Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2012 June 21

= June 21 =

Faroese lyric translation?
Is there anyone here who knows Faroese? If so, could you translate these lines from the Týr song Lord of Lies, which is about Loki from Norse mythology. I'm aware of its general thrust: about the earth shaking and Loki breaking his bonds, but I'd very grateful for a native translation.

Skelvur jørðin øll og rapa bjørg og fjøll Brýtur hav um lond og slitena so øll bond

Thanks in advance. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 01:32, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * You can figure most of it out using google translate and trying Icelandic and Danish:


 * from Icelandic gives:


 * Skelvur rapa all the earth and rocks and mountains
 * Breaks hav countries and so slitena All bond


 * From Danish gives:


 * Skelvur jørðin øll and rapa Bjorg and fjøll
 * Brýtur ocean um Lond and slitena sow øll peasant


 * Which implies to me a rough translation:


 * Skelvur [breaks/ravishes?] all the earth and rocks and mountains
 * Breaks the sea [around/and?] the land and so frees all peasants


 * μηδείς (talk) 03:05, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * That seems like a reasonable translation with what I can glean from my knowledge of Swedish (i.e. not much). However, in the case of Týr lyrics, it looks like you'll get a much better answer by asking at the Týr forum language board. I didn't actually find a translation for the line you asked about, but there seem to be plenty of helpful native Faroese speakers there who can answer you. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 06:53, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Mike. I had a look there before asking here, but the problem is that there seems to be an unwritten site policy of "If you want lyrics translations, buy the album and you'll find them on the sleeve". I found a short and not entirely conclusive discussion of "Skelvur jørðin øll". Gordonofcartoon (talk) 10:55, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

I know Danish but not Faroese. I read the lines like this. Skelvur (Shake) jørðin øll (all earth) og (and) rapa (crush) bjørg (mountain) og (and) fjøll (hill). Brýtur (Break) hav (sea) um (onto) lond (land) og (and) slitena (tear apart) so (also) øll (all) bond (ties). Bo Jacoby (talk) 08:41, 21 June 2012 (UTC).
 * That's my reading of it too, from knowing a moderate amount of Swedish and German, and having some passing familiarity with Danish, Icelandic, and Norse-influenced varieties of English. I'd versify it something like this:


 * He shakes all the earth and crushes peak and fell;
 * Breaks the sea round the land and sunders every bond.


 * (I can't reproduce the rhyme-scheme of the original without significantly more time and coffee.) AlexTiefling (talk) 09:11, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Ask User:EileenSanda. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 09:04, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

"The court requested the two sides to attempt to settle the matter."
"The court requested the two sides to attempt to settle the matter."

I'm not asking if there's a more elegant way to say this (there is). I'm asking: is the above grammatically correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.218.9.50 (talk) 01:52, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Don't see any big problem with it... AnonMoos (talk) 02:14, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "I request you to do something" sounds quite odd. One requests things in the accusative case.  One requests that people, in the nominative case, do things.  It should be a noun in the nominative wth the subjunctive verb, not an accusative noun with the infinitive:  "The court requested that the two sides attempt to settle the matter."  I'd definitely mark it wrong in a prescriptive setting.  I understand Britons don't get the subjunctive, though, so they might judge differently.  μηδείς (talk) 02:17, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * How is this different from I asked John to close the door? You can of course say I asked that John close the door, but there's nothing wrong with the former form (and it's certainly more usual in anything but the very highest registers). --Trovatore (talk) 02:23, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * PS, "I asked John to close the door" means you expected he heard you. "I asked that John close the door" means you made a general request, perhaps to a committee, that he be the door closer. μηδείς (talk) 03:10, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Request and ask are not the same in the way they govern objects. You can request a book.  It's not the same as asking a book.  They govern different cases. μηδείς (talk) 02:26, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Although you can {request|ask} a favor. —Tamfang (talk) 02:34, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * It's faux-elegant. For reasons already stated, The court asked would be better grammar. —Tamfang (talk) 02:33, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your excellent answers.76.218.9.50 (talk) 02:47, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

