Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2009 June 1

= June 1 =

German website help
Hi,

I just cleaned up Schuttberg, and there's a broken link supporting a statement. The site is meant to be in German, could anyone with fluent German have a quick look and see if Schuttberg can still be found? Thanks Aaadddaaammm (talk) 10:03, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

They packed it in, funds dried up.--Radh (talk) 10:07, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * And another question, what's the standard abbreviation on WP for million? I had a look but couldn't find it written down anywhere official. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 10:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * On the English-language Wikipedia, I would be surprised if any page claimed there was a standard abbreviation here for "million", and if there were such a claim, I'd dispute it. It should just be written as million.  Tempshill (talk) 15:27, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Steve Baker found this Manual of Style (dates and numbers) when I asked a similar question. . 71.236.26.74 (talk) 05:48, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

"St", "Sp" in German
They say that "st" and "sp" are pronounced "ʃt" and "ʃp" when at the beginning of a word. But for me it rather sounds like "ʃd" and "ʃb"... is this possible? Or are my ears just fooling me? --88.73.106.137 (talk) 11:28, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Where are you hearing this German, there are big differences between dialects, I don't know if the St/Sp sounds are different in any, but someone else will. High five for 3 German questions in a row. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 12:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You're ears aren't fooling you - they're just not used to German phonemes. The distinction between "d" and "t" in German is sometimes difficult to make, at least for native English speakers. It's not as common to see beginning language learners complain about "p" and "b" being similar, but now that you mention it, I would agree that they do sound similar to each other, at least more so than English "p" and "b" do. When learning a foreign language, it takes some time to get accustomed to how things are pronounced, if you ever can. The most (in)famous example is native Japanese speakers learning English. In Japanese there is no distinction between the "r" and "l" sounds (they're the same phoneme). This becomes a problem when Japanese speakers try to learn English, where "r" and "l" are very different sounds. To someone whose brain is set up to lump the two sounds together, it's difficult at first to see how "rice" and "lice" are different. -- 128.104.112.106 (talk) 14:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * This is probably an issue of aspiration. Sometimes English speakers confuse unaspirated consonants with voiced ones, like at the beginning of the English "spot", "stop". Mo-Al (talk) 15:15, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It is more likely a problem of people slurring their sounds, having a local accent or speaking a dialect and very few pronouncing things as IPA would insist they should. There is a region in Germany where st is pronounced as it stop. (Germans crack up by saying the phrase "stolpert übern spitzen stein" with the s pronounced as s.) Then you get people whose dialect lets them pronounce the consonants very softly. Their vowel sounds are also different.  People from around the German town of Hannover are said to get closest to "book German" in their pronunciation.  Even they leave out quite a few sounds when stringing together words in a sentence. 71.236.26.74 (talk) 05:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not necessarily an issue of aspiration because in words like spot and stop, are analyzed by native English speakers as /s/+ fortis consonant (that is, we see the t in stop as the same as the t in top). I would imagine that such words from German (a language that has very similar patterns of voicing onset time with English) would be analyzed as   + fortis consonant.  I suppose anyone who doesn't take on that analysis would hear an unaspirated [t] as /d/.
 * As for "slurring their sounds" I'm not sure how that explains anything. For one, "slurring" (which has negative prescriptivist connotations) implies some sort of assimilatory process where articulation overlaps.  But the actual difference between  and  is one of dissimilation: the laryngal setting changes between the consonants which takes more work.   — Æµ§œš¹  [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]  07:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Vocab Lists
Where can I get a really long list of categorised vocabulary on the web? I mean really long, over 1000 words in any language with the English equvalent. I want to learn a language, any will do, but vocab is so hard to find. 90.216.148.237 (talk) 17:53, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * otherwise, is the telephone directory ok for you? --139.18.116.55 (talk) 18:27, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * See Visual Dictionary Online and Visual dictionary and LOGOS - Multilingual Translation Portal.
 * -- Wavelength (talk) 20:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * See LanguageGuide: Foreign Language Vocabulary, Grammar, and Readings. -- Wavelength (talk) 20:33, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * See Category:Glossaries - Wiktionary (in English) and Categoría:Wikcionario:Apéndices - Wikcionario (in Spanish)
 * and Catégorie:Thématiques - Wiktionnaire Catégorie:Thématiques - Wiktionnaire (in French)
 * and Wikizionario (in Italian) (Scroll down to "Lemmi divisi per categoria"). -- Wavelength (talk) 21:20, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Here is some advice regarding Internet searches for lists of themed items. When I wanted to find a list of collective nouns for different animals, I did not try searching for different possible titles for such a list, because of the variety of possibilities.  Instead, I selected some items which I already knew, and I did a Google search for these four words: "bee swarm lion pride" (I do not remember the order).  My search was successful.  One could also try Google Sets. -- Wavelength (talk) 21:33, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * See glossaries - Google Directory. -- Wavelength (talk) 22:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * See Category:Glossaries and the interlanguage links at the left-hand side of the page. -- Wavelength (talk) 22:09, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Slight word of warning when it comes to learning a language and vocabulary. You use words in your native language within a framework of grammar, syntax, meaning and register that you grew up with.  Little to none of that translates in the same way to another language.  I've encountered quite a few students whom we called "walking talking dictionaries".  They had a vast amount of vocabulary at their disposal and could explain the "rules" of grammar better than I would be able to.  Yet they failed at what we call "put five words together to make a sentence".  Here's a suggestion if you do go for the word lists above: Google each of your new words with the search engine at a site using your new language as native language (newspaper or news sites usually work well for this.)  Take note of the position and form of the word and the intention and feeling each sentence conveys.  (A human tutor might be useful for the latter two.) If you need an example the simple German phrase "Sie sitzt auf der Bank." can be translated into English as: - She is sitting on the bench. - She has been benched. - She has a desk job at the bank. - She's in the pew. - The ship has run aground on the sandbank. - She won't let anyone get any money out of the kitty. - She won't tell us the position of the oyster bed. - It always sits on top of the bank building.  ... to name but a few.  See a tad of a problem here?71.236.26.74 (talk) 04:59, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Knowledge of vocabulary and knowledge of grammar are both important for fluency in a language, but, if one has to choose to study only one of the two, then knowledge of vocabulary would be more useful.  A person can improvise with vocabulary and be understood, although recognized as not being fluent, but a person who has only studied grammar might sound like someone speaking Jabberwocky. -- Wavelength (talk) 20:34, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I wonder whether it would be an exaggeration to say that vocabulary is to grammar
 * as semantic memory is to episodic memory. -- Wavelength (talk) 04:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Isn't grammar more like procedural memory? —Tamfang (talk) 07:01, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I do not know; it might be and it might not be. I looked at that article briefly, and it might require much study before I can answer that question. -- Wavelength (talk) 23:06, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Do you know Schliemann autobiography? Besides other things he succeeded in learning a dozen of languages, by his curious personal method. This was based on reading a book (always a translation of Paul et Virginie in the language he was studying) and learning long pieces of it by hart. But first of all, I recommend this book for the enthusiasm it transmits. --pma (talk) 06:19, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I do not know who is being addressed with that question. I, for one, do not know that autobiography, although I looked briefly at that article. -- Wavelength (talk) 23:06, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Asking for comments, etc. - Spanish vs. Mexican Spanish
I'm trying to type some response cards in Spanish, where people can make comments or request more information after a talk. Since some will be Mexican, and more familiar with Spanish than English, I felt it proper to provide them in Spanish. (Although they would probably know English well enough, they might feel more comfortable.)

