December 28

The article wild boar mentions three different Latin names for wild boar: sus scrofa, aper and singularis porcus. I know that sus scrofa is the official scientific name for the animal, but I'm still confused about the other two. When were they used and how, as to meaning what? And is sus scrofa only a modern invention and never used in ancient Roman times? JIP | Talk 20:32, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not an expert in Latin and no reference, but I thought this was interesting and coundn't resist: could it be that aper is classical Latin and singularis porcus is the vulgar Latin version, like the equus / caballus pair? --Lgriot (talk) 21:12, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Probably something like that. "Aper" is the classical Latin word for boar, but in the Romance languages the words for boar, as in the French "sanglier", would have to trace back to the Latin word "singularis", so evidently in Vulgar Latin they called it a "loner (pig)". I may be mistaken, but it doesn't look like "singularis porcus" is ever attested in written Latin, it's just reconstructed from the Romance languages. Adam Bishop (talk) 04:03, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, apparently "singularis ferus", or "solitary wild animal" is found in Psalm 79:14, or Psalm 80:14 depending on which version you're using: "exterminavit eam aper de silva et singularis ferus depastus est eam". In the KJV this is translated as "The boar out of the wood doth waste it, and the wild beast of the field doth devour it." (I'm guessing the Hebrew has "boar" and "something else, we dunno" since modern translations have anything from "insects" to "all that move".) Interestingly, in French this is translated as "sanglier" and "bête des champs". So, possibly Jerome translated a Hebrew expression literally as "singularis ferus", and that influenced the development of the words for boar in some Romance languages, or he used a pre-existing expression for boar (as well as the classical word, "aper") that evolved naturally into "sanglier", etc. Adam Bishop (talk) 14:22, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a one-word noun in English that describes the degree of difficulty or ease of living with a particular person? Foreach n everyday (talk) 22:28, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Compatibility. Bus stop (talk) 23:55, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note that "compatibility" refers to the relationship between two people. If you want to describe the person alone as being easy for anyone to get along with (or not), perhaps "low" or "high maintenance" are better terms, although not a single word. StuRat (talk) 19:36, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any nouns that have more than one word? I rather doubt it. The definition of a noun applies to words, not groups thereof. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 06:34, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Try 'bus stop', 'pine tree', and many more. Akld guy (talk) 07:16, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have thought 'stop' and 'tree' were nouns, but 'bus' and 'pine' were adjectives. Even if the latter pair are considered attributive nouns, that still means each expression consists of two nouns, not one. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 11:35, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but taken together, what is a 'bus stop'? It's not a verb, not a preposition, not an adjective, not an adverb, not a conjunction, so what is it? A bus stop is a physical entity, therefore it must be a noun. Akld guy (talk) 12:09, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article on that: Compound nouns, in English. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 12:11, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In "types of compound nouns", they could have added base ball / base-ball / baseball, all of which were variations on the name of the same sport. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:08, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, even a compound noun is still a noun isn't it, so there are such things as multi-word nouns. Akld guy (talk) 19:14, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

From compound noun: Most English compound nouns are noun phrases (= nominal phrases) that include a noun modified by adjectives or noun adjuncts. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:39, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's right. In this case, an adjective plus a noun is still a noun, a compound noun. Obviously this applies in many other areas of life, e.g. a meal plus a drink is still a meal. We can use 'meal' to refer to food and drink or food alone, depending on the context. Matt's talk 01:04, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The OP's request has merit for dictionaries list each multi-word entry such as "bus stop" and "pine tar" simply as a "noun". [1] -Modocc (talk) 22:53, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And there certainly are proper nouns consisting of more than one word. For example, West Virginia is a noun for a US state, while "west Virginia" would mean the western portion of another state. StuRat (talk) 18:19, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it depends on the level one is considering. Now, if you'd all kindly ascend to my level, we might proceed.  :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:46, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Whys my Krisia Todorova crying (towards the end)?Lihaas (talk) 23:48, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

She's "just excited" (просто разчувствувала съм? - actually, I hardly know Bulgarian but this was understandable).--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 11:39, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank god. I was getting worried. Thanks.

Does your name mean Love-something?Lihaas (talk) 23:23, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Bulgarian. I had somehow overlooked this question, even though I usually skim over this desk daily. @Lihaas: At 4:04, Slavi Trifonov asks Krisiya why she is crying and whether something has happened, and she replies: "не, просто се разчувствах" ("no, I just felt emotional"; "no, I just gave way to my feelings"). @Любослов Езыкин: Notice: (1) the reflexive particle се; (2) the aorist; (3) the suffix -ва- ((раз)чувствам, (из)ползвам, участвам) rather than -ува- ((раз)чувствувам, (из)ползувам, участвувам). The -ва- forms are now overwhelmingly more common, and are the standard ones as per the current prescribed norm; the -ува- forms once used to be standard and common, but now, if not completely disappeared, are regarded as old-fashioned or otherwise stylistically marked. --Theurgist (talk) 01:15, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Theurgist: Thanks! As I said I've never learned Bulgarian formally and I hardly know it, I just can understand Bulgarian texts due to my knowledge of Russian and general Slavistics. My understanding of spoken Bulgarian is even worse, I hardly understand anything. But the word просто struck me at once, then I heard something similar to Russian расчувствоваться. I searched a Bulgarian dictionary and found the form which I thought I've heard. Though, I have not heard her properly, but I believe the man said разчувств(ув)ала си, so this led me to my proposal. P.S. I saw you here on the RD/L many times and I must have spoken with you, but I have never had a single thought that you are Bulgarian!--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 09:47, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]