Language desk
< January 5	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 7 >

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.

January 6

I have 2 younger brothers - help!

Actually, this is a grammar question! I'm the oldest in a family of four children - two brothers and two sisters. The difficulty arises when situations arise in which I find it convenient to talk about my siblings without using their names. My sister is easy - she's just "my sister" or "my younger sister." My brothers pose a difficulty, however, since they're both younger and there are only two of them. I can't refer to the elder of the two as "my elder brother," since he's actually my younger brother. Referring to the younger of the two as "my youngest brother" feels wrong to me since I only have two brothers, and therefore it's grammatically incorrect to refer to one as "youngest" relative to the other. Calling them "the elder of my two younger brothers" and "the younger of my two younger brothers" is frightfully wordy even for me, and "my older younger brother" and "my younger younger brother" is just weird. Short of selling one of them on eBay, which might not be a bad idea actually, does anyone have any ideas? - AJ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.139.75 (talk) 04:03, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Younger" and "youngest" are perfectly acceptable. The age base for comparison is yours: one is younger than you are and the other is the youngest of the three of you. (He may also be the youngest of the four of you, but you haven't said if that is true.) You can also use "young" and "younger", though I find that confusing if you have more than one younger brother. A reference to "my young brother" usually means, to me, either that you have only one brother and he is younger than you are, or that you have more than one brother but he is the only brother who is younger than you are. ៛ Bielle (talk) 04:13, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why youngest brother would be wrong, he is the youngest of your bothers. I would call the other, "my middle brother" though I don't know if that's correct in English, it is usable in my native though. — chan dler — 04:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could also call the youngest "my baby brother", although he might find that insulting, but that could be a bonus, couldn't it ? StuRat (talk) 04:43, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in a similar situation - I have two elder sisters. I usually say "my oldest sister" and "my second sister", or more wordily "the older of my sisters" and "the younger of my sisters". But you're right, it is inconvenient to refer to them like this, so usually I just say what their names are first off, and then refer to them by name. —An gr 09:44, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am in much the same situation though mine is doubled. I have four siblings, two of each gender, and all are older than me. Calling the oldest brother my "oldest brother" is not grammatically wrong as you, OP, seem to be saying. "Oldest" is a word and "brother" is a word. So saying "oldest brother" is not incorrect. When speaking of them to someone, I generally point out at the beginning of the conversation that I have two of each and they're all older. From then on, in the conversation, if not wanting to use their names, I refer to them as my "oldest brother/sister" and my "younger older brother/sister". This last one sounds contradictory but it isn't. It is simply a statement of fact. It's also the shortest vocally. And Angr, I generally don't use names very much because then people can easily get confused and ask "so, this is the older one?" or some other question because with all four names, they can't recall very well just where each name falls in the chronological order of siblings. Dismas|^(talk) 10:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose it depends on what you're saying about them, but most of the time when I'm talking about my sisters, their relative ages are unimportant to the story anyway. But if it is, I prefer "second oldest sister" or just "second sister" to "younger older sister". I suppose we should all pity Malcolm in the Middle, who would have to talk about his oldest brother, his younger older brother, his older younger brother, and his youngest brother. —An gr 10:45, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Like Angr, I should side-step all this by saying "My brother Hannibal", or whatever. If you need to say more, "My brother Hannibal, he's the youngest of us" (oldest of us/one in the middle/younger brother but older than me/etc.) Strawless ^(talk) 12:34, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have Malcolm in the Middle's problem. I have two older brothers. When I want to distinguish between them I have to talk about my eldest brother and my younger older brother, or my second older brother. Traditional Chinese kinship allowed you to talk about 1st, 2nd and 3rd older brothers, etc., because big families were common. But then, traditional Chinese kinship terms are a nightmare. 130.56.65.25 (talk) 23:04, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How about my youngest brother and my middle brother ? —Tamfang (talk) 19:28, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your helpful suggestions. Since my younger younger brother is, in fact, the youngest, I suppose I could overcome my grammar-snobbish objections and refer to him as my youngest brother. There are far too few people these days who observe the rule that one can only correctly use "-est" when comparing three or more of the same thing anyway. I suppose I could also solve the problem by referring to them as they fit into the birth order as a whole, not just as they fit into the birth order of brothers ("second-oldest" and "youngest" are gramatically correct and not at all unwieldy) - probably the best solution. I could also arrange to acquire another younger brother, of course, but that would just be going too far. - AJ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.215.227.218 (talk) 14:21, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Latin origin of the word 'limen' still relevant today?

