Welcome to the language section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.
Select a section:
Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia


How can I get my question answered?

  • Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
  • Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
  • Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
  • Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
  • Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
  • Note:
    • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
    • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
    • We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
    • We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

  • The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.
See also:

March 23

James is having an effect on the teacher since Monday.

When I see a sentence like this one, I would wish to have it rephrased as either of the following:

Would I be correct to assume that the "is having" sentence above (shown in italics) would demonstrate an erroneous usage of the word since, or is that just my presumption? - MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 20:11, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence in the section title is not very natural in English, and is reminiscent of things that Continental European speakers sometimes say ("I am living in Paris since 1992" etc). I'm not sure that "James had an effect on the teacher since Monday" is much better, but the others are OK. The short explanation is that continuing action up to the present moment usually requires the perfective construction in English... AnonMoos (talk) 22:18, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's poor English, so it's impossible to tell what the intention of the sentence actually is. That being the case, it's impossible to be certain about how to correctly rewrite it. HiLo48 (talk) 22:54, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) I'd go with "James has been affecting the teacher since Monday" as what comes most naturally to an English speaker, assuming that is what is really meant. I think we may need more context. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:59, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm -- the notion of "affecting" a person falls oddly on my ear; I'm not sure it's the same as "having an effect" on the person. I think there's interference coming in from "affection" and sense 3 of "affect". That said, James has been having an effect on the teacher since Monday is still an odd sentence, but not in the same sense as the original sentence. The original sentence is unidiomatic, whereas the one I've put in gray is just something that I struggle to imagine a situation where I'd ever want to say it. --Trovatore (talk) 01:39, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with "I have been living in Paris since 1992." being one of the best ways to rephrase it, and now that I've thought about it, "I lived in Paris since 1992." kinda sounds like an incomplete sentence. - MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 02:31, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, the truly Continental way to misuse "since" would be "I live in Paris since four years" (the way some people with weak English skills would mistranslate the impeccable French sentence "J'habite à Paris depuis quatre ans"). AnonMoos (talk) 09:31, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As a non-native English speaker, I would also say that "I have been living in Paris since 1992" sounds most natural, but then, is there a difference in meaning between that and "I have lived in Paris since 1992"? — Kpalion(talk) 08:57, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I'm concerned, "I have lived in Paris since 1992" would convey the same meaning while being just as natural-sounding (if not moreso) than "have been living in Paris". – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 21:46, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also more concise. Cullen328 (talk) 07:39, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 24

Relative prosodic length of a long vowel in Arabic: 2x or 3x a short vowel?

