Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2008 May 17

= May 17 =

Mexican Webpage
Is there some website that translates a mexican webpage to english? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.83.26 (talk) 08:11, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * If it's in Spanish, try Google Translate. If it's in another Mexican language, like Nahuatl, you're probably out of luck. —Angr 08:15, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * In case you don't know, practically every Mexican website will indeed be in Spanish. -Elmer Clark (talk) 05:19, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

in mediis rebus
I read the phrase in the introduction to a dialogue of Plato's, "in mediis rebus." Of course, the well-known phrase is "in medias res," but when we say "The action starts in medias res," would it not be better to write "in mediis rebus" which is clearly more correct, or should we avoid Latin inflections? I know this may come down to personal opinion, but often there is an existing debate on a subject (or a sufficiently related one) that people can refer to, so it is still potentially a reference desk question. Thanks in advance, 203.221.127.209 (talk) 19:13, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The difference in meaning is fairly straightforward: in mediis rebus - in the midst of things; in medias res - into the heart of the matter. The second is commonly used of a story or a statement which plunges into the middle of the action and doesn't start at the beginning of it, and the literary habit is I think based on its use by Horace, "semper ad eventum festinat et in medias res / non secus ac notas auditorem rapit". (Here, medias res is accusative.) If you want to say "The action starts... [in medias res]", then it would indeed be more correct, or at least more learned, to say in mediis rebus, but as there's a long tradition which favours in medias res for this purpose, it might be more subtle (that is, less like showing off) to turn the English part of your sentence around! Xn4  00:14, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Xn4, this is really helpful. I think I'll go by the "long tradition," which is pretty much as I had understood it. I'm just not learned enough to know for sure that the accusative is accepted widely, so I was seeking confirmation. Otherwise I would have been tempted to succumb to the authority of grammar, which is silly if it isn't our own (in an English sentence, at any rate). 203.221.127.102 (talk) 16:28, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

"in medias res" as an invariable form is simply illiterate. It would never have occurred to Horace to say - as the Wikipedia article on the Odyssey does - that the action "begins in medias res". It begins "in mediis rebus" (in midstream). In most instances that will be the sense people want to convey and the appropriate form to use in English. Horace is actually discussing Homer at Ars Poetica 148. He says "in medias res" there because he is describing the author plunging the reader straight INTO the ongoing action ("as if" the background were already "known" and understood). Refusing to inflect or adopt the appropriate form is no more acceptable for Latin than for modern languages, including borrowings from English.

"To hoover" in Russian
I am aware that discussion already exists about the spelling of this verb, but my poor Russian prevents me from following much of it. Anyway, is it я пылесошу or я пылесосу?

Thanks in advance for your help. 86.147.112.77 (talk) 21:24, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It's я пылесошу, with stress on the о. But be aware that пылесосить is an informal word. More formally, to vacuum (something) is чистить/почистить (что-нибудь) пылесосом. Joeldl (talk) 22:18, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * One of my Russian professors (many years ago) was unsure about the pronunciation of the first person singular of this verb. A student joked that it was probably because it's hard to hear someone say "I'm vacuuming" over the sound of the machine. :-) --Cam (talk) 14:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)