Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2008 December 8

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.

December 8

-ographer

I was thinking of a concise way to say "a person who writes or edits dictionaries of music, or writes about music generally". For the dictionary people, it's usually "music lexicographer", but I was thinking that "musicographer" might be a more apt word. Googling tells me that "musicography" already means the specific field of musical notation, but is there any reason why the -er version couldn't be used for writers about music?

Similarly, a person who writes/edits dictionaries of ballet/dance could be described as a "terpsichographer", but this gets no Google hits at all. I'd like to officially coin it, but would anyone take me seriously? -- JackofOz (talk) 01:00, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I think terpsichorographer would be a better-formed coinage (the element meaning "dance" in the Muse's name "Terpsichore" is from the stem χορ-, so the second "r" is definitely necessary). The trouble with coinages is that it's impossible to tell whether they will gain any currency until … well, they gain any currency, by others taking them up, and more others, until they become commonly used. The application of this one, I fear, is too specialized to ever become current when more generally understandable expressions like "dance lexicographers" or "compilers of dance encyclopedias" are available. Deor (talk) 03:03, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I see. Well, it seems this word is doomed from the outset, so I won't bother coining it. I must say that "terpsichographer" rolls off the tongue far more easily than "terpsichorographer", but since I've always objected vociferously to "appendectomy", I can hardly carry a torch for "terpsichographer", can I. Thanks, Deor. -- JackofOz (talk) 03:34, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Out of curiosity--what's objectionable about "appendectomy"?Cherry Red Toenails (talk) 23:03, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

It conflates the root "appendic-" with "-ectomy". It should be "appendicectomy". Adam Bishop (talk) 03:54, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

A real old-style Classics traditionalist would probably insist that there couldn't be any truly correct form of the word at all, since mixing Latin and Greek roots is by definition incorrect. (However, in the real world this battle seems to have been lost when "television" was coined...) AnonMoos (talk) 04:12, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

How do you say "appendix" in Greek? Adam Bishop (talk) 04:30, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

According to this, in modern Greek, "appendix" is σκωληκοειδής απόφυση ("vermiform outgrowth"), and "append(ic)ectomy" is σκωλικοειδεκτομή. Using Latin spelling and the English ending, we could have "scolicoidectomy". Lesgles (talk) 16:50, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

The USonians have form in this area, and they'd probably convert that to "scolicectomy", and then start pronouncing it "skolisectomy", and then re-spell it as "scholisectomy". No, better leave it alone.  :) -- JackofOz (talk) 19:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Neighborhood fire?

I was reading an Isaac Asimov pop science book the other day and the last line in the book is something along the lines of "oh well. anyone want to have a neighborhood fire?" what exactly does that mean? is he going to have a barbeque or is he going to burn down the neighborhood, etc? Evaunit♥666♥ 01:18, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure it would make sense if you would indicate what he was talking about before that. My guess is it's about burning down the neighborhood or a house in it. --Anonymous, 07:03 UTC, December 8, 2008.

I remember that one. The essay (evidently the last one in the book) begins by remarking on the hypnotic appeal of watching a house burn down, and goes on to describe bigger fires: galactic core explosions. It ends by lamenting that if our galaxy's core explodes (as in Larry Niven's universe) we won't see it because of the thick dust clouds in the way, so we may as well settle for the more mundane sort of fire. (He's probably wrong about not seeing it; the dust clouds won't protect us much.) See what you miss by skipping to the end? —Tamfang (talk) 08:15, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Time

What are the correct time separators: . and : or ' and " ? 60.230.180.175 (talk) 02:00, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I've seen both for minutes and seconds - 3' 7" or 3:07, but only 6.3:07 for hours, minutes and seconds. I don't think it's a question of right and wrong, more a question of style. The only issue with the 3' 7" style is that it could be mistaken for 3 feet 7 inches. -- JackofOz (talk) 02:22, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

And we've all had the problem when home-taping of making that mistake - "how long is that track?", "Oh, 4 foot 6" :) DuncanHill (talk) 02:25, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

In North America nobody uses . in times (unless you're talking about decimal fractions of a unit); : is standard (and you use two digits for the part after the colon). Hours, minutes, and seconds would be 6:03:07. 3:15 could be 3 hours 15 minutes or 3 minutes 15 seconds, depending on context. (As a time of day, of course, it is hours and minutes.) I have also seen 3'15" used for either of the two meanings of 3:15, but this is rare and I think it is very confusing and should be avoided.

In Britain it was formerly common to write times of day like 6.3, with a . between hours and minutes and no leading zeroes, but this is old-fashioned now. I think most people there write 6.03 or 6:03 or 0603 (hours and minutes with leading zeroes and no punctuation -- this style would always imply the 24-hour clock).