Hi, I can't make sense of a reply from a user regarding the way the dictionary "works". I have tried to reply as a prompt for clarification, but it was unsigned, so no talk page. Can you help make sense of it for me? Either reply here, or continue the discussion. The post is here. Thanks...—F^red ¹1⁴ 07:13, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, we have an article, "Liminality" and afaik, limen pops up in several think-fields, as this thumbnail article attests. Hope this helps, Julia Rossi (talk) 11:20, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In reference to words, the statement that X comes from Y is ambiguous, but it can be disambiguated with the statement that X is etymologically derived from Y while being a translation of Z. See limen - Definition of limen at Your Dictionary.

-- Wavelength (talk) 17:35, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your very easily understood explanation. That is helpful. I'm arguing that the meaning of Y can still have relevance today, and should be included in our encyclopedia. The meaning of the word 'limen' would still have meaning in the non-psycholgical sense if it wasn't for psychology. We just need to work a bit harder at finding it. Why shouldn't it? —F^red ¹1⁴ 18:55, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I found 28 "occurrences" of the English word threshold at Bible Concordance: Threshold. It counts one occurrence for a verse, even if that verse contains the word more than once.

The respective multilingual pages are as listed below, where the Latin Vulgate version is shown fourth in the first column. In these web addresses, the hyphen separates chapter and verse, and does not mean a series of verses. In some of these passages, the English word threshold corresponds to another expression in the Latin Vulgate, but I have excerpted some portions which use limen or a form thereof. (See also Psalms#Numbering).

http://multilingualbible.com/judges/19-27.htm (in limine)

http://multilingualbible.com/1_samuel/5-4.htm (super limen)

http://multilingualbible.com/1_samuel/5-5.htm (super limen)

http://multilingualbible.com/1_kings/7-6.htm

http://multilingualbible.com/1_kings/14-17.htm (ingrederetur limen)

http://multilingualbible.com/2_kings/12-9.htm

http://multilingualbible.com/2_kings/22-4.htm

http://multilingualbible.com/2_kings/23-4.htm

http://multilingualbible.com/2_kings/25-18.htm

http://multilingualbible.com/2_chronicles/3-7.htm

http://multilingualbible.com/2_chronicles/34-9.htm

http://multilingualbible.com/esther/2-21.htm

http://multilingualbible.com/esther/6-2.htm

http://multilingualbible.com/psalms/84-10.htm

http://multilingualbible.com/jeremiah/35-4.htm

http://multilingualbible.com/jeremiah/52-24.htm

http://multilingualbible.com/ezekiel/9-3.htm (ad limen)

http://multilingualbible.com/ezekiel/10-4.htm (ad limen)

http://multilingualbible.com/ezekiel/10-18.htm (a limine)

http://multilingualbible.com/ezekiel/40-6.htm (mensus est limen ... id est limen)

http://multilingualbible.com/ezekiel/40-7.htm

http://multilingualbible.com/ezekiel/41-16.htm (limina et fenestras obliquas)

http://multilingualbible.com/ezekiel/41-25.htm

http://multilingualbible.com/ezekiel/43-8.htm (qui fabricati sunt limen suum iuxta limen meum)

http://multilingualbible.com/ezekiel/46-2.htm (super limen)

http://multilingualbible.com/ezekiel/47-1.htm (subter limen)

http://multilingualbible.com/zephaniah/1-9.htm

http://multilingualbible.com/zephaniah/2-14.htm (in liminibus)

-- Wavelength (talk) 20:56, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps some elementary facts need to be laid out explicitly: The Latin word limen ("threshold, lintel") is at the root of common English words like eliminate ("to throw out over the threshold"), lintel, preliminary, possibly sublime, and certainly subliminal (which is directly relevant to the use of limen in psychology, and does something towards clarifying the meaning of subliminal). In the history of some such words the Latin word limes ("path, boundary, boundary path") is influential also, though its own etymological connection with limen is uncertain.

