Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2006 September 6

=September 6=

Being Annoyed

 * While we're on the topic of errors... Why is annoyed capitalized in the subject title when the WP:MOS clearly states headers shouldn't have any non-noun words after the first one capitalized unless book/film/song titles are involved? =) Mgm|(talk) 11:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

One of the above questions about your/you're welcome made me remember something that happens quite often: if there is a grammatical error somewhere in public, it really bugs me. A lot. One specific instance is when a sign said said, "please fill out YOURE papers and sit until YOUR ready" There wasn't any apostrophe in that sentence. It bugged me so much, I took out a sharpie and changed it, and I was asked to leave. I did feel better afterwards, though. What's wrong with me. Some kind of OCD or something? schyler 02:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Not at all. I regularly amend restaurant menus, shop signs etc that perpetrate atrocities like this.  Lynne Truss, in her wonderful book "Eats, Shoots and Leaves", advocates that people do exactly this.  Some sins are simply unforgiveable and they deserve whatever correction they get.  Apostrophe power forever!  JackofOz 03:47, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The checkout lane sign that says "10 items or less" is a common offender, which should properly say "10 items, or fewer". StuRat 03:56, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I'd say that you're being overly proper. "10 items or less" is short for "10 items or less than 10 items."  Proper spelling is one thing, but I will not stand idly by and watch a prescriptivist correct a signmaker on word usage.  AEuSoes1 05:08, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Um, no - "less than 10 items" is incorrect. StuRat is right.  As for the first post in this thread, it is of course not just the lack of apostrophes in the sentence that is wrong, but the fact that 'your' and 'you're' are the wrong way around. --Richardrj talkemail 05:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

"10 kilograms or less" would be correct.~ Edison


 * Correct. For integers, the word is "fewer" ("fewer coffee beans"), while for real numbers, the word is "less" ("less coffee").  This is quite an oddity in English, especially considering that "more" works for both integers and real numbers. StuRat 06:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * In Belgium they've got maximum speed signs that read '60 km'. People shortening units to other units is irritating enough, but to do that on an official sign ... DirkvdM 06:31, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

StuRat, you said in answer to an earlier question today that "by definition, whichever spelling is most often used is the correct spelling (or, at least, one correct spelling)." I took you to mean that, with spelling, two wrongs don't make a right, but a million wrongs eventually do. Applying that same argument to grammar, if most supermarkets use the "10 items or less" words, that common usage would by definition make it correct. But now, you’re saying it's wrong, because of an oddity with the English language which we must respect. Why do you support that oddity, when you refuse to support other oddities, eg. you insist on spelling both the possessive "its" and the abbreviation "it's" with an apostrophe, your argument being that you're supported by logic, which apparently takes precedence over "correctness". Can you explain why it's ok to make up your own logic-based rules about some things, but remind others of the commonly agreed rules about other things even when they're not very logical? JackofOz 06:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * If I believed that they knew the proper word was "fewer", yet choose to use the word "less", in an intentional effort to change this odd grammatical practice, then I would have some sympathy for the attempt. However, I'm quite sure they're just morons who don't know the current grammar rules, and that annoys me.  To summarize: "rebellion I like, ignorance I hate". StuRat 11:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, but people who use 'your' for 'you're' do so out of ignorance. Your position is untenable. --Richardrj talkemail 11:53, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * How so, I don't support the confusion of "less" with "fewer", out of ignorance, and neither do I support the confusion of "your" and "you're", out of ignorance. In the case of "your" and "you're", I don't even see any logical argument that could be made for swapping the two. StuRat 12:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * (after edit conflict) Spot on, Richardrj.