The ISO 8601 standard format for times of day uses colons or no punctuation, and requires leading zeroes in each field -- so 06:03:07 or 060307, or if seconds are omitted, 06:03 or 0603. This format also requires the 24-hour clock to be used.

--Anonymous, 07:11 UTC, December 8, 2008.

The only usage I know that's analogous to hours, minutes, and seconds that use ' and " are arcminutes and arcseconds. For example, you could say that an astronomical object is located at declination +42°35'14", which would signify 42 degrees north, 35 minutes, and 14 seconds. ~AH1^(TCU) 23:29, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

What do GPSes use? -- Wavelength (talk) 21:33, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Give, seen, came and done as past tense variants

I must be on a roll today. In Australia, it's very common in rural and regional places (not only there, but it's most noticeable there) for people to make statements like:

• "They only give me $500 for my car" (rather than "They only gave me ...").
• "I seen him do it" (rather than "I saw him do it")
• "Frank come over to my place and we smoked some joints" (rather than "Frank came over ...")
• "She done it to me" (rather than "She did it to me").

In most other respects, the language of these people is indistinguishable from that of city folk. I'm wondering if these quirks constitute a dialect, or how else could they be described? I'm looking for answers other than "grammatically incorrect", because in these places, this virtually is the (descriptive) grammar. It's not that those who prefer the standard verb forms are looked down on or are regarded as "up themselves" or anything like that; at a social gathering you'll hear a healthy mixture of variants. And many people who speak this way know to write "saw" rather than "seen" in letters etc. It only seems to happen in speech, and only among some elements of the community. -- JackofOz (talk) 02:55, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

They sound rather like some West Country dialects of English - perhaps not surprising, especially if these areas were ever mining country. DuncanHill (talk) 02:59, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Yep, many of these features are also characteristic of Appalachian English in the United States (see in particular the section Appalachian English#Other verb forms), many of whose speakers, coincidentally, have historically also worked as (coal) miners. I think these are clearly derived from particular English (and Scottish) dialects whose speakers have emigrated to both Australia and the United States. Deor (talk) 03:13, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like Newfoundland English. Actually, I hear "I seen" all the time from relatives from Newfoundland and Northern Ireland, including their descendants who have lived all their lives in Ontario cities. Adam Bishop (talk) 09:26, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

There are various mining areas in Australia, but these utterances occur all over the non-metropolitan parts of the country, and are often heard by city dwellers as well, but probably not in places like Toorak and Double Bay. I can see the link with West Country, Scottish and Irish dialects, so that's undoubtedly where they started. Thank you. -- JackofOz (talk) 19:26, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Could anyone identify the script

http://i33.tinypic.com/zty8eo.png

I couldn't find a match in any of the Indian scripts. Maybe I didn't do a thorough job in poring over them

Thanks in advance. 24.27.90.7 (talk) 12:03, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

According to our article on Aum, it is in the Siddham script. Fribbler (talk) 12:29, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Speechreading, Deaf culture, and children

Hi, I haven't posted here in a while, but I've just had a startling experience at school today, and I'm trying to clear my mind a little bit. I teach English at JH/SH in Japan (I'm a proper teacher, not an assistant or anything), and during a test today, one of the kids in one of my JH classes put up her hand and said "She's not good at hearing, aren't you gonna give her the script for the listening?". I didn't really understand what she meant right away, and I asked the girl (let's say, Sara) if she wanted to sit closer to the machine. She said no, and then I realized that she was deaf.

I have quite a few qualms about my school, but this just blew me away. I've taught this class for almost 6 months now, and nobody bothered to tell me that one of my students was deaf. You might wonder how I could possibly not notice, but all I can say is that it's not exactly the highest ability class in the first place, and there is at least one other kid in the class who also never writes anything down during listening quizzes. Now that I look at her marks and ignore all of the listening assignments, I can see how hard she's been trying; she's one of the top kids in the class when it comes to writing. This whole time I just assumed that she was ignoring me and talking to the girls beside her. I had never really gotten angry at her, but I had warned her and her friend a number of times to "listen", to which they had laughed, apparently aware of my ignorance, or at least curious.

It's hard for me to explain myself correctly, but the least I can say is that I felt absolutely horrible. I quickly tried to fix things up just so that we could finish the test and end class normally, but the whole time I could feel my chest twisting and the blood rushing to my head. I myself have studied Japanese Sign Language for more than a year, and although I've never actually met a deaf JSL signer, I thought I knew a little about deaf culture in Japan. I was wrong, obviously, and although this girl Sara was laughing it off as if she was used to it, or I was just a silly teacher, as a teacher I felt as if I had committed a cardinal sin, and I had risked seriously damaging one of my students.

I also felt angry that my supervisors had not informed me of her deafness. I know she doesn't want to be treated special or anything, but me not knowing put her into a position where she would get scolded for doing only what she needed to do, and that must have been frustrating for her.

