Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2011 April 11

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.

April 11

Blockbuster - new meaning?

Where I live, in Melbourne, Australia, it has become normal for games in local sporting codes where high attendance is expected to be called blockbusters, by the media and some fans. This occurs for Australian Football and Soccer (Association Football) games. It appears in articles here covering those sports, such as Docklands Stadium#Home teams. This usage doesn't match any of the meanings given in our Blockbuster disambiguation page (especially not the original meaning of "a large bomb which had enough explosive power to destroy an entire city block"!) Is this usage common elsewhere? Do we need an article? HiLo48 (talk) 04:21, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

The second definition says "a term for a successful entertainment production". Isn't that basically what a sporting event is? What is a sporting event if not an entertainment production? --Jayron32 04:23, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

You skipped the last bit of that usage, " especially a film", and that's what that article is all about. The usage I describe includes using the term long before a sporting event has occurred, so it doesn't describe an event that IS successful, it describes one that the marketers hope or expect or want the fans to believe will be successful. So, it's a marketing term for a sporting event, a quite different usage. HiLo48 (talk) 04:40, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I think you are overconstraining the potential to use blockbuster. It seems quite reasonable by analogy to use it to describe any entertainment event with a substantial audience. Insofar as it is being used by many people to describe a sporting event in those terms, whether describing the settled past or the hopeful future, the fact that the usage exists means it is an allowable usage. If I heard someone describe a rugby match as a "blockbuster" or "is likely to be a blockbuster", even if I never heard the specific usage in reference to a rugby match, I (and I suspect many english speakers) familiar with the usage to describe a film, would think either "This is likely to be a match with a lot of spectators" and, seeing as I appear to be right, so long as the speaker and the hearer understand the term without undue awkwardness, it is correct usage. Films will often be described in potential terms as well, a film will often be speculated to be a likely blockbuster before it is released, so I don't think that the temporal relation between the speaker and the event should have any bearing on the appropriateness of the term. It seems like an unsurprising and understandable usage of the term "blockbuster", given some of its other usages. --Jayron32 05:05, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Yep. You're probably right. Maybe I should work on expanding our Blockbuster (entertainment) article to cover more than just movies. Would examples work as sources, or would I need to find someone else having written about what I have observed? HiLo48 (talk) 05:21, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

It would probably best for the latter; to see if you can find a secondary source, like a dictionary or a published work by a respected lexicographer or linguist, that notes the different meaning. --Jayron32 05:31, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

What are "local sporting codes"? —Tamfang (talk) 08:09, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what's confusing about that term. Must be a cultural difference. Melbourne, Australia is a city where a wide range of sports are played at a high level. The most popular is Australian Football. When I said "local sporting codes" I was most strongly referring to it and Association Football, locally known as Soccer, although the term Blockbuster is used in other sports too. HiLo48 (talk) 08:18, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

By "codes", I assume you mean "sets of rules". For example, there are two different sets of rules for two major types of Rugby. You've also uncovered the contradictory usage of the term "blockbuster". That's a type of bomb, obviously. Yet a movie that's a "blockbuster" is a big hit, and a movie that's a "bomb" (or which "bombs") is a failure... at least that's how it's used in the US... although I've heard that "bomb" in the UK is considered to be a positive for a presentation, i.e. consistent with "blockbuster". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:13, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Slang is frequently contradictory. While a movie that sucks is often said to "bomb", for almost 20 years now the phrase "So-and-So is the bomb" is unambiguously a positive reference. To call someone or something "the bomb" means to hold them in high regard. Language, especially slang, works like that. --Jayron32 15:38, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes. For example, saying "bad" to mean "really, really good". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:48, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

And "fully sick". -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 20:58, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Australian Aboriginal English takes this idea further, with the very best things being described as deadly. The national annual performance awards for Aboriginal people are known as The Deadlys. HiLo48 (talk) 22:30, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Awesome. So succeeding in winning that award could be a called a Deadly Do-Right. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:45, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

