Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2014 April 14

= April 14 =

"Brunette"
I already know English has no masculine/feminine nouns, but some nouns may be used mainly for females and some nouns mainly for males. The word, "Brunette," seems to be only used for females. Is there a masculine equivalent for a brown-haired man or boy? Can "Brunette" be used for an individual with black hair or dark blonde/light brown hair? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.254.226.201 (talk) 14:15, 14 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Regarding your first question: There is the word "brunet" for males, but it doesn't seem to be used very frequently. ---Sluzzelin talk  14:19, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Makes sense.

140.254.226.201 (talk) 14:31, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Blonde (feminine) vs. Blond (masculine)
 * Brunette (feminine) vs. Brunet (masculine)
 * Red-haired
 * Black-haired
 * Regarding the second question, I don't think there is an English term for people with black hair. See our article "Black hair". Brunet and brunette are defined by the OED to include "dark-complexioned", but I'm not sure whether this includes people with black hair. My impression is that when the terms are used, most people would assume that they mean brown-haired people. I don't think it is possible to say definitively that brunette cannot include people with dark blonde or light brown hair. Whether hair is better described as blonde or brunette is probably a matter of personal impression. — SMUconlaw (talk) 14:42, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I would have thought that dark complexion means that a person has dark brown skin, black afro hair, and dark brown eyes. 140.254.226.201 (talk) 15:04, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * It's hard to tell from the OED quotations: "Your Fair Women..thought of this Fashion to insult the Olives and the Brunetts." (1713); "But I should like to see what sort of a man this hussar is,—whether he is brunet or blondin." (1887). This 1861 quotation suggests that it means a skintone that is brown rather than black: "The Indian Stock..skin brunette rather than black." — SMUconlaw (talk) 15:16, 14 April 2014 (UTC)


 * 140.254.226.201 -- Sometimes in nineteenth century England, "dark" was defined relative to the white population of England (who were roughly divided into "dark" and "fair"), while non-white people were completely left out of consideration. That's still the meaning of "dark" in "tall, dark, and handsome"... AnonMoos (talk) 07:44, 15 April 2014 (UTC)


 * "Raven-haired", although that's really just a synonym for "black-haired". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:20, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Using "they" even if the gender is known
Is it good and proper nowadays to use the single "they" after the gender has been established? For example if people were talking about a person named Kari and referring to them as them (hah!), and I were to say that I know Kari very well from Finland and HE is a good friend of mine. Would it still be non-silly to continue using the pronoun "them" when speaking about Kari when the other speakers (or writers) can purport that they do not know Kari or their gender? --Pxos (talk) 14:56, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Here's how I go:

I never use They. I just don't use it. Singular they is a matter of personal preference, anyway. Some people use They, because they think it's "correct" or gender-neutral, but really I have no problems with using the generic he or genderless it. 140.254.226.201 (talk) 15:12, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * If the person is male, then I'd use "he".
 * If the person is female, then I'd use "she".
 * If the person is agender or transgender, then I'd go by that person's personal name, which can be revealing. For instance, I know this agender person, whose first name is Chris. Instead of overtly asking "Are you male or female?", I ask, "Is that 'Christina'?" And she nods and adds that everybody tells her "Well, you don't exactly look like a Christina," presumably because of the way she dresses herself.
 * If the subject is an inanimate object or a nonhuman animal or a baby, then I'd use "it".
 * Right, in my experience, few humans like to be referred to as "it", and roughly equal numbers of people get annoyed by genderless "he" and singular "they". SemanticMantis (talk) 17:13, 14 April 2014 (UTC)


