Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2011 September 25

= September 25 =

Medical term: Appropriate morpheme for "interstitial fluid"?
("Interstitial fluid" is the fluid between the cells in our body, but outside the bloodstream.) The medical term for "too low blood glucose" is the word: "hypoglycemia" (uk: "hypoglycaemia") which consists of the three latin greek morphemes: 1.Hypo (=Having a lower than normal ammount of ...) 2.Glyc (=Having to do with glucose) 3.Emia/Aemia (=Having to do with properties of the blood). I need a similar word for: "Too low glucose level in the interstitial fluid". Well, I guess it will be: "Hypoglyc " but I need help with the -part. :-) Do you know? or could you please help me with an educated guess? Esocul (talk) 01:56, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * You may be more likely to get an answer to this at the Science reference desk. r ʨ anaɢ (talk) 04:09, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I suppose this isn't really the point, but "hypoglycemia" is all Greek, not Latin. "Interstitial" is Latin, however. The modern Greek for interstitial fluid is "Μεσοκυττάριο υγρό", "intercellular liquid", so I guess you could use the "liquid" part ("υγρό") and say "hypoglycugria". Adam Bishop (talk) 07:13, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * But Adam, that element is aspirated (it occurs in words with "hygr-" in English: "hygrometer", "hygric", "hygrophanous", etc.). And of course the υ would go to a "y", as in the "glyc-" element. It would therefore be "hypoglycohygria" or "hypoglycygria" (compare "[hypo]glycaemia" of course; but contrast "hyphaemia", in which the rough breathing of the "haem-" is respected). N oetica Tea? 08:17, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * But Noetica, consider "hypoglycaemia", which is not "hypoglychaemia" or "hypoglycohaemia" (though I think it should be the former). In answer to the question, how about "lymph"? Our article says "Lymph is considered a part of the interstitial fluid", though it is actually the part which is no longer interstitial but concentrated into vessels. "Lymph" looks Greek, (though it is actually Latin), so "hypoglycolymphia" does not look too awful. --ColinFine (talk) 11:01, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * More generally and less analogously, there is glycopenia for shortage of glucose (see for example neuroglycopenia). I suppose you could call it "interstitial glycopenia", though google yielded no hits for this term. ---Sluzzelin talk  12:01, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Does the word you are looking for mean something other than dehydration, exsanguination, or low blood pressure? μηδείς (talk) 02:11, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

English Term...requires citations?
The name "Malvinas Islands" is used in English as an alternate name to the Spanish term "Islas Malvinas". The most common English name for the islands is "Falkland Islands". A user in the article's talk page is demanding that I provide a source which "verifies" that "Malvinas Islands" is an English language term. My understanding is that common knowledge does not require citation. "Malvinas Islands" is obviously an English term (less common than the other term, but English nonetheless). I would like to hear the opinion of the language experts here. Does the English term require citations to "demonstrate" that it is an English term, or is this simply an unreasonable demand? -- MarshalN20 | T a l k 19:05, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Not the place to ask, but any statement like to be challenged should be referenced. In the case of some incredibly controversial islands, their name is going to be one of them. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 19:25, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps my question was indeed worded incorrectly (RSN deals with the citation). What I meant to ask here is whether "Malvinas Islands" is an English term or not?-- MarshalN20 | T a l k 19:31, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It depends on what you mean by a term. Malvinas Islands is, of course, a perfectly good English translation of Islas Malvinas. However, I think the editor's concern is that Malvinas Islands is not commonly used in English publications at all (presumably Falkland Islands is used instead), and therefore would like to see some evidence since you assert the contrary. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 19:57, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have provided the editor in question with a GoogleBooks search in which the term "Malvinas Islands" is used (in various forms). To quote him directly: "not one single source has been put forward to verify the presumption that Malvinas Islands is an English language term". In other words, he is questioning whether "Malvinas Islands" is an English term or not. Hence my question. An English language term does not require citation to demonstrate it is an English language term...it's simply a matter of common sense. Hence why I came here and not the RSN board.
 * To the question of whether "Malvinas Islands" is an English term or not, should I take your response as a yes or no? Thanks again for answering. Best regards.-- MarshalN20 | T a l k 20:21, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, to me Malvinas Islands does not seem a natural English translation of Islas Malvinas. I think Malvinas is in the role of a plural adjective in Spanish.  According to the article it's a translation from the French adjectival form Malouine, derived from the place name Saint-Malo.
 * In English we don't pluralize adjectives, so I think if there's an English-language form that translates Islas Malvinas directly, it's probably Malouine Islands or some such. --Trovatore (talk) 20:26, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * To help provide a better picture to the situation. It would be like him claiming that I need a source to claim that "Republic of Peru" is an English term. This is not a matter of citations (hence no need for the RSN), but rather a matter of language. "Republic of Peru" is the English term, while "Republica del Peru" is the Spanish term. Similarly "Malvinas Islands" is one of the English terms for the Spanish "Islas Malvinas" (the most common English term being "Falkland Islands"). I hope this example helps.-- MarshalN20 | T a l k 20:28, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It is not a form I have ever encountered in English, so I would say it is not an common English term, and requires citation. The common English name for Las Islas Malvinas is The Falkland Islands, not The Malvinas Islands. Peru is irrelevant, because it hasn't a distinct name in English. The common English name for (die Stadt) München is (the City of) Munich, not "The City of München". --ColinFine (talk) 23:06, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * @Trovatore, the term used in English is "Malvinas Islands" (not "Malouine Islands", though I agree that it sounds better and is historically much more accurate). A simple GoogleBooks search demonstrates this. I can present it here if you would like?-- MarshalN20 | T a l k 20:29, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