There is a (probably apocryphal) story about a British theater producer reporting on the success of a play on the London stage to an American who had given money for the production. The British producer sent a telegram saying, Play a bomb. Am posting notices. To an American, that means the play was a failure and the producer was closing the production. To the British sender, it meant the play was a big hit and he was going to be mailing the reviews. Corvus cornix_talk 23:51, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

HiLo, can you explain what you're getting at with the word "successful" above? From a marketer's perspective, any match that draws a large crowd is successful (= $) even before the pre-match entertainment gets under way. But from a spectator's perspective, what would distinguish a successful match from an unsuccessful one? I should clarify that one of my pet peeves is describing someone as a "successful" artist, writer, politician, sportsman, brothel keeper or whatever, but without ever defining what it means to be successful in any of these fields. That's one thing, but a successful football match is a whole 'nother ball game, if you'll pardon the irresistible pun. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 09:45, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I didn't introduce the word successful to this discussion. Its use here came from one of the definitions on the Blockbuster disambiguation page, as explained in the second post above from Jayron. Not sure if you're into the Australian Football League, but many commentators suggested after the event that the Round 1 match this year between St Kilda and Geelong was not a success, because it involved a particularly boring style of play, more likely to deter fans than attract them. HiLo48 (talk) 22:39, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. I'm not a huge AFL fan, but I get my fair share since my partner is a walking encyclopedia of all things AFL, particularly Carlton. I see what you mean about that Saints/Cats game - which tells us there's an unwritten success criterion, that games must be visually exciting or stimulating. Not sure why that would be so, when billions of people around the world go crazy for soccer, which does not seem to concern itself with anything remotely like excitement. But I suppose people could say the same thing about cricket. They need to get in touch with the restrained inner excitement that comes from watching flannelled fools disporting themselves in a gentlemanly fashion. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 01:22, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Indubitably. HiLo48 (talk) 02:00, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Help with sentence in Price Tag

Hi! I need to understand some sentences.. "The Guardian's Caspar Smith called both the song and J's previous single 'Do It Like A Dude' "planet-saving R&B-based hits-in-waiting."[9] AOL Radio's James Wells praised the song, saying that it "shows off the tirelessly upbeat, Motown-tinged singing and songwriting for which Jessie J has become known." He went on to contrast the song from other tracks from J's upcoming debut album Who You Are, calling it less aggressive and more "about the positive vibes."[7] Nick Levine of Digital Spy compared the song to Miley Cyrus's "Party in the U.S.A." (2009), which was co-written by Jessie J. He said, "Truth be told, 'Price Tag' does come off a little bit corny, but thanks in no small part to Jessie's spunky likability"" I didn't understnad "shows off the tirelessly upbeat, Motown-tinged singing and songwriting for which Jessie J has become known" and " "Truth be told, 'Price Tag' does come off a little bit corny, but thanks in no small part to Jessie's spunky likability" ". Can someone explain it to me in simple english? thanks, Ofekalef (talk) 05:51, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh, and "sun-dappled, hip-hop-inflected midtempo head-nodder"... Ofekalef (talk) 05:52, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Try this on:

• "planet-saving R&B-based hits-in-waiting." This is likely to change the world. "Planet saving" implies that it will make the world a better place "R&B based" refers to Rhythm and blues music, and "hits in waiting" means that the songs are likely to become popular in the future.
• "shows off the tirelessly upbeat, Motown-tinged singing and songwriting for which Jessie J has become known" Upbeat refers both to music that is "up-tempo" or played at a fast pace, and music which has a positive outlook, or is optimistic. Motown refers to a style of R&B music associated with Detroit, so Motown-tinged (tinge meaning colored lightly) refers to subtle influence by Motown-style music.
• "positive vibes" are again, optimistic feelings.
• "Truth be told, 'Price Tag' does come off a little bit corny, but thanks in no small part to Jessie's spunky likability". Corny implies a sort of juvenile sensibility, which makes sense considering the comparison to Miley Cyrus in the previous sentence, as does "spunky", which again implies a sort of juvenile sensibility; i.e. tending to be more likable by younger audiences.
• "sun-dappled, hip-hop-inflected midtempo head-nodder" Sun-dappled is again, that optimism. Hip-hop is a musical style and culture associated with urban African American youth. Mid-tempo (see uptempo above) refers to a song which is not too slow, and not to fast, in rhythm. A "head-nodder" is a "catchy" song, one which the listener finds themselves wanting to "nod their head" along with the beat.

