Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2014 April 2

= April 2 =

Asia languages
examples of countries or communities in a country where many people fluent in two asian languages but only basic english? i know one is the chinese malaysians fluent in both mandarin and malay. --121.7.10.138 (talk) 10:15, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * In many parts of China, people will be fluent in their local language as well as Mandarin. See Languages of China.  -- Jayron  32  12:30, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Probably the majority of urban Javanese people are fluent in Indonesian, with good (low) Javanese, but middling English. It's quite common to be bilingual in Indonesia, considering the vast number of languages spoken in the country./ — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:52, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Our list of multilingual countries and regions in Asia might be of help here (for example the large minority of Azeri Turkish-speakers in Iran who also speak Farsi. Or the Kurdish- and Aramaic-speakers in Iraq who also speak Arabic). ---Sluzzelin talk  13:07, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Papual new Guinea have over 850 languages on a population of 7M, and knowledge of English exists, but is not good, see Languages of Papua New Guinea and Papua New Guinea. A friend who has been there once told me that it is quite common for children to speak five local languages just to be able to communicate with all the other children that they play with. (No reference, just hearsay, I am afraid). Star Lord  -   星王 (talk) 16:20, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Some areas of New Guinea practice linguistic exogamy, where a female marries a male of a group speaking a different native language. This often means a young woman knows the native language of her father's group, the language her mother brought into the family, and the language of her new husband. See William A. Foley The Papuan Languages of New Guinea. μηδείς (talk) 16:58, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I've heard of a town in western(?) India where effectively everyone speaks three languages, each in its own domain, e.g. all commerce is done in one language. Two are Aryan and one is Dravidian (or vice versa) but they have converged in syntax though not in vocabulary. —Tamfang (talk) 08:25, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
 * For the record, that would be Gumpertz & Wilson's classic 1971 study of the village of Kupwar (Maharashtra, India), with Urdu, Kannada and Marathi spoken. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:45, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The situation the questioner describes is common in several Asian countries. It is especially widespread in India and Pakistan, where most people speak a local language or dialect, at least one regional lingua franca such as Hindi or Urdu, and at least the rudimentary English they learned in school.  The Philippines are similar:  a local language or dialect, Tagalog, and at least rudimentary English.  In Indonesia, the pattern is a local language, plus Indonesian, plus maybe a little English.  In Malaysia, members of the non-Malay minorities will speak a home language, Malay, and probably a little English. In Singapore, most of the native-born population will speak a home language, Singlish, and some standard English. Someone else has pointed out this pattern in parts of China where the local language is not Mandarin. The same is true in the Arab countries, where people speak their local vernacular, some degree of standard Arabic, and maybe a little English (though I think English is far from universal in Arab countries other than perhaps along the Persian Gulf).  Ethnic minorities in other Asian countries often speak their minority language and the national lingua franca, but apart from Sri Lanka and Nepal, English knowledge is not widespread (beyond maybe a few words) in other Asian countries with linguistic minorities. Marco polo (talk) 14:48, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Chinese merchants in Phnom Penh, Cambodia will often speak their ancestral Chinese dialect, Khmer, be at least familiar with Mandarin, and, to varying degrees, conversant in English (for tourists). Some of the older generation will also still be able to manage some French.--William Thweatt TalkContribs 21:51, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Existing features under lost estates
Is there anything wrong with this sentence:
 * "The Hodbarrow Drain is a mine working under the 17th-century Huddleston Estate, then in the historic county of Cumberland."
 * To my mind, this mixes tenses, unacceptably, in a single sentence. Or is it acceptable? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:52, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * It's acceptable but it seems to me you're trying to cram a lot of information (about the mine, the estate, and the county) into one short sentence. If it's a "lost" estate, how about "The Hodbarrow Drain is a mine working under the former Huddleston Estate, which was founded in the 17th-century in what was then Cumberland." Also it might be more relevant to provide the date of the mine rather than the date of the estate (are they connected in any other way?), and "Cumberland" is rather a vague identification of the location; how about "X miles north of Y-town" so that the inclusion of an historic county is unnecessary?--Shantavira|feed me 16:21, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * In addition, it would be clearer to say "... is a mine working which lies beneath ...", to make it immediately obvious that the word "working" goes with "mine" and not with "under".Ehrenkater (talk) 17:30, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Is "working" a noun or a verb. Is it that the mine is working, or is a "mine working" a thing?  If, as I suspect, the latter, then there's only one verb in the sentence, and the question of clash of tenses doesn't arise.  --  Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  19:14, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * It was intended as a noun. But it might just as well be mine-shaft, or tunnel, or whatever. Please ignore it. My basic problem is with the word "is" occurring before the word "then" - the 17th-century Huddleston Estate no longer exists, nor does the county in which it was located, but the tunnel beneath it still does. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:43, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Then I'd pretty much echo Shantavira's first sentence. --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  20:49, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * It was the estate that was founded in the 17th century. "Mine working" is OK as a technical term, not identical to mine-shaft (which implies verticality). Ergo: The Hodbarrow Drain is a mine working under the 17th-century Huddleston Estate, in the historic county of Cumberland." Itsmejudith (talk) 21:00, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * How can a mine-working be under something that no longer exists? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:08, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * How can a mine-working be under something that now longer exists? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:08, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * It's under the location of the former estate. I'd state that explicitly.  Also, "mine tunnel" sounds a lot better to me, in US English, at least.  I'd also prefer parens in this case: "The Hodbarrow Drain is a mine tunnel under the former 17th-century Huddleston Estate (then in the historic county of Cumberland).". StuRat (talk) 21:19, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the ideas. But it's all hypothetical. Fortunately, the actual problem has been now solved, by a clever editor, at Great Haigh Sough. lol Martinevans123 (talk) 22:01, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Port/dock terminology,
Naval nomenclature is the bane of my existence!

