Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2013 May 9

= May 9 =

definition of eCPD
can you provide a definition of the English term eCPD used by various membership bodies all over the world41.0.147.162 (talk) 11:19, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I assume "CPD" refers to continuing professional development (that is, a requirement to keep oneself updated by attending courses and other forms of professional training), and the e- prefix probably means that the CPD is delivered online. — SMUconlaw (talk) 11:23, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Checking grammar
For a school project I've got to make a website concerning the history of the 16th century. Since English isn't my mother tongue I was wondering whether someone could check my grammar and vocabulary. Or is there maybe an external site where I could post this question. It concerns (i'm not up to date with the english wiki regulations so please remove the link if not confirm your policies) this site Yours sincerely --Larsnl (talk) 16:04, 9 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I think most users on this page would be happy to check individual points. I'd be quite happy to look the whole thing over myself if I get the time; how long do we have before the work is due? Your English appears quite clear so far. If you don't mind my asking, what is your mother tongue? Knowing this may help us address any unusual quirks of grammar or vocabulary. Thanks! AlexTiefling (talk) 16:07, 9 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Alex, thanks for your quick reply the hand-in date is just in a few weeks time. And the project isn't totally finished yet (most pages, expect for two are finished), might it be useful to post a message on your talkpage when i'm finished? My mother tongue is Dutch. Thx so far --Larsnl (talk) 16:14, 9 May 2013 (UTC)


 * (after ec) OK, some initial observations, starting with the home page:


 * "Welcome to this website", rather than "Welcome on this website", would be clearer English. Additionally, you should either start a new sentence right after that, or replace "on this site you can..." with "where you can...". ("on which you can..." would be regarded by some as more technically correct, but "where" is clearer in practice.)


 * A few words seem to have gone untranslated from Dutch (which is clearly your mother tongue). Firstly, "De Rooy". If this is a proper name, leave it like that, but provide an explanation (a gloss) for users who may not know what it means. Otherwise, translate it. Further down you have "tijdvakken".


 * "All the key aspects that are appointed by the Rooy to be characterizing for this site are taken into account." - This is very unclear. Did you use machine translation, such as Google Translate, to produce it? I can't even begin to produce a meaningful translation. It may be that this says something about your course requirements. I might suggest putting course-specific details on an 'about' page, rather than on the main page.


 * "The main focus of this site is at the Netherlands." - Either use 'on' instead of 'at', or use no preposition here.


 * "human- and world-view" - "World-view" is a known English compound, like the German Weltanschauung, but "human-view" isn't.


 * "sciene" - should be "science"


 * "Karel V" is these days usually called Charles V in English.


 * What does "De Beeldenstorm" mean? There may be a good English analogue.


 * Willem van Oranje is usually called William the Silent in English. ("William of Orange" to the English usually means William III, Stadholder and King of England and Scotland, unless the context is the Battle of Waterloo, at which a different Prince of Orange put in an appearance.)


 * On a note of web design, you'd do better to put your navigation widget at the top, not the bottom, and to provide clearer links to all the pages, not just the one that you want the users to read 'next'.


 * I am very interested in the subject matter of your website, so I'll be sure to keep checking back and trying to help where I can. And yes, if you don't hear from me for a bit, please do put a reminder on my talk page. Thanks! AlexTiefling (talk) 16:19, 9 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Tijdvakken" should probably be translated into English (time periods, eras) rather than referenced in Dutch. And as Alex points out, you need to fully explain De Rooy; it may be obvious to Dutch readers that it's historian Piet De Rooy, and that the eras are those from Een canon van het Nederlandse verleden (or whichever text you're using), but it won't be obvious to most people who read English. - Nunh-huh 23:47, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * As readable on the talk page of AlexTiefling, i've made some adjustments and I hope that with this explanation it's more clear who de Rooy is for readers who aren't familiar with him. Furthermore I don't translate the Dutch terms (eigennamen, don't know the translation) because the teacher who will assess this is also a native Dutch and in class we also just use the Dutch names. --Larsnl (talk) 09:35, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Chinese penchant for numbering things
Not quite sure whether this belongs in /Language or /Humanities, but I was wondering if someone could explain something about Chinese culture for me. I've noticed in a great many articles connected to China and Chinese culture there is a common theme for important terms to be numbered, usually in the format "The [number] [noun phrase]s". These may be specific lists of things or just used purely as a rhetorical device. A few random examples from religion, history or politics: The Hundred Schools of Thought, The Three Kingdoms, The Four Books and Five Classics of Confucianism, Eight Immortals, Three Treasures (Taoism), Three laughs at Tiger Brook, The Five Pecks of Rice Movement, Sun Yat Sen's Three Principles of the People, Hundred Flowers Campaign, Four Olds, The Four Bandits, the Gang of Four (Literally "(the) four man group"?), The Three Links, Deng Xiaoping's Four Modernizations. There's also more contemporary examples from internet culture, such as the Baidu 10 Mythical Creatures joke.