I was watching a video that gives the rules for the recitation of the Quran and something puzzled me: it said Arabic long vowels have naturally a "madd" مَدّ (that literally means "extending") of twice the length of a short vowel (in their terminology a "madd" of two "harakaat" حركات, one "harakah" حركة being the length of a short vowel). That's the so called natural madd المدّ الطبعيّ and let's not even worry about the other kinds of madd which are irrelevant here. But that would give a total of three "harakaat" for the long vowel which would make it three times the length of a short vowel since the madd is the extension of the vowel beyond the duration of the short vowel, not the total length of the long vowel, that is (again in their terminology) the length of one of the three extension letters that are used to write long vowels in Arabic. In most languages a long vowel is twice the length of a short vowel. Am I misinterpreting their rules or are Arabic long vowels really supposed to be (at least in the context of the recitation of the Quran and possibly the recitation of poetry) three times as long as short vowels? Thanks. (talk) 03:11, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Absolute durations of vowels and consonants measured in milliseconds do not have simple arithmetic relationships with each other, and in many cases if you're looking at a spectrogram, it's very difficult to say precisely where one sound ends and another begins. Usually in various languages, long vowels are enough longer than short vowels that there's a Categorical perception distinction between the two types. Of course, Qur'anic recitation has special features; what Wikipedia has on the subject is in article Tajwid... AnonMoos (talk) 04:03, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. The traditional Western term for "extension letters that are used to write long vowels" is matres lectionis... AnonMoos (talk) 04:07, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Traditional prosodists (be they Latin, Greek or Indian) make statements like "a long is worth two shorts". I was not concerned with spectrograms and measurements in milliseconds but such statements. My question was: What does Arabic traditional prosody actually say? The way I understand statements made in videos made by people of Arabic origin apparently familiar with traditional Arabic prosody is simply in contradiction with statements made in your article Tajwid such as that "[p]rolongation refers to the number of morae (beats of time) that are pronounced when a voweled letter (fatḥah, ḍammah, kasrah) is followed by a madd letter (alif, yāʼ or wāw). The number of morae then becomes two." (at paragraph "Prolongation"). This is in contradiction with the way I understand Arabic theory which is that "the number of morae is then increased by two" (as opposed to "becomes two"). Your article mixes traditional terminology and Western terminology (what it calls "prolongation" is the "madd" and "morae" are the "harakaat") but its statement is otherwise clear. But is it correct? Did your article misunderstand Arabic theory and was it me? That is basically my question. (talk) 13:46, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When those grammarians say something like "a long is worth two shorts", in a context such as parsing dactylic hexameter verse, they're referring to the "mora" linguistic unit, which strictly speaking is a property of syllables as a whole, though in some contexts moras can be associated with individual vowels or syllable coda consonants. The original purpose of the mora was mainly to serve as a unit of syllable prosodic weight for purposes of determining poetic scansion and/or stress placement, not really as an absolute measurement of vowel length. I know some things about linguistics and the Arabic language, but nothing about traditional Qur'an recitation, so if there are discrepacies between a Youtube video and the Wikipedia "Tajwid" article (not mine, I don't think I ever edited it), I can't help you in resolving them, sorry... AnonMoos (talk) 18:28, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for trying. By "your" article I meant Wikipedia's. I meant the collective body of Wikipedia's editors. I can see how my use of "duration" may encourage one to believe I was interested in absolute measurement. I guess "prosodic length" should be clearer. Changed it as I believe strikethrough in section headings messes up searches. There is enough uniformity in various videos and tajweed sites on this point to conclude that this must be a real feature of the Arabic theory and not a random error. Whether I interpret it correctly that's another story. That's why I wouldn't say I'm certain there is a real discrepancy between the article and the traditional theory. That's what I'm trying to find out. I was hoping there would be some knowledgeable Muslims here. The next best option is to contact a couple of creators of those Tajweed resources and ask them directly. I may wait until after Eid al-Fitr though. Thanks again. Cheers. (talk) 19:41, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 25