I asked her to come meet me after school, and I apologized for not realizing, and I set things straight. She unfortunately (I don't think I should use that word here, but I find it hard not to, could someone advise?) doesn't understand sign language, and not only believes that she can get by with just lipreading, she does very well. Of course, I wasn't making it any easy for her by facing in the opposite direction while I was teaching my lessons...

Anyway, she said that she wasn't really interested in learning sign language, and though her parents had asked before if she wanted to go to a "deaf school" (where they learn sign language in Japan), to which she said no (apparently there were only 2 students in the school), she also mentioned that she heard that people who study SL as babies are... well "can't do language properly" is basically what she said. I study linguistics intensely, and I was aware that she might say that, but as a teacher (or "just a teacher") I wasn't really in a good position to say anything at that time, so I just left it at that and said we'd talk again.

I talked to the administration of my school about her today to see what was known about her situation, and as I expected both Sara and her parents simply want her to have a normal education, an study as all of the other kids do. I have a lot more questions and concerns though, and I know a couple of JSL signers online, so I sent them this story, and I asked them what they thought. The first response was short and I think he may have misunderstood what I wanted to say, because he sounded critical of something I said, though I'll have to wait to clarify.

So basically what I want to ask is whether I have done anything wrong here, other than fail to realize for such a long time. Is there anything wrong with the way I am thinking now? Have I explained myself in an insulting way towards deaf people? And how should I approach this situation? I don't want to do anything that nobody is requesting of me, but if I am in a position to do some good, I would like to try. Please advise. Thanks in advance! Sorry for the length... 210.254.117.186 (talk) 12:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Do the students have files with the administration in this school ? Do teachers have access to these files ? Does her file state that she is deaf ? If so, then I'd say you need to read each of your student's files instead of relying on somebody to tell you these things. (It would be nice if they would give you a "heads up", but don't count on it.) If there isn't even a file that states that this girl is deaf, then I'd say you need to test each student yourself and add this info to their files. The headphones with the randomly timed beeps in each ear at different frequencies are a fairly inexpensive test, and you might be able to borrow the equipment for free from an organization for the hearing impaired. As for students who don't do a particular assignment, I'd say each case deserves a follow-up. That is, ask them why they didn't do it. For this particular student, see if you can't retroactively change her grades to bypass tests which required hearing. Also, I'm curious, if she's profoundly deaf she shouldn't be able to speak very well, either. Haven't you ever heard her speak and noticed a problem ? The first day of class you should probably have each student say their name, both so you know how to pronounce it and detect any speech problems. StuRat (talk) 16:31, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

While not claiming to be an expert in deaf culture, my limited experience is only in GB deaf culture (I have a relative whose parents are both deaf, and he is the only hearing/speaking member of their family), I do have an insight which might help here.

There is an ongoing debate about the teaching of BSL (British Sign Language). The nub of the argument is, on one side you have those people who see themselves as members of mainstream society if a little different, while on the other side you have those people who see themselves as members of a separate community from mainstream society. Generally this second group are those who want to use BSL exclusively, and who, if offered implants to enable them to hear, will refuse. The second group have been the most vocal in recent years, and have succeeded in getting BSL recognised as the official second language of GB.

From your experience, it seems that this girl and her family fall into the first group. She probably wants to be treated the same as her friends, which is important to children. Don't beat yourself up about it. As her teacher, however, you needed to know this important information about your pupil, and your school has let you down badly here (IMHO of course!). If you are expected to teach each child to their full potential, you at least need to be told what potential limitations and special considerations each child has. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TammyMoet (talk • contribs) 19:49, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

