Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2015 August 3

= August 3 =

odd usage of the phrase 'as well'
Hi. In an article about Alexander the Great's horse, I stumbled on these 2 sentences:
 * He spoke soothingly to the horse and turned it towards the sun so that it could no longer see its own shadow, which had been the cause of its distress. Dropping his fluttering cloak as well, Alexander successfully tamed the horse.

The usage of 'as well' in this context feels odd to me, as it seems to imply that dropping the coat was an important additional step in the taming process. Or am I over-interpreting this, and is 'as well' a perfectly fine way to establish a narrative timeline here? Personally, I wouldn't use 'as well' here but instead a 'then' or 'after that':
 * 'Then, dropping his fluttering cloak, he jumped on the horse's back and successfully tamed him without violence.'

How's that? I feel this way there's less odd emphasis on the rather irrelevant cape-dropping and the timeline becomes clearer. Rh73 (talk) 06:06, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't think that whoever wrote the sentence viewed the dropping of the cape as "rather irrelevant". The way I read it is that Alexander calmed the horse by turning it to prevent it from seeing its shadow and, in addition, by taking off his own cape (the fluttering of which was likely to spook the horse). So the idea is that "that dropping the coat was an important [or at least a prudent] additional step in the taming process". Deor (talk) 11:32, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Agree, thank you. I have to admit: while I wrote this question, for some reason I didn't realize the connection between a fluttering cape and spooking the horse - in this context dropping the cape becomes relevant and the phrase 'as well' makes much more sense.


 * Funny sidenote: In the meantime I compared a couple different translations of this story and found that none of them (including the one referenced in this section of the article) actually describe the cape as "fluttering" or as having any other (threatening) qualities. Neither does the Greek source material: "ἀπορρίψας ἡσυχῆ τὴν χλαμύδα" which unadornedly translates to "he gently/quietly put away 'the cloak'". So, on one hand an editor took the liberty to add a little bit to the source. On the other hand it's a single word, it aids understanding, and most probably only few people would obsess over such details or even notice them anyways... I'll drop some ramblings on the talk page and see what happens. Again, thanks for your reply. Rh73 (talk) 15:37, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Given that some creative editing/translation seems to have been going on, is it possible that Alexander had actually used the (non-fluttering) cloak to cover the horse's eyes before mounting, in order to calm it? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 18:58, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

"In all those fields, supportive evidence were to be found/ were found/ have been found".
Hello,

which one of the above three forms is the most adequate in the context of a scientific paper? specifically, when would one use "were to be found"?

Thanks. 212.179.21.194 (talk) 06:11, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * "Evidence" is uncountable, so it's never parsed as plural. You could say "Pieces of evidence have been found in all those fields".  But then the verb is governed by the word "pieces", not by "evidence".  --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  06:42, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * thanks, so let me change my question to which of the three is the most adequate in a scientific paper: "In all those fields, supportive evidence was to be found/ was found/ has been found". 212.179.21.194 (talk) 06:52, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * It depends on context. Is the evidence still to be found?  Was it found in the investigation under discussion, or has it been found sometime in the past?    D b f i r s   08:03, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Let me invent a context where this wording might be used, to show what the grammar should be: The theory of evolution has been studied in biology, paleontology, and biochemistry.  In all those fields, supportive evidence has been found.  That's not exactly stellar writing, but at least it is valid. Looie496 (talk) 13:21, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

"your first parlay"
What does "...this is your first parlay." mean in this context?

Parlay (gambling) doesn't seem to make sense in this context. Judging by the context, I was expecting a word that's synonymous with battle/skirmish/war/fight/engagement. My other car is a cadr (talk) 06:49, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Parley makes sense: "a discussion or conference, especially one between enemies over terms of a truce or other matters". However, parlay as well as parley are stressed on the first syllable, not the second (and pronounced a bit differently). The French word "parlez" is stressed on the second syllable. Rh73 (talk) 07:43, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately the reference you quoted is now dead, but 'parlay' (not parley) has the sense of 'opening gambit'. On the face of it, your sentence means "...this is your first venture". Akld guy (talk) 11:22, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * This reference here works:  Rh73 (talk) 13:55, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I think in that reference, the soldier's use of the word is a pun on all three meanings listed above: parley, as in a negotiation before declaring the start of fighting, French 'parlez' as in talking or discussing, and 'parlay' as in '[first] venture into [battle]'. It is after all, a comedy skit. Akld guy (talk) 07:41, 4 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I would think "foray" would be the more usual term. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:30, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

