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

= November 9 =

Are we ready for "fishers"?
In an Australian geographical article on my Watchlist somebody just changed "fishermen" to "fishers". Our disambiguation page for "fishers" describes it as "an archaic term for a fisherman, revived as gender-neutral". However, Fisherman, not surprisingly, says the word "may be used to describe both men and women".

I find "fishers" disturbing, at least partly because it can be quite ambiguous when spoken.

I won't fight the change just made, but I'm interested in others' thoughts on the evolution of the language here. HiLo48 (talk) 04:24, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * What does what people in this limited environment matter? Either the term is well understood and comfortable in usage among enough English speakers for dictionaries to note it as such, or it isn't.  Our opinion as a small community of people who frequent this website means fuckall as far as whether or not a word has acceptance.  -- Jayron  32  04:39, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * It should also be noted that the term is hardly a neologism. The King James Bible was comfortable enough with it to use it in Matthew 4 where Jesus refers to Simon-Peter and his brother Andrew as "fishers of men".  -- Jayron  32  04:44, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I've heard people called fishermen "fishers", and according to EO it preceded the term "fisherman", though the latter seems rather more common. I was also thinking of the KJV quote, which of course is in the original English (ha). ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:47, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Jayron says things are OK so long as the term is "well understood and comfortable in usage among enough English speakers...". The area in question is not a big city, trendy kind of place with a strong population of feminists who go fishing. I doubt if many speakers there would be at all comfortable with it. Yes, I know it's an old term, but it's effectively a neologism in it's modern, gender neutral form. Not pleasing to my ears. HiLo48 (talk) 04:54, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * They're your ears. Why are you asking us to decide why things should be pleasing or not to them?  You get to decide what you want to be pleasing to your ears.  You can't change the entire language because you don't like it. -- Jayron  32  04:57, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * True. That's why changing the entire language is not my goal. In fact, changing the language seems more the goal of the editor who made this change. HiLo48 (talk) 05:02, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, perhaps "preserving the language and obstructing what would otherwise be part of the natural, continual, and millenium-long evolution of language because I can't be bothered to accept such changes in my fossilized opinion of what language should be in the sense that I learned language as an unchanging thing at some point in my education and thus I refuse to accept that any changes are possible from what I learned proper language to be" is a better phrase than "changing the entire language", but not quite as pithy. -- Jayron  32  05:05, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Complete misrepresentation of my position. Why would you do that? HiLo48 (talk) 06:54, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * You said you found the word "disturbing". I'm struggling to understand why it's any other person's responsibility to explain that.  It's your emotion, we can't explain why you find a word disturbing.  It's a word.  There's nothing to be disturbed about.  It's vocal chord vibrations, and does you no harm.  -- Jayron  32  22:34, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll watch you in your campaign to tell the world that Facebook bullying doesn't exist. HiLo48 (talk) 00:03, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Wait, what? I'm confused how your dislike of the word "Fisher" has led you to make that statement.  Could you please explain the connection between the word Fisher and my advocacy against bullying? -- Jayron  32  01:35, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Can't be bothered. I'm sure some people understood my words. HiLo48 (talk) 02:07, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * You should ask the Australians.Chrisrus (talk) 05:05, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I may be wrong, but I think HiLo is Australian. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 07:06, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Too bloody right. HiLo48 (talk) 07:10, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

In academic writing about fishing, "fishers" is increasingly used. Itsmejudith (talk) 10:10, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * So the cost of a fishing license would be a Fisher Price? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:19, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Asuming your (HiLo48's) "ambiguous when spoken" refers to "fishers"' likeness with "fishes", this applies to a number of plural agent nouns whose root ends in a sibilant. Examples: mixers, bashers, pissers etc ... ---Sluzzelin talk  11:20, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes. It bothers me that a change made for seemingly "correct" reasons in one area (gender neutrality) actually makes things worse in another (clarity). This is not an accidental language change. It's being pushed by people with a particular goal. My opinion on that goal is irrelevant, but my opinion on the reduction in clarity is that it's bloody annoying. Could they not have made a better choice of a gender neutral word? HiLo48 (talk) 11:26, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Some of us pronounce "fishes" and "fishers" differently. I know that it is a merger in a lot of varieties. And I like to say "fisher person", plural "fisherfolk" but people don't seem to be following me yet. Itsmejudith (talk) 11:59, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * In RP it's [fɪʃɪz] vs. [fɪʃəz], while in many quasi-"General American" dialects it's [fɪʃɨz] vs. [fɪʃɚz]. Any dialect which pronounces the two words the same would appear to have problems with a lot more words than those two.  Anyway, for many purposes the plural of "fish" is actually "fish"... -- AnonMoos (talk) 16:53, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * As in "all the fishes in the sea"? When the "ambiguous" comment came up, at first I thought it was because "fisher" is a homonym of "fissure". I forgot about the folks who drop the "r". It could certainly be confusing. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:56, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * There are some people who are interested in "fissures of men". --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  20:07, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Ah, I thought the ambiguity was between humans and birds. —Tamfang (talk) 23:55, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * The change was made by a new editor whose interest clearly lies in articles about places in a particular area of Australia. So there's a fair chance that editor is Australian, and pronounces fishes and fishers identically himself (or herself, as the case may be). Gender neutrality is nice. Adding ambiguity isn't. HiLo48 (talk) 00:09, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * "Fishers" and "Fishes" are not pronounced identically in either UK quasi-standard English or US quasi-standard English, and I really don't know what prominent type of English-language speech, spoken by a fairly large number of people, would pronounce them identically. In any case, any dialect that pronounces the two words identically probably has problems with a lot more words than those two, and "fishes" is not actually the normal plural of "fish"... AnonMoos (talk) 03:44, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Syriac help
What is the Syriac text in this picture? http://www.chaldeanculturalcenter.org/images/top2.jpg - http://www.webcitation.org/6KzcuQ7nO

Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 05:04, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't know much about Syriac, but the transliteration is " qnṭrwn yrtwtny' kldy ", (or in Hebrew/Aramaic script "קנטרון ירתותניא כלדיא"). The first word is  qin ṭron, meaning "center". The third word is kal ' da: ia:, meaning "Chaldean". The second word I couln't find exactly, but it appears to be derived from ia:r ' tu: tha:, meaning "inheritance", so I would translate the phrase something like "Chaldean heritage center" (but again, keep in mind I don't actually speak Syriac). - Lindert (talk) 10:57, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your help! I was able to get the Syriac text from the Syriac Wikipedia WhisperToMe (talk) 17:43, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Abortionist
Is this word pejorative? I have altered it in various texts I've edited because I am under the impression that it is. But I haven't been able to find consistent evidence that it is. Does anyone have insight? ÷seresin 08:48, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I would say it is only pejorative if the speaker is anti-abortion. The word itself is a simple statement of fact, unlike 'frog' for French people, or 'gook' for East Asians. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 09:05, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's pejorative. You should say "a doctor who carries out terminations of pregnancy". The doctor probably does many other things as well. Itsmejudith (talk) 09:50, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Abortionists are not usually doctors, though. The vast majority are ones who support abortion for various reasons that are not appropriate to discuss here. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 10:10, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * What about the much simpler "abortion doctor"? Dismas |(talk) 10:08, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Do doctors actually specialize in abortion? And is Kage's statement correct? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:17, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/abortionist See definition 3. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 10:22, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * That writeup does a good job of explaining why the term is negative. What it doesn't say is who performs legal abortions nowadays. I would think it's mostly, if not totally, done by MD's. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:27, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Depends, mate. You can just use a coat hanger. Some countries even jail women for miscarriages, because they think it was an induced abortion. In the UK at least, it is done by proffessional personnell. But some immigrants (mostly from Africa or the Middle East, or Pakistan) do it themselves. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 10:32, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * In places where it's legal, is it mostly done by doctors? The whole point of Row v. Wade was to liberate women from the risks associated with the proverbial "back alley abortionist". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:34, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * In the UK, both doctors and nurses take part. I don't think they specialize in abortion, necessarily, but they know how to do it. Lots of years in college didn't help them for nothing. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 10:42, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * As noted in Miscarriage, the medical terms used to be "spontaneous abortion" and "induced abortion". Unfortunately, the term "abortion" has come to be synonymous with "induced abortion", and the euphemism "miscarriage" is now used for "spontaneous abortion" (an "act of God", as they say). In the days when induced abortions were illegal in the US, the public probably considered an "abortionist" to have roughly the same level of esteem as "narcotics pusher", "prostitute" and "child molester". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:04, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * To me, "Abortionist" suggests the old "back-alley" practitioner, who is probably not an MD, charges all that the traffic will bear,is not overly concerned with sanitation or the health of the women on whom he operates. I would not use it for a modern doctor or nurse who performs legal, or illegal but patient-oriented, induced abortions. DES (talk) 17:09, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * If you'd like to know what an English abortionist looked like, I suggest you watch the Mike Leigh film Vera Drake. --TammyMoet (talk) 21:59, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Not really my subject, but I suspect that someone who legally performs an abortion would prefer to be called a gynecologist. Alansplodge (talk) 02:19, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Are we sure the OP was referring to the person who performs the abortions? When I read the section title, I thought "Abortionist" = a supporter of/crusader for abortion "rights" along the lines of "abolitionist", "prohibitionist", "suffragist", etc.--William Thweatt TalkContribs 03:40, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * That would be an abortion rights or pro-choice campaigner. I have never heard abortionist used for anything other than the person performing the procedure, although Dictionary.com lists it as included in the Collins and Random House dictionaries as an alternative meaning, "usually intended as an offensive term". See also Abortion rights movements. - Ka renjc (talk) 08:43, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The term is not used in the UK, only on certain news items about women protesting in the streets of America. This might be the confusion. None of them are doctors, and probably not even working as anything, because it's during the day, and the whole "I',m a full-time mom" thing doesn't cut it, because the kid(s) are at school most of the day and are only home when work finishes, for the husband. Total waste of a resource (Been there, done it, got the T-shirt). Anyway, I think 'abortionist' is fine for people who have that choice in mind. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 10:29, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