You weren't told about Sara's condition and you had no evidence she was deaf, so I wouldn't beat myself up about it. It's not always the case that profoundly deaf people cannot speak well, or cannot appear to have hearing. Sara reminds me a little of someone I know very closely. James was born hearing, but in his first week of life he needed a blood transfusion. Something went badly wrong, and he came out of it profoundly deaf (ironically, his father is a consultant paediatrician). His parents decided he would be taught to lip read rather than to sign, as they wanted to bring him up as close to normal as possible. That plan may not work for everyone, but it certainly worked for James. If you were introduced to him casually, you would have no way of knowing he has any hearing problem. Not only does he speak virtually the same as everyone else (with only a slight lisp, which for all I know might have happened anyway because one of his hearing brothers has a similar lisp), but he can match anyone I've ever known in debates on social issues, politics, music and just about anything else. He has worn hearing aids from a young age, which has a good side and a bad side. They certainly amplify the sound, but they also intensify the distortion that's an inherent part of his listening experience. Growing up, he wanted to be treated as normally as possible, so he grew his hair long to cover the hearing aids (he wears less visible ones these days, so can have shorter hair). Because he relies on lip reading so much, he told his teachers (and new friends, university lecturers etc) that he was deaf, and asked them not to talk with their backs turned. He does like to use teletext when watching TV, but managed for many years without it. He also has occasional episodes of tinnitus that at times has been so overwhelmingly severe, it has not let him sleep for 3-4 days straight and he needed to take sick leave to recover. But apart from that, he gets on just fine in most ways. He's extremely widely read, has an enormous vocabulary, and has 2 degrees, one of which was in music of all things. He was taught piano from childhood, decided he wanted to be a professional pianist, and was accepted into a university music school despite the university's initial strong reservations. However, his condition made it too hard and frustrating to be a performer; he's very good at being able to modulate the volume of his own voice, but less good with judging the musical nuances so vital for a musician. So he changed to musicology. This is his story in his own words, and here are 2 other bits about him (but ignore the bit about him having worked as a music therapist - that was just some journo's hype): [1], [2]. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:08, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks everybody for the encouraging responses. I think I'm thinking a bit clearer now, and I see where I might have acted prematurely yesterday.

Sturat: Thanks. I can only assume there are "files" for the students that are created when they enter the school, but none of these are available to me, and I wouldn't be suprised if I'm not allowed to see them. The schools I've worked for have often acted paranoid over certain things, and individual student information is definitely one of them. This is certainly one of the reasons why I didn't know in the first place. It also may be the case that these files are only available to homeroom teachers, and though I have a homeroom class, there are unfortunately some things that foreign teachers aren't "expected" to participate in, or understand. I'll keep in mind in future that such information might be kept from me, something that I wouldn't have believed possible just 2 days ago. Testing the students explicitly really isn't an option, I'm afraid. There are things about parent teacher relationships that I don't understand, but I'm pretty sure that many parents here would interpret a test as some sort of intrusion or even an insult to the family. There is a girl in another of my classes with an autistic condition, only as far as I know she has never been actually diagnosed, and she is, at least officially, attending school the same as any other student. There is a deep fear in many Japanese parents that having a childs condition officially diagnosed will force them into a less benificial position, and expose them to discrimination. In some instances it may be true; there are still many schools that will not accept students diagnosed as autistic no matter how well they perform on tests, though I know this is probably true of most countries. Either way, for me to make some attempt to prove that she was autistic would be a big mistake. Of course I, informally, should still be actively attempting to assess the students based on other factors, but I just simply didn't notice. As far as I know she's completely deaf, and she said she was like that when she was little too so I assume she was like that effectively from birth. I talked to her in Japanese yesterday, and though her speech is good, it is obvious that she has a bit of trouble speaking accurately. The main problem is that I never spoke to her in Japanese, and she rarely spoke in English in the first place. I had noticed her odd accent, and her trouble reading out-loud (now I know she only has trouble reading out-loud, and can actually read silently quite well), but many if not most of the kids have pronunciation troubles, and I have had students with worse (badly shaped teeth are often the problem), and it was easy to assume that it was an English-related problem. I know I still should have noticed, I just never thought to consider her speech a result of her deafness. I won't make that mistake again, though.

TammyMoet: I guess that's the issue right there. I had thought that there was an issue, possibly the result of her parents influence and ignorance of the effects of early childhood bilingualism, but now I see that this probably isn't the issue at all. She most certainly would describe herself as a "deaf member of non-deaf society", and now I understanded why she insisted to me yesterday that "all of my (deaf) friends lipread". I'm glad I didn't push any farther for JSL, though I believe the school may be considering meeting with her parents and discussing her options for her future, after she graduates and may have to distance herself from her friends. I guess I was studying the JSL side of deaf culture so intently that I completely failed to realize that the deaf community as a whole is much larger. Thanks for the advice, you really helped a lot.

JackOfOz: Thank you for telling me about your friend. I was really touched by his story, and it makes a world of different to hear it coming from someone who's experienced it. Although Sara doesn't wear a hearing-aid, I'm sure she could relate to him on a lot of the points he brings up. I wish I was in a position to read his story to her, but I know I've already attempted to overstep my bounds, and it's not my place to try to influence her life-choice, and though as a teacher it's hard for me let things be sometimes, her and her family are obviously making the best choices for her.

Thanks again everybody, my mind is at ease, and I shall sleep well tonight! 219.102.220.90 (talk) 04:08, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Shimmer me Timbers

Where does the saying "shimmer me timbers" come from and what does it mean? --Christie the puppy lover (talk) 18:53, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I think you may mean "Shiver me Timbers" - our article has an explanation. DuncanHill (talk) 18:59, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Hee hee. I think "Shimmer me timbers" is a "mute point"! :) --69.149.213.144 (talk) 04:16, 10 December 2008 (UTC)