Hope that helps. --Jayron32 06:13, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Helps!!! :) Thanks! Ofekalef (talk) 06:29, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Pronunciation of Ani-kutani

According to the article for Ani-kutani, the English pronunciation of the name has every vowel as long, which strikes me as unnatural for a five-syllable word in English. Can anyone confirm it? --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 19:49, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

No, the ɑː sound is a short, open a as in "father" (long "a" is the sound in the word "bait" or "crate", and represented by the IPA symbol eɪ). The pronounciation is more like "Ah-nee-koo-tah-nee". --Jayron32 20:12, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant 'long' as in 'length', not 'quality', generally represented in IPA with the symbol 'ː' as in this case. I will take your answer as a confirmation, then, Jayron? Just seemed odd, but thanks. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 20:44, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Actually, most phoneticians use the term "long vowel" in Kagetora's sense, to refer to a vowel that is held for a longer duration than a "short vowel", the symbol ː indicating that the preceding vowel is long. (The use of the term "long vowel" to refer to English /eɪ/ is somewhat of a misnomer, though common in primary school education, reflecting the state of English vowels before the Great Vowel Shift, when they were diphthongized.) I believe Kagetora is asking whether the unstressed vowels in such a word as ani-kutani could really be considered phonetically long. Something like /ɑˈniː kuˈtɑːni/ might indeed be a more accurate realization, especially for American English. The existing transcription, however, probably arises from a desire to present English phonemes consistently, regardless of their stress (see International Phonetic Alphabet chart for English dialects). Lesgles (talk) 20:56, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Your transcription sounds more to me how I (as a Br.Eng. speaker) would pronounce such a word. I was wondering about recommending an alteration to the IPA in the article, as the way it stands it sounds very unnatural. It specifically states 'English pronunciation', even though I believe it seems to refer more to the native pronunciation (if anything). Of course, I could just fix the article myself, but it is always best to have a second opinion - especially about something I cannot source reliably. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 21:38, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

(EDIT) In fact, the only link I have seen with anything that looks like a phonetic transcription on it is a Google books link which loads for a split second and then informs me of a DNS error, but it's up long enough for me to see 'Anī-kutānī', which I believe to be the native pronunciation. This again is different from the transcription in the article (in that two of the vowels are short here). However, I cannot quote a broken link as a reference. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 21:57, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I think Lesgles is right, the present transcription simply arises from following the chart at WP:IPAEN consistently. The chart uses length marks on the vowels /ɑː/, /iː/ and /uː/ because that is how they are written for dialects (such as RP) in which vowel length is salient. It doesn't allow short /ɑ/ or /u/. It does allow unstressed /i/, but that indicates a "happy" vowel which can be either [iː] or [ɪ] depending on dialect. Do people without happy-tensing have [ɪ] or [iː] in Kutani? Other than that, I don't think it could be changed without diverging from the chart. That said, are we sure the stress on "Ani" falls on the second syllable? The original respelling simply said "Ah-nee-koo-tah-nee". Lfh (talk) 08:38, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Rhyme or chant children use to remember how to spell "Mississippi"

I grew up in Mississippi. When learning to read/write, one of the first tasks was to memorize your address, which included, for me, spelling out "Mississippi." Not exactly an easy task for a first grader. Anyway, there was this little rhyme or chant we used to help us visualize the word. Something about "humpback" for sure. This isn't quite right, but it was something like: "Humpback, i, double-squiggle, i, double squiggle, i,...etc" Like I said, that's not quite right, except I remember the humpback part for sure. Anyone else remember learning this, and how it went? Thanks, Quinn ^☂THUNDER 20:09, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