 * For reference, we have an article on singular they. It actually has a long and rich history in English, used by Shakespeare, etc. You will still find pedants who insist it's "wrong" to use it. We can't really say what is acceptable in your social circles, but there is noting ungrammatical about your example usage. Additional info at gender-neutral_pronoun, but good luck working "zie" into conversation without having to explain it! SemanticMantis (talk) 17:10, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * No one asked me my opinion, but I'm offering it anyway. I have no objection to singular they used in reference to an indefinite pronoun or noun phrase, like everyone or some student, but it annoys me when it's used in reference to a specific individual (even if that individual's gender is not yet known) or in reference to an indefinite noun phrase in a context where the gender is known (as in each player of the Dallas Cowboys, since they're all male). So no, it would (IMO) not be non-silly (i.e. it would be very silly) to continue calling Kari "they" once his gender has been established, or even once it's clear he's a specific individual and not a "someone". Angr (talk) 18:43, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * In the Kari example I would be perplexed if people continued to refer to Kari as they once I had credibly revealed his gender. Particularly among non-anonymous people in flesh and blood (things might be a bit different on an anonymous/pseudonymous online platform such as Wikipedia, but I can't really comment on that). It would almost be as though those people weren't acknowledging my input or not taking my word for it, which would be sort of rude to me (or to you, Pxos) though not necessarily to Kari. ---Sluzzelin talk  22:17, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The wikipedia article cited above is interesting. The first two examples seem natural to me. In my experience, the following three examples would usually be converted to versions with plural subjects. Again in my experience: I am accustomed to the view that the use of the singular they is informal and should be avoided. But I've noticed it is getting much more usage lately. I think it is to avoid using the sexist "he" when gender is unknown or the awkward "he or she," and I appreciate the attempt to solve those problems although I'm not sure this is the best way. It is my understanding that the singular they is becoming more acceptable than it used to be. I have experienced the case in which someone continued to refer to a gender-known person as "they." It was in a context where the person being referred to was being evaluated as a job candidate. It was before we had spoken to the candidate, but the person's gender was clear from the person's name. I think the person using the singular they was attempting to avoid any appearance that the candidate's gender factored into the evaluation, but it seemed odd to me.--Dreamahighway (talk) 18:36, 15 April 2014 (UTC)


 * It's normal for indefinite reference of known gender (a mother in Shakespeare, no man in Shaw), and for definite reference of unknown gender (the patient in Pullum et al.) The latter is relatively new, AFAICT, maybe from the 20th century?  Some style guides say that only indefinite antecedents are acceptable, so "they" for "a mother" is okay, but "they" for "the patient" would be wrong.  For a definite reference of known gender, it would be odd for many people, but it's becoming more common, and feels less and less odd to me.
 * BTW, I disagree with the example from the US declaration of independence, which seems to me to just be a semantic plural, like when you say "the team are". — kwami (talk) 00:10, 16 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I agree with Kwami. To me, there is absolutely nothing wrong with "Every player on the Dallas squad knows their role," although his would be equally acceptable. The indefiniteness is what allows their to be used here, despite the fact that the gender is unambiguous from the context. Another question for those who say you can't or shouldn't use they when the gender of the referent is known. Complete the following text. (This is the example from Shaw that Kwami was likely referring to.)
 * No man goes into battle to be killed. But [he does/they do] get killed. 184.171.208.24 (talk) 05:57, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

"Drank out of the wrong bottle" ?
Which does this mean ?

1) Drank wood alcohol instead of grain alcohol.

2) Drank a form of grain alcohol that they couldn't handle, probably high proof, like whiskey or vodka. StuRat (talk) 15:36, 14 April 2014 (UTC)


 * It means there was a proper bottle to drink out of. And they drank from a bottle that wasn't that one.  Otherwise, without context, we have no means to know what the "proper" bottle is.  -- Jayron  32  15:56, 14 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I see no evidence that this is a common phrase that stands on its own. See e.g. here, or here But, for the record, it means drinking rootbeer when cola is expected ;) SemanticMantis (talk) 17:16, 14 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Something alcoholic when nonalcoholic was expected, maybe. 75.41.109.190 (talk) 17:23, 14 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Something non-alcoholic when something alcoholic was expected would be far worse. DuncanHill (talk) 17:29, 14 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Speaking as a non-drinker myself, No, getting alcohol would be worse. You can't un-spike a drink. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:17, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

I heard it used in the first way, in an episode of the original Star Trek: The City on the Edge of Forever, where it was said about Leonard McCoy, who was acting crazy at the time, due to a disease he had.

I heard it used in the second way in an episode of The Lone Ranger, where it was used to describe a man acting angry.

Note that these are both US TV shows, and from the 50's and 60's (although the Star Trek episode was set in the 30's), so it's possible it's a US expression only, and is now archaic. They might have said "Drank from the wrong bottle", if that matters. StuRat (talk) 22:38, 14 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Compare off his meds, and got up on the wrong side of the bed. You young'ns need to watch more classic TV and film. μηδείς (talk) 00:28, 15 April 2014 (UTC)