There seem to be an enormous number of words describing places where ships dock. Warf, pier, quay, dock...to name just a few. Are they all just synonyms or is there some subtle maritime reasoning behind what bit of planking/stone stretching out over the sea is called what? Dictionaries seem confused on the topic. SteveBaker (talk) 20:29, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * The Shipping Law Blog: What is the Difference Between a Port, Quay, Pier and Wharf? has answers in words and pictures.
 * —Wavelength (talk) 20:36, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Pretty good brief summary of the differences. Recommended for those confused on those particular terms. Palmeira (talk) 23:14, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I left a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships, linking to this discussion.
 * —Wavelength (talk) 21:06, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Whoever invented all those terms should take a long walk on a short jetty. StuRat (talk) 21:22, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Dock also has the connotation of exposing the hull for cleaning or repair, usually as the noun drydock, but sometimes as a verb without the dry- prefix.


 * Sailors may have devised a portion of their vocabulary for hazing apprentices. When securing the lines mooring the ship to shore, pity the line-handler who doesn't know the difference between Bitts, Bollards and Cleats.Thewellman (talk) 21:58, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Nah, just specific, technical language. There are much cleverer things for hazing. Sending some poor soul off to the bridge with grease to "grease the relative bearings" was always fun. The best was the mail buoy back in the old days before electronics made ships part of the regular world with e-mail and phone calls. When mail sometimes took months to catch up with the ship newbies were suckers for sometimes spending hours, often in foul weather, searching for the mail buoy where mail for ships was deposited for pick up (Oh sure!). It was sometimes fairly elaborate. There is a goodly list of such diversions for old hands. Palmeira (talk) 13:57, 3 April 2014 (UTC)


 * As with any field specialized terms actually do indicate different things the layman may not recognize. There are lots of specialized names for hammers and using just any hammer as if those names make no difference can make a job difficult to dangerous. While nautical terms may seem mystifying they are not there to haze or confuse apprentices. They'd better learn the subtle differences, in some cases to avoid real problems. There is one hell of a difference between a "dock" and a "pier" with the old Bowditch definition of "dock" being illustrative: "dock: The space between two two piers, or a basin or enclosre for reception of vessels and controlling the water level." The ship lies in the dock alongside a pier. Pity the poor mariner that puts the ship onto the pier—you just had a wreck. Similarly if line handlers ashore with cleats and bollards available are told to put a line over "that bollard" and instead put it on a cleat the line is not where intended and probably not secured as intended. Don't think any of us would appreciate going into surgery where a surgical nurse thinks all those specialized names for sharp, clamping, spreading and other such instruments are just for fun! "I've got a bleeder! Hand me the clamp" then fumble, bumble while the scalpel is exchanged for the spreader and then maybe the clamp. Palmeira (talk) 23:08, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Heh. I must share an experience I had some years ago. My then partner and his best friend took me out sailboating on a lake.  They'd both done it many times, but it was a first for me. They were doing the steering, and I was basically a passenger just enjoying the ride.  We were going along OK, then a wind sprang up.  It was getting choppy and getting harder to steer, then at a certain point they both yelled out to me "Uncleat the jib", because apparently I was closest to whatever the jib was.  When I stared back uncomprehendingly, they just shouted louder "UNCLEAT THE JIB!".  That increase in volume had zero impact on my knowledge of what a jib was or what the verb "to (un)cleat" meant.  We started taking in water and before long we were overturned.  We're all good swimmers and we weren't too far from shore so it was OK.  We managed to upturn the boat and get back to safety.  Then came the postmortem.  Somehow I was supposed to have known, without any training whatsoever, what to do in such a situation, and to understand nautical terminology.  To this day I refuse all responsibility for the outcome.  But I mention it from time to time in jest, never failing to include the immortal words that my friends will never live down: "Uncleat the jib".  --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  04:36, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
 * A similar story comes from my dad going sailing with my (maternal) grandfather. They're both good sailors, something I've spectacularly failed to inherit from either of them.  Unfortunately, one of them knows all the terms in English, and the other in Polish.  This led to a lot of arguments, and exchanges such as "Ready about!"  "Yes, of course I'm ready, what the hell are you shouting for?" MChesterMC (talk) 08:16, 3 April 2014 (UTC)