"Malouine Islands" does have usage, but not as much as "Malvinas Islands" or "Falkland Islands". It's interesting, nonetheles, so thank you for bringing it up Trovatore. Here is the GB search on the term ("Malouine Islands"). I'd bring it up in the article, but then it would probably get deleted.-- MarshalN20 | T a l k 20:47, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Mistranslations can achieve common usage, although the prevalent name for Islas Malvinas in English is the Falkland Islands or the Falklands, not the Malvine Islands or Malvines (or whatever). A more famous mistranslation would be Islas Canarias, which comes from the Latin for "Dog Islands" but is called "Canary Islands" in English. ←baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:30, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * None have really answered the question so far, however. GoogleBooks has 10,100 results of the term "Malvinas Islands". Is it or is it not an English term? Best of wishes.-- MarshalN20  | T a l k 00:35, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Well it is perfectly cromulent as far as I can see. If an English speaker, for some reason, didn't want to call that archipelago by the name used in the UK, then why would they not use "Malvinas Islands", on the same basis as Bugs quoted above for the Canary Islands? And if there are 10,000 results on Google Books for it, then why would it not be considered "an English term"? I've just done a Google search using that term, and 224,000 results are returned, including some international news sources. I'm with you on this one. --TammyMoet (talk) 12:01, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe the result is skewed by uses such as "Falkland/Malvinas Islands" and "Falkland (Malvinas) Islands". I otherwise pass no comment. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 12:07, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * So if I search for a term using inverted commas to enclose the term, would the search result include items such as you have quoted above? Because that's what I did. --TammyMoet (talk) 14:57, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * The question you should be asking is not "Is 'Malvinas Islands' an English term?" but "Is 'Malvinas Islands' an alternative name for the Falklands in English?" The former is irrelevant, the latter requires proof.  By comparison, "United Arab Emirates", "donkey", and "International Commonwealth of People who Hate Sport on TV" are valid English terms, but none of them are names for any islands in the South Atlantic. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:06, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

The insistence that the phrase Malvinas Islands needs a source to show it is an English term is tendentious. The question is rather whether Malvinas Islands is (one of) their English name(s). The answer to that is no. A search of google books finds the usage Malvinas Islands fraught with political implication. A typical neutral description is:

James Patrick Byrne, Philip Coleman, Jason Francis King - 2008 - 967 pages FALKLAND /M ALVINAS ISLANDS The Falkland (the British name) or Malvinas Islands (the Argentinean name) are an archipelago in the south Atlantic, about 300 miles off the continental coast of South America. The islands were first occupied ... books.google.com

The proper lead sentence would be something like: The Falkland Islands' are a British territory of the South Atlanitic disputed by Argenitina which refers to them as the Islas Malivinas. The explanation (or Malvinas Islands) could be placed after Islas Malvinas but it doesn't seem necessary and does seem to be pushing a very obvious POV. μηδείς (talk) 17:37, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm honestly confused about what all this is coming down to. Some of you seem to agree that the term "Malvinas Islands" is indeed an English term, and other seems to disagree? What is the decision? Also, mentions of "POV" and other whatnot should be left for other places (Such as the NPOV noticeboard). Please just focus on the question at hand. This is the Language Desk. Proof exists that the term is used as an alternative name for the islands (even if political, the term has English usage). The question remains the same: Is the term "Malvinas Islands" an English term? I need concrete answers so that we can finish the discussion in the talk page. Best of wishes.-- MarshalN20 | T a l k 00:04, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