And I just realized I set myself up for this, but please no comments about how people in Mississippi learn the read/write in the 10th grade. That's a myth and is only true for college sports prospects ;) Quinn ^☂THUNDER 20:13, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Ah wait, I think I found it: "M, I, crooked letter, crooked letter, I, crooked letter, crooked letter, I, humpback, humpback, I". I was assuming the humpback to be for the "M" instead of the "p"'s which threw me off. Scrolling down a few more pages in the search results produced the answer above, unless someone has anything to add, I think that answers my question. Quinn ^☂THUNDER 20:18, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

This used to be used by girls as a jump-rope chant where I grew up (beside the Mississippi River in St. Louis). Deor (talk) 22:19, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Presuming that's what it was, it seems too complicated. You can get into a rhythm with it like a railroad train: em-EYE-es-es-EYE-es-es-EYE-pe-pe-EYE. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:26, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I learned it the way Bugs did... Just the letters, but in a that sort of poetic meter that made the spelling easier to remember (I think its an Amphibrach, but I had to look it up). --Jayron32 22:33, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Along the lines of the original question's answer, "Which state is round at both ends and high in the middle?" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:35, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

In central Pennsylvania we learned it the same way as Bugs is describing; we just recite M-I-S-S-I-S-S-I-P-P-I really fast.

Also, Bugs: Ohio, of course! rʨanaɢ (talk) 13:51, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

And the boy gets a bubble-gum cigar! :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:24, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I learnt it as "An 'M' and an 'i' and an 's', 's', 'i', an 's', 's', 'i' and a 'p', 'p', 'i'." (Recited with the same kind of rhythm Bugs describes.) --Tango (talk) 22:48, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

At least the doubling of the consonants is consistent. As opposed to "Cincinnati". Ugh. Speaking of which, it's in the state that's the answer to the riddle I posed above, which is probably such an old one that everyone's forgotten it. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:55, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

The version that used to be current over here was "Missus Em, missus i, missus es-es-i, missus es-es-i, missus pee-pee-i". We learnt that in the same lesson as Woolloomooloo: "Double-you double-o double-el double-o em-double-o el-double-o". -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 09:08, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

So how did you all learn the correct spelling for Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg? --Jayron32 12:34, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

W-e-b-s-t-e-r. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:39, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

I was taught how to spell it with a song. I've forgotten most of the lyrics, but somehow the spelling aspect stayed with me forever. It ended something like "It used to be so hard to spell / It used to make me cry / but now that I'm in grade school / it's easy as pumpkin pie / emm eye ess / ess eye ess / ess eye pee pee eye" but I have no idea of the context or if there's more at the beginning. Anyone know? Matt Deres (talk) 13:18, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Synonyms that have opposite connotation?

Is there a term for words which are synonymous at the level of content but antonyms at the level of empathy (e.g. Foul-mouthed v Salty)? 76.69.191.126 (talk) 20:33, 11 April 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.69.191.126 (talk) 20:32, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

You mean like "I am firm, you are obstinate, he is pig-headed" ? --ColinFine (talk) 20:56, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

How about euphemisms? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:06, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Or do you mean like the pairing "fat chance" and "slim chance", or the pairing "I could care less" and "I couldn't care less", which are both pairs of grammatical antonyms, but in usage are synonyms. --Jayron32 21:11, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

These sorts of things are often mockingly referred to as irregular verbs or, I suppose, irregular adjectives, in places such as Yes Minister and the writings of Miles Kington. But yes, connotation is the relevant article. 86.164.75.102 (talk) 17:54, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

You may find the article Connotation of interest. One could describe such pairs as "foul-mouthed" and "salty" as having fairly widely divergent connotations. Deor (talk) 22:22, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Do you mean like "flammable" and "inflammable"? Gabbe (talk) 19:24, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't think so. rʨanaɢ (talk) 20:14, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Lain and Greek

I'm reading Schleiermacher's The Christian Faith, specifically the section "Holy Scripture." He seems to be citing some Canonical texts in his first and second theorems. I'm wondering what they say.