And μηδείς ... I'm American, so your objection applies. Thanks again.76.218.9.50 (talk) 02:53, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Hehe. I have to assume that educated Britons can at least understand us Americans when we use the subjunctive, if not produce it themselves, in the same way that we educated Americans can appreciate Shakespeare, if not improvise Elizabethan English. μηδείς (talk) 03:13, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Were I to tell you that some of us in the UK still use the subjunctive, your assumption would be confirmed.   D b f i r s   07:11, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * God bless you Sir, or Madam. μηδείς (talk) 22:05, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * There really isn't one unified "subjunctive mood" in modern English, but rather various different surviving fragments and relics of the old subjunctive, each of which is now a somewhat separate construction. The particular "subjunctive" construction which is more common in the U.S. than in the U.K. is the lack of "-s" ending in 3rd person present-tense forms (and invariant present-tense finite "be" in all persons and in numbers) in "I demand that he stop breaking the law" or "I insist that he be put in prison" etc. (as opposed to "I heard that he has stopped breaking the law" or "I know that he is in prison" etc.).  Other surviving subjunctive constructions are roughly as common in the U.K. as in the U.S., as far as I know... AnonMoos (talk) 20:42, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Is your point, if I understand it correctly, to point out that the difference between the subjunctive and the indicative is not marked in every person and tense? μηδείς (talk) 22:01, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * PS, here's a particularly painful unuse of the subjunctive to American ears: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science#TV_with_a_particular_type_of_EPG μηδείς (talk) 22:04, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * There's another frequently seen example of misuse of the subjunctive: that of using it in both parts of an "if ..., (then) ..." construction, when it should apply only in the latter part.
 * Example: "If you would have told me he was already here, I wouldn't have wasted time calling him". The first part ought to be "If you had told me he was already here...".
 * Americanites are no slouches when it comes to this, but I'm sure they're not the only ones. Australians are prone to saying "If you had have told me ....".  --  ♬  Jack of Oz  ♬  [your turn]  23:25, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * If you would have is a bit different from if you had. If you had is, in and of itself, a neutral counterfactual.  If you would have is generally a reproach.  Think of would as the past tense of will, and will in the sense of wish/choose to. --Trovatore (talk) 23:33, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Jack is correct. The conditional should be used after the subjunctive, which is the counterfactual condition that conditions the conditional.  It is often used twice in a row by people who have a feeling they shouldn't be using the present indicative, but aren't quite so used to the mental exercise.  Kind of like using the high beams just because it is after dark.  Trovatore has given a technically possible rationalization, since would could be taken as the subjunctive of will if it is used as a full verb, meaning to wish, not an auxiliary.  But that's giving far too much credit.  The supposed indicative "if you will have told me" is not something I have ever heard. μηδείς (talk) 00:01, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Further, "If you would have" is not universally recognised as a proper formulation. In many places it's considered a prescriptive error.  Not all places, obviously.  Reproach can be achieved by the use of the appropriate voice tone when speaking, or using "only" in writing: "If only you'd told me was here ...", or both.  "Only" wouldn't fit if "would" were part of the equation ("If only you would've told me he was here ..." - nah). --  ♬  Jack of Oz  ♬  [your turn]  00:08, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Similar to the pattern Jack mentions: "I would have liked to have seen that." —Tamfang (talk) 00:31, 25 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Related is "I would have thought that XYZ would have been the case", when what they actually mean is "I think that XYZ is/was the case". --  ♬  Jack of Oz  ♬  [your turn]  18:43, 26 June 2012 (UTC)