Perhaps this is confirmation bias but as far as I know there is no such recurring rhetorical device in the European languages I am familiar with. Of course every language can number things (barring perhaps languages spoken by remote pre-industrial societies), but the way these phrases are used makes it seem like they are more than just descriptions. Particularly in the case of the political terms there seems to be a purposeful effort to phrase things in this format.

Am I correct in reading this as a distinctly Chinese style? Or maybe it is a relic of translation, and it sounds more natural in the original Chinese? Is it perhaps connected to the use of classifiers in Chinese grammar? I apologize if these questions seems ignorant. I am just curious if anything has been written about this. --EminentCluster (talk) 22:27, 9 May 2013 (UTC)


 * We have Category:Chinese numbered policies. There was also the infamous Khartoum "Three Noes" for a non-Chinese example... AnonMoos (talk) 22:32, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I think the OP could find countless examples in English-language works also. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:39, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yep. HiLo48 (talk) 03:00, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The examples from classical culture might not be peculiarly Chinese, but the lists of behavioural exhortations are a feature of Maoist propaganda. Contrast the slogans of the British government in public information films. "Clunk-click" to remind you to put your seatbelt on, but not "the 5 safety gestures". Itsmejudith (talk) 06:24, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * English (and European culture generally) tends to use trilemmas for political slogans and official instructions. 'Stop, Look, Listen' for pedestrian road safety, for example. AlexTiefling (talk) 07:00, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Think the technical term is Hendiatris... AnonMoos (talk) 09:16, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * (e/c) I was unfamiliar with the term "trilemma". Our article suggests that its meaning is different than the way you're using. Apparently, "A trilemma is a difficult choice from three options, each of which is (or appears) unacceptable or unfavourable." 64.235.97.146 (talk) 14:00, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * That's weird. AnonMoos is right; I do mean hendiatris, not trilemma. My mistake. AlexTiefling (talk) 14:24, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I think it's pretty prevalent in English too. The Ten Commandments, the 13 Treasures of Britain, the Seven Deadly Sins, the Four Alls, the Nine Worthies... AlexTiefling (talk) 07:00, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * It's not just ancient stuff either. Top 40 and G7 come to mind. HiLo48 (talk) 07:23, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, there are lots of numbered lists. But Maoists have a particular penchant for grouping exhortations into such lists. They issue a lot of exhortations. In the 1950s they had to take illiteracy into account; the exhortations had to be memorised like a secular catechism, and knowing how many item were in the list helped with that. Itsmejudith (talk) 07:35, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with what has been said above - it's similar to what religions, governments and schools have been using through the centuries in other countries, except that the practice has dropped off elsewhere because in liberal Western society making people memorise lists no longer serves much useful purpose. It's got to do with postmodernism and a more cynical or critical worldview suspicious of claims to authority, I think, as well as the de-emphasis of rote learning in education.
 * The Communist government has always sought to stamp out "divergent" thought, so that its monopoly on violence achieved through the revolution would extend to a monopoly on thought - this is the underlying philosophy behind the Cultural Revolution. (A "true believer" will tell you that the monopoly on violence and on thought serves a higher purpose, but these days that kind of argument is probably a symptom of doublethink.) As part of that effort, it made sense to group slogans together to make them easier to proclaim and enforce, and also discouraged any critical thinking of the actual content of the slogans (since the slogans are merely referred to, not even actually said out loud). My favourite bit of weird Maoist abbreviation is not actually numbers based - it's the "Denounce Lin/Denounce Kong" campaign - Lin referred to Lin Biao, Mao's former right hand man and anointed heir who had just been killed as a "traitor", while Kong referred to Confucius, who lived in the 5th to 6th century BC. (Mao had criticised both in the same sentence.) There are anecdotal stories of less informed rural participants assuming that Confucius was a present-day "traitor" to the Party just like Lin. Comedy ensues.
 * Of course, things are changing even in China, and today's government is probably much less likely to use such slogans, especially outside the Communist Party's internal purposes. To educated Chinese people they probably appear pretty dated and a bit silly.
 * Things like the "three kingdoms" or the "five dynasties and ten kingdoms" are both a tool for rote learners, and a handy way to label a historical period when a syngle dynastic name is not available or not appropriate. You wouldn't call any of them the "Chinese Civil War" because there were so many of them. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 09:30, 10 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Criticize Lin, Criticize Confucius" appears to fall within the genre of the Four-character idiom... [[Image:SFriendly.gif|20px]]. AnonMoos (talk) 19:16, 10 May 2013 (UTC)


 * It's the eight-fold path for you. :) --   Jack of Oz   [Talk]  20:01, 10 May 2013 (UTC)


 * It still seems to be common in Chinese, where I now live (I'm British). In English translations (written by Chinese people) - especially "official translations" (e.g. at tourist sites), I quite often see sentences like. " consists of five and three ".  The rest of the paragraph usually consists of a list of all the sub-objects, along with a description of each.  I find this way of writing to be particularly painful to read in English.  However, I suspect that this is the way that people are taught to write a "good essay" in Chinese schools. Bluap (talk) 09:19, 11 May 2013 (UTC)