First Theorem:
Conf. Helv. i.: Scriptura Canonica, verbum Dei Spiritu s. tradita et... mundo propista, etc.-- Conf. Gall. v.: Credimus verbum his libris comprehensum ab uno Deo esse profectum.-- Conf. Scot. xviii.: Spiritus dei per quem s. scripturae litteris sunt mandatae-- Conf. Belg. iii.: Confitemur sanctos Dei viros divino afflatos spiritu locutos esse. Postea vero Deus... servis suis mandavit, ut sua illa oracula scriptis consignarent.-- Decl. Thor.: Profitemur... nos amplecti sacras cononicas... scripturas... instinctu spiritus s. primitus scriptas, etc.

Second Theorem:
Art. Smalc. ii.: Regulam autem aliam habemus, ut videlicet verbum Dei condat articulos fidei et praeterea nemo, ne angelus quidem.-- Conf. Gall. iv.: regulam habemus, idque non tantum ex communi ecclesiae consensu, sed etiam multo magis ex testimonio et intrinseca Spiritus sancti persuasione.-- Expos. Simpl. i.: Credimus... scripturas canonicas... ipsum verum esse verbum Dei, et auctoritatem sufficientem ex semetpsis non ex hominibus habere... Et in hac scriptura... habet... ecclesia plenissime exposita, quaecunque pertinent cum ad salvificam fiden tum ad vitam Deo placentem recte informandam.-- Conf. Angl. vi.: Scriptura sacra continet omnia quae ad salutem sunt necessaria, ita ut quicquid in ea nec legitur, neque inde probari potest, non sit a quoquam exigendum ut tamquam articulus fidei credatur.-- Conf. Belg. vii.: Credimus sacram hanc scripturan Dei voluntatem perfecte complecti, et quodcunque... credi necesse est, in illa sufficienter edoceri... Idcirco toto animo reiicimus quicquid cum certissima hac regula non covenit--.....

Also, there are two Greek phrases used. In my rough transliteration they go: "Theopuestoz" and "upo pueumatoz agiou phieromeuoi." Again, this is my transliteration, so there may be mistakes in these two phrases.

Thank you Wikipedians for any insight you can give! Schyler (one language) 22:01, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

First three words of the second phrase are hupo pneumatos hagiou literally "from under holy spirit"... AnonMoos (talk) 23:00, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

The first is from the first Helvetic Confession, and the bit you have says "The canonical Scripture, given and put forth to the world as the word of God by the Holy Spirit..." There is a German translation of it here, although I can't find an English one at the moment. Next I imagine should be the Gallic Confession, although that seems to have been in French originally. In any case it says "we believe that the Word included in these books came from God." Then the Belgic Confession, which was also in French, "We confess that the holy men of God spoke filled with the divine Spirit. But afterwards God ordered his servants to commit their speeches to writing." Then the Declaration of Thorn, which we don't seem to have an article about, "we profess that we embrace the holy canonical Scriptures, written in the beginning with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit." In the second theorem, there is the Smalcald Articles, "we hold as another rule, that the word of God creates the articles of faith and no one else, not even an angel." The Gallic Confession again, "we hold this rule, not only by common consent of the church, but also much more by the testimony and intrinsic persuasion of the Holy Spirit." I guess the next one is the Expositio Simplex, no article for that either, but the same thing seems to be in the Second Helvetic Confession: "We believe the canonical scriptures to be the true word of God, and that they hold sufficient authority from God himself and not from men...And in this scripture the church holds that everything pertinent is fully explained, for correctly explaining both the salvific faith, and a life pleasing to God." The English Confession is the Thirty-Nine Articles, which are helpfully translated here, but I'll try to modernize it a bit, "Holy Scripture contains everything that is necessary for salvation, so that whatever is not read in them, and cannot be proved in them, should not be given consideration by anyone so that he believes it to be an article of the faith." Then the Belgic Confession again, "we believe that this holy scripture embraces the will of God, and thatwhatever is necessary to be believed is sufficiently taught in it...Therefore we reject with our entire soul whatever is not stated with certainty in this rule." So basically, they were all big on sola scriptura. I hope this is all correct, it's a little quickly and roughly done. Adam Bishop (talk) 08:46, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

That's amazing. Thanks so much Adam! Schyler (one language) 13:25, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Resolved