 * When I say "I would have thought", there's an implied "until I got this new info". —Tamfang (talk) 21:21, 26 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Medeis -- my point is exactly what I said previously: There are a number of modern relics of the old historical subjunctive (e.g. "so be it", "if I were", "if he were" etc.) which are probably used more or less similarly in the U.S. and U.K., but one particular relic of the historical subjunctive (as explained previously) is more commonly used in the U.S. than in the U.K.  There is no subjunctive in modern English in terms of a unified grammatical/morphological verb conjugation -- there are only scattered relics and remnants of the old historical subjunctive, and each such modern remnant is a somewhat different construction within the synchronic grammar of modern English. AnonMoos (talk) 23:49, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * That is like calling the third person singular a scattered relic of tense marking. Fine, if that's the terminology you want to use.  And you can also say there are set phrases that use the subjunctive such as so be it.  But there's nothing relict about the regular use of the present subjunctive in examples like "I insist he show up on time."  That is simply regular use of the mood, not a relic.  Nor can the other regular forms of the indicative simply be substituted for the reqular present subjunctive.  One can say, "I insist you pay me immediately." But not, "I insist you are paying me immediately."  μηδείς (talk) 00:01, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Each of the so-called "subjunctive" constructions in modern English covers only a rather small and semi-obscure corner of modern English grammar, and there's really nothing unifying them in terms of modern English itself. It's only our historical knowledge which enables us to know that "If I were" and "I insist that he come" have a common origin -- someone studying the modern language only, without access to historical knowledge, would not be able to connect the two constructions, since they have no particular similarity in terms of modern English.  Furthermore, "If I were" is preserved in Britain much more than "I insist that he come", which is evidence that these are two rather separate and disconnected constructions in the modern language... AnonMoos (talk) 00:27, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * But since when has the ability to do internal reconstruction been a prerequisite for linguistic competence?  There is nothing semi-obscure to the North-American speaker about the present subjunctive.  It is entirely regular: use the infinitive form without "to".  "I demand he see me immediately!"  "I insist she not be late!"  But never, *"I demand he is seeing me immediately!" nor *"I insist she isn't being late!"  You are conflating loss of the distinction by certain speakers with "modern" English grammar.  One might as well insist that if an American doesn't say "What's up bruva?" he's not speaking modern English but using a semi-obscure dialect. μηδείς (talk) 03:31, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * You're absolutely correct that the construction is perfectly productive in American English (and the use of the "infinitive"-appearing verb form there is mandatory for correct standard American English) -- though it's hardly the most commonly-used construction, and there are many ways to rephrase any sentence to avoid the construction. HOWEVER the connection between the "if I were" construction and the "I demand that he see me immediately" construction is historical only -- there's no way that anyone would group the two together without specific historical knowledge of non-modern English... AnonMoos (talk) 10:45, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * 2012 LinkedIn hack (version of 03:31, 20 June 2012), in the current set of WP:DYK articles listed on the Main Page, contains the following statement.
 * LinkedIn requested its users to immediately change their passwords.
 * —Wavelength (talk) 00:12, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Heh. Kind of like "She requested her vacation days to immediately schedule the surgery"? From whom did LinkedIn immediately request its users? μηδείς (talk) 00:20, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Name of Guinea-Bissau
What is the name of Guinea-Bissau in Guinea-Bissau Creole and in French? Please leave me a note on my talk page if you know. Thanks, Liam987  (talk)  16:14, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Guinée-Bissau or Guinée-Bissao in French. I can't be bothered to post this on your talk page. 92.80.52.54 (talk) 17:18, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * We don't do that, as a matter of policy and system architecture. Any questions asked here will be answered here.  --  ♬  Jack of Oz  ♬  [your turn]  19:19, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * What a wonderful phrase is "system architecture" - I shall save that to impress my friends with ;-) Alansplodge (talk) 21:12, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I'd be surprised if it's an unprecedented coinage, but I did just come up with it myself.
 * Whoa, we have Systems architecture and Systems architect. Nothing new under the sun. --  ♬  Jack of Oz  ♬  [your turn]  21:18, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * It's at least ten years since I read that RIBA were complaining vocally about how the IT world had hijacked the word "architect". --ColinFine (talk) 00:02, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Maybe they should have put their complaint in writing. --  ♬  Jack of Oz  ♬  [your turn]  00:10, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the helpful comments, does anyone know the answer to my question? Liam987  (talk)  15:51, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * You asked 2 questions, one of which was answered straight away. --  ♬  Jack of Oz  ♬  [your turn]  20:43, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * In Creole it might simply be the same as the name of the country in Portuguese, i.e. 'Guiné-Bissau', or simply 'Guiné' as the language (in Portuguese) is called 'crioulo da Guiné'. V85 (talk) 20:58, 23 June 2012 (UTC)