Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2007 October 8

= October 8 =

The Mercy Seat technique
I noticed that in different recordings of The Mercy Seat by Nick Cave and The Bad Seeds the verses are in a different order, and the lines are subtly different, but the song retains its meaning as a whole. Is this a specific technique, and does it have a name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fountainmon (talk • contribs) 04:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * You might consider the different versions of Hallelujah, both by Leonard Cohen (its composer) and others, to be another example of this phenomenon. Tesseran 05:08, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, I had thought of that, it is the technique I'm referring to, but does this have a name, or is it just loose writing of lyrics? Fountainmon 06:54, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I couldn't come up with a term. It's not an uncommon performing practice, especially among singer-songwriters. In the case of thought-out, "composed" renditions, I might just call them "variations of lyrics", with a hint of a nod toward musical variations. Some singers will play with the lyrics in the spur of the moment, in which case it might be called ad-libbing. ---Sluzzelin talk  07:20, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * For "verses in different order", I also found the neologism "anaphrase", analogous to anagram. ---Sluzzelin talk  07:30, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Midge Ure's surname, and the possessive for words ending in "X"
How is Midge's surname pronounced? Is it rather like "urr"? "Yurr"? Forgive me, I'm not terribly good with IPA.

And on the subject of Ultravox, what is the correct way to indicate possession with words ending in "X"? Would you write "Ultravox's" or just "Ultravox'"? You know, given that there's an "S" sound in the "X" already. Thanks in advance. —DO&#39;Neil 06:06, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * "You-r", and I'd spell it "Ultravox's" and pronounce it "Ultravoksiz", -- Arwel (talk) 06:23, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Categorized index for Wikipedia:Refence desk/Language
(Posting here, since I have no idea who reads the desk's talk page) I'm toying with a categorized index for the language desk. My attempts can be found here. Improvements, boldness, and feedback are more than welcome. See also the corresponding talk page. ---Sluzzelin talk  09:04, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I am confused. What are you trying to do ... and why?  From a quick glance, it seems to me that you will have as many categories/classifications as there are questions.  In other words, a great majority of questions are so unique that they would constitute their own category.  In which case, what purpose does having the category/classification serve?  This is my initial thought.  (Joseph A. Spadaro 17:09, 8 October 2007 (UTC))


 * I think it's a great idea - I'll take my time though before suggesting any improvements, Joseph makes a good point about the difficulty of categorization. I do feel that the refdesk is a great resource, and that the existing system of archiving is not user-friendly when it comes to finding subjects. DuncanHill 17:13, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your feedback, Joseph and Duncan. What I'm trying to do is create an index of this desk's questions sorted by topic. Why I'm trying to do it, is because it might make it easier to find questions and their answers. Yes, categorizing is the challenge here. Some questions may even remain uncategorizable (which is why I added a couple of stop-gap categories "uncategorized"). Some groupings make sense to me: sorting by foreign language, for example, or some of the alphabetically sorted categories. The main goal is to make it operable and user-friendly, I guess. (I am not precluding that it might be a waste of time.) ---Sluzzelin talk  17:29, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I wonder whether the tag (metadata) (perhaps not implementable here) wouldn't be the best & easiest system. It would seem somewhat simpler to slap on the tags (e.g.) "Chinese (Classical)," "English," and "translation request."  This would nicely allow for category-spanning topics.  It would also possibly cut down the indexing work, and make the index still useful even if the tagging sometimes remains incomplete.  Wareh 18:14, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I would not call it a waste of time -- just that it will take up lots of time. As we both stated, categorizing will be difficult -- not impossible, but certainly difficult.  Another thought is that many questions would probably fall under several categories.(Example:  Is this particular question really about the use of slang or about its French grammar?  I guess I will file it under both categories ... "slang" and "French.")  So, if you have (say) only 100 questions ... yet (say) 500 categories ... you may be defeating the purpose of "narrowing things down" to make them easier to find.  Good luck with your project.  (Joseph A. Spadaro 22:50, 8 October 2007 (UTC))


 * To clarify - is this intended to be used just for the archives, or on the active page as well? It would certainly be an asset to the former, but would clutter the active page and make recent additions too hard to find. -Elmer Clark 16:32, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


 * (To Elmer): It's intended to direct to as many archived questions as are useful, gradually moving all the way back to 2005 and beyond, and regulary updated with freshly archived material. It certainly should never be listed on the active page - the active page's structure should remain untouched, as should the monthly archives. For the time being, it's a construction of sand in my box. If it ever became useful to readers, provided it grew in size and quality, the page(s) might be moved to project space. We could link to these pages from Reference_desk/Archives, the archive^s' main page.
 * I'm thinking about Wareh's less time-expending suggestion as well. One problem here with semi-automatically established indices are the titles/subheadings chosen by querents. Often they are generic and general ("Translation", "Language questions", "Is there a word for this?") Specific keywords are lacking more often than not. On the other hand, the template solution would allow for additional groupings, such as frequently asked questions. Perhaps this also addresses the multi-optional problems Joseph mentioned. ---Sluzzelin talk  11:26, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Pull GS - explanation needed
Hi, everybody, pls help me to understand what the expression "pull 5 Gs" means. The context I have is not very illustrative, since it is a joke, so there's no point in providing it. I understand that it might be connected with driving, but what does "Gs" stand for? Thanks! Elena —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.33.196.2 (talk) 10:29, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * The context of the joke might help. 'G' is used for the force of gravity, so pull five Gs could be about feeling five times normal gravity, which might happen during the fast acceleration of an aircraft. The letter 'G' is also sometimes used by gamblers and others to mean a thousand dollars, or even a thousand pounds. You can pull money from someone who might be called a mark. Xn4  10:44, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Just incidentally, in aviation such high G-forces are usually associated with breaks rather than linear acceleration (even the space shuttle doesn't accelerate at 5g). This is also why it's "pulling" Gs - the pilot is controlling the forces by pulling back on the control stick. FiggyBee 05:42, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


