Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2011 October 14

= October 14 =

Quality of online Chinese dictionaries?
A post above this introduced me to http://nciku.com/, which I'd never seen despite 4 years living in China (doh!). I'm a big fan of Dict.cn, for what it's worth. They both have iPhone/Android apps, however the former's is not free. Does anyone on this board have enough experience using both to compare and contrast them? I'm wondering if I should cough up the additional 50 RMB for nciku's app... or if I'm not missing anything just using Dict.cn's... Thank you The Masked Booby (talk) 00:33, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I prefer nciku because in general I think it gives more information, more examples, and sometimes more accurate definitions; it also allows you to handwrite characters (less of a pain than looking up radicals) and, if you're interested in that kind of thing, has various "community" stuff and lists you can sign up for and things like that (I've never ventured into that so I can't vouch for how good it is). That being said, it sometimes goes down, and on a poor internet connection (which is probably what you have if you're in China!) it can be difficult to load, so I often fall back to dict.cn when I can't open nciku. I also use dict.cn when I have doubts about the a translation on nciku and want to double-check. http://zhongwen.com is also good.
 * Another caveat: I don't know anything about the phone apps. If dict.cn has one that works, I would recommend sticking with that; regardless of which one has a better website, there's no reason to pay for a Chinese dictionary app, there should be plenty that are good enough and free. r ʨ anaɢ (talk) 03:52, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I work for nciku, so I'm probably too biased to answer your original question, but we do have free versions of our apps too(iPhone version, Android version). They need an internet connection and don't have all the features of the paid app, but the basic dictionary functions are there. Ironfrost (talk) 03:21, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Klingon vs Esperanto
I understand from reading James Gleick's Information that the Klingon language Wikipedia was closed down. Is this true? If so, why, if not Esperanto? Or Volapük? Where is the discussion? μηδείς (talk) 03:45, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It looks like there might be some information at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Klingon_Wikipedia . r ʨ anaɢ (talk) 03:54, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I thought that Jimbo initially made a decision like that no languages without an ISO 639-1 code could have a Wikipedia? But this clearly isn't true anymore since we have a Samogitian Wikipedia amongst others.. anyway, I think the real reason behind it was that International Auxilliary Languages are fine, constructed languages for fiction and popular culture would just open the floodgates.. - file lake  shoe  08:07, 14 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I think Toki Pona and Siberian Wikipedia were the turning point. Toki Pona is a relatively young constructed language with almost no speakers at all that got its own Wikipedia without much ado because "Klingon has one too". Siberian at the time of its Wikipedia's creation was presented as a real language and it got its own Wikipedia without much questioning. Later it turned out to be a made-up language. These cases lead many to the opinion that the policies for new projects were too lax. So the policies were tightened. The new consensus was that a language must be in a situation where it realistically can be used as a medium for information seeking. For the sake of information seeking, not for the sake of using the language. Natural languages and well-established auxilliary languages are a realistically useful and used medium for information seeking, constructed languages like Toki Pona or Siberian are not. And after this cut between actively used auxilliary languages and other constructed languages, Klingon was on the wrong side and needed to be closed to set no precedent, so nobody could argue "but Klingon got one too".
 * The discussion is scattered in the old archives of mailing lists, on meta and probably other places. --:Slomox:: &gt;&lt; 08:40, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I seem to remember something about native speakers? Or am I remembering wrong? &mdash;Akrabbimtalk 15:09, 14 October 2011 (UTC)


 * See Category:Speakers of international auxiliary languages. (The word auxiliary has only one l.)
 * —Wavelength (talk) 18:52, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Specifically, see Category:Native Esperanto speakers. The best-known member of this category is George Soros (yes, that George Soros). -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  19:28, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Certainly I've met native speakers of Esperanto, although that's been a while. Michael Hardy (talk) 20:17, 14 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Wow, a delivery boy for the Nazis  a convicted inside trader       and a native Esperanto speaker?  I guess it would explain the accent. μηδείς (talk) 20:33, 14 October 2011 (UTC)


 * As to the comments 1..3 above: Soros was 14 at the time, a Jewish boy in Nazi-occupied Hungary.  Some 400.000 Hungarian Jews were exterminated in concentration camps after the occupation.  What have YOU done in 1944, Medeis?   --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:26, 15 October 2011 (UTC)