My question is, looking at the translator in Altavista's website, it goes English to Spanish, but I'm not sure if there's a substantial different in Spanish Spanish versus Latin American Spanish. I'm thinking of the difference between American and British English, and I think there probably won't be, but thought I'd better ask. Thanks.209.244.187.155 (talk) 19:54, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The British do have their terms, such as "flat" for "apartment," but I think that the context would be understandable, on a simple comment card. (As an example, if asked "address" and then "apartment number," for instance, a Londoner would probably guess that translates to "flat number," and vice versa.)


 * Since the sentence structure, etc, are the same, I would suggest that asking for comments, etc. would be the same for both. If you're that worried aboutit, maybe a lighthearted joke at yourself about it would be proper in the speech. However, I have been in situations where I have spoken to non-English speakers. I'm generally very forgiving and just happy they're trying to use my language. I think your Mexican listeners will be, too.Somebody or his brother (talk) 20:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * If posible, you should have a native Spanish speaker (of any nationality) review the translation before printing it. Automatic translators are capable of major errors.   Will Beback    talk    20:28, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yup, I'd worry a lot more about the problems of automatic translation than about differences between the various national varieties of Spanish. That said, there are some everyday words in European Spanish that are best avoided in Latin-american Spanish, coger being a case in point . --NorwegianBluetalk 20:37, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks; ouch, that coger one is tricky. Especially if you're talking about catching a baseball, it would be really embarrassing to be an announcer trying to do Latin American games.:-)209.244.187.155 (talk) 22:01, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I would definitely say that an Altavista translation is worse than no translation at all. If you can't find a real Spanish speaker to translate for you, don't bother; your result is certain to sound ridiculous and may even be completely nonsensical.  -Elmer Clark (talk) 05:55, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Spanish - imperfect vs. preterite discussing a historical era
Does one use the imperfect or the preterite in Spanish when discussing a characteristic of a historical time period? For example: Doesn't preterite imply a one-time action (which thisdoes not seem to be), but imperfect implies something that was ongoing during the time frame of a more specific event (which doesn't fit either)? 64.252.193.6 (talk) 21:37, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * El arte español floreció en el Siglo de Oro, or
 * El arte español florecía en el Siglo de Oro?


 * I have it from 'una nativa' that it is the former: El arte español floreció en el Siglo de Oro. Technical explanations are not available "That is how we say it". Richard Avery (talk) 18:11, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * While both are technically possible (though the second sentence may look somewhat incomplete), I believe the poster wants to use the first sentence. Differences in usage of the indefinite and the imperfect preterite are so subtle that a native has to get a good think before trying to explain them to a non-native speaker!


 * The main characteristic of the indefinite is the mark of completeness conferred to the action. In the present case, the poster's first sentence implies certain development of the Spaniard Art; to be more precise, florecer in this connotation more or less means "to be in a period of greatest influence"; hence, the sentence gives the idea that the Spanish Arts were at their best during the period. In later times, this influence and development were arrested. Let us not forget that florecer is anyway an inchoative verb; as such, its usage with the indefinite preterite doesn't mean an abrupt end of the action.


 * The imperfect preterite, on the other hand, highlights the duration of an action, and is frequently used (as the English past continuous) to mark an interval in which another punctual action takes place: For instance: *El arte español florecía en el año en que nacía/nació Cervantes. Pallida  Mors  20:55, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * When not used in the previous sense of framing the continuated duration of an action, the imperfect usually also marks a longer prolongation than the indefinite, or may also mark a greater frequency: Compare
 * De chicas, mis hermanas se peleaban (As young, my sisters used to quarrel)
 * De chicas, mis hermanas se pelearon (At a young age, my sisters had a [one] serious argument, ie maybe they never talked to each other again). Pallida  Mors  21:05, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * thank you for that O pale one. Richard Avery (talk) 15:59, 3 June 2009 (UTC)