–_⊥^{¡ɐɔıʇǝo}Noetica!^T– 22:18, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely, the meaning of Y (Latin limen) has relevance today, because of its use in the Bible, and because of the medical and non-medical definitions of X (English limen).

Also, the word is used in the names of some organizations and in their web addresses.

Fred114, does someone object to including the meaning of Latin limen in Wikipedia?

Which article(s) do you want to include it?

-- Wavelength (talk) 00:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For me, this dispute arose at this edit here. As you can see, I deleted the word "latin" arguing that the origins of the word liminality were the english origins, not the latin. I was clearly confused, partly because the article on limiality was mainly psychological, and partly that I was wrong. I added an explanation at the talk page here. Your contribution to the discussion has not only ironed out the origins of the word, but add other important sources of its meaning. The bible was a brilliant place to look. I've learnt something from that. But also your construct has also helped. The latin origin of the word is in my reading of the article the 'english' origin, the psycho bablle stuff. I want to see the latin origin given more promience in liminality. Perhaps this work has not yet been done. In a crossed discussion which I began here, an editor contributed that the original meaning of 'limen' cannot be bought back today, because it has no relevance. I hope this makes sense. —F^red ¹1⁴ 01:18, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The word limen is declined at limen - Wiktionary.

List of anatomical topics has a red link to Limen insulae. (See column 2, line 2, at http://www.uams.edu/radiology/education/residency/diagnostic/pdf/sylvian_cistern_RSNA2003.pdf.)

With macrons, the i after the l is marked long in līmen, līmes, sublīmis, and ēlīmināre. (See Help:Macrons.)

-- Wavelength (talk) 03:56, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[I removed the comma from the excerpt from Ezekiel 40:6 at http://multilingualbible.com/ezekiel/40-6.htm
and I inserted an ellipsis. -- Wavelength (talk) 17:39, 9 January 2009 (UTC)][reply]

The seven moods of English and five persons of grammar

I'd like to make some additions and corrections for my earlier section.

The seven moods of English

You shall heed. (As it fits.) You should heed. You will heed. (As it wants.) You would heed. You mot heed. (As it goes.) You must heed. You do heed. (As it makes.) You did heed. You can heed. (As it works.) You could heed. You owe heed. (As it needs.) You ought heed. You may heed. (As it comes.) You might heed.

as ~ whenever mot ~ feel like shall ~ likely Many say "should" instead of "ought". Mood is contrasted with aspect (progressive), tense (prospective), and person (imperative). In my notes I also list the five genders (common, masculine, feminine, epicœne, neuter), declinations (gerundive, nominative, accusative, dative, supine), positions (locative, ablative, stative, allative, demonstrative), cases (vocative, paritive, ablative, genitive, possessive), quantities (frequentative, diminutive, comparative, augmentative, superlative), persons (imperative, active, objective, indicative, passive), tenses (prospective, past, present, future, causative), aspects (progressive, optative, perfective, subjunctive, infinitive), and some of their Middel and New English equivalends, prepositional and enclitic:

many small more great most -el -ick -er hr- -est O for by of with -ow -r -o -'s -u where from at tom til -ham -ey -borne -ward -n when fro an to as -ing -am -em -im -m thuh this the thy that -l -a -e -i -t

-lysdexia 11:57, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

"...mot heed..."? Is it a typo? Strawless ^(talk) 12:41, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not a mistap. However, some use the modern spelling "mote" as in "so mote it be", under risk of confusion with the other mote. -lysdexia 14:26, 6 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.108.164.45 (talk)

Maybe it should be "mot the heed." Matt Deres (talk) 14:25, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lysdexia, do we need to remind everyone again that you are a banned troll, and also insane? Adam Bishop (talk) 14:34, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Troll or no, it's best not to be in a mood for this piffle. If you can't consistently spell words like "middle," you ought not to waste your substance on a chimera like reforming a language. --- OtherDave (talk) 14:56, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm not unglad of the reminder. —Tamfang (talk) 19:24, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bila Tserkva (in Ukrainian)

