Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2015 April 5

= April 5 =

Motherfucker
Does the American word "motherfucker" have any direct translations in other languages (rather than compounded phrases to emulate the original)? 101.251.102.122 (talk) 12:29, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Dutch does have the translation "moederneuker", but it's hardly used except in youth language, and even there mostly for comic effect. - Lindert (talk) 13:35, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Mexicans say chinga tu madre: fuck your mom.--Jondel (talk) 13:38, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * "Nique ta mère" was not French. It didn't appear in French language before the early nineties, from the influence of the Arab immigration from North Africa. Akseli9 (talk) 20:03, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

In Korean, '니미씹할(ni-mi-ssip-hal)' has the exact meaning.Analphil (talk) 14:13, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Chinese is a particularly rich source of 'mother' insults: Mandarin Chinese profanity.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 14:19, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

German 'Mutter Ficker'. I doubt the Oedipus Complex is unique to Americans. KägeTorä - (影虎) ( もしもし！ ) 17:30, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * The thing about this particular word, though, is that its literal sense is almost entirely lost in actual usage. Indeed the actual usage is almost entirely non-sexual (except that the referent is usually male).  I'm curious whether the Korean translation with "the exact meaning" has just the same literal meaning, or the same or similar usage as well. --Trovatore (talk) 21:06, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * In German, "Fick deine Mutter" (Fuck your mother) is common among rappers or elementary school children who pick up phrases like these very fast because the secondary Hauptschule is often located in the same building. But this is not close to "motherfucker". I doubt it's possible to transfer all connotations to another language. However, you can create the compound word "Mutterficker" (compound words are written as one word or with a hyphen, a rule more and more people tend to forget due to the influence of English), but the only situation where I can imagine it being used is literally talking about it. It would sound weird as an actual insult since it's a literal translation. --2.245.116.104 (talk) 23:26, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Russian yob tvoyu mat’, which may be roughly understood as "fuck your mother", though the subject here is obscure. It may have some variations (yeti, yebat’, or simply semi-euphemistic tvoyu mat’/mat’ tvoyu etc.) and is used as a general swear word. Some linguists consider "(let) a dog fuck your mother" being the original phrase. Not to mention it has parallels in other Slavic languages and goes back to pagan times (the Slavic cult of the Mother-Earth).--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 08:40, 6 April 2015 (UTC)


 * It's well known that "mother" is only half a word. --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  00:40, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Rhiwlas
How do you pronounce 'Rhiwlas', a village in Wales?Analphil (talk) 14:11, 5 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Antur Enwau has "sound clips so that you can hear the correct pronunciation of the names" (Rhiwlas is about halfway down the page). Alansplodge (talk) 16:13, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Our Welsh orthography says that the "iw" diphthong is "not present in English except in the interjection Ew!; closest to 'i-oo' (short i)" and gives an IPA rendering of /ɪu/. Alansplodge (talk) 16:20, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Rewlas or Ri-uwlas would be a pretty accurate rendering. People are always confused by the w being a vowel. 82.21.7.184 (talk) 17:35, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * No, the "Rh" is a voiceless alveolar trill which is quite different from any sound in English. It is followed by something like the sound of the English word "you", and then "las".Ehrenkater (talk) 17:40, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, like I said. My description would be the closest you get to it without going to those arcane IPA runes, which nobody gets anyway. 82.21.7.184 (talk) 18:17, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * And emphasis on the second syllable which has a short "a" and a hard "s" like "lass". If anybody DOES understand "those arcane IPA runes", perhaps we could add it to our Rhiwlas articles. Alansplodge (talk) 23:23, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * According to my non-native interpretation of Welsh phonology, it should be /r̥ɪulas/, although I don't know the stress myself. If LAS is stressed it's:  /r̥ɪu'las/  μηδείς (talk) 03:19, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Clarification,, does your example "lass" have the same vowel as trap, or as bath in RP? μηδείς (talk) 06:31, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
 * "Lass" as in Lassie Come Home. Alansplodge (talk) 14:23, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
 * And notice that Medeis has used the lax /ɪ/ rather than the tense /i/ (and I agree). --ColinFine (talk) 19:24, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Speaking English and knowing Welsh pronunciation I would Anglicise it as or .--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 08:16, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Welsh phonology has the diphthong as /ɪu/, and Ljuboslov has also give a voiced, rather than unvoiced trill. There are differences between the northern and southern dialects, my analysis is based on the southern. μηδείς (talk) 18:37, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Not sure about that, Luboslov. The most common English pronunciation I've heard for Rhiwbina is /ru'baɪnə/, as though the first syllable were written "roo". --ColinFine (talk) 19:24, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Agree. I tried to imitate Welsh pronunciation with the help of English phonology without inventing any new sounds to it. Many others who know little about Welsh (I believe 99% people outside of Wales) may pronounce Welsh names in any possible way. Some names may have established "wrong" English pronunciation as well. --Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 09:57, 8 April 2015 (UTC)