 * Stu, doesn't that undermine your "By definition, whichever spelling is most often used is the correct spelling (or, at least, one correct spelling)" comment. "You're" is slowly being morphed into "your", not out of anything but pure ignorance.  You seem to think that's fine.  What's different about "fewer" vs. "less"?  Why does ignorance of the rules in one circumstance attract your support, but in another, attract not only your opposition but your judgment of the individuals involved, whom you label "morons"?  Why do you reserve your invective for the victims of ignorance rather than for the hopeless education system they had to endure?  JackofOz 11:56, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't think that's fine. My comments on the use of Google hits have been misinterpreted.  See the section where I first made the comment on Google hits for a clarification. StuRat 12:36, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * This thread is dangerously close to violating WP:CIVIL. Please be careful and try to lower the temperature here. - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 11:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * It is ? Nobody has even questioned my parent's marital status at the time of my birth yet, or suggested that I perform a physically impossible sex act upon myself.  StuRat 12:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * David Crystal is promoting his new book which calls Truss's approach elitist and pedantic; but then he did say to Truss punctuation books don't sell. Im with David on this and find your annoyance annoying. MeltBanana  13:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I too find it terribly annoying when people are annoyed with other people. --Lambiam Talk 22:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I have a lot of respect for Prof Crystal, however his prediction proved quite false. "Eats, Shoots and Leaves" was a best-seller and is still selling well.  It was anti-pedantic and most definitely anti-elitist.   It was written with great humour and flair, and was aimed at the general reader and not at language specialists.  Her main thrust is that the correct use of apostrophes is not rocket science, and there's really very little for people to stuff up if they remember a handful of simple rules.  For a language expert to call those who advocate good usage "pedantic", is ill-becoming.  JackofOz 20:56, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

finding out a word for similar words
the words would sound the same, but they have a different spelling and meaning. examples: tow/toe, knew/new, blue/blew etc... could someone please inform me of what the word is for this example? Thanks!


 * That would be a homophone. JackofOz 03:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I could add a comment here about Jack's telephone, but I'm far too polite for that. :-) StuRat 03:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I take this as a sign of your great personal respect and trust of me, which is perfectly understandable.   JackofOz 05:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

This is a slightly confusing area. Wiktionary contains an excellent chart explaining the differences between words like homophone, homonym and homograph.

Hope that helps further. --Dweller 10:51, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

word usgin
using word to a friend, he said it was icorrect but a dictionarry tells us using it is very correct who is being ight? sorr y for english usage! Jasbutal 04:46, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Please restate the word. I have not heard of an English word "usgin." Edison 05:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * don't patrozine me. Jasbutal 06:34, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * When you spell "patronize" wrong, it's very hard not to. Otherwise, I would trust the dictionary more than your friend, but I'd like more information about the word you're speaking about. 惑乱 分からん 13:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Jasbutal, we don't understand your question. Are you asking about whether the word using is correct English? (It is.) Can you give us a sentence with the word in context, so we can say whether it is correct? Philbert2.71828 06:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I think you can assume your dictionary is correct; and your spelling looks just fine in your other contributions, so hopefully this is only a temporary lapse.--Shantavira 07:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Usage of the word "using" is entirely acceptable if you're using it correctly. --Dweller 09:22, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Sometimes dictionaries contain mistakes, but generally I'd trust the dictionary more than my (or your) friend. If you tell us what the word is, we might be able to say more about it. --Lambiam Talk 10:33, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

use of question mark in compound sentences
Can anyone tell me how to punctuate the following sentence: "Can someone lend me a pencil, because I've lost mine." Should it end with a question mark, because it is interrogative, or a full stop because the last clause is a statement? The Mad Echidna 05:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * full stop according to my MLA guide 70.225.173.251 05:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * It would be better to say, "Can someone lend me a pencil? I've lost mine." Treating "because I've lost mine" as a statement is a bit dubious, so a full stop would be questionable at the end of the sentence as written. Philbert2.71828 05:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * According to the article (and what I've heard on occasion over the years):


 * It can also be used mid-sentence to mark a merely interrogative phrase, where it functions similarly to a comma, such as in the single sentence "Where shall we go? and what shall we do?", but this usage is increasingly rare.


 * ...which hints that "Can someone lend me a pencil? because I've lost mine." would be appropriate punctuation. I don't think it needs to be said that this is purely colloquial and would never be acceptable as written prose. freshofftheufo  ΓΛĿЌ  06:31, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Would this be correct: "Can someone lend me a pencil (because I've lost mine)?" ? This is a double question - about the rephrasing of Echidn's phrase and about the way I wrote the question.