 * It's clearly an English term in a broad sense, seems to me. And yes, it is sometimes used in English sources, if rare relative to other terms for the islands. If the question is just whether it is an English term, then the answer is yes, I would say. I'm not sure I would use it myself. "Islas Malvinas" seems more common in my experience. I've seen the islands referred to simply as "the Malvinas" (eg, ), similar to "the Galapagos", and even "Las Malvinas" . For what it's worth, GEOnet Names Server lists Falkland Islands and Islas Malvinas as "approved", and lists "variant" names Falklands and Iles Malouines. Also, personally, "Malvinas Islands" sounds a bit odd to me in the same way Negro River, instead of Rio Negro, sounds odd. Another example: I don't understand why the English Wikipedia uses the name San Juan River for the Mexican Rio San Juan, a tributary of the Grande River. On the other hand, no one seems to have any problem with "Galapagos Islands". In short, my answer (or opinion at least) is "yes, but..." Pfly (talk) 04:33, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * One further comment. This topic is dominated by the modern conflict over the islands, which quickly turns discussions political and pro- or anti-Britain/Argentina. Most of my encounters with the name Malvinas come from history books, especially those about Spanish exploration. Historians might use one term or another for modern political reasons, but often it seems to me the use of "Malvinas" is appropriate when describing, say, the Malaspina Expedition of 1789-1794. It is like using La Florida or The Californias. It is from history books about Spanish Empire related topics that I've more often seen "Islas Malvinas" or just "the Malvinas". But "Malvinas Islands" is sometimes seen too, for example, . Pfly (talk) 04:56, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you Pfly. "Malvinas Islands" is not the most used name for the islands, but that is not the purpose of this query. It does seem to be mainly a historical name, used for political reasons as well, but it's undeniable that the term is one of the English version for "Islas Malvinas". The most common name is, obviously, "Falkland Islands," and this is undisputed.
 * The purpose of the question is simply to confirm whether this term is an English term or not. In Talk:Fakland Islands, a user is demanding that I provide sources to "confirm" that "Malvinas Islands is an English term". However, this is impossible because no source exists which actually states "Malvinas Islands is an English term" because common knowledge does not require citation. By establishing here in the language desk that "Malvinas Islands" is an English term (with minority usage, but still English), there exists no need for me to provide any such source for his strange demand. Thanks again for the response, and hopefully my explanation helps to better explain the situation.-- MarshalN20 | T a l k 05:21, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think you are ever going to confirm this, because it can always be claimed that "Malvinas Islands" is just the English translation of a Spanish term, but if you can find citations from reputable newspapers and published books that use "Malvinas Islands" without quotation marks, then you would be on firmer ground.   D b f i r s   07:09, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter whether it's an English translation or a natural English term. The point here is simply to establish that it is an English term. Published books, as demonstrated by the link provided by Pfly, do indeed use the term without quotation marks. I think for the most part the Reference desk is in favor of "Malvinas Islands" being an English term, or am I getting it wrong?
 * ✅JackLee
 * ✅Bugs
 * ✅TammyMoet
 * ✅Pfly
 * Trovatore
 * ColinFine
 * μηδείς
 * This is the list of users that have directly answered the question without heading off into other topics. If "Malvinas Islands" is an appropiate English translation, therefore one of the terms used to refer to the islands (less common, but still used in English), then it is an English term. The 4 v 3 ruling seems way too close. I would like to give it until the end of the week to see what ends up being the "decision" from the Language Desk. Either one has to agree that it is an English term ("valid" translation counts as well), or disagree ("not a valid translation" claim also counts here). Sorry for the complicated subject, but surely it must be somewhat entertaining to think about it. Hehehe. I'll abide by what is decided here, so please do express your opinions.-- MarshalN20 | T a l k 11:07, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Allow me to put some background to this discussion. Malvinas Islands is not an equivalent English language name for the Falkland Islands as such. You will see it in Argentine documents translated into English as they refuse to use the term Falkland Islands, sometimes as a result when the UN publishes Argentine documents you will see it there. It became a cause celebre amongst certain left-wing fringe groups, eg the Socialist Workers Party to refer to the Falklands as the Malvinas Islands but this is WP:FRINGE use and per WP:DUE not something we'd typically include. You also sometimes see it in documents as a translation of the Spanish term eg The Falkland Islands known in Argentina as the Malvinas Islands. You also see the ISO Designation Falkland (Malvinas) Islands or variations thereof which produces a false positive in a Google books search. All of which we'd be happy to include in an etymology section. All of this can be cited, however, Marshall wishes to state it is an English name without attribution, when clearly it is not. He has provided no source whatsoever to back up his claim that it is an English name for the islands even in minority usage. Effectively he is demanding we include the Argentine name and its translation into English ie giving undue prominence to the Argentine name by giving it twice.

