Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2013 July 31

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.

July 31

tug one's remaining bit of hair out

Would you please teach me the meaning of "tug one's remaining bit of hair out" in the following passage? Many thanks in advance.123.221.54.99 (talk) 00:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)dengen

  I won't take their charity. I won't live in their bloody grace and favour 
  home like some old groom who broke his back looking after horses for the 
  squires and gets some kind of bothan and tugs his remaining bit of hair out 
  in gratitude for the rest of his life.---Maeve Binchy, Circle of Friends, 
  p. 279.

It's a variation of or reference to the expression "tug one's forelock", which is to make a gesture of deferential respect (negative connotations). 86.160.214.132 (talk) 00:51, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, but to "tug one's forelock" with excessive enthusiasm. It was a custom to remove your hat when meeting someone in authority or higher social status - if you didn't have a hat on, you could touch the front of your hair instead, to show that you would have removed your hat if only you had one. Alansplodge (talk) 23:36, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

So the narrator is saying that he/she will not accept an offer of rent-free ("grace and favour") accommodation because they believe they will be expected to continually show their gratitude by excessive subservience and grovelling. Gandalf61 (talk) 10:06, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

More accurate English translation of Latin inscription

Hi, could a Latinist please have a look at the Latin inscription in the "History" section of the article "Horsburgh Lighthouse"? An English translation has also been provided, but to my untrained eye it does not look very accurate. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 14:53, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

The Latin text and the English translation were both added at 08:09, 14 October 2010, by User:Philg88.

—Wavelength (talk) 15:31, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

The accompanying footnote links to http://www.sabrizain.org/malaya/library/ananecdotal02.txt, from where it appears that both the Latin text and the English text (the supposed translation) were copied verbatim.

—Wavelength (talk) 15:40, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

The English is more of a paraphrase I guess...the Latin seems unusually difficult. It also seems to be written from the perspective of the lighthouse! Here is the Latin so we can see it on this page too:

Pharos Ego

Cui nomen praebuit

Horsburgh Hydrographus

In maribus Indo Sinicis praeter omnes proeclarus

Angliae Mercatorum nisi imprimus indole

Ex imperii opibus Anglo Indici denique constructa

Saluti nautarum insignis viri memoriae

Consulo

A.D. MDCCCLI

W. J. Butterworth, c.b.,

Prov: Malacc. Proof.

Here is my attempt:

"I, the Horsburgh Lighthouse, named after the hydrographer [or literally "to whom was given the name of Horsburgh the hydrographer"] who is famous beyond all others in the Indo-Chinese sea [i.e., the hydrographer is famous, not the lighthouse], constructed, if not primarily by the natural talents of the English merchants, then certainly by the power of the Anglo-Indian empire, for the salvation of sailors and in memory of the famous man [i.e. in memory of Horsburgh], during the consulate of W.J. Butterworth, cb, governor of the province of Malacca, in 1851".

It's a bit confusing, but "Pharos" is feminine, so it goes with "constructa", and the masculine nouns and adjectives must refer to Horsburgh the hydrographer. There are some transcription/scanning errors, I think: "proeclarus" should be "praeclarus", "imprimus" must be "imprimis", and "proof." must be "praef.", so I assume "consulo" must be "consule". In that case it would mirror the Roman style of dating monuments by listing who was consul at the time (i.e. it just means "while Butterworth was governor"). "CB" presumably means he was a companion of the Order of Bath. Adam Bishop (talk) 10:58, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

That's great. I'll add the more accurate translation to the article. Hope that brought you some minutes (hours?) of enjoyment! — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 16:10, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

I had a look at the source (Charles Burton Buckley (1902), An Anecdotal History of Singapore from the Foundation of the Settlement under the Honourable the East India Company, on February 6th, 1819, to the Transfer to the Colonial Office as Part of the Colonial Possessions of the Crown on April 1st, 1867, vol. 2, Singapore: Fraser and Neave, p. 519, OCLC 603524705), and realized that the so-called "inaccurate" English translation was actually an English inscription on the same plaque. Anyway, I've added your translation to the article. Have a look at my edits if you are interested. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 17:08, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Great! I was hoping one of the other Latinists would come along and offer some alternative translations, but oh well. Adam Bishop (talk) 11:18, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't think I can reasonably improve on your translation, Adam - good work. AlexTiefling (talk) 11:36, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

This source has nisa ... indole, "resting on ... the genius" rather than nisi ... indole, "if not ... by the talents". According to this source, it was a group of merchants that had came up with the idea to build a lighthouse in honour of the hydrographer thirteen years earlier. There is an opposition between imprimis, "in the first place", "first", and denique, "finally", in the next line, but I am not sure if that is meant to highlight the temporal aspect ("in the beginning..., finally [=at last]...") or to accentuate a hierarchy ("in the first place..., finally [=also]...") or if it is merely a variation on "primo..., secundo...". Perhaps it combines two or more of these aspects. The imprimus of the text cited above must be an error. Iblardi (talk) 07:06, 6 August 2013 (UTC)