Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2007 October 18
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Language desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < October 17 | << Sep | October | Nov >> | October 19 > |
| 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. |
Contents |
[edit] October 18
[edit] Need Translation...
What does "JUNCTA JUVANT" mean? nat Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?! 03:00, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- The article on University of Cincinnati and UC's website translate it as "Strength in Unity". iungere means to join/unite, iuncta is the perfect passive participle joined/united in the neutral plural form. iuvare means to help/aid (There's probably a more fitting meaning, but I'm sticking to what I found on wiktionary). Iuncta iuvant literally could be translated as united, they help (one another). There seems to be a legal phrase "Quae non valeant singula, iuncta iuvant." ("What is without value on its own, helps when joined" (? Please correct, if mistranslated, Latin classes are far away.)" This reference interprets it as "(Words)which have no meaning when considered separately, obtain their sense when they are brought in connection with one another." ---Sluzzelin talk 06:25, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- That works well in the legal phrase but as a motto for a university it's kind of odd. Iuncta is neuter, so if it is the subject of iuvant (and it could be, grammatically), it means some lifeless inanimate joined things are helping! But if it is the object (which it could also be, grammatically), it means "they help the joined things." Seems like it would work better if it were Iuncti or Iunctos... Adam Bishop 07:38, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- you know...it's also the motto of New College, University of Toronto. nat Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?! 09:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- The explanation Sluzzelin quotes seems quite satisfactory for the neuter, since the aim of a broad liberal arts education is to unite disparate fields of learning into something greater than the sum of its parts. Wareh 15:22, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- you know...it's also the motto of New College, University of Toronto. nat Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?! 09:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- That works well in the legal phrase but as a motto for a university it's kind of odd. Iuncta is neuter, so if it is the subject of iuvant (and it could be, grammatically), it means some lifeless inanimate joined things are helping! But if it is the object (which it could also be, grammatically), it means "they help the joined things." Seems like it would work better if it were Iuncti or Iunctos... Adam Bishop 07:38, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
- I am guessing that "juncta" is meant to be feminine singular, not neuter plural, and that it is meant to refer to the university (universitas, schola, alma mater) and to mean something like "They support the united [university]". Marco polo 15:22, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- But iuncta cannot be the feminine singular object of iuvant. Wareh 15:23, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Of course not. Then it would be "junctam". How embarrassing. ;-( Marco polo 17:36, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- I am guessing that "juncta" is meant to be feminine singular, not neuter plural, and that it is meant to refer to the university (universitas, schola, alma mater) and to mean something like "They support the united [university]". Marco polo 15:22, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Norwegian Dialects
In http://books.google.com/books?id=CPX2xgmVe9IC&pg=PA335&lpg=PA335&dq=%22middle+norwegian%22&source=web&ots=IJVj3Zzc-U&sig=_uSbhtzkjboI_XuW9brgk7eGau8#PPA337,M1, it says "Runic writing survived into the 18th c. in archaic communities such as Oppdal....". I was wondering which those are the most archaic? Thanks.70.74.35.53 04:04, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] a latin sentence
What is the meaning of these two latin sentences: "notio quaedam intellectualis n mente aeternaliter facta" and "in qua dicitur non esse". Both are from John Scotus Eriugena. Thank you in advance for your kindly help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.90.156.3 (talk) 08:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- (Note: in mente divina for n mente.) The first is Eriugena's definition of a human being, "and not only of a human being, but also of all things which are created in God's wisdom." It can be translated, "a certain idea of the intellect eternally created in the mind of God." The second quote concerns the "superessentiality" of God's nature. In fact, superessentialitas is the antecedent of the relative pronoun qua, so that Eriugena is saying that, "In God's superessentiality, he is said not to be." This will make sense if you consult this section on Eriugena's negative theology & idea of superessentiality. In general, go to the SEP article for Eriugena's philosophy, and not to Wikipedia's article. Wareh 15:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Neither is a sentence; the first lacks a primary verb, and the second lacks a subject. The first means something like "a certain intellectual idea eternally made in the mind" or "a kind of intellectual idea...". The second means something like "in which it is said not to be", but it is hard to know for sure without the context.Marco polo 15:14, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Drawing a Blank
At some point about two years ago, I saw a http://www.dictionary.com/ posting for a word whose definition was, essentially, the same as "drawing a blank" or having a "brain-fart." That is to say, in the middle of a conversation, you suddenly forget something that you are sure you have knowledge of, but just can't recall at the time.