 * Note that this would never be a problem in real life, though, because punctuation only matters in writing and what would you be writing with then? :) DirkvdM 06:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I read your sentence as putting a restriction on your benefactor's motives: that is, you require that they lend it to you because you've lost yours, rather than for any other reason. In the original sentence, the addendum functions, to my ear, as explaining why you're asking the question. To me this results in a change in meaning. Tesseran 23:09, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Freshgavin's this is purely colloquial and would never be acceptable as written prose. Maybe not in some contexts, but for a play or a film something like this could very well turn up.  Most characters in movies don't speak like English professors, but like real people.  How would they punctuate it in the script?  JackofOz 07:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * However they like, because most actors aren't idiots. :) What about reported speech, as in a novel? "Can someone lend me a pencil? I've lost mine." is an elegant solution.... but it doesn't answer my fellow madman's question, which is specifically about how to punctuate a single sentence in its compound form. I would have thought that the answer was "Can someone lend me a pencil, because I've lost mine?" But I could be completely wrong. However, I'm quite sure (?) that using a question mark mid-sentence is absolutely wrong. Morally. TheMadBaron 12:06, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * This type of error, where a person adds an afterthought to a complete sentence, while not grammatically correct, is quite common. I suggest writing it as "Can someone lend me a pencil ? ... because I've lost mine" to emphasize the afterthought nature of the addition. StuRat 13:00, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Question marks were formerly acceptable in the middle of a sentence, and still may be, in rare cases. For example "Do you have any ham ? beef ? chicken ?".  It would be better to write this as "Do you have any ham, beef, or chicken ?", but this form doesn't reflect that the items are being asked about individually, rather than collectively.  An answer to the first question might be "Yes, yes, and no" while the answer to the second question would just be "Yes". StuRat 13:00, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I must say that was a very thickly masked computer science lecture StuRat, but oh well. When I said "written prose", I should have said "narrative or formal prose" or something like that. Not really sure what I should call the collective bodies of work that are not intended to be vocalized. freshofftheufo  ΓΛĿЌ  03:11, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


 * A "computer lecture" ? It must be so thickly masked that I can't even see it myself. :-) StuRat 05:41, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Not sure what you're looking at, but I can see the point you were trying to make quite clearly!

booelan answerYesNoQuestion (English rawQuestion) {  boolean collectiveQuestion(rawQuestion); English isolateStatment(rawQuestion); int optionList(makeList(rawQuestion, statment)); if collectiveQuestion {    while (optionList.questionsRemain) {questionEvaluate(optionList.nextOption);} result questionEvaluate.resultAND; } else {    while (optionList.questionsRemain) {if (!optionList.questionEvaluate(optionList.nextOption)) result FALSE;} result TRUE; } }
 * That actually not exactly what you said. It's too much trouble for me to make it able to give an array of boolean results - -;;.  freshofftheufo  ΓΛĿЌ  09:13, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, I do like my Boolean logic. There's even a Biblical quote that goes something like this:

"Let your yes mean only yes and your no mean only  no, for all else is the work of the devil."


 * StuRat 05:26, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Still confused about French consonant followed by vowel
Hello,

I have made a topic about this earlier (which I couldn't find anymore, which is weird) but I still don't get it. (Mostly due to having learnt this language from books)

1.Ils ont un ami.

2.Ils sont amoureux.

3.On travaille.

4.En travaillant...

5.Ils aident un ami.

6.J'étais amoureux.

7.Il était amoureux.

8.Ca plaît aux jeux.

9.Je finis un devoir.

Do you have to pronounce those consonants in bold?

I am using this site to learn more, but I don't know whether or not I can trust it at all times : 

If there is any good place on the internet, or an article, or whatever, that addresses this issue so I can get over with it once and for all I will be very happy. Thanks,Evilbu 11:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The answers can be found in Liaison (linguistics). I do remember the question being asked and this answer being given before, relatively recently, but, oddly, there was no Reference-desk page in the "What links here" for Liaison. --Lambiam Talk 11:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * You certainly wouldn't pronounce the 'n' in your third and fourth examples, nor the 't' in the fifth. Most of the others, I would be tempted to pronounce, but I might be wrong. --Richardrj talkemail 11:56, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I seem to remember there being a difference in the pronunciation of the 't's in 1 and 2, but I can't remember which is which. Skittle 12:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Isn't there a difference between 6 and 7?Evilbu 13:27, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't think that such verb endings are ordinarily liasoned except in inverted questions, where the "t" has become a sort of independent question transition element (e.g. Y a-t-il? etc. etc.). AnonMoos 14:33, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * In On travaille and En travaillant, there is no liaison because the second word does not start with a vowel. Both on and en are pronounced as a single nasalized vowel here. Although the n is not sounded as a consonant, its influence is heard. --Lambiam Talk 12:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Normaly there are strict rules which state when you can or not pronunce a liaison. But don't worry, it is so complex that except purists nobody know them, so it will depend on each person. Spontaneously here's how i would pronouce thoses sentences. The sign - show when I would pronunce the liaison

1.Ils - ont (none here) un - ami, but I would say "ils sont - amis"

2.Ils sont - amoureux.

