To me, the phrase "a number of studies have been made" sounds right and "a number of studies has been made" sounds wrong. 80.44.167.65 (talk) 15:56, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The compound modifier a number of, meaning "numerous", and making the modified noun plural, is semantically and grammatical not the same as the phrase a [modifier] number of [complement], where number is no longer part of a compound but is a noun in its own right. I believe that 81.132... is correct about an implied singular "number of" in the sentence in question. Marco polo (talk) 17:39, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Refinement sought[edit]

Can somebody check the paragraph below and see if it is okay? Does it under mine any religion? Rephrase the paragraph if wished/possible?

"In life our age increments, we age to a detrimental point when we realise what life is all about, some of us realise at an early stage (due to the life we live), some realise after (due to health issue(s) conceive[d] either genetically or environmentally, some after death…), do not be late to realise who God is, in life. God doesn’t need you, you need God. No one will help you in life and or in the afterlife if you don’t help yourself. Not even the prophet, messenger, apostle, messiah, whoever or whatever that comes by, because even they are under God. God come first, the sooner you acknowledge Him, the better for you. He is/will be the reason why you’ll have a solicitor (the religious leader of the religion you follow) in the afterlife. Activate God by using your logic, consciousness and understandings. Have a route (religion you was born with or of your choice) to be distinguished from other routes. Use your logic, consciousness and understandings while following a religion, a solicitor/angel or whatever will automatically be there for you in the afterlife…"

Thanks in advance. -- Apostle (talk) 20:46, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See Paraclete for the theology, incidentally - "advocate" would be a better term than "solicitor". The paragraph needs quite a bit of work to get it into usable form - you need to merge the parentheses into the text and get rid of the "and/or"'s and similar constructions, to start with. Tevildo (talk) 21:37, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To describe the point in life when we realize what life is all about as "detrimental" jars in the ears of a non-native speaker. I would consider that to be a point of enlightenment. And IMHO stating that being alive implies aging is stating the obvious... --NorwegianBlue^talk 22:38, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of errors in grammar, vocabulary and punctuation, especially in the first half. But I'll just mention the points where you fail to communicate your point at all (at least to me):

"detrimental point" - This doesn't really make sense.
"solicitor" - not sure I understand what this means -- someone who tries to convince God to give you better treatment?
"Activate God" - I don't know what this means.
"Have a route ... distinguished from other routes" -- seems vacuous; all routes are distinguished from other routes.

CodeTalker (talk) 00:03, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A statement intended to appeal to people of all religions should not use masculine terms to describe the deity. That excludes people who reject the notion that God has a human gender. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:01, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I understand what you guys mean: Keep my flopped out philosophies to myself because my English is rubbish... -- Apostle (talk) 20:16, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can somebody refine the enquoted paragraph please, my English is not good enough, and some thing's (philosophies) I have to insert in my book; one of this is this crap paragraph... -- Apostle (talk) 20:16, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here are a few suggestions. I really do not understand some of it, so it still needs work:

“In life we age in increments. At some point we age to a point of enlightenment where we realise what life is all about: some of us realise it at an early stage (due to the life we live); some later (due to genetic or environmental health issues); and some after death. Do not wait too long to realise who God is in your life. God does not need you, you need God. No one can help you in life or in the afterlife if you will not help yourself. Not even the prophet, messenger, apostle, or messiah, because even they are below God. God comes first. The sooner you acknowledge Him, the better it will be for you. He is the reason why you will have an advocate (the religious leader of the religion that you follow) in the afterlife. Dedicate yourself to God by using your logic, consciousness and understanding. Have a path (the religion you were born with or that you choose), to be distinguished from other paths. Use your logic, consciousness and understanding while following a religion, an advocate or angel will automatically be there for you in the afterlife…” —Stephen (talk) 20:42, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Steph.