Anyone have an idea? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.57.82.122 (talk) 09:00, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Lapsus memoriae? Sometimes translated as lapse of memory. [1] might, or might not, help. Bessel Dekker 12:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- "At the tip of the tongue" might also work in certain contexts. Duja► 15:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- It certainly might, and the article is very informative.
- aporia is different, I should think: it refers to doubt, whether genuine (and then it is a philosophical term) or pretended (and then it is rhetorical). Whereas "drawing a blank" is a psychological effect, hence a slip or a lapse. Bessel Dekker 15:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- If we had to depend on Wikipedia and dictionaries to guide us, then, yes, we'd find only the philosophical and rhetorical senses. And, in fairness, I don't see why other usages of the word would be encyclopedically notable, though that doesn't excuse the dictionaries' omission. But the core sense, "being at a loss," "not knowing what to do/say," certainly persists, despite the term's having been largely appropriated and narrowed by philosophers. A bit of Googling easily finds it used to mean "a feeling of helplessness," in connection with speechlessness and perplexity in general, etc. These include more and less careful usages, people who do & don't know Greek, people influenced by Derrida & people whose minds remain unclouded by Derrida, etc.—kind of messy, but enough to warrant more attention from lexicographers. There is a long tradition (Buridan's ass) of philosophically worrying the question of the springs of action, which we now tend to think of with the help of psychology. Wareh 16:04, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- There is a very real difference between
(1) not knowing the answer to a question ("doubt, perplexity, aporia") and
(2) knowing a word perfectly well but being unable to hit upon it ("lapse, slip").
In the first case, the answer is not there (not stored in one's mind), in the second case it is there but cannot be accessed. Bessel Dekker 16:21, 18 October 2007 (UTC)- Yes, it is possible to draw such a distinction, but I find it a bit too tidy, and I don't think the English expressions brought up in the original question are used only in cases where the answer "is there" in some definite sense (this is a quite philosophical question, and disagreement is possible about whether I "have" the resources of expression and action that are failing me—there's nothing wrong with calling it aporia without addressing this question). Wareh 16:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Linguistically, I think the two are quite distinct: after all, it is a matter of definition (word reference). But let's agree to disagree. Bessel Dekker 17:32, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, it is possible to draw such a distinction, but I find it a bit too tidy, and I don't think the English expressions brought up in the original question are used only in cases where the answer "is there" in some definite sense (this is a quite philosophical question, and disagreement is possible about whether I "have" the resources of expression and action that are failing me—there's nothing wrong with calling it aporia without addressing this question). Wareh 16:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- There is a very real difference between
- If we had to depend on Wikipedia and dictionaries to guide us, then, yes, we'd find only the philosophical and rhetorical senses. And, in fairness, I don't see why other usages of the word would be encyclopedically notable, though that doesn't excuse the dictionaries' omission. But the core sense, "being at a loss," "not knowing what to do/say," certainly persists, despite the term's having been largely appropriated and narrowed by philosophers. A bit of Googling easily finds it used to mean "a feeling of helplessness," in connection with speechlessness and perplexity in general, etc. These include more and less careful usages, people who do & don't know Greek, people influenced by Derrida & people whose minds remain unclouded by Derrida, etc.—kind of messy, but enough to warrant more attention from lexicographers. There is a long tradition (Buridan's ass) of philosophically worrying the question of the springs of action, which we now tend to think of with the help of psychology. Wareh 16:04, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Probably incorrect usage, but lacuna is a "missing space," and is sometimes used in literature. It'd be a novel use of the term, but I think it applies well. -- Kesh 17:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Synonyms
Wondering if anyone can help.
Working on a resume for high school and i need some synonyms for on time. Preferably one word but can be more.