Ducks in a row

Where does the idiomatic phrase "to get all one's ducks in a row" come from? Thanks. (talk) 14:30, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Under the alternative form have one's ducks in a row, Wiktionary conjectures, "Perhaps from the image of ducklings following their mother in an orderly line. See also line up one's ducks." For the latter, Wiktionary offers a conjecture from rather different imagery: "Most likely a reference to the line of ducks in a shooting gallery."
Here we find these two idioms in a mash-up: "He had it all planned out before he brought it up for discussion, my Uncle Roy being a man who liked to have his ducks lined up in a row before shooting them."[1]  --Lambiam 15:06, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So nothing to do with snooker or bowling then? (talk) 15:09, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here are Michael Quinion's thoughts on the idiom. He does mention that some have proposed the cue sport of pool as a possible origin but dismisses that suggestion. Deor (talk) 15:22, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Have you ever watched a mother duck with her ducklings? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots18:46, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Where they all follow in an unruly gaggle and the mother duck just leaves them to it... Wouldn't that be getting all your ducklings in a line? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:22, 26 March 2024 (UTC) Maybe your ducklings are just much better behaved?[reply]
Line and row are synonyms in this sense and the shorter "duck" might be favored over "duckling".--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:08, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For some reason I imagine a line of ducklings like a queue and a row of ducks like a shooting gallery. For me it depends on the orientation! Martinevans123 (talk) 16:14, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The orientation of the viewer, not the ducks themselves.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 12:34, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The orientation of the ducks is an added complication. As is the position of the viewer. I might accept they were synonyms from a God's-eye view. If the ducks were flying overhead, however, I'd not describe them as being in a row. Perhaps one has to assume stationary ducks, which are physically within reach. Although, of course, they are only idiomatic notional ducks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:16, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why wouldn't flying ducks be in a row? --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 15:12, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know, possibly just my personal use/understanding of the word "row". And I can't actually claim to have ever seen either. Unlike geese, ducks seem a bit more random in their flying formations. And I'm not sure you can have a line, or a row, of just two. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:21, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ducklings follow their moms in orderly rows: Why ducklings follow in a row. Then, of course, the idiom reappropriates their innate behavior of doing that to our own ends. Modocc (talk) 20:25, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Who does the getting? It looks somewhat too innate to be managed, least of all by Mom? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:32, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Their moms are known to lead them in and around the water. When in the water, they have a distinct advantage of surfing each other's wake in an orderly row per the article I linked to. Modocc (talk) 21:10, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, sure they lead them, and generally not looking back. If "getting one's duck(ling)s in a row" is idiomatically expressive of leadership, then I guess that's consistent. But I suspect the phrase generally means something more/else. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:01, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By following their mothers in orderly lines, the ducks are well-organized. Thus the idiom means "to get things ready, be well-organized, to put things, especially affairs, in order" as in "completing preparations for doing something". Modocc (talk) 00:18, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I can see the similarities, but am still not convinced, sorry. Another issue is the fact that as soon as the mother duck stops, the ducklings' orderly line disappears. The idiomatic ducks seem to be deliberately and carefully placed in a static formation? I've looked at the definitions over at wikt, but they seem to have no sources to support them at all? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:13, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can we be sure it's not related to bowling? Bowls is an ancient sport. This book [2] says:

One tale takes us to the early history of bowling when the bowling pins were clunkier and squatter, earning them the nickname "ducks". Before fancy machines did the job, someone had to manually line up these "duck pins" after each round. So having your ducks in a row was like having these bowling pins all neat and tidy before rolling your next ball.

This book [3] traces it back to forte dux in aro (forty ducks in a row) found in Caesar's De bello Gallico. I don't recall it despite it being a set book at school. 2A00:23D0:73F:FC01:2DB6:579E:2C6E:580A (talk) 10:25, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So that would be Commentarii de Bello Gallico, with the phrase translated as "Brave Leader in Battle"? Thank you very much for that. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said, we obviously reappropriate their innate behavior of doing that to our own ends. Including calling bowling pins duck pins (and if they quack like ducks they're likely ducks). Modocc (talk) 12:12, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's time to take cover from this thread... Martinevans123 (talk) 19:10, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't recall it from reading Caesar at school, it may be because in the school editions they skipped the parts written in dog Latin. "Brave Leader" would be fortis dux. There is a Latin adverb forte, meaning "perchance". So, does it mean, perchance, "Perchance a leader in battle"? Nopes, that requires a noun *arus or *arum, but there ain't no such noun in Latin.  --Lambiam 23:21, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes. Thank goodness someone here knows their aris from their Roman elbow. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:38, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I found this Google "snippet view" from the The Westminster Monthly: Volumes 38-39 (1908) from Westminster College (Missouri) which says:
John Trippe (picking up Caesar) - "O say, Latin is sure easy. I wish I had taken it. Forte dux in aro, 'forty ducks in a row'; Passus sum jam, 'pass us some jam'; Caesar sic decat unde cur egressi licitam, 'Caesar sicked the cat on the cur, guess he licked him'."
Not sure if the John Trippe mentioned is John Trippe, or if that matters. Alansplodge (talk) 13:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"I'm not impressed by any cooks who can brag about a filet mignon. A guy who can take the neck of a shank or can use tripe to make into something delicious is really interesting to me; that's impressive." - American celebrity chef, Anthony Bourdain. As we all know, Wikipedia just has too many cooks? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:00, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 26

Wordplay type?