 * And anyone not getting what is going to happen tacking or coming about on a small sailboat may have a hard head knock, or worse, as a learning experience. It is why it is a good safety policy to make sure clueless visitors do not get involved in big ship operations and on tourist or private sail boats where some interaction is going to be necessary are given some instructions before setting out. The working parts of ships and ports are fairly dangerous places. Ever seen a five inch mooring line start "smoking"? Ever seen that line visibly narrow to an inch or less, snap with a crack like a small saluting gun, and then whip across 2-3 inch steel pipe stanchions bending and laying them flat? Take your head off or maybe, particularly if steel cable doing the same, slice you in two. Scary thing, particularly when, as I once watched, there were casual passers by standing about a lock and just luckily not in line with that whipping monster. They stood about like cows as ship's crew yelled warnings as water vapor began "smoking" on a part of the line being used to pull the ship forward in the lock. That's why sailors and port workers treat lines under tension like the dangerous beasts they are. Palmeira (talk) 13:57, 3 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Fundamental problem there; expecting a passenger without any background to understand what has to be done. Then it appears you were on a very small boat near the cleat where a scramble to get to it might itself be a hazard. If someone does not know what the jib is and what it has to do with a cleat, whatever that might be, explaining it in an emergency in other terms will probably be after whatever disaster befalls. Maybe "There's a rope to that sail up there wrapped around that little two horned thing on the deck. Take it off!" would have worked—if your friend had managed the translation fast enough. It isn't a bad idea to give even casual guests aboard a quick run down of what happens and the need to either stay in place out of the way or learn enough to not get in trouble. Palmeira (talk) 13:57, 3 April 2014 (UTC)


 * We're definitely on the same page. Thanks.  --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  19:07, 3 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Struggling back on-topic here... :-)
 * So, to summarize the discussion so far (many thanks!) I think that we've established the following highly informative distinctions:
 * A Port is the entire place - a place on the coast with services for ships - often including a town or village.
 * A Wharf is a man-made structure on a river or by the sea, which provides an area for ships to safely dock.  Some ports have just one wharf, others have many.
 * A Quay is, a part of the river bank or coastline which has been modified so ships can dock at it parallel to the shore.
 * A Pier is a, normally wooden, structure which protrudes from the shore at a level above the water level, allowing ships to disembark passengers in the deeper water further out.
 * A Dock is the space between the piers where ships may go.
 * So a port may have many wharfs each of which may comprise multiple quays and piers - interspersed with docks. That's a nice clear set of definitions.


 * I'm still not sure about the following though:


 * Harbor -- I think it's a coastal inlet that may or may not include a port. That's kindof a surprise, I thought a harbor was just a port.
 * Jetty -- Kinda vague but maybe ANY kind of man-made prominance out in to the water?  So a pier is a jetty but a jetty isn't necessarily a pier?
 * Berth -- Same thing as a dock?  Or maybe just the space in a dock that one ship might occupy?   Not sure.
 * Haven -- A harbor that's a good place to go in a storm?
 * Slip/Slipway -- A sloping bit of concrete to get boats from land down into the water and vice-versa maybe?
 * Landing -- Eh...same thing as a Slip?  I don't know, honestly.
 * Embarkment -- A bit of a pier where people get on and off the ships?
 * Marina -- A kind of port...a part of a port? Not sure.


