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.
What does "plan" mean in the following context? "The house she lived in lies two miles from mine--- a simple, two-story structure with the boxy plan, steeply-pitched roof and unadorned lines that are typical of houses built in the middle of the nineteenth century near the New Jersey shore." Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.249.220.167 (talk) 00:57, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm more confused about "boxy". To me that means lots of rectangles, but that's most floor plans. So what makes one floor plan more "boxy" than the rest ? StuRat (talk) 01:32, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it does mean Floor plan, Bugsy, but the size of the lot you were given (more in the Midwest than in Noi Joisey). The size of the ground, not the size of what you build on it. Si Trew (talk) 09:04, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To me "boxy" in a US context just means "square", "orthogonal", and something people disliked until Art Deco architecture rounded things off a bit. I think it just means "square", really. So the floor plan is orthogonal. Sorry for being so literal. Redbrick is no help; Eastern Seaboard may be some. Si Trew (talk) 09:10, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I used to have on my user page the following sentence: "He never opposed any objection to my usurping his username". Recently someone contacted me and told me they didn't think you could "oppose an objection" and suggested "posed" instead. I thought about it and I agreed that "opposed" didn't sound right. But their suggestion didn't sound right to me either. So I changed it to "he never made any objection to my usurping his username". What do you think? What verbs go with "objection"? ContactBasemetalhere01:05, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's the simplest answer in the context of the original sentence structure, and "raised" works too. But Deor's "He never objected to..." works better as a good English sentence: it's a little more direct or crisp sounding. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 02:06, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"He posed AN objection", suggests his very existence was an objection. As in "He poses a threat to me". So, "he NEVER posed AN objection", means he wasn't a problem to my carrying out my plan. However, the OED accepts posed as being the same as proposed. So, see my suggestion later. Also, the OED has "pose: To propound or raise (a question, puzzle, etc.); to present or constitute (a difficulty, problem, danger, or threat)." Myrvin (talk) 06:29, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you originally meant "never proposed any objection." I think an objection can be proposed. And your brain turned prop into opp. Myrvin (talk) 06:09, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I can think of a few unusual cases where you could use it: "The group needed to find any legal grounds for halting the development. One member, an ex-Lawyer, proposed several objections which could be raised".
Sure, but the object of the question is not to justify the use of the word "proposed". It's to discover the best verb to go with the sentence the OP has given us, the current version of which is "he never made any objection to my usurping his username". "Made" is all right, and "stated" or "raised" would also fit. I'd put "proposed" way down the list, and "opposed" off the list entirely. -- Jack of Oz[pleasantries]09:47, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The question was "What verbs go with 'objection'"?" - not necessarily the best (whatever that means). We are also (as an interesting aside) discussing why the questioner might have hit on opposed, and if it is a possible verb to use here. Myrvin (talk) 10:41, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think the original sentence is merely archaic; at least, I seem to have read in old works oppose in the sense ‘put up in opposition’, thus: "To any intruder we oppose a barricade." Sometime when I ought not already to be in bed, I'll check the OED. —Tamfang (talk) 08:00, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Definition II 3 a might be something like it. "trans. To set (something) against or in opposition to; to place or position as an obstacle. Also: to put forward (a person) as an antagonist. Chiefly with to; also (now rare) with against." Examples include "The enemy opposed to us a tremendous fire from a numerous artillery", and "Nor could the Modern have avoided present Death, if he had not luckily opposed the Shield that had been given Him by Venus". Myrvin (talk) 09:05, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Most definitions of interpose are about putting things between other things, so don't seem useful. However, there is one that says: "To put forth or introduce (action, authority, etc.) in the way of interference or intervention." Last cited from 1882 by Lamb: "Expecting every moment when he [the owner] shall interpose his interdict." Seems rather contrived to me. Myrvin (talk) 14:49, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
? If you interpose an objection, surely it would be putting the objection between a proposal or an act, and the continuation or fulfillment of the proposal or act. Alanscottwalker (talk) 18:27, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. But it's still interesting to know what verb can go with "objection". If someone asked for the best way to go from city A to city B by car, you could suggest that it'd be better if they flew instead, or you could answer their question. ContactBasemetalhere21:04, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Original Russian for Bakunin's phrase: When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called "the People's Stick." ?