Is there a term that describes the type of wordplay or pun where similar-sounding words are substituted, like "flutter-by" for butterfly or "dangle-lion" for dandelion? I was reading about Charles Rumney Samson who referred to German Uhlans as "ewe-lambs". Alansplodge (talk) 11:54, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Malapropism. (talk) 11:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Eggcorn? Nardog (talk) 12:19, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Flutter-by would be a single word variant of a spoonerism. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 13:54, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Eggcorn might be the closest, but most of the examples quoted in our article are unintentional mishearings, rather than being intended for humorous effect. Alansplodge (talk) 14:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For a related concept, see Mondegreen. {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 17:49, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
'Flutter-by' for 'butterfly' is a Spoonerism - swapping the initial sounds of two words, or in this case, two parts of one word. -- Verbarson  talkedits 17:26, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, but I was asking about substituting asonant words as a type of joke. Another example might be the Great War soldiers' versions of local names, such as "Eat apples" for Étaples or "White sheet" for Wytschaete. Alansplodge (talk) 18:40, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Or Wipers for Ypres. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 20:12, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These appear to be simply known as one of two kinds of puns: "... or the use of words that are alike or nearly alike in sound but different in meaning, a play on words.". For example, see Puns, Palindromes, And More: 14 Types Of Wordplay "Puns that involve similar sounding words:" Modocc (talk) 01:23, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, so there isn't a specific term. Many thanks all. Alansplodge (talk) 19:00, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Like eggcorn and mondegreen were coined for a phenomenon in need of a term, one could be coined here too. Perhaps chicken pee soup, as I have heard chickpea soup referred to by someone who did not like an indeed somewhat watery and tasteless concoction.  --Lambiam 23:41, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dandy lion is a less distasteful alternative for a name for this type of wordplay.  --Lambiam 23:56, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 29

"Moon" in Slavic languages

Slavic vocabulary shows that "Moon" is one of very few Swadesh list-based words that differs across these languages (most have месяц or its variation, while Russian and Bulgarian have луна, which is more surprising when other similar concepts are compared - sun, sky, star, etc). Is it known why and/or when approximately did such deviation occur?

For some reason, moon and luna show that Proto-Indo-European had two words for "moon" - *mḗh₁n̥s and *lówksneh₂ which is perplexing - in that case it seems that most Slavic languages, as well as English, followed the *mḗh₁n̥s pattern, while Russian and Bulgarian, as well as Romance languages, followed the *lówksneh₂ pattern via Latin luna. Brandmeistertalk 17:53, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Latin and the Romance languages use mensis for "month" and luna for "moon", much as modern Russian does. Both words are present in early Slavic texts: looking at Luke 21:25, you can find "luna" in the Dobreyshovo Gospels (Bulgaria, 13c) and "mesjats" in Codex Zographensis. It doesn't seem too surprising that several languages that originally had multiple words available for "moon" or "month" have narrowed the semantic range of each one make a distinction between the heavenly body and its associated cycle in time.--Amble (talk) 19:48, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would expect Proto-Slavic language to have a single (or at least primary) word for "moon", just like for PIE, though I'm not sure. Does it mean that PIE and PSL had two equally common words for "moon", that later became templates for other languages? Brandmeistertalk 20:16, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PIE certainly had the two words — you mentioned them yourself, mḗh₁n̥s and lówksneh₂. I don’t know about ‘’equally common’’, or whether they had identical semantic range in PIE, but each was common enough to leave commonly used descendants in many languages. —Amble (talk) 20:53, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So both Russian dom and luna are cognates to Latin that happen to look very similar. Interesting. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 21:25, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the Latin phrase Romani ite domum in Russian would be римляне, идите домой!, which sounds pretty similar. —Amble (talk) 17:11, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Brandmeister -- For a comparable case, there are two separate Proto-Indo-European stems which can mean "wheel": stem 1 and stem 2. Both stems are present in Germanic languages: English "wheel" and German "Rad", etc. AnonMoos (talk) 01:45, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks all. Brandmeistertalk 07:48, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 30