TESOL or CELTA
How do I get a qualification in TESOL or CELTA? I know I can do it online, but is there any way that I could make the certificate myself? I own a language company, and have 16 years' experience in teaching. Or is there some official channel I have to go through? This is for VietNam. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 09:02, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I assume you're being asked for this by a potential employer, and/or you need it in a hurry? You certainly can't make your own certificate from one of the accredited providers, such as Trinity's CertTESOL and Cambridges's CELTA, both Level 5 on the QCF.  I hold the former, in the 130-hour version, and there was a lot of teaching and learning theory as well as the subject-specific material, mandatory observed and assessed teaching practice, and the reflective summaries. As far as I know, neither organisation will offer you 100% APL (accreditation of prior learning), but it might be worth contacting them and asking the question. Both are available online intensively if you need them in a hurry, as are shorter courses, which are correspondingly less well recognised by employers abroad.  I haven't worked in Thailand but am told by a colleague who has that a college degree is more of an issue than a Level 5 subject specialism. Have you considered Cambridge's Teaching Knowledge Test? It can give you a kind of accreditation quickly, and with your considerable experience, that might be sufficient for your purposes. -  Ka renjc (talk) 21:33, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Adjusts glasses. Sorry, I don't know anyone who has taught in Vietnam. - Ka renjc (talk) 21:36, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Further investigation shows that there's an accredited TKT exam centre in Nara prefecture if you wanted to take it in person rather than online (see here). They might be a useful contact for queries about APL in the Cambridge series, as they also offer DELTA module 1. - Ka renjc (talk) 09:15, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that information. I shall look into it. Also, Nara Prefecture is not in the UK or anywhere near Vietnam, so would not be useful. Thanks anyway. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 10:18, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Lol sorry, for some reason I had it in my head that you were based in the Kyoto area (probably just jealousy on my part - I've visited it twice and love it) so Nara would have been feasible. If you're looking in the UK there are plenty of options. -  Ka renjc (talk) 10:55, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * If you need this to work as an English teacher in Vietnam, note that the government requires a qualification which includes observed teaching practice, in which case the TKT would not help you. The people at the ministry are generally incompetent jobsworths, but they do enforce this requirement. (Equally incompetent employers such as my old one have found this out to their cost). HenryFlower 11:59, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * In which case an intensive full-time CELTA or CertTESOL subject specialism can be completed in four weeks. Note that this doesn't count as a teaching qualification on its own in the Lifelong Learning sector in the UK; you would also need a minimum of the PTLLS award ("threshold licence to teach") if you were desperate enough to seek work in what little funded ESOL provision remains after the cuts.  If you go down this road, be aware that some providers may offer an extra bridging module at little or no extra cost, allowing you to gain PTLLS alongside your chosen EFL specialism.  It's not directly relevant if you don't intend to teach in the UK, but is well worth doing if you ever want to be in a position to apply for jobs abroad requiring higher teaching qualifications, such as those with the British Council, because it can be accredited as a step along the road to a PGCE or its vocational equivalent, DTLLS. -  Ka renjc (talk) 17:24, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Putonghua
Where does the Standard Mandarin pronunciation come from? I know it's not Beijing because they speak differently there. Moreover (I'm talking about pinyin), Northern people tend to pronounce wa, wan, wai, wang, wei, wen, weng with IPA [v] instead of [w], but don't do that with wo/wu. On the IPA page for Mandarin, I didn't find [v]. The fact which confuses me most is that even news anchors pronounce it that way. Is [v] the standard pronunciation or not? --2.245.236.128 (talk) 17:58, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I am sure you have looked at Standard Chinese. The 'v' pronunciation is mostly middle China, and not Northern. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 18:52, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * "When /w/ occurs in syllable-initial position, many speakers use [ʋ] before any vowel except [o] as in 我 wǒ, e.g. 尾巴 wěiba [ʋei̯˨pa˦]." I suppose the OP confused [ʋ] and [v], they are indeed a little close.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 21:38, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * This is what I meant, thank you. However, there is still the question why they choose CCTV news anchors with that pronunciation if [ʋ] is not standard?--2.245.236.128 (talk) 00:30, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * See the source I've just added to the article.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 01:24, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Standard Mandarin pronunciation does indeed come from Beijing, but not from the common, working-class speech of Beijing locals. Instead, it is the speech of educated government officials based in Beijing in the early 20th century, which avoids some of the features specific to working-class speech in that city. Marco polo (talk) 16:24, 11 November 2013 (UTC)