I just made the stub The People's Stick, since this is an interesting anarchist political metaphor by Bakunin. Can someone help provide the original Russian for the quote? And if it's worth it and you have a moment, since it's just a short stub maybe help make the equivalent article at ru.wikipedia? Thanks! MatthewVanitas (talk) 10:47, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Can somebody determine how the articles Syarhey Herasimets and Serhiy Herasymets should be spelt ? They are father and son so as a minimum I suspect they should have the same surname. The father is named as Syarhyey Hyerasimets in his article, a third spelling of the surname, and an alternative given name... Any definitive answer ? Thanks GrahamHardy (talk) 13:40, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
They both spell their names in the Cyrillic alphabet, and there is no exact one-to-one relationship between letters in the Cyrillic and Roman alphabets, so there will be more than one possible way to transliterate the same name. It's made even more complicated because there are three languages involved - Russian, Belorusian and Ukranian, all of which use the Cyrillic alphabet but in slightly different ways, and different standard systems of transliteration are used for each language - see Romanization of Russian, Romanization of Belarusian, and Romanization of Ukrainian. --Nicknack009 (talk) 14:21, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Aha, the father is cited as being Belarusian and the son Ukranian, which may account for the difference in the spelling of their surnames... GrahamHardy (talk) 15:34, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The two men have the same first name and the same last name. (They have different "middle names" or patronymics, based on their respective fathers' names.) It's common for names to be "translated" between Russian, Belarusian, and Ukrainian, both when written in Cyrillic and when transliterating to the Roman alphabet. We have the father's name as rendered in Belarusian (both in Cyrillic and transliterated), and we have the son's name as rendered in Ukrainian (both in Cyrillic and transliterated). If we had articles for both of them in Belarusian Wikipedia, the names would be identical; and if we had articles for both of them in Ukrainian Wikipedia, the names would also be identical. In English Wikipedia we have to somehow choose which variant of each person's name to use. The current solution of Belarusian for the father and Ukrainian for the son is a reasonable choice given their sporting affiliations. --Amble (talk) 20:30, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In the Czech and Slovak languages, how common are and have been the terms "Česko" and "Slovensko" as opposed to "Česká republika" and "Slovenská republika"?
Could someone who is acquainted with those languages explain briefly the present-day and historical situation with the usage of each name in each language? --Theurgist (talk) 21:03, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, I haven't, but Google Ngram Viewer doesn't support Czech or Slovak anyways. I do already have a rough idea about the matter, and it is more or less covered in Czech Republic#Etymology and Name of the Czech Republic. I know that until recently, a "short" Czech name for the Czech Republic was nonexistent or very rare, but "Česko" has since gained much currency, and now the Czech Wikipedia page on the country is at cs:Česko (there have been tons of discussions on whether or not this should be so). The English equivalent "Czechia", though recommended and lobbied for by some, is still uncommon. I was hoping to get some firsthand, more accurate and more thorough information about each name's usage in various contexts. --Theurgist (talk) 08:41, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
All the Slavs originally called their lands with the formula "...ĭska(ja) zemĭa (zemĺa)" (compare Deutschland, England), so the old Czechs and Slovaks shoud have used "Češ(ĭ)skaja zemĭa" and "Slověn(ĭ)skaja zemĭa", later transformed into "Česká země" and "Slovenská zem". In colloquial the latter word was dropped and the countries simply should have been called "Česká" and "Slovenská". Polish retains this usage until now (cf. Polska). But I believe this usage was not stable and in the Czechoslovakian region there was a tendention to transform those adjectives into adjectival nouns with neutral gender. So we have "Česko" and "Slovensko" as the colloquial well-established names of the countries. The "republika" names are undoubtly contemporary (the 20th century) inventions and used only in official contexts.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 18:44, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the third example (pervert/pervert) is the same as the first two as those homographs are etymologically related words. I hope you do not mind this fairly kind kind of criticism. ContactBasemetalhere 23:50, 15 July 2015 (UTC) PS: Any idea why "kind" is not in the List of English homographs? It's not even in any of the list of homographs on the net. I'm getting worried. ContactBasemetalhere00:06, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There are a few ow words: Spying on Robin Hood and Maid Marian, I saw the man with the bow bow to the lady; Beatrix Potter never wrote of her pig family, "You will never see another sow sow those seeds so well." Come to think of it, if one of her animals was a potter, I could have seen that Beatrix Potter potter potter about; If there were a line or row of gondolas, and the boatmen had an argument or row, then I might see the gondolier in the row row row away angrily. Myrvin (talk) 06:21, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Could a watery tear tear quickly down someone's face?