two 'k's

Why did the Greek 'ekklesia' have two 'k's? Did it make a difference in pronunciation if it had one 'k'? Omidinist (talk) 06:48, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The word ἐκκλησία comes from ἐκ (ek) + καλέω (kaléō), which means "to call out" (cf. wiktionary), so it simply kept the two κ. In general, doubled consonants were pronounced longer than single ones. --Wrongfilter (talk) 07:21, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Omidinist (talk) 07:29, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Exploring "nuclear" and the fact that the word is not "nucular"

Many of us know that "nuclear" is a word that is commonly mispronounced "nucular". However, I've explored Wiktionary's Etymology section of the word and it revealed in the etymology that the word adds the -ar suffix to a masculine Latin word, and that the word would have been nucular (the way it is commonly mispronounced) if it had been derived from the feminine form. Is this really true?? Georgia guy (talk) 17:57, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's true. However, if the alternate form nuculeus had been chosen to add a suffix to, it could have been "nuculear". A word ending in "-cular" is "homuncular"... AnonMoos (talk) 19:39, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is true that if the Romans had formed an adjective from nucula + -aris, the result would have been nucularis, just like familia + -aris gave rise to the word familiaris. The meaning would have been, "related to small nuts". Unlike nucleus, the word nucula did not have the figurative meaning of "core". If there is ever a trade war over pistachio nuts between the US and Greece, it may be called a nucular war.  --Lambiam 20:39, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 1

Yiddish article

Snippet from Der Moment July 13, 1916 issue on electoral districts

I'm struggling to map the electoral districts for the 1916 Warsaw City Council election (earlier post here - Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2024_March_13#1916_electoral_districts_in_Warsaw?). We have sources talking about 52 electoral districts (such as Goniec Poranny. 1916, no 317 p. 1) but then there is this ordinance seemingly dividing voters into seven voting stations with no reference to the 52 districts. Now I found a snippet in Der Moment July 13, 1916 issue (see the image) which might resolve the query or at least provide greater detail. It makes a reference in the middle to 52 electoral districts and later seems to have a similar listing of 7 voting places as the electoral ordinance. But I can't get exactly what the article is trying to say, is there any possibility to translate from Yiddish to English? -- Soman (talk) 08:57, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My Yiddish is limited, and it isn't helped by distortions and irregularities in the letter shapes caused by the original printing process and/or the document's handling down the decades. The first sentence seems to say that there are 6 Curias, but the word "Curia" doesn't occur anywhere else in the image. The word which has ditto marks beneath it in columns is Wahl-Rayon, which appears to combine a German word with a Russian word. Voters in the 7 areas with one type of characteristic vote in polling places for each area -- those in the first area at an address in the 6th Wahl-Rayon, those in the second area at an address in the 8th Wahl-Rayon, etc. Voters in the 7 areas with another characteristic vote at another list of locations -- in the same Wahl-Rayons, but sometimes at different addresses. Not sure what's used to classify the two types of voters, but the header to the second list seems to say something about "From letter [Buchstab] D to M", so maybe it's alphabetic... AnonMoos (talk) 10:45, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to contact a Wikipedia user who is more proficient in Yiddish than I am, you could try an expedient common in the early days of the Language Ref. Desk, and look through the "User_yi" categories (though technically those Babelbox categories mean that a user can reply to comments in the language or is interested in editing Wikipedia in the language, which is not necessarily the same thing as an interest in answering questions about the language)... AnonMoos (talk) 02:52, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. So the Wahl-Rayon seem to match the Stimmbezirk mentioned here or Okreg in Polish, whereas the 52 Wahl-Biuro seem to match listing in Polish refs (okrag, see https://crispa.uw.edu.pl/object/files/175137/display/JPEG) but it doesn't seem the article can help us connect which Wahl-Biuro belonged to which Wahl-Rayon (which would have helped us to make a map of the city with the voting results). --Soman (talk) 11:59, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The word Wahl-Byuro (with additional final consonant) occurs in the image twice (not in the lists), but I didn't mention it because I wasn't sure whether it was a loanword or a native Yiddish word unrelated to "bureau", and I was having a hard time telling whether the occurrences in the image ended with the letter Samekh or the final form of the letter Mem. The word Wahl-Byuro(s/m) occurs next to the number 52, while the highest number that the word Wahl-Rayon occurs next to is 26. The word Tsugab-Lokalen also occurs twice in the image, once next to the number 2, if that means anything. I'm getting the impression that the voting procedures in this election may have been complicated... -- AnonMoos (talk) 13:34, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Among my Jewish friends, Sir Joseph has a grade one proficiency in Yiddish - last edit 22 February. Debresser has grade three proficiency - last edit 2 April. 2A00:23D0:545:BD01:4117:D5D2:BA7:59D6 (talk) 14:45, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic stress: is there a Western convention having nothing to do with real Arabic?

