Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2009 November 25

= November 25 =

In business usage, does "payroll" include "benefits" ?
For example, if I'm discussing Company A's payroll figures and budget, does that include benefit costs the company pays? I suspect in America these are calculated separately. But in China most "benefits" take the form of cash additives to monthly paychecks, making things a bit murkier. Is this something that varies from company to company? I haven't been able to get a definitive answer anywhere and am hoping a CPA or other such expect drops by and sees this... Thank you. 218.25.32.210 (talk) 09:12, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
 * My dictionary definition of "payroll" : a list of a company's employees and the amount of money they are to be paid : there are just three employees on the payroll.

• the total amount of wages and salaries paid by a company to its employees : small employers with a payroll of less than $45,000.


 * I'd say no. Benefits are a cost to the company but not on payroll. Hope that helps. A8  UDI  16:39, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Questions about the use of prepositions
Consider the following sentences:


 * Q1: Where did you get the birthday present for Mary?
 * Q2: Where did you get the birthday present for Mary from?
 * Q3: Where did you get the birthday present for Mary at?


 * A1: I got it at Sears.
 * A2: I got it from Sears.

Are the prepositions at the end of Q2 & Q3: (i) grammatically acceptable (ignoring the style "rule" about not ending a sentence with a preposition)? (ii) necessary? Assuming that Q1–Q3 are all acceptable, which of them sounds most natural to you?

Between A1 & A2, which of them sounds more natural (assuming that they are both grammatically acceptable)? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.49.11.55 (talk) 13:33, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Smells like a homework question. +Angr 13:44, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
 * No. --173.49.11.55 (talk) 14:03, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Q2 specifically asks you where you were when you got the birthday present.
 * Q3 asks where were you when you got the present. So you would answer: "I was at Sears when I got the present.".
 * Q1 asks "Where did you get the birthday present?"


 * Both Q1 and Q3 are especially similar, but Q2 specifically asks where you were.174.3.102.6 (talk) 14:27, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't get that interpretation from them at all. The questions all mean the same thing. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 16:04, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * (Edited) I expect different people to understand the sentences differently, based on the degree to which they analyze them and the interpretation adopted. I expect many people to understand them as synonymous or near-synonymous, but you can also make an argument that Q2 & Q3 emphasize different aspects of the acquisition. Q2 can be interpreted as asking about [a place but in its role as] the seller in the transaction, and Q3 about the place at which the present was acquired. If the person who got the present for Mary got it at a flea market, the seller is not the same as the place of acquisition. --173.49.11.55 (talk) 17:12, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * After thinking about it some more, I think the flea market comparison is not a good one because the question is a "where" question. (The answer should be a place.) --173.49.11.55 (talk) 17:47, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I would never use Q2 and Q3, as they sound awkward, to my ear. In addition, "I got it at Sears" implies, to me, that I went to a store and bought it, whereas "I got it from Sears" could mean you bought it online from sears.com.  99.166.95.142 (talk) 16:30, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The exact wording of Q3 is uncommon, but you see this same kind of structure in things like "Where are you at?" (Which also sounds awkward to me, but it's quite common anyway.) r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 18:23, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It's a very useful question when you have little or no idea about the state of play with an individual's involvement in a certain issue. It's akin to "Where are you up to with ...?", or "What stage are you at with ...?" or "How are things progressing with ...?".  When you and your other half haven't exchanged any words about your relationship for over 12 months, it's always good to unexpectedly come out with "Where are you/we at with our relationship?" over dinner.  Or "Where are we going with our relationship?"  But pick your mark, because left-brain types have a really hard time coming up with any answer at all to such questions.  They'll just sit there looking bewildered, their brains obviously in extreme overdrive, but nothing comes out of their mouths for many minutes, while the questioner waits patiently.  Finally, they might ask "What do you mean?".  I know; I was that person.  :)  --  JackofOz (talk) 20:38, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I can here the difference between Q2 an Q3 as, "I got it at the mall" and "I got it from the mall". Two very different statements.  While Q2 and Q3 are asking the same question in principle, there is some difference.  In the case of the Sears example.  "I got it at Sears" could mean going in to the actual store, but "I got it from Sears" could suggest online shopping, catalogue shopping, or Sears sending the gift to you and you re-gifting it. Aaronite (talk) 18:04, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * For me, Q1 is correct (no prepositional phrase), Q2 is correct (contains the phrase "from where", rearranged), but Q3 is wrong because the phrase "at where" is wrong. Why is it wrong?  I don't know, it just is.  "What store did you get it at?" would be fine, because "at what store" is a valid phrase, but not with "Where did you get it at?" --Anonymous, 19:45 UTC, November 25, 2009.


 * I had an answer very much like Anon's building up in my head as I was reading the replies. I believe we're both SW Ontario, so there may be regional variation regarding these distinctions. My friend from Newfoundland would pick Q3 as standard - and he would also use the somewhat parallel construction "Where'd you put it to?" if the current location was in doubt. Matt Deres (talk) 15:23, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Sport Abbrevations?
What is "PL'r"?