 * One might try saying "hree-oo lass" to get a decent approximation. The problem is that the diphthong and the voiceless r are "impossible" sounds in English. μηδείς (talk) 18:37, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Time taken to learn a language
The web page here gives estimates of the length of time it takes to learn various languages. The students to whom these figures apply are said to be almost 40 years old, and native speakers of English who have a good aptitude for formal language study, plus knowledge of several other foreign languages. They claim that such students can reach "General Professional Proficiency in Speaking and Reading" in most of the listed languages in anything from 23 to 44 weeks and 600 to 1100 hours of classroom study. To me, these numbers seem ridiculous. Can anyone (other than maybe some kind of language genius) learn a language to a standard of "professional proficiency" from scratch in that space of time? 86.152.160.58 (talk) 17:34, 5 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep in mind that the students in these courses are studying 25 hours a week in class with another 28-ish hours of “directed self-study”. This webpage,, has a table that estimates the time it takes to learn a language based on how much study per week. It says that 20 hours a week leads to proficiency in a category 1 language in 10 months, so imagine how quickly you can reach it by studying over 50 hours a week. Another website, , claims that language proficiency can be accomplished even faster through immersion in the culture and living among native speakers. is another source that advocates for immersion based learning. This article goes into more depth, but basically is seems to be more effective to learn through experience than learning in a classroom. The numbers might seem low, the time frame does seem possible though, just remember that these students are basically treating learning the language as a full-time endeavor, not simply passing a class. Gpict201 (talk) 19:20, 5 April 2015 (UTC)


 * The assertion that Croatian, Hebrew, and Georgian are equally difficult to learn is absurd, as is the suggestion that Arabic is much more difficult than Hebrew. There's also the question of learning grammar and phonology, versus learning idiom and vocabulary. μηδείς (talk) 22:42, 5 April 2015 (UTC)


 * It really depends on the amount of dedication and focus that one puts into learning a new language. It can also just depend on the "aptitude" that a person has or if they have a knack for learning languages. According to this chart, the time that it takes to learn another language is dependent on your natural ability to comprehend and pick up another language. Those that are less "language inclined" take longer to learn another language than someone who is more "language inclined". It's like music almost, anyone can learn music with practice and dedication but some have a natural inclination which makes learning music and its concepts far easier. It is also dependent on the level in which you are learning. Are you trying to learn casual conversation or are you trying to learn the academic level of a language? There have also been articles that it takes around 3 to 5 years for ESL members to learn common English and 4 to 7 years for ESL members to attain an academic level of proficiency in English . It can also be dependent on the age that the language learning begins. It's been proven time and time again that children pick up foreign languages easier and that the time it takes for children to learn a new language is far less than that of an adult. The time it takes to learn a new language is dependent on so many things and the times are usually just base estimates but not necessarily too far off. B A England (talk) 00:11, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Russian educational standards of higher education state that students of departments of linguistics/translation must spend around 2200 Russian "academic hours" (45 min) to learn the first language and 1500 hours to learn the second during a 4-year "Bachelor of Linguistics" course (the second usually learnt from the 2nd years), at least 60% of the time is in auditorium with a teacher. Not to mention 1000-1500 hours of special disciplines (translation practice, general lingustics etc.). Bear in mind that the first language is usually learnt for 10 years at school (add around 1000 "hours") before entering university. So in sum the first language might be learnt up to 4000 "hours" for 14 years, while the second up to 2000 "hours" for 3 years. Though even after all that not every graduate knows languages very well, especially the second one. I know enough university teachers with degrees, who know well only their "main" language, knowledge of their other language(s) is somewhat shallow. But I also personally knew other teachers who taught at least 3 languages (one of them they taught themselves before teaching students). I think the raw number of hours is not the key, but rather method, personal skills and dedication, though the lowest number of 1500 hours (60 min) for advanced level is quite a good estimation. --Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 11:43, 6 April 2015 (UTC)