 * If you mean YOU plural, Cookatoo, I have plenty of relatives from the former borderlands of Austro-Hungary who died rather than collaborate. I also have five Americanized uncles who bore arms against the Huns and died in WWI & WWII. Their brothers who didn't die survived to beat the Nazi's asses and make the world safe for collaborators, currency speculators, and inside traders.  (Oh, but one of my uncles on the other side of the family was in the Pacific, so he only helped beat the Japanese.)  But, if by YOU you mean thou, I myself have also lived in a war zone, had mine and my father's workplace bombed, had thousands of neighbors and co-workers annihilated, been falsely detained by law enforcers, been a victim of racism and prejudice, witnessed murder at first hand, been shot at, survived the murder of a lover and of a relative, stood up to physical threats by criminals, outlaws, and authoritarians, worn a triangle and been persecuted for it, and used arms and drawn blood to defend myself from attack and invasion.  Just not in 1944. Sorry my personal claims are OR, and I am not going to out myself by naming my uncles dead in European wars or my murdered lover or murdered relative.  I also apologize for only having had the opportunity to defend mine and my own by stabbing or pummeling people into submission, rather than ever having had the honor of shooting anyone to death.  Have you ever shot anyone to death, Cookatoo?μηδείς (talk) 21:01, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Of course, none of this aside has anything to do with the original question. Lady  of  Shalott  21:43, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Who said it did? But the original question was mine, and I reserve the point of privilege to answer Cookatoo's personally insulting ad hominem. μηδείς (talk) 01:11, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

english language
sir "will" is used to tell about obstinate insistence.can you give some examples for this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.241.177.53 (talk) 12:00, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * This will not stand. μηδείς (talk) 12:07, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I will have my way! You will listen to me! — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 14:04, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The dîstinction between shall and will is disappearing rapidly. In my dialect, they have all but disintegrated into these very confusing rules: will is used in every situation, but shall may be used for both to create emphasis, and when talking formally shall is both the required form for the first person and used for emphasis in the second and third persons, except in some cases when will may be used for no apparent reason... Inter  change  able | talk to me  15:04, 14 October 2011 (UTC)


 * When I was teaching English, I taught it thus:


 * I will - I want to
 * You will - I want you to
 * He will - He wants to

And 'shall' is simple future (except with the 2nd person, where it carries connotations of desire on the 2nd person's part). --  KägeTorä - (影虎)  ( TALK )  15:17, 14 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I have to say that I don't think KageTora's rules apply in most varieties of English today. In most varieties of English, at the conversational level, shall is all but dead, except for certain questions in the first person, such as "Shall I turn on the TV?"  Even this is more likely to be phrased, "Do you want me to turn on the TV?" or "Would you like me to turn on the TV?"  The only varieties of English in which shall still follows any of the rules outlined in our article Shall and will are 1) upper class English as spoken in England, and 2) the most formal registers of English used throughout the English-speaking world, particularly in legal documents.  Otherwise, will is universally used as a modal verb indicating future tense, or to indicate a few other modal senses, such as desire or inevitability.  Marco polo (talk) 15:50, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, my understanding of the distinction is certainly archaic, but it was of interest to my students. My friends here in Liverpool use 'will' all the time, and 'shall' is completely unheard of. I use 'shall' and 'will' in the ways I outlined above, but I don't know many others who do. 'Will' is the norm for simple future nowadays, and 'shall' is very often considered to be condescending. 94.1.193.180 (talk) 16:49, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Just a note of confirmation: the only time I really use shall is in the first person for questions. Shall we go to the pub?, Shall I bother with this? etc. I'd much sooner use shall than Would you like to [...]? or Do you want to [...]? though. I'm English, but not upper class (squeezed middle, if anything).  Omg †  osh 07:35, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

It would be interesting to know the earliest attestation of the supposed (and obviously grammarian-concocted) difference between the first- and second/third-person uses of shall and will. It has no valid comparative linguistic basis. The distinction does not occur in other languages which have cognates in wollen and sollen or in volo.μηδείς (talk) 17:08, 14 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Editor 117.241.177.53, see the article “Shall and will”.
 * —Wavelength (talk) 18:38, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Liverpool speakers might be influenced by Irish English, which I think doesn't use "shall" in the same way. Do we have an Irish person around? Itsmejudith (talk) 18:48, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * There are plenty of instances of 'shall' in Father Ted. I have the whole 35 GB's worth of every episode and cutscenes, and stuff that never made onto TV, and I assure you, 'shall' is said quite a lot.  KägeTorä - (影虎)  ( TALK )  01:10, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, 117. Very interesting. μηδείς (talk) 20:31, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't say "shall" wasn't used in Irish English. I said it wasn't used in the same way. From our article Hiberno-English, "Will is often used where English English would use "shall" ("Will I make us a cup of tea?"). The distinction between "shall" (for first-person simple future, and second- and third-person emphatic future) and "will" (second- and third-person simple future, first-person emphatic future), maintained by many in England, does not exist in Hiberno-English, with "will" generally used in all cases." Itsmejudith (talk) 21:25, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Shreedevi
Is someone with the given name of Shreedevi most likely male or female? 205.156.84.229 (talk) 23:15, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Female. Devi means "goddess"; the masculine equivalent is dev or deva. Shreedevi, also spelled Sridevi, is a name for/title of Lakshmi. Angr (talk) 00:06, 15 October 2011 (UTC)


 * If it's endocentric on Devi, I would assume female... AnonMoos (talk) 00:09, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

In hindhi, many female names end in -i, and not -a, as a European might expect. Conversely, many male names end in -a. KägeTorä - (影虎) ( TALK )  00:41, 15 October 2011 (UTC)