Btw, can I use the words "god(s) and or goddess(es) wannabies" before the word prophet? Also, is it okay if I insert the following words "prophet, messenger, apostle, or messiah" in plural form? e.g., "prophet(s), messenger(s), apostle(s), or messiah(s)"? -- Apostle (talk) 06:31, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would shorten it. "Realize who God is sooner rather than later. God doesn’t need you; you need God. With death comes the need for an advocate. Activate God in life utilizing the religion you were born with or a religion you adopt." Bus stop (talk) 07:38, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

-- Apostle (talk) 18:59, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wannabes is the wrong register, too chatty and informal. Maybe "competing gods and goddesses" or "competing deities" instead. Try not to use parentheses except where absolutely necessary, so "prophets, messengers, apostles, or messiahs". —Stephen (talk) 07:55, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay! -- Apostle (talk) 18:59, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot everyone. Regards -- Apostle (talk) 18:59, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If we "should not use masculine terms to describe the deity" the only alternatives are "she" and "it". Which is better? 78.145.24.30 (talk) 14:40, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They is an alternative. Bazza (talk) 15:21, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Or you could use a neutral noun instead of a gender-specific pronoun, such as God, the Supreme Being, the Lord, the Almighty, the Creator, the Maker, the Godhead, Jehovah, Yahweh, the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost, the Holy Spirit, the Holy Trinity, the Great Spirit, the Deity, the Divine Being, the Celestial Being, the Divinity, the Immortal One, I Am, the Timeless One, the Formless One, the All-Possessing, the All-Powerful, the All-Wise, the Incomparable One, the Gracious One, the Helper, the All-Glorious, the King of Kings, the God of Abraham, HaShem, the Omniscient One, the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End, the Most High, God the Father. Take your pick. See also 101 Names of God —Stephen (talk) 19:25, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, want to keep it simple. I don't know, Cullen stated above too. I used "[S]he" because of user "Steph" and "Bus Stop" did not change that part earlier. "It" sounds alright (in a way) but using it doesn't fit somehow, to me because someone said it is used at animals and non-living things. And, now you guys confused me... -- Apostle (talk) 20:14, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A song in a Norwegian dialect[edit]

Hello, There is this song of which I can't make out some (many) parts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2rkxrwvZHw. I'm rather bad at this, and the dialect doesn't help either. Would any Norwegian speaker like to help me with the missing words (and possibly identify the dialect, besides being from somewhere in the eastern part of the country)? I have written out the parts that I do get.--95.42.25.72 (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jeg har et lite småbruk langt opp i ......,
men kjerringa ...................................,
................................................ utedo,
drar noe særlig damer, men apropos -
jeg har .......................... på TV-2,
......... fullt av kvinnfolk på høghælte sko
og......... så vælja blant alle dem som kom,
men det er ei spesiell ei som jeg drømmer om.
(Refreng:)
Det er ‘a Katrine Moholt e vil ha,
‘a Katrine Moholt som gjør meg glad,
.............. aldri (gjør seg tau?!)
jeg må bare si at jeg (vil ikke ha no’ laug?!)
............ aleine i alle disse år,
med brennende begjær blant gris og kuer og får
..............gamle kjerringer fra nær og fjern,
men det er ei spesiell ei som gjør meg helt gæren.
(Refreng.)
Det virker itte som ‘a Katrine Moholt er noe klar,
sjøl om (jeg er lei?).................. jeg skulle ønske at ‘a var,
men det er et håp om at når filmrullen er dum,
så skal ‘a Katrine Moholt .......... (litt om?)
(Refreng.)

The performers/songwriters "no:Trøste og Bære" consisted of Bjørn Anders Hermundstad (recently deceased) [1], from Gran in Hadeland, and Trond Amlie from Toten. The dialect is from the west side of Mjøsa. Whether it's Hadelandsdialekt or Totendialekt, I'm not sure; both go under the general heading of "Opplandsmål". I'll see if I get the time to fill in the blanks, but hey, it's 17. mai! If I get the time, would you like the version "written in dialect", i.e. "Je" instead of "Jeg", "tel" instead of "til", or would you like standardized spelling? --NorwegianBlue^talk 13:33, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the dialect identification, og gratulerer med dagen! It's not a problem if it's not *today* but tomorrow or the day after tomorrow that you fill them in - I'll be very grateful if you do it at all. As for the spelling, the closer to what he is actually singing, the better, but by all means do whatever is more convenient for you! Cheers, --95.42.25.72 (talk) 18:37, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, here goes:

Je har et lite småbruk langt opp i tæ dals,

men kjerring har det æller kømmi frivillig tæ gards,

Det virker ikke som traktor og utedo, drar noe særlig damer, men apropos:

Je har vørti med på no - på TV-2,

GALA/GARDA fullt av fullt av kvinnfolk på høghæle sko

og je ska messom vælja blant ælle dom som kom,

men det er ei spesiell ei som jeg drømmer om:

(Refreng:)

Det er a Katrine Moholt je vil ha,

a Katrine Moholt som gjør meg glad,

Dom andre jinten' som går rundt og gjør seg tel

jeg må bare si at jeg vikke ha dom læll

Og je som gikk aleine i ælle disse år,

med brennende begjær blant gris og ku og får

Plutslig kom det kjerringer fra nær og fjern,

men det er ei spesiell ei som gjør meg helt gærn.

(Refreng)

Det virker itte som a Katrine Moholt er noe klar,

sjøl om det er der jeg skulle ønske at a var,

men jeg har et håp om at når filmrullen er tom,

så skal a Katrine Moholt få tenkje seg litt om

(Refreng)

Notes

The singer switches between standard forms "jeg", "ikke" and dialectal forms "je", "itte"

Some translations:

a = hun/henne (In many dialects, names are very often prepended with han/'n or hu/ho/a)
te = til
æller = aldri
kømmi=kommet
dra damer = attract ladies
vørti = blitt
GALA/GARDA: I'm unable to recognize this word, but assume from the context that GALA fullt means chocking full
messom=liksom
vælja=velge
dom = de/dem
jinten' = jentene
gjør seg tel = I cant think of an exact translation to English, it means pretend to be (something they aren't)
vikke = vil ikke
læll = likevel
plutslig = plutselig
itte = ikke
tenkje = tenke

And for the benefit of those who don't understand Norwegian, but still would like to know the meaning of this work of art:

I have a tiny farm far up in the valley

But no woman has ever visited it voluntarily

It appears as though a tractor and and outhouse doesn't attract the ladies, but a propos:

I have joined this thing, on TV-2 (Refers to a TV show, Norwegian version of "Farmer Wants a Wife")

Chocking full of ladies on high-heeled shoes

And I'm supposed to chose between all those who come

But there is someone special, who I'm dreaming of:

(Refrain)

It is Katrine Moholt (The host of the TV show) that I want

Katrine Moholt fills me with joy

The other girls who walk around and pretent to be (hot)

I just have to say that that I don't want them anyway

And I who walked alone, during all those years,

With burning desire among pig and cow and sheep

Suddenly comes ladies from near and far

But there's a special one who drives me out of my mind

(Refrain)

It doesn't appear that Katrine Moholt is ready (at all)

Even though it's there that I would wish that she would be

But I have a hope that when the film reel is empty

Then Katrine Moholt will think things through

(Refreng)

-NorwegianBlue^talk 21:40, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I cant think of an exact translation to English, it means pretend to be (something they aren't). - Masquerade? Akld guy (talk) 22:52, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. "Gjøre seg til" has connotations of acting silly, and its meaning will vary quite a bit depending on context. It can mean pretending with the intention of actually achieving something, or pretending just for fun. --NorwegianBlue^talk 15:20, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Make believe --217.140.96.140 (talk) 10:23, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Closer, but can the expression be used in the lyrics above without specifying what kind of make-believe the girls are doing? In the context given, the expression evokes the image of ordinary girls who usually wouldn't wear high-heeled shoes wobbling around pretending to celebrities. Word-by-word translation: Dom (The) andre (other) jinten' (girls) som (who) går (go/walk) rundt (around) og (and) gjør (do) seg (themselves) tel (to). --NorwegianBlue^talk 15:09, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tusen takk, NorwegianBlue! That was a lot of hard work, since I see I had understood even less of the text than I thought. Thanks for the explanations in Bokmål, too - words like messom and læll would have been a problem even when spelled out - and for the English translations! This was really difficult (for a non-native speaker such as myself).--95.42.25.72 (talk) 11:11, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bare hyggelig. My pleasure! --NorwegianBlue^talk 15:09, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"[W]obbling around pretending to celebrities." I presume that should be 'pretending to be celebrities'. Imitating or mimicking might be suitable, but don't convey a sense of silliness. Aping does, but links to the same article as those two and unfortunately the distinction is not brought out. Akld guy (talk) 00:02, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]