MS Word changed short hyphen to long hyphen
I was typing in MS Word and it autocorrected a hyphen from the short type to the long type. I want to confirm whether this is correct? Wording was as follows "...separated one culture of each sample into GFP-positive and –negative fractions". MS Word changed the second hyphen (i.e. "-negative") into a long hypen (I think it's called an "em dash"). Is it correct to do that? Thanks. --192.41.131.251 (talk) 14:08, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * No, it is not correct. Both hyphens should be the same. --Viennese Waltz 14:11, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * "Word" can be dumb.  I had occasion to mention the name of a Welsh lady, whose Christian name was "Claer".   No matter how many times I typed it, it always came out "Clear".   I eventually managed to solve the problem - I'll leave you to puzzle out how I got round it. 86.134.217.6 (talk) 14:17, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Two ways to deal with that would be add the name to the spell dictionary or to change the settings in Word. It is possible to change the settings in Word so that if a spell checker change is reverted, it will stick as is.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:30, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Obviously it was an autocorrect entry which you simply had to delete. Shouldn't have taken you more than a couple of minutes to figure that "problem" out. --Viennese Waltz 14:28, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * It's an en dash. An em dash is slightly longer. Hack (talk) 14:25, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Generally, you can hit ctrl+z immediately after an autocorrect occurs, and it will undo the autocorrect without undoing what you typed (though getting into the habit of doing this can backfire when you start using a program which doesn't have autocorrection!). MChesterMC (talk) 15:23, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * In my version, if you type X-X it will keep it as a hyphen, but if you type X - X it will convert it to a dash. As to the spell check, I think you can add things to the local dictionary. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:18, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm not a technological whizzkid.  In every other case when I've been autocorrected I've retyped the spelling I wanted and Word didn't argue, but in this case it was firm.   No harm done - I see there's a manual override which I didn't know about.   Compare that with the case of the motorist who entered his car which had central locking and a flat battery.   It was a hot day, he couldn't open the doors or windows and perished with his dog.   That system also had a manual override but unfortunately he didn't know about it. 86.134.217.6 (talk) 16:24, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * See Microsoft Word Spelling and Grammar Check Demonstration.—Wavelength (talk) 16:27, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Locked into a car
(I've moved this subthread down into a separate section. It's not really on-topic here, of course, but I doubt there's a lot more to say...) --65.94.50.73 (talk) 04:24, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * If the battery was dead, how did he get the door open in the first place? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:46, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * FWIW, my car has a battery-powered key which will open (or lock) the doors from a distance – one press for the driver's door, a second for the other 4 (it being a hatchback) – but the driver's door will also open if I simply put the key in its lock and twist. Does the latter require the car battery's power?
 * However, while I imagine that different models of car from different eras may have variously differing modes of operation, I've never seen a model whose doors' manual operation from the inside was anything but obvious to an adult. I'd like to see a citation for 86's anecdote. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 19:15, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Really! (Unless the driver is so young that s/he couldn't imagine that the locks actually work manually, too.) I'd be absolutely amazed if safety regulations didn't require that at least one door lock (if not all door locks) didn't have an unpowered mode of operation. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:22, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Here's a news story on that incident: --Amble (talk) 19:36, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Fascinating. I'd still be pretty surprised if there hadn't really been a way out of the car, but I am in no position to dispute the findings of the Port Arthur police, either. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:48, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * RTFM! KägeTorä - (影虎)  ( もしもし！ ) 21:19, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * OBPersonal, but my car is specifically designed to do that. If the doors are locked, they can only be unlocked (a) with the remote control, or (b) by using the key from the outside.  There's a warning box on _five_ successive pages of the manual - "WARNING!  Do not leave anyone in the car if it is locked!  The doors and windows cannot then be opened from the inside.  Locked doors could delay assistance in an emergency."  European safety regulations, at least, apparently do not require an emergency manual release. Tevildo (talk) 21:21, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * As to how he got in, the news story from Port Arthur says the police think the battery cable came loose when he got in. That's possible: if it wasn't possibly tightened, the jolt from closing the door could have done it.  I've heard of other cases like this, including one where (as 86.134.217.6 said) the car definitely had a manual override but the trapped person didn't know about it; but I don't have a cite for one like that.