Thanks
--204.218.240.26 12:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Punctual and promt are the two main bad boys. Lanfear's Bane 12:11, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Allow me to prompt you for the missing "p". :) JackofOz 12:13, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Okay, Thanks those words should help. And thanks for the spelling mistake, word didn't pick up on it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.218.240.26 (talk) 12:15, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Oops... my speeling isn't all taht grate at timse. Lanfear's Bane 12:35, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Ha Ha.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.218.240.26 (talk) 12:38, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sure you, like Milkbreath, are "a better speller than your orthography would indicate". -- JackofOz 04:34, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Another synonym: timely.--El aprendelenguas 20:27, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Salir vs. irse
Salir and irse can both be translated as "to leave" in a literal sense, according the dictionaries I've consulted. Are they interchangeable when used in this sense? I already know that they aren't interchangeable when used for certain figurative expressions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KeeganB (talk • contribs) 18:43, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Salir = to go out, to leave the room/building etc
- Irse = to go away, to take oneself off
- reference here [2] SaundersW 20:32, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
-
- Yes, SaundersW pretty much hit the nail on the head with salir = "go out" and irse = "go away." Salir is almost always used with de (="of"): Salió de su casa a las ocho = "He went out of his house at 8:00." Irse means "go away" or "take one's leave": Quiero quedarme contigo, pero tengo mucho sueño y me debo ir = "I want to stay with you, but I'm really sleepy and I ought to go (away)/leave." An example that clearly shows that the two verbs are not interchangeable is Me voy para California mañana = "I'm leaving for California tomorrow." Salgo would not work there at all; you're not "going out" of some edifice. Hope that makes sense.--El aprendelenguas 20:22, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Creation of a new language
The New Zealand government owned radio station (Radio New Zealand) has been including Maori (local indigenous peoples language) words in discourse. This is in their everyday conversation. Some examples are whanau in place of the Engish word family (I think here, there may also be a spelling change from the original 'Whaanau'), Kia Ora in place of hello, Kai in place of food and Kina in place of sea urchin. This practise has become everyday usage in many forums in New Zealand. In recent times the radio station has increased usage to include many more Maori words and sentences. My question is for language specialists. Is this the beginning of a new language (one could call it "Maolish") a combination of English and Maori? How does it fit in with examples of English and other languages? Is this a type of Pigeon English or is it something else? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Platsonzl (talk • contribs) 21:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Surely it will just be the integration of foreign words into the current language spoken. Like how words like (hoping these are foreign) naive, that schadefraud (spelling) word etc. To be fair most of the english language is nicked from other countries, be it part greek words, part latin, part french, part german etc. ny156uk 22:08, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Try Schadenfreude... and I agree, English has been gobbling up words from other languages for more than a thousand years. It will survive, out there in far-flung New Zealand. Xn4 00:50, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
-
- Ny156uk has it correct - to become a new "mixed language", they would probably have to use Maori grammar mixed with the English as well. As it stands, it is simply a variety (similar to dialect) of New Zealand English with a higher frequency of Maori borrowings. At the extreme end of this is a language like Media Lengua, which has Quechua grammar and almost completely Spanish words. If they use a lot of Maori vocabulary and it becomes unintelligible with normal New Zealand English, there might be some justification to calling it a different language. The definition of language, of course, remains somewhat blurry. 130.56.65.24 02:27, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
- A language is a dialect with an army and navy. --Milkbreath 04:07, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
- I wonder whether this is merely a matter of substratum words surfacing. Now that Maori as a language is under threat, it seems that there is an official New Zealand language policy to promote the language. This seems to me a different process from the "natural" process of borrowing. Bessel Dekker 17:01, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
- A language is a dialect with an army and navy. --Milkbreath 04:07, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
- Ny156uk has it correct - to become a new "mixed language", they would probably have to use Maori grammar mixed with the English as well. As it stands, it is simply a variety (similar to dialect) of New Zealand English with a higher frequency of Maori borrowings. At the extreme end of this is a language like Media Lengua, which has Quechua grammar and almost completely Spanish words. If they use a lot of Maori vocabulary and it becomes unintelligible with normal New Zealand English, there might be some justification to calling it a different language. The definition of language, of course, remains somewhat blurry. 130.56.65.24 02:27, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds pretty much like Hawaiian pidgin, in a way. Though in that case, they take a lot of the sentence structure of the Hawai'ian language and English, and mash it up pretty spectacularly. -- Kesh 17:42, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