The page tells us that Bila Tserkva "literally translated means 'White Church.' " Is that so? Where Once We Walked (first edition), a gazeteer of Eastern European place names, cites among the older names Belaya Tserkov, Biala Cerkiew, and unaccountably the English White Field (and in Hebrew, the literal translation Sde Lavan). Could the current and/or former names have meant "White Field" or something similar? My knowledge of the Ukrainian language is virtually nil. -- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 13:08, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know about Ukrainian in particular, but cognates of tserkva in other Slavic languages indeed mean church, not anything related to field. (Now that I think about it, Slavic cerk- would derive by palatalization from older *kerk-, which sounds too similar to Germanic kerk (Dutch), Kirche (German), church to be just a coincidence.) It could be that "White Fields" is simply an alternative name of the place. — Emil J. 15:25, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(I'm not entirely sure of the original vowels, it also might have been cьrk- < kirk- or something.) — Emil J. 15:32, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No coincidence. The Slavic and Germanic words both derive from Greek kyriakon "of or pertaining to the Lord". That's not the usual Greek word for "church", though. —An gr 16:06, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As for White Field, the usual word for field in Slavic languages is pola, polya etc. It's where Poland derived its name from. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The name "Bila Tserkva" means "White Church" literally in Ukranian. "Belaya Tserkov" is Russian for the same, and "Biala Cerkiew" is Polish - although the usual term is "kościół", the article on cerkiew explains its etymology and difference. It's fairly typical of old cities in Europe's less-stable regions to have multiple translated versions of their name in different languages. "White field" is strange though - could be a mistranslation/folk-etymology or similar. If it was ever even used? Many if not most Central/East European cities were historically referred to in English by their German-or-Germanized names. E.g. "Moscow" from German "Moskau" from Russian "Moskva". --130.237.179.182 (talk) 20:31, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Linguistic background of Indian salt workers?

Would the poorest and hardest working salt workers of Gandhi's Salt Satyagraha to Dandi have primarily spoken Oriya language, Kutchi language or some other language?

I assume that you are talking about the salt workers at the Dharasana Salt Works, the site of the Dharasana Satyagraha which followed the salt satyagraha, since the salt satyagraha was not directly involved with salt workers. In fact, the point of the salt satyagraha was to show that Indians did not need to rely on salt from British-controlled salt works such as the one at Dharasana. There were many British salt works other than the one at Dharasana, and the workers at the various salt works would have spoken the various regional languages where they lived and worked. As for Dharasana and Dandi, they are both located in the Navsari district of Gujarat. Therefore the villagers at Dandi and the salt workers at Dharasana would have spoken the local Surati or Southern dialect of Gujarati. Marco polo (talk) 17:22, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Psalm 151 by Haile Selassie

There are many different versions of Biblical Psalm 151 floating around. When Haile Selasse recited Psalm 151 in full, which version was it? Was it a particular Amharic translation? Which English translation would be equivalent to the version Haile Selassie chose?--Sonjaaa (talk) 16:07, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean the time when he recited it to his Council of State, then he may have used the Amharic of Abu Rumi's translation, but he also may have used a more traditional Ge'ez version. In English, the best parallel for either is probably the Authorized King James Version, which has a very long tradition of use by the British royal family. An even older English translation is that in the Great Bible. Strawless ^(talk) 18:20, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, as Strawless suggests, the English Bible translation closest in sociological terms to the Ge'ez Bible in Ethiopia would probably be the King James Version, certainly the most traditional of English versions. However, it is likely that Haile Selassie would have used one of the Amharic translations that he himself sponsored in the mid-20th century rather than the older Abu Rumi translation. In that case, the closest sociological equivalent might be one of the more "authoritative" mid-20th-century English translations, such as the New English Bible or the Revised Standard Version. However, none of this gets at the English version most similar in meaning or in style of translation to the version used by Haile Selassie, if that's what you are looking for. If you are looking for the version most similar in meaning, there is really no way to distinguish among English translations, since they are derived from the same original Greek and Hebrew sources as the Ethiopian versions. If you have a translation of something in Language A to something in Language B, there is no way to determine whether one translation of that same source in Language C is more equivalent than another Language C translation to the Language B translation. On the other hand, you can distinguish among translations in terms of the approach to translation. Some translations aim at literal equivalence. Literality often comes at the expense of readability, since expressions and idioms common in one language are not easy to understand when translated word-for-word into another language. Therefore, other translations aim more at functional equivalence, or getting the larger meaning across in terms familiar to speakers of the target language at the expense of word-for-word correspondence to the source language. It would be possible to identify an English translation with a similar approach to the translation used by Haile Selassie, but that English translation would still not really be "equivalent" to the Ge'ez or Amharic translation. Marco polo (talk) 01:28, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, except that I believe Sonjaaa is asking about an event early in Haile Selassie's reign, so in the early 1930s, which was some time before any of the new Amharic translations had been made. My best guess is that he used the Ge'ez, but it's only a guess. Strawless ^(talk) 19:03, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"In language there are only differences without positive terms" (Saussure Course in General Linguistics)