 * "They say he drinks out of the wrong bottle..." = "It is rumoured that he's gay...". Old slang. RomanSpa (talk) 05:57, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Searching the internet, it seems to mean the person means to do/achieve/be one (positive) thing, but ends up having the exact opposite (negative) effect/consequence/result. One result referenced a scene in Alice in Wonderland. (I'm not an expert on Alice in Wonderland but an internet search points to a scene in which Alice drinks from a bottle marked "Drink Me" and shrinks down in size small enough to fit through a door that she wanted to enter, and so it doesn't seem to fit with the other meanings.)--Dreamahighway (talk) 18:11, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * So in light of the above, I think the phrase is an expression that doesn't literally mean either of the two options that you list above. But it could apply to either situation you describe. In the second case, I think it might imply that the person meant to enjoy being intoxicated and ended up having a bad experience from drinking alcohol. That second one & your explanation of the context kind of (vaguely) reminds me of "he got up on the wrong side of bed."--Dreamahighway (talk) 18:18, 15 April 2014 (UTC)


 * If it's not meant literally, the only allusion I would understand would be Alice in Wonderland, meaning making the wrong choice, maybe in a situation where you can only guess which to choose. — kwami (talk) 22:50, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

"Knew an Arsenal from Tottenham blue"
The original lyric was "He knew an Arsenal from a Tottenham Jew" As Tottenham FC have a large contingent of jewish supporters - He was told to remove the word jew by the record company lkest it may cause offense! Sad indeed - But True

I'm back with more possibly unanswerable questions about the Pogues and football clubs. Their song "Billy's Bones" opens with the following lines: "Billy ran around with the rare old crew / And he knew an Arsenal from Tottenham blue." I've puzzled over the meaning of this, and I wonder if it involves some Britishism that doesn't register with my American brain. Is it simply saying Billy could distinguish between Arsenal and Tottenham (and/or their colours)? If so, that doesn't seem like much of an accomplishment, though maybe this is intentionally an understatement, i.e., Billy was only that smart. If someone said that to you, how would you interpret it? Or would it just sound like gibberish? --BDD (talk) 23:32, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * No reference to back me up on this, but I suspect it's a play onthe common phrase "knowing your arse from your elbow" (i.e. having basic common sense - it occurs more commonly as "he doesn't know his arse from his elbow") and at the same time suggesting that Billy was involved in organised football hooliganism, as many of the football firms include the word "crew" in their name, and a fight with a policeman - which the verse goes on to describe - would fit with that. "A Tottenham blue" is not a standard phrase. Although Tottenham do have blue in their normal strip, they are not generally referred to as "the Blues" (unlike several other English sides). All the small number of Google hits for the specific phrase link to the Pogues lyrics (or somebody apparently quoting them). Valiantis (talk) 00:25, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Just to add - and I might be reading to much into this - but as the rest of the song recounts Billy becoming a soldier and serving in the Middle East, "arsenal" is an appropriate name to pick and Tottenham, as well as being Arsenal's traditional local rivals, supposedly have a significant Jewish fanbase - see Tottenham Hotspur F.C.. Valiantis (talk) 00:34, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Maybe it is just as simple as the fact that Arsenal and Tottenham are arch rivals, according to the Tottenham Hotspur F.C. article ("The club has a long-standing rivalry with near neighbours Arsenal..."), and the fact that "blue" rhymes with "crew."--Dreamahighway (talk) 16:59, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't believe anything an Arsenal supporter said, myself possible coi .  Jimfbleak  -  talk to me?  17:05, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Before doing too much analysis of song lyrics, it's wise to be sure that the transcription is correct. Internet lyric sites often contain errors. My feeling is that the first line is more likely to be "Billy ran around with a rare old crew", but this is fairly trivial. While it seems that the second line does refer to Arsenal and Tottenham, I can't hear the word "from" and can't verify that the last word is "blue" either. Did you get the lyrics from a reliable source? 86.128.4.167 (talk) 20:40, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I think so. It can certainly be hard to understand Shane MacGowan; in that first line, it certainly could be "a rare old crew," though I'm not sure how much that one would affect the meaning. The others sound right to me. My source was this page. I don't think it's updated anymore, and there's some of what we would call original research, but it's generally good research regarding allusions in Pogues songs. In this case, though, it just says "The Arsenal Gunners [sic] and Tottenham Hotspur are archrival English football (soccer) clubs," so that's not very helpful. --BDD (talk) 21:42, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I found another recording which is slightly easier to hear, and it seems to me as if he says "he knew an Arsenal and Tottenham ...". Not really sure what difference that would make. Of course, there's no guarantee that he sang exactly the same lyric each time. The last word does sound a bit more like "blue" in this one, but I wouldn't want to swear to it. Also, the colour usually associated with Arsenal is red, not blue, which is a bit odd. 86.128.4.167 (talk) 23:03, 16 April 2014 (UTC)