Wheeler M. Thackston's "An Introduction to Koranic and Classical Arabic" gives the following three rules for the stress of Classical Arabic (I'm re-writing his statement to make my question easier to state):

(1) the final syllable never receives stress (this rule of his is false incidentally)

(2) if either the penultimate or antepenultimate is heavy (CVC) then the closest of these to the end of the word receives the stress

(3) if neither penultimate or antepenultimate is heavy then he gives an alternative (which he calls "two schools of practice"):

(a) either the antepenultimate receives the stress (even if it is light, i.e. CV)

(b) or the accent can recede towards the beginning of the world without limit until a heavy syllable is found or, if no such syllable is found, the first syllable of the word is stressed, even if it is light.

These last two possibilities that he gives would permit a form like "madiynatuhum" ("their city") to be accented either "madiynátuhum" or "madíynatuhum" (Writing "iy" for the long "i" as I can't find my macrons). Now I've never heard of any Arabic accent anywhere that can recede further back than the antepenultimate. So where does the second possibility he gives ("madíynatuhum") come from? His use of the phrase "school of practice" leaves me a bit puzzled. "School of practice" is not what one usually calls a stress pattern that is borrowed from a language form in actual use. He seems to be talking about "conventions". Could that second possibility simply be a convention used in Western departments of Arabic that has nothing to do with any actual Arabic stress pattern practiced in the Arab world? Or is there in fact a way of accenting MSA or Classical Arabic in the Arab world that does correspond to that second possibility and that I simply happen never to have heard of? (talk) 20:19, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Not relevant to my question, but the first rule he gives is strictly speaking false: a final syllable of the form CVCC (super-heavy) is always accented. In Classical Arabic such syllables can occur only at the end of a word (with minute exceptions) and only in pausa. I find it odd that a scholar of Thackston's caliber could make such a gross error. Maybe he excluded pausal forms for some reason, but as stated his rule is false. (talk) 20:19, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't discuss any details without making an effort to look things up, but I can tell you that modern Western academic linguists in the last few decades of the 20th century spent more effort analyzing the observed stress patterns of "Cairo Radio Arabic" (MSA) than what's theoretically correct when reciting the Qur'an. But "schools of practice" are presumably much the same thing as what is called "pronunciation traditions" when discussing the Hebrew Bible... AnonMoos (talk) 20:46, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 2

which shorthand?

In a story published in 1952:

Officer Sam Stern made the last little tipped-v that stood for a period in his transcription [of a witness's account] and looked nervously about him. His chief peered approvingly—even if uncomprehendingly—at the notes . . . .

From the "tipped-v" can you tell which species of shorthand Stern uses? —Tamfang (talk) 16:17, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pitman's uses what could be called a "tipped-v" for a full stop (period). See quick reference table here. DuncanHill (talk) 16:35, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 3