 * Here is an even worse trap: not only could the car not be opened when the doors were locked, but there was a time limit on how long they could be left unlocked. A 22-year-old man fell asleep in an unlocked car and died of dehydration.  Here is the original news report in French.  Here is a summary in English. --65.94.50.73 (talk) 04:37, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Memo to self: keep house-brick in glove compartment. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 13:14, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Car windows are pretty tough; that actually might not work. Special tools are available for the purpose.  See this Mythbusters episode (and in connection with the particular hazard they were concerned with there, also this followup.) --65.94.50.73 (talk) 17:17, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * It's advisable, when entering a car, to ensure you have a working mobile phone with you.  Leaning on the horn to attract attention if you are trapped does not work according to one commenter.   That said, people are aware of the international distress signal (SOS) and if they become aware that you are using it they will either come to your aid or notify the authorities.   So instead of indiscriminate honking you should give three short blasts (pause) three long blasts (pause) three short blasts (long pause) then start the cycle again.
 * The Russian submariners who were trapped in the Kursk at the bottom of the Barents Sea tapped this signal on the hull.  British and American specialist naval rescue ships embarked for the area but unfortunately the Russian authorities did not give permission for the operation until it was too late.
 * A boy got a job as an assistant at an industrial laundry at Heathrow airport.  Each washer had a key which was inserted in the appropriate switch in a bank of switches in a control area to enable it to function.   The boy entered one of the washers to free a jam which had caused it to stop working.   As he freed the washing the door closed and the washer started a cycle - twenty minutes, six spins a second, one thousand degrees.   The supervisor hadn't seen the boy for some time and went to look for him.   There was a strange banging coming from one of the machines but no sign of the boy.   The banging stopped and she went back into her office.   She noticed water pooling onto the floor and opened the machine it was coming from.   There she found the boy, who had the control key in his pocket.
 * In addition to cars, lifts, public lavatories and refrigerators are a problem.  I worked for a firm which left a freehold office building in Clerkenwell to rent the basement and second floor of an office building in Holborn.   The Clerkenwell premises were left empty.   One day while collecting some items from Clerkenwell the managing director was in the lift, which stopped between floors.   Luckily he had his mobile phone with him.   The Holborn building also had a nasty feature - the gate to the service lift on the second floor was kept locked outside working hours.   Anyone could enter the lift at the basement level from the street, but once inside it would only travel to the second floor, and once there it would not move again until the gate had been opened.   Early one Saturday morning there was a courier inside frantically banging on the gate while a temporary office manager hunted round for the key.
 * At the fishmonger's shop where I worked the cold store had a handle which enabled it to be opened from the inside.  This appears to be an unusual feature.   Before entering his shop in the morning a butcher used to buy a newspaper from the girl in the shop across the road and chat with her.   One morning he didn't appear.   The girl thought he must be ill and went to look for him.   She found him locked in his cold store.   When released he said "I knew someone would find me".
 * Another butcher was getting some meat from his cold store when a thief, who had followed him into the back, slammed the door, raided the till and made his escape.  The shopkeeper was there for twenty minutes until a customer, tired of waiting to be served, went behind the counter and found him.
 * The manager of a lunch parlour was not so lucky.  After the shop had closed and all the staff had gone home he entered a tiny refrigerator to pack away stock.   The door closed behind him. 80.43.198.251 (talk) 09:58, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Word for married woman's male sex partner outside of marriage?
Is there a word for this? "Keeping a master" doesn't work. 71.79.234.132 (talk) 21:09, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * "Gigolo" is in the neighborhood. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:27, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * [ec] Gigolo? Paramour? "Bit on the side" [coll.]? Tevildo (talk) 21:30, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually, if colloquial expressions are acceptable, "fancy man" is probably the best term in BrE. Tevildo (