F. de Sausure said "In language there are only differences without positive terms". I'm struggling to discover what the phrase "without positive terms" refers to. Is this a reference to some mathematical principle? Does it have to do with mathematical operations relative to positive terms vs. negative terms, as 1 subtracted from 2 vs. -1 subtracted from 3? I'm assuming that the phrase "without positive terms" is an important component of the proposition or else Saussure wouldn't have added it.

I have pursued this question without success throughout documents about both linguistics in general and Saussure in particular. Perhaps the meaning is so obvious it doesn't merit clarification. Nevertheless, the significance is lost on me. 68.157.93.254 (talk) 20:33, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This famous statement (occurring here) is given an explanation here.

The term positive is complex, having several subtly distinct meanings in philosophy which have migrated into linguistics and general academic discourse. The sense intended in Saussure appears to be something like "absolute, unconditioned, objective", as opposed to "relative, contextual, subjective". So once more we have a broad pleasing parallel (like those supposed to obtain in literature and the other arts, and in morals) with Einstein's roughly contemporaneous Theory of Relativity, according to which there are no absolute positions, motions, or points of view. There are only differences and relativities.

–_⊥^{¡ɐɔıʇǝo}Noetica!^T– 21:51, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The basic insight is that language is inherently relational, rather than being an assembly of isolated non-interacting items. AnonMoos (talk) 03:00, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your attention and the clarifications. However, I'm still uneasy especially in light of the clause that occurs near the famous proposition: "Even more important:a difference generally implies positive terms between which the difference is set up; but in language there are only differences without positive terms." This is what makes me think there is some reference to mathematics or possibly logic: "a difference generally implies positive terms between which the difference is set up"65.34.215.75 (talk) 01:05, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pretend it said "but in language, there are only relationships without fixed entities". AnonMoos (talk) 01:48, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cricket St Thomas

The article states the word "cruced", which corrupted to "cricket", derives from Anglo-Saxon. I understand the word "cruced" is actually Welsh. Can the Editorial Team review? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Taurito (talk • contribs) 21:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which article? Our article, Cricket St Thomas, makes no mention of "cruced", but states it's from the Anglo-Saxon word "cruc," meaning a hill or ridge. The Oxford Dict. Placenames offers more detail:

Cruche 1086 (DB), Cruk Thomas 1291. Celtic crǖg 'a mound on a hill' with the later addition of O French -ette 'little'. Affix from the dedication of the church.

So, no cruced there either. I know no Welsh, so don't know if cruced is Welsh, but it's a little irrelevant (the village is in Somerset, England, and some way from Wales) but the Celtic languages do share similar roots, so it is not surprising that there are similar sounding words. Hope this helps. (By the way, there is no "Editorial Team" at WP: we are just a community of like-minded volunteers.) Gwinva (talk) 23:37, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify: Anglo-Saxon is not a Celtic language. My discussion referred to the ODPN's "Celtic crǖg". WP's contradictory Anglo-Saxon ref is from a guide book, so I'd trust Oxford on this one. Gwinva (talk) 23:50, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cricket St Thomas isn't near Wales per se, but it is in the part of England where placenames of Brythonic origin are not unusual (Welsh and Cornish are both Brythonic languages). —An gr 14:16, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2009 January 6

Contents