If the size of dance halls were measured by the number of mirror balls in the ceiling, then you could hire a room for a two ball ball.Myrvin (talk) 19:06, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If someone can have liver liver, then the fabulous Liverpool bird, the liver, probably has a fabulous liver. So the remedy would keep the liver liver liver.The well-known Liver-bairdMyrvin (talk) 06:43, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@ Everybody else (explicitly excluding Tevildo) :) : Good work, fellows. I'm more than happy with this lot, but if you come up with more, let me not dissuade you. -- Jack of Oz[pleasantries]23:26, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hmph. I suppose words of a demotic and earthy character are unknown in Jack's place of residence. Let us suppose that the pervert wore a long evening gown, while engaged in the education of a friend who enjoyed dressing up as Thomas the Tank Engine. One evening, he decided to attach one of his spare gun mountings to the hem of his garment. However, although it elevated correctly, he couldn't make his train-train train train. Tevildo (talk) 00:17, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
My guess is that all those trains come from the same root too. There is a train that means whale blubber oil - comes from the Dutch for exudation. You might be able to train that. Myrvin (talk) 06:34, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have a garden where I produce produce in my spare time. At birthday parties, the host presents presents to the celebrant. An ingenious man once used a pinwheel to let the wind wind his watch for him. The drunkard with the beautiful head of hair was a lush lush. --Jayron3206:45, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A large industrial site may be called a complex. A large industrial estate that is complicated may be a complex complex. If someone has psychological thoughts about a complicated industrial site, they have a complex complex complex. If their psychological thoughts are particularly complicated then they have a complex complex complex complex. Widneymanor (talk) 07:44, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure why that's a relevant issue. According to our article, "A homograph ... is a word that shares the same written form as another word but has a different meaning." Nothing about the words needing to be from different roots. As long as they have different meanings, that meets the criterion. -- Jack of Oz[pleasantries]07:58, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There's no "if so" about it. The onus of proof is on those who believe homographs need to come from different roots. It is they who need to produce a source for that assertion. -- Jack of Oz[pleasantries]08:25, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have changed the lead (in my lead changes, that was not the lead lead) there quite a lot now. See [7] for a detailed discussion. Myrvin (talk) 10:34, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't insist on the origin difference, you'll end up with several boring verb - noun phrases: backs backs, bakes bakes etc. And adjective - noun phrases: a pencil made of the metal would be a lead lead (and the first one would be the lead lead lead - SM combined the first and last above). Also, if that metallic pencil were to be used as a "plummet for sounding", and it was the first one, it would be the 'lead lead lead lead'. Furthermore, if, by some weird design, the lead lead plummet for sounding were to be used as a leash to control a dog, and it was the first of those, it could be the lead lead lead lead lead. And if that dog were the head of a team, and the team were ahead of the other teams, and some dogs had the lead lead lead leash, then the first of those dogs would be the lead lead lead lead lead lead. Myrvin (talk) 10:11, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There is also the problem that sequential adjectives and other examples should really be separated by commas. I think some of mine are like that. Does Jack accept those? Myrvin (talk) 08:32, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies for being late.
"It's such an unusual sight to see a libertine doing garden work: look at the rake rake!"
(What's more, if you had a train full of gardening roués, it would be a rake rake rake.)
Yes, I made the same mistake above. The roué rake is from rakehell , where that rake is the same as raking the grass. However, if we can turn any noun into an adjective(e.g. to call someone a train roué), the OED has 8 rakes as nouns, and 4 verbs. Several of these nouns are now defunct, but many are from different roots. Myrvin (talk) 06:48, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I like the idea of stringing a load of nouns together as if they were adjectives, even though I may have done that myself. But, for my original roué phrase, if the roué were to cause something (e.g. his drunken self) to lean at an angle, then we could see the rake rake. Myrvin (talk) 08:33, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And to give Shirt his triple run, albeit using a noun as an adjective, if the roué came from "a steep narrow path up a hillside", then we could have the rake rake rake. Myrvin (talk) 09:11, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And if there needed to be a description of a train with a lean to one side, full of drunken libertines who both have a taste for horticulture and are from are mountain villages, (and you are OK with verbing nouns and so on) it would be a rake rake rake rake rake rake.--Shirt58 (talk) 10:34, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To get algebraic about this. You need an adjective W, a noun X, and a verb Y. So that, without co-opting nouns to adjectives and verbs or vice-versa, you can have W X Y, not necessarily in that order. It would be nice to find a similarly spelled adverb Z, so that you could have W X Y Z. They would be all spelled the same, and ideally, all would be from different etymologies. Myrvin (talk) 12:02, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The closest I've got so far is the rose rose rose rose-like, but , as you see. it broke down at the end. Also three words are from the same root (because it's a plant). Myrvin (talk) 12:07, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Closer, with all different definitions, but the same root - is the blind blind blind blind. The unseeing awning darken relying on instruments only. Myrvin (talk) 12:18, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There's a joke about that. A nun is in the bath and hears a knock on the door. (Cut the middle.) She wouldn't let him in, but he was a blind man. So she let him in. Right, nice tits, but where do you want the blinds? Si Trew (talk) 09:21, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think you can do it sixfold if you are really trying. A sound sound sound sound sound sound would be a strong signal from a beach where a sailor has been grounded to signal to the lighthouse, and that would be their reply signal. Si Trew (talk) 09:21, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for answering. Contact Basemetal here 11:58, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