 * My immediate thought (especially with the driving connexion) was g-force. DuncanHill 10:39, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, Duncan, edit conflict. Xn4  10:44, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * "G" often refers to a thousand. If I heard the expression, "John pulled 5 G's" ... that means "John made five thousand dollars."  As in: The bank robbers pulled over 20 G's in that heist last week.  Or: You can easily pull in 5 G's if you sell dope on the corner of Main and Pearl Streets.  (Joseph A. Spadaro 16:48, 8 October 2007 (UTC))

I'd be very surprised if the meaning indicated by Xn4 and Duncan was not the right one. --Anon, 03:07 UTC, October 9.


 * I think the money one is more likely. I can't imagine too many jokes involving gravitational forces.  Of course, it might have a double meaning within the joke and mean both, forming the punchline. -Elmer Clark 16:34, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, I can't imagine too many jokes where "pulling" some amount of money would arise. Perhaps the original poster would tell us the joke?  --Anon, 04:23 UTC, October 10, 2007.


 * Yes, the original joke -- and the context of the 5 G's mention -- would help. (Joseph A. Spadaro 06:56, 10 October 2007 (UTC))

caes.. (latin)
caesium from blue and caesar from hairy according to the articles - so no connection between regality and sky blue for the romans.. Is this right - ?87.102.17.101 13:09, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Caesar, according to the OUP "A Dictionary of Surnames, is probably from an Etruscan root, perhaps ultimately a cognate of Charles. Folk etymology in classical times produced the association with caesaries, meaning head of hair. I believe that there is another tradition that Caesar does mean blue (as in blue-eyed) but cannot recall the reference at this moment. DuncanHill 13:16, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * And this is an interesting article, with several possible derivations - Etymology of the name of Julius Caesar. DuncanHill 13:20, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Note that the word caesius mentioned in that article and translated as grey is the same word as caesium. Caesius is the masculine form and caesium is neuter, and the color they refer to is somewhere between blue and gray (often translated as "bluish gray" or "steel-colored"). Sky blue is caeruleus, not caesius. —Keenan Pepper 14:51, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Does this mean that Caesium is wrong "Caesium (Latin caesius meaning "sky blue" or "light blue")" - and/or was it a case of the scientists not really knowing their latin? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.102.17.101 (talk) 15:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * It would appear so - Chambers Dictionary has caesium deriving from "caesius, bluish grey". DuncanHill 15:11, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * As does the 2nd Edition of OED. DuncanHill 15:13, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I have therefore amended the article accordingly, referencing the OED. DuncanHill 15:29, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Good.87.102.17.101 18:30, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

The Little Something That Could
Hello. Once in a while, I come across something similar to the title - The Little Something That Could. Usually, a noun replaces the something. How does this work? What does it mean? Is this formal English? Please include any miscellaneous information that I should know. Thanks in advance. --Mayfare 16:31, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I believe it is a reference to the American children's story The Little Engine That Could. Having never read the book, and being English, I am unable to tell you more. DuncanHill 16:34, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Undoubtedly a reference to the storybook, and the article contains the gist of the story. What would be a British equivalent - "stiff upper lip, old chap" ? :-)  -- LarryMac  | Talk  16:51, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I think (from reading the article) that "it's dogged as does it" would express the attitude - that or "sheer bloody minded refusal to give up" which is another great British characteristic (cf England vs. Australia on Saturday, or the Blitz). DuncanHill 16:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, the expression generally refers to that children's story, the article on which offers a good synopsis. In common parlance, it refers to the notion of "someone who tries very persistently and, by doing so, succeeds" (usually against the odds -- but not necessarily so).  For example, say that Hilary Swank was an actress who auditioned for a thousand roles and could not get one -- then from audition number 1001, she wins an Oscar -- a witty or playful writer might call her "The Little Actress That Could" ... and people would catch the reference to the train story.  (Joseph A. Spadaro 16:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC))


 * By the way, I certainly would not call this formal English. Rather, it is a metaphor -- perhaps a pun -- a play on words.  I doubt it would be used "formally".  (Joseph A. Spadaro 17:18, 8 October 2007 (UTC))
 * Not a pun, surely? At least I, densely, fail to see two words that interact. Wouldn't you rather say that this is an expression (in casu, a title) that has become productive in the language, i.e. it is capable of being used to form new expressions? Bessel Dekker 17:33, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Probably "pun" was a poor choice of words on my part. I meant that the expression "The Little Actress (or Whatever) That Could" is a light-hearted and amusing play on words for "The Little Engine That Could."  Pun probably does not fit, unless the definition is stretched a bit.  (Joseph A. Spadaro 23:01, 8 October 2007 (UTC))


 * Isn't it a snowclone? —Angr 17:45, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * A related and much older fable asserts that "Slow and steady wins the race.". ---Sluzzelin talk  17:41, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Re snowclone: that word is new to me, but it seems to cover the idea perfectly. Bessel Dekker 18:04, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Googling for "the little" "that could" -engine turns up all sorts of interesting hits. It's a snowclone (a term I learned here on the Language Reference Desk too!) all right! —Angr 18:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * You can try "the little * that could" -engine also. Tesseran 05:11, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Can we improve on the article--and should we? It has a template expressing doubt. The problem seems to be that this is regarded as a neologism (and it was coined in 2004) and that there are no printed references as yet. It seems to occur in studies on journalism, however, and no amount of googling will, to nobody's surprise, bring to light a printed source rather than an electronic one. Bessel Dekker 19:44, 8 October 2007 (UTC)