The crux of the matter is somewhat different and revolves around Islas Falkland as a name for the islands with minority usage in the Spanish language, although at one point was almost as common a term as Islas Malvinas. The use of Islas Falkland produces a violent reaction among Argentines, for reasons I do not entirely fathom, example. It was a term that was even used in Argentina as late as 1941. In addition, Argentina has lobbied successfully to have the term banned in Mercosur and Unasur countries. Note that in each case the use of the term Islas Falkland can be supported by cites per WP:V and WP:RS

Marhsall has suggested a quid pro quo ie don't mention Islas Falkland and we won't have to mention Malvinas Islands See and  for example. Despite acknowledging it is a term used in the Spanish language eg, I find the rationale for excluding it from wikipedia at odds with the policy of WP:NOTCENSORED.

I also note that Marshall did not have the courtesy to note this discussion at Talk:Falkland Islands as he would normally be expected to do. He is lobbying hard for you to support his position, without giving full information as to what has provoked the discussion. He makes an extraordinary claim, which does rather require extraordinary proof; something he is unable to provide. Wee Curry Monster talk 13:20, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


 * The Gods must be crazy. In your first paragraph you clearly state that the term "Malvinas Islands" has usage in the English language. It doesn't matter whether it is used by fringe groups or my grandmother's knitting association. If "Malvinas Islands" is used in the English language as a valid alternative name for the Falkland Islands, it is therefore an English term and that requires no citation (Common knowledge is not something to be cited).
 * Also, the Language Reference Desk only deals with, you guessed it (well, probably not), language. If you have any other issues to handle, please take it to the appropiate noticeboards.-- MarshalN20 | T a l k 13:47, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


 * That isn't what you were arguing though. You argued that Malvinas Islands (as opposed to constructions such as Falklands/Malvinas Islands or Falklands (Malvinas) Islands) was used as a standard English-language term in a modern context by a significant minority of English-language sources (you claimed one of Malvinas Islands for every ten of Falkland Islands) "simply as an alternate name to the territory, with no political intent".  We can verify that as your position as of three days ago here.  The only source provided for this claim being the Google Books search above, which doesn't verify any of those points.  Since then you have outright refused to provide any cite that would suggest that the name belongs in the article.


 * Now, I always figured the reference desk was for questions not about article changes, but for more general questions about stuff, but this point is as much a language issue as your original question, and I believe that it has been answered quite clearly in the negative: Malvinas Islands does not enjoy such status. Pfainuk talk 18:11, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Anyone with a British library card can access references to the use of the term as follows:

 * ...sovereignty over the Malvinas islands, reflects the spirit of the Argentinian
 * ..."To the Fallen in the Malvinas Islands and South Atlantic",
 * ...Centre of Ex-combatants of the Malvinas Islands, said his group was a stooge of
 * ...to the mine situation in the Falkland (Malvinas) Islands. May I reaffirm


 * ...he supported Argentina's claim to the Malvinas islands during the Falklands war,
 * ...his right arm, and a silhouette of the Malvinas Islands signal he is one of the
 * ...statement that British aircraft "based on the Malvinas islands flew over various
 * ...normally lives off the Falklands/Malvinas Islands in 5,000 metres of sea. Mr
 * ... The sense of threat surrounding the Malvinas islands, regained from the
 * ...our claims on the Malvinas islands are along fully peaceful paths.' Mr Blair
 * ...Argentina to solve the 'Malvinas Islands' dispute peacefully. Amid increasing
 * ...would want to hang on to the God-forsaken Malvinas islands? Well, Margaret
 * ...big screen. Sovereignty of the Malvinas islands, as they are known in Argentina,
 * ...said that our claims over the Malvinas Islands are being pursued along a fully
 * ...British occupation of the Malvinas Islands, a territory of Patagonia".
 * ...government return the Malvinas islands to the Argentinian people." Later,
 * ...his forces to seize the Malvinas Islands. Then head of Argentina's military
 * ...opinion poll conducted in the Malvinas Islands (reports, November 3 and 4) calls
 * ...in the waters around the disputed Falkland/Malvinas Islands. Credit: --(AFP)
 * ...invaded what it considers its Malvinas islands in 82 and got a bloody nose from
 * ...election? Football? The Malvinas islands? No: crime. As passengers are
 * ...and the Falklands/ Malvinas Islands, and society and development in Latin
 * ...Kingdom is illegally promoting in the Malvinas Islands. "The Argentine
 * ..."We have said that our claims over the Malvinas Islands are being pursued along
 * ...which refers to the islands as the Malvinas Islands, calls for exploring "all
 * ...called the Malvinas Islands. Mr Keogh is anti-Irish and a daft Englishman
 * ...once again our sovereign right over the Malvinas Islands". For Argentinians,
 * ...Falkland/Malvinas Islands, just weeks after my posting to Argentina for the
 * ...the Falkland (or Malvinas) Islands, which has been reignited by the arrival of
 * ...over the Malvinas Islands." Desire said drilling was expected to take about
 * ...British military base in the Malvinas islands, whose operating capacity extends
 * ...have said our claims for the Malvinas Islands are along fully peaceful paths,"
 * ...stand against the "usurpers" of the Malvinas islands is itself a reminder of
 * ..."we will see the Argentine flag flying in the (Malvinas) islands". Our own
 * ...forums over the Falkland (Malvinas) islands issue. "The rights of Argentina over
 * ...prolonged occupation of the Malvinas Islands (the Argentine name for the
 * ...post-Falklands. 'Our Malvinas Islands are doing well,' came the frosty reply.
 * ...called the Malvinas Islands. Mr Keogh is anti-Irish and a daft Englishman
 * ...once again our sovereign right over the Malvinas Islands". For Argentinians,
 * ...Falkland/Malvinas Islands, just weeks after my posting to Argentina for the
 * ...the Falkland (or Malvinas) Islands, which has been reignited by the arrival of
 * ...over the Malvinas Islands." Desire said drilling was expected to take about
 * ...British military base in the Malvinas islands, whose operating capacity extends
 * ...have said our claims for the Malvinas Islands are along fully peaceful paths,"
 * ...stand against the "usurpers" of the Malvinas islands is itself a reminder of
 * ..."we will see the Argentine flag flying in the (Malvinas) islands". Our own
 * ...forums over the Falkland (Malvinas) islands issue. "The rights of Argentina over
 * ...prolonged occupation of the Malvinas Islands (the Argentine name for the
 * ...catchment area (from the Malvinas islands to Canada, inclusive). One week it's
 * ...of this call, which is the Malvinas Islands . . . Queen: I think we'll
 * ...post-Falklands. 'Our Malvinas Islands are doing well,' came the frosty reply.