3.On travaille.

4.En travaillant...

5.Ils - aident un - ami.

6.J'étais - amoureux.

7.Il était - amoureux.

8.Ca plaît aux jeux. (this sentence doesn't mean anything ?)
 * Ça plaît aux yeux? --Lambiam Talk 15:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It is still a strange sentence. You will say "pour le plaisir des - yeux" ( for instance in front of a nice painting), "cela fait mal aux - yeux" (that hurts my eyes, for eg the sun), "Ca plaît aux gens" (after "plaît" no liaison)

9.Je finis un devoir.

The pronunciation of the s liaison is always "z" ils -z- ont un -n- ami


 * I'm very grateful for all the help everyone gave me. But that article Liaison (linguistics) doesn't seem to put "J'étais un chien" or "J'avais un chien" in either the obligatory, optional or forbidden category. Am I misunderstanding the article or is it incomplete?Evilbu 16:51, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I would add those examples it in the optional category. Both sound correct to my ears and it will depend on each person. As I wrote, i have heard there should normaly be strict rules. But i don't know them (and i'm french) and I wonder if there any french who know these rules or perharps members of the "Academie française".

says I should say the t in "Il était un ami" but not the s in "J'étais un ami." Is this site untrusthworthy according to you? (Which is possible, it is just a bot.) Anyway, I'm afraid I can do no more than asking questions about that article, I wouldn't dream of touching it, such a thing must be left to native speakers I'm afraid... Evilbu 19:05, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Have you looked at the French wikipedia article? It is a featured article so presumably is reliable. Jameswilson 23:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I have found french.about.com to be very interesting. says that after verbs is optional e.g. in the case of "Elle prend un livre". It notes that this is "very high register", which does not mean (as I first thought) in a high pitched voice, but it has a particular connotation of "formal", "educated", "snobbish" or "pretentious" according to audience (as I understand it). Also, something useful I learned: think of the sound of the liaison as moving to the next syllable. "Ils ont" -> il zont helps understand the sound pattern, though they run together. Notinasnaid 07:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Aha! The original question is here: Reference_desk_archive/Language/2006_July_26. Notinasnaid 07:51, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

word meaning
i want to ask about the linguists ideas for 'directing' and maintaining' words. i got difficulties for my thesis. please send me the meaning of that words. thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.124.209.20 (talk • contribs)


 * It is not clear to me what you are asking. Is it that you want to know the meaning of the words "directing" and "maintaining"? They are derived forms of the verbs "to direct" and "to maintain". For such "-ing" forms, see Gerund and Participle. For the meaning of the verbs, try for example http://dictionary.reference.com/. You can also use Google to see how the words are used in context. --Lambiam Talk 13:23, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * It seems you have a question about some particular usage of words, but we'd need some clarification and explanation to understand what you're talking about... 惑乱 分からん 13:27, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

He probably means language planning... AnonMoos 14:27, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

differeces between "laugh" and "laughter"
220.20.35.13 13:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)What are the differences between "laugh" and "laughter"?

I know laughter is a noun, but laugh is also used as a noun.

Is it OK to say "Laughter is good for your health"?

If this is OK, how about "Laugh is good for your health"?

Thanks in advance,

taked4700


 * 'Laughter' is more abstract as a noun in general.


 * 'Laughter is good for your health' is correct, 'laugh..' is not.