 * I kinda have a feel for some of them - but, I'm trying to get to the more exacting maritime meanings.
 * SteveBaker (talk) 17:33, 3 April 2014 (UTC)


 * See Glossary of nautical terms.—Wavelength (talk) 17:58, 3 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Are you confusing embarkation (the act of embarking, ie getting on board) with embankment (an artificial raised area, not necessarily nautical but certainly including some dock fronts)? AlexTiefling (talk) 22:01, 3 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Harbor emphasis is on a place to find shelter from heavy seas. The harbor may or may not have developed shore facilities for fueling, maintenance, loading, offloading, etc.


 * Jetty glossary definition is good. Jetties almost never have mooring fixtures, and are seldom surfaced to be safe for vehicle or personnel access. If provision is made for access, the structure is typically called a Mole (architecture).


 * You have the right idea for berth (parking space) and haven (refuge).


 * Slipway article is useful, but slip has another meaning for ferries which may be a specialized type of landing. The slip is typically rather like a funnel which receives the bow of the ferry and aligns the ferry so a loading ramp is immobilized for vehicles to roll on or off the ferry.


 * Marina article is pretty good. The emphasis is on recreational rather than commercial vessels.Thewellman (talk) 23:27, 3 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Wharf above is too limited. It includes the facilities ashore, including warehouses and accessories to store and transship cargo. The description and photo in the link, The Shipping Law Blog: What is the Difference Between a Port, Quay, Pier and Wharf?, gives the idea.


 * Another aid would be the chart symbols and glossary in American Practical Navigator (commonly just "Bowditch"). They are available by section in .pdf form from NGA, but the easiest link for the whole 5.7mb .pdf is NOAA. Part F, Ports, is the section most applicable here and the chart symbols will help in understanding shapes and locations. Here is a quick web version of a limited selection giving the idea of those symbols. You might have to do some further research to really understand things like "Deviation dolphin" or "Gridiron, Scrubbing grid" if you are interested. For fun, look at the photos of the old "scrubbing grid here and the concept here. Note that those symbols are in U.S. public domain documents so people wanting to illustrate the definitions here can do some snapshot and upload work if they wish to take the time. Palmeira (talk) 13:59, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The NGA publications selection is a useful resource for this type of thing. For example, select American Practical Navigator and then, way down below highly specialized tables such as "Meridional Parts" (from which you can hand build a Mercator chart) you will see a 3mb "Glossary" option for download. Palmeira (talk) 14:12, 4 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Does anybody want to try to tackle the modern (mis)use of many of these terms by property developers to make the latest housing estate or commercial retail development sound attractive? HiLo48 (talk) 21:46, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure developers have been as misleading as cartographers who portray piers, jetties and moles with the same symbol causing users of their map legends to conclude the three are synonymous. Jetty has the same root word as jettison, and often originated as unwanted rubble arriving as ballast in empty ships being deposited in locations to protect loading port facilities from wave action or to preserve navigable channels. Loading facilities similarly protruding from the shore were either solid Mole (architecture) or pier platforms supported on piles or pillars similar to Pier (architecture).Thewellman (talk) 18:40, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Words on a Chinese date stamp
I bought a Chinese date stamp. I notice that I am able to stamp Chinese words after the date, like in the image here: http://postimg.org/image/77p1j1yzh/ Please tell me what these Chinese words mean. 96.57.219.74 (talk) 23:18, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * 1. Production (of goods, etc)
 * 2. Produce (things that are produced)
 * 3. Effective (as in "it works")
 * 4. Ineffective (as in "it no longer works")
 * 5. To purchase (generally a big purchase, not something you buy at the store)
 * 6. To sell (generally a big sell, not you selling something to a friend)
 * 7. "Payment received". Signifies that the receiving party acknowledges the receipt
 * 8. "To be paid": as in, "this bill was duly paid" (antonym of 6)
 * 9. To give approval to (i.e. upper court giving approval to a lower court's rulings)
 * 10. Expired, became invalid
 * 11. To cancel, to write off
 * 12. To put to the test (i.e. to test a hypothesis, to check quality)
 * If you want, I can give you the Chinese characters themselves. --Bowlhover (talk) 01:36, 3 April 2014 (UTC)


 * So I guess this stamp was made for big businesses and such. Well, I guess I can still use phrase #8.