 * ...junta over the Falkland/Malvinas islands two years earlier. By branding


 * Tom Pippens (talk) 18:51, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Tom, we note above that Argentines translate Islas Malvinas incorrectly into English as the Malvinas Islands. What do you hope to achieve with a whole load of irrelevant quotes proving the point again?  20:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Originally I wanted to form my own opinion; now I wish to understand how μηδείς can hold the view expressed below. Tom Pippens (talk) 20:13, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * But all those examples are direct quotes of Argentine people, that merely reinforced his point and mine. So?  Wee Curry Monster talk 20:19, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Some certainly are. Others use Falklands (Malvinas) style constructions (whereas the claims here relate to Malvinas Islands as a standalone term).  But all in all, I'd say that it is difficult to draw any useful conclusions from any of these quotes given the lack of context.  As such I don't see that such a list demonstrates anything at all. Pfainuk talk 20:26, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * My opinion is that there are indeed many direct direct quotes of Argentine people included. If the Argentine point of view is to be excluded so be it. But the author of many of the above are not Argentines. I am also advertising the availabilty of the local library as a wonderful resource...context can be provided to either side as required.   Tom Pippens (talk) 20:37, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Where did anyone say the Argentine POV was to be excluded please? Wee Curry Monster talk 20:47, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Dunno Tom Pippens (talk) 21:09, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * So, we're left wondering what your point was? Wee Curry Monster talk 21:18, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * We? Tom Pippens (talk) 21:20, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Seriously though I was addressing a point made by User:MarshalN20; I'm beginning to feel that this issue is under the ownership of the "we" Tom Pippens (talk) 21:29, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * You brought up the false premise of the "Argentine POV" being excluded, where is it please for the second time of asking? And which point of Marshall's are you addressing? Wee Curry Monster talk 07:53, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * ...er if you trawl back through the comments and be honest with us, you will see that I did not. Tom Pippens (talk) 08:10, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