'A laugh is...' would be grammatically (sp?) correct, but isn't an expression. Rentwa 13:16, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I think "laughter" could be used as a mass noun, while "laugh" has to be marked either in singular or plural. ("one laugh", "a laugh") 惑乱 分からん 13:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Indeed. "This one gave me a good laugh!" is quite idiomatic. "Laughter" is wrong here. You could say that "laugh" is a countable noun, whereas "laughter" is a mass noun. A further difference is that "laugh" can also be used to refer to the object of derision. --Lambiam Talk 13:33, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, "laughing is good for your health" is fine, and in fact might be preferable to "laughter", especially in spoken English. --Richardrj talkemail 13:50, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

In general, I'd never use "laugh" as a noun without "a" in front of it: "A laugh a day keeps the doctor away." User:Zoe|(talk) 18:44, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * impression of a non-native speaker: laughter is something you hear. you don't say "I hear his laugh".--K.C. Tang 09:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * But you could contrive a scenario: "I'm sure Bill is not far away. I can hear his laugh".  JackofOz 11:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with K.C. though, that "laughter" is more "animate" than "laugh", and personally I wouldn't say "I can hear his laugh" unless he had some sort of strange way of laughing that I couldn't get out of my head.  freshofftheufo  ΓΛĿЌ  03:02, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Exactly what I had in mind with my contrived scenario, although I failed to fully explain it. JackofOz 07:57, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

"At the coal face"
What does this phrase mean?


 * It means close to the centre of the action, as opposed to being on the outside. Someone who is "at the coal face" of an activity is personally involved in doing that activity.  It is derived from coal mining. --Richardrj talkemail 14:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * My favourite example was a doctors' representative who said "Whatever the Department of Health may say, those of us who work at the coal face know that there is still a problem with the provision of post-operative cancer care." Jameswilson 23:46, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

A more common expression meaning the same thing, but using a military analogy, would be "on the front lines". StuRat 00:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


 * At the 'sharp end' would be good for the medical profession. 8-) Sharp end of what tho?--Light current 05:54, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

crossword help
roman general who fought the volsci(10)
 * Coriolanus. --Lambiam Talk 15:07, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

one who doesnt belong (or is'nt fancied)(8)
 * outsider. --Lambiam Talk 15:08, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * If they aren't fancied to win something, then maybe underdog... --  the     GREAT     Gavini   15:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

last part of race (course)(4-7) home stretch --Richardrj talkemail 15:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

biscuit-banger-brilliant one (7) cracker --Richardrj talkemail 15:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

moving target (4-6) clay pigeon --Richardrj talkemail 15:19, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

small bit (of comfort)(5) crumb --Richardrj talkemail 15:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

burns county (8) Ayrshire --Richardrj talkemail 15:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

say out and out (5) state? --Richardrj talkemail 15:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)it cant be state (v_t_r)Mightright 15:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC) utter - that 'v' must be wrong. --Richardrj talkemail 15:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)yes u are rightMightright 15:47, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

flat -consistent-plausible (6) smooth --Richardrj talkemail 15:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

formal gathering (8) assembly --Richardrj talkemail 15:16, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

only just-not quite(6)
 * almost? --Lambiam Talk 15:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC) or nearly--Richardrj talkemail 15:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * or barely? --  the     GREAT     Gavini   15:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

here is the pattern (h_R___)Mightright 15:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC) hardly, then. --Richardrj talkemail 15:34, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

environmentally sound (5) green --Richardrj talkemail 15:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * or clean... --  the     GREAT     Gavini   15:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

(repulsive-looking) fruit (4)Mightright 15:04, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * ugli. --Lambiam Talk 15:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

tnanx for your help dudes and dudettesMightright 15:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC) i need help with these last clues

aspersion (4)(_L_R) slur --Richardrj talkemail 15:56, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

trash (A_O_N_E) Mightright 15:47, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * If it's the verb and assuming one of your letters is wrong, it could be trounce or atomize? That must be pretty much the entire crossword we've done for you now.--Shantavira 17:15, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

it is announce212.72.3.59 04:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It couldn't be "announce". That has too many letters, and it doesn't mean "trash".  JackofOz 06:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * But if "announce" is actually the right number of letters, then "denounce" could be a possible solution. --LarryMac 17:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I like that idea, except it doesn't fit the given pattern that starts with an A (A_O_N_E). JackofOz 22:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

 and  in Argentina
I was discussing with a Spanish teacher how in Argentina,  and  have a unique pronunciation. In many books, I've seen this sound transcribed as, but having heard Argentinians from Buenos Aires speak, I think it is more like a lightly voiced. Any comments? Thanks in advance.--El aprendelenguas 15:50, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I always thought it was . It is both, though, in the Rioplatense Spanish article.  --   the     GREAT     Gavini   16:11, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

It's a sound change in progress. Older speakers, particularly male say, younger ones, particularly females, devoice that. mnewmanqc 22:05, 8 September 2006 (UTC)