What is "OL'ing"?174.3.102.6 (talk) 14:22, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Just a guess. PL'r = power lifter, OL'ing = overhead lifting? --173.49.11.55 (talk) 15:32, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Judging from the rest of the content of that page, I might agree. But those abbreviations are not used on the page supplied.  Maybe the entry that used them was taken off the home page?  Dismas |(talk) 15:54, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The web page contains dynamic content that changes from one retrieval to another. The dynamic content looks like reader comments or testimonials. The abbreviations are used in one of the reader comments. --173.49.11.55 (talk) 16:54, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Etymology of religiosity
What is the etymology of "religiosity"? 64.138.237.101 (talk) 17:27, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * From Latin "religiositas", "religiousness". That comes from "religiosus", "full of religion", which, of course, ultimately comes from Latin "religio", which probably comes from the lig- root that also appears in "ligament", "obligation", and the Latin word for "law" ("lex"), so it probably means something like "binding together". Adam Bishop (talk) 17:41, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks Adam Bishop, that gives me excellent details on this word. When was the word first put into use? Could "religiosity" and "pius" be used somehow in a sentence? 64.138.237.101 (talk) 19:40, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * "Religio" means taboo or restraint. Same sentence? OK: One who is pious has much religiosity. Although it would be less awkward to say that one who is pious is very religious (adjectives); or who one has piety has religiosity (nouns). ("Pius" is the Latin, "pious" is the English via French. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:47, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Pious tends to be used in a straightforward way. Religiosity has a straightforward meaning of religious, and also a commonly conveyed implication of insincerity of religious devotion. But piety tends to mean just what it says &mdash; a strongly spiritual involvement. Bus stop (talk) 20:00, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Bugs, I don't see that "religio" ever means "taboo". It's just "religion" in basically the same way we think of it. Anyway, the first time "religiosity" was used, according to the OED, was in Wyclif's translation of the Bible in 1382. Ecclesiasticus 1:17-18 says "The drede of the Lord [is] religiosite of kunnyng. 18 Religiosite shal kepen, and iustefien the herte." This is a translation of "timor Domini scientiae religiositas, religiositas custodiet et iustificabit cor iucunditatem atque gaudium dabit", so you can see that this was one of the cases where Wyclif had no equivalent English word and made one up based on the Latin. That passage of the Vulgate is one of the three citations given in Lewis and Short's Latin dictionary, the other two are "App. Dogm. Plat. 2, p. 16, 3" and "Tert. Apol. 25 al." but I can't find what those mean (well, Tert. is presumably Tertullian...) Adam Bishop (talk) 20:20, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm going by the word origin as stated in my old Webster's: "religion, noun. [Old French, from Latin religio, properly taboo, restraint]." Taboo is defined as "under restriction, prohibited". Ligament comes from ligare, "to bind". So it's possible the words religio and ligare are connected. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:52, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Hmm, weird...Lewis and Short, the Oxford Latin Dictionary, and the OED don't say anything about taboo. Adam Bishop (talk) 01:55, 26 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I thought it was a little odd also, but I'm just reporting what Webster said. Does the OED indicate that "religio" originally meant "restraint" or something similar? My own Latin dictionary gives a whole bunch of words that "religio" means, including "religion", of course, but that's not very helpful. The concept of religion being a restraint seems to fit, though, and that's where one definition of "taboo" comes in. Nowadays "taboo" is taken to mean "forbidden", but it also means "restricted". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:01, 26 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually, if I read just a little further down, the OLD does say "religiosus" can mean "taboo" (the adjective), so nevermind :) I do see how it could mean that, especially since Roman religion was so secretive. Adam Bishop (talk) 03:13, 26 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I have a 1995 edition of the Pocket Oxford Latin Dictionary, which includes the following translations for religio: supernatural feeling of constraint; scruple; sanction; religious awe; superstition; sanctity; ritual; conscientiousness. I don't see "secretive" as the issue, but rather "restraint". With religion comes moral laws and the like. Before you jump in, I'm not saying moral laws are necessarily a product of religion, as some religionists do. Atheists or "secular humanists" have moral laws also. But I'm saying that a given religion typically has moral laws connected with it, i.e. constraints or restrictions on behavior - with the added bonus of the threat of divine retribution for failure to obey. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:27, 26 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Would then this be a more or less correct sentence? A son of religiosity in pius to his father. - meaning a son of binding together in great respect and devotion to his father. 64.138.237.101 (talk) 22:16, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Why would that be a sentence, and what is it you are trying to say? Give me an example using more common words if possible. Bus stop (talk) 23:23, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Here is an example sentence: He was thought by some to be a pious individual, but to those who knew him, his outward signs of religiosity merely hid a life of crime. Bus stop (talk) 23:28, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Something like: He was a pious son of religiosity towards his father. - meaning he was a very devoted son towards his father to the point of being religious (divine worship). Could you come up with this idea using BOTH words of pious and religiosity? 64.138.237.101 (talk) 23:42, 25 November 2009 (UTC) 64.138.237.101 (talk) 23:42, 25 November 2009 (UTC)