I have to concur fully and agree strongly with Wee Curry Monster. Malvinas Islands is only used in Argentine English-Language publications and as WCM notes is a cause among the left. Google Books makes this obvious as does the source I quoted above. Use of the term in the lead is undue weight tending to fringe. Only in the body as a translation (whose necessity I sorely doubt) would the term be acceptable. μηδείς (talk) 19:43, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I have to agree with Medeis. If I read Malvinas Islands in any document, I'd naturally assume that it is either a translation of an Argentine document, or that it is making a political point.    D b f i r s   22:10, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The discussion here has been diverted from the main question as to whether "Malvinas Islands" is an English term or not. All of you, regardless of your other opinions, keep stating that the term is used in the English language. Yet, despite this, the topic then gets twisted into a subject which should be handled either in the RSN, NPOV noticeboard, or some other place. Please focus on the purpose of the Language Reference Desk.-- MarshalN20 | T a l k 23:20, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * No, the discussion is very much focused now on the relevant question you were posing in Talk:Falkland Islands. You need to provide a supporting cite for your claim. Wee Curry Monster talk 07:53, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Ref THE SOUTH PACIFIC STATES. The Morning Chronicle April 14, 1857: Of the crew sixteen men were saved by the Cuba and taken to the Malvinas islands Tom Pippens (talk) 08:38, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Ref WEST INDIA AND PAIFIC. Daily News June 27, 1860: ''Letters received in Valparaiso, by way of Montevideo from Stanley Bay (Malvinas Islands), dated March 17, state that the American ship Sea Ranger, from Liverpool to California, was wrecked 120 miles from that place - crew and part of the cargo saved. Tom Pippens (talk) 08:51, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Ref New from the Pacific The Standard 30 August 1861: The captain of the British barque Precursor reports that the British Ship Santiago had a collision with another vessel, and was obliged to bear up for the Malvinas islands to repair. Tom Pippens (talk) 09:12, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Ref http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=zPj7UmZZEjgC&pg=PA7&dq=Malvinas+islands&hl=en&ei=1PKCTveKFY648gP0mPUJ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CE4Q6AEwBg#v=onepage&q&f=false
 * Ref http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=agfvVQnBu9MC&pg=PA317&dq=Malvinas+islands&hl=en&ei=1PKCTveKFY648gP0mPUJ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CFQQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=Malvinas%20islands&f=false
 * Ref (the UN year book) http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=MLAxV20gktQC&pg=PA1134&dq=%22Malvinas+islands%22&hl=en&ei=PPOCTp_bN8698gOm2OQJ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC8Q6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q=%22Malvinas%20islands%22&f=false
 * Ref http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=T1tqu3Xc9TAC&pg=PA100&dq=%22Malvinas+islands%22&hl=en&ei=PPOCTp_bN8698gOm2OQJ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CDUQ6AEwATgK#v=onepage&q=%22Malvinas%20islands%22&f=false
 * So its clear that the term Malvinas Islands is used as a tanslation of Islas Malvinas.Slatersteven (talk) 10:14, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Summing up: "Malvinas Islands" is used in English translations of material from Spanish sources. The only "common name" in English is "Falkland Isalnds." Simlarly, the Spanish translation is "Islas Falklands" for all English language sources. The Munich example is spot on, and there are many other examples - some of which have even been to ArbCom in the past. In this case, best usage would indicate using "Falklands" for all English references, and Malouines or Malvinas for French or Spanish sources which specifically used those words. This Wikipedia happens to be in English, and so the English term has place of honour. This, by the way, appears to be the strong consensus here, and should lay this contretemps to rest. Cheers. Collect (talk) 12:31, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * A slight correction, Islas Malvinas is the predominant Spanish term by some margin, Islas Falklands has fringe use in Spanish; particularly in Chile. And what started this off was the discussion whether it was worth including as a minor term in Spanish.  It probably wouldn't be but makes it slightly notable are the efforts of the Argentine Government to have use of the term Islas Falkland banned in Mercosur and Unasur. Wee Curry Monster talk 12:52, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Summing up 2: Reference desk/Language is meant to answer language questions. Never before have any of my questions here gotten so distorted and taken off-topic. "Malvinas Islands" is established as a valid English term? The question remains floating in the air. All agree that it's a valid translation, but apparently (according to some of the editors) translations are not "valid English words". Therefore, according to such a conclusion, using the term "Malvinas Islands" is the same as using gibberish (since, after all, it has no "valid" language). The conclusion is that there was no answer to this question, instead everyone jumped into the boat without a clue as to what the original question actually required as an answer. Thanks go to those few people that actually did respond to the question. Everyone else...Best regards.-- MarshalN20 | T a l k 20:22, 28 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I think were were all aware that the question was loaded, and was not asked as a simple enquiry. The correct place for discussions on the validity of a term in an article is the talk page of that article.  "Falkland Islands" is the established English term, but obviously any sequence of words in the English language can convey meaning.    D b f i r s   20:26, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The question wasn't "loaded" with anything. Simply answering "no it's not a valid English term because ..." or viceversa would not have changed the course of the discussion. I still would have needed to provide more sources to demonstrate the relevance of its usage. Nobody is contesting the name "Falkland Islands", and your mention of that simply further shows you don't understand the purpose of the question. Good day.-- MarshalN20 | T a l k 15:46, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

One's "calling" ?
The word "calling" can mean one's chosen profession. Was the word "name" ever used the same way? LordGorval (talk) 20:39, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Do you lean literally substituting the word "name" for the word "calling"?


 * I'm finding this list of possible terms that in some usages could substitute for "calling":


 * chosen profession, art, business, career, craft, day gig, do*, dodge*, employment, gig, go*, handicraft, hang*, life's work, lifework, line, mission, métier, nine-to-five, occupation, play, province, pursuit, racket, rat race, slot, swindle*, trade, vocation, walk of life, work. Bus stop (talk) 20:43, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm surprised the word 'job' is not listed. --   Jack of Oz   [your turn]  21:01, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps because a job is something you do when you'd rather be doing something else? --  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   21:11, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I distinguish "job" from "profession" as being more specific. My profession might be computer science, but my job (i.e. what they're paying me to do) might be programming or analysis or support, for example. ←baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:50, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, literally substituting the word "name" for the word "calling". As in: That would be your name. Meaning: that would be your calling (your chosen profession in life). Was it used this way perhaps centuries before or maybe in England? LordGorval (talk) 21:09, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * JackofOz. A "job" as opposed to a career or vocation has the implication that it is not your calling, but something you just do for the money. -- Q Chris (talk) 21:13, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Must be a down under thing, then. Job can mean something temporary, sure; I am associated with an organisation that revels in the name Job Services Australia, and many of the placements we help our clients secure are decidedly temporary in nature, or something they're prepared to do for a while until something more fulfilling comes along.
 * On the other hand, strangers who meet at social occasions often ask "What's your job?" as a way of getting to know each other. There is no general assumption that they're doing anything temporary.  Anyone who responds with "I don't have a job; I have a career/profession/calling" would be roundly condemned for the wanker they are.  --   Jack of Oz   [your turn]  21:25, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Another example of a possible usage: We will speak to every man in this name. Meaning: We will speak to every man in this calling. Another way of saying: We will speak to every man of this lifetime profession. LordGorval (talk) 21:16, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * A quick browse through some online references backs up my thought that originally a "calling" was something much more than a job. It was something someone was called to do, and the call was thought to have come from God. All the priestly professions (another word with a religious beginning) were callings (nuns, monks) etc. Now, it means any profession to which one has a strong attachment, either by way of investment (money and/or time) or interest. So, one is formally "called" to the Bar. (One may also be "called" to the bar, but I have my doubts that there is anything divine about it.) Medicine and teaching are also considered callings, but I wouldn't have thought to use it of a computer analyst, for example, or an engineer, however worthy their work and however much they love it. I wouldn't ever substitute "name" for "calling" and don't have an recollection of ever seeing it be used that way even in early writings in English. Bielle (talk) 21:30, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * As for your immediately preceding example, I would never understand "We will speak to every man in this name" to mean either of the examples you show. In fact, the sentence means nothing to me at all as it stands. Bielle (talk) 21:34, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with this Bielle, except that I think "called to the bar" is a different expression, since it refers to the point or process by which one becomes a barrister, not to practicing as a barrister. ---ColinFine (talk) 23:11, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Wait... I thought that still is the main definition of the word? It certainly still is in our English, anyway. A 'calling' implies divine inspiration, and is most often used for people who decide to become priests or nuns.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   01:11, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * But not (specifically) barristers. The "call to the bar" was a call by those in authority to speak before the court, see Call to the Bar. Outwith this specific case one's "calling" is pretty much equivalent to one's vocation (which, not by coincidence, comes from the Latin verb "to call"). Tonywalton Talk 01:42, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Oh not what I meant. I agree that "called to the bar" is a rather different phrase altogether of course (we don't actually use it even, we use the US "admitted to the bar"). But isn't "calling" used for priestly professions anymore out there? I mean, preferentially, as opposed to everyday jobs? Out here "calling" refers not to something chosen voluntarily, but something 'pre'-chosen (we're a rather fatalistic lot, lol) i.e. Something you were meant to do, not something you want to do, although the latter usually accompanies the former. Hmmm... it might be a Roman Catholic thing.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   02:29, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I hear 'calling' or 'vocation' used only really for the sort of jobs that nuns, monks and priests used to fill for free: so I hear it used to refer to teaching and nursing, but not engineering. Jobs centred on helping others, with traditionally fairly low pay despite the usual expectation of the workers being educated. The sort of job that you do not because you want to get rich, but because you genuinely feel 'called' to it (which isn't really a predestination thing as much as there being somewhere you'd do the most good), just like the religous vocations of Holy Orders, Religious Life, Marriage, etc. Christus vocat te and all that. 86.162.71.40 (talk) 14:53, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * The closest I can find are occupational names (trade names). e.g. A Saxon would say:


 * Min nama is Sigbert þa sceáphyrde.


 * "My name is Sigbert the shepherd."


 * He's not technically saying that's his calling, but by saying his complete name, including the name he had adopted (the occupational name), he's basically saying 'This is my [personal name], and this is what I [choose to] do.'--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   21:55, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

No, the word name has always meant name (or word in the sense of noun). The reconstructed Proto-Indo-European root has the same meaning and it has cognates in the Proto-Uralic  language as well as other Uralo-Siberian languages. Going back that far there was no differentiated 'career' other than man, woman, or shaman. μηδείς (talk) 01:33, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. I wasn't aware of that claimed Uralic cognate. It looks convincing at first sight - until you notice that the I-E root is complex, containing the widespread neuter suffix '-mṇ'. So if the Uralic root is cognate either it is a borrowing from IE, or that suffix must also occur in Uralic. --ColinFine (talk) 23:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Well,
 * Michael Fortescue gives Uralic, Yukaghir, Eskimo-Aleut and Chukchi-Kamchatkan.
 * Joseph Greenberg gives Indo-European, Uralic and Yukaghir.
 * Sergei Starostin gives PIE, Altaic, Uralic, PCK and a link to Afroasiatic under "Borean"
 * The Altaic link would seem to go better with Latin numen or Finnish Jumala than nomen assuming the Latin words are not deep congeners. (To name, to pray and to call and magic being semantically related.)  The PIE word need not be analyzed as having an -mn suffix (to what would be a CV root) but could be a heteroclitic -n.  Note that nime and wete are given as Uralic cognates of name and water and both lack the final consonant and neither form could have been borrowed into Urallic from Indo-Iranian.  The laryngeal prefix strikes me as more problematic than the -n suffix, yet a possible laryngeal is reconstructed by some for Uralic.  And the whole laryngeal theory is based on internal reconstruction-external comparisons with PIE's relatives should throw light on the matter.
 * μηδείς (talk) 18:43, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

places one has visited, in German
What's the most appropriate way in German to say where you have been on holiday? Would you say, I have visited...(list of places), or I have been to.... or I have holidayed in... What would the translations be for those phrases? 82.71.20.194 (talk) 21:22, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * And how would I say something simple like, "I have never been to Germany." Google Translate is saying "Ich habe noch nie in Deutschland gewesen" which seems twisted.  How would a native say it?  82.71.20.194 (talk) 21:57, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * If you don't know German well, you might be better off communicating those facts in English. ←baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:24, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Is it a trick question? Surely a German native would never say "I have never been to Germany".  AJ  Cham  23:42, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * They might be Austrian, or German-speaking Swiss... Tonywalton Talk 00:33, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * That's a good one. :) Presumably a German might say, "I have never been to [name of country]", and then one could substitute Deutschland - assuming that's a valid assumption about the language? ←baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:13, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sounds a bit like a "was ich auf Uralub tat" Hausarbeitfrage. You could say "Ich besuchte Berlin, Dortmund, Garmisch-Partenkirken und eine kleine Kneipe in Hamburg", ("I visited"), "Ich bin in Berlin ... [usw] gewesen", and so on (I've been in...). Or "ich war in Berlin ..." ("I was in") or "ich fuhr nach Dortmund" (I drove to Dortmund). Like your examples in English, none is more "appropriate" than another. As for Google, it seems to have forgotten that "sein" takes "sein" in the perfect tense, so "ich bin nie in Deutschland gewesen" or perhaps "ich war nie in Deutschland". I'm now waiting for a native German speaker to come and shoot me down in flames. Tonywalton Talk 00:33, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Maybe, ,,Ich habe Deutschland nie besucht" for I've never visited Germany I think. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie &#124; Say Shalom! 27 Elul 5771 00:19, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * On the first one, it depends on how you go to the country and what the Country's gender is. So let's say,,Ich bin zum/zur [Land] gefloggen/gefahren." Zum is for male and neuter and Zur is female and floggen (past of fly); fahren (to travel via vehicle other than plane). Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie &#124; Say Shalom! 27 Elul 5771 00:28, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * You would never say "ich bin zum Deutschland gefahren". It's always "ich bin nach Deutschland gefahren". It only gets tricky with countries like "die Ukraine" where I guess you would say "Ich bin in die Ukraine gefahren". Also, there's no such thing as "gefloggen" - the correct spelling is "geflogen". Tonywalton's examples seem correct, but I'm not native either. ElMa-sa (talk) 08:57, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Tonywalton's examples are indeed correct, except that "besuchte" sounds a bit stilted (though entirely possible). One would say "Ich war in Berlin, Dortmund, Garmisch-Partenkirchen und in einer kleinen Kneipe in Hamburg." and "Ich war noch nie in Deutschland." --Wrongfilter (talk) 09:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * If anyone still reads this: While "besuchen" does literally translate to "visit", it is rather limited to people. To me as a native speaker, "besuchen" sounds a bit awkward or stilted when talking about place names. When talking about places you have(n't) been to, simply use the past tense of "sein" (literally "be"), for example "Gestern war ich in Berlin", "Ich war noch nie in England" etc. 95.89.200.137 (talk) 01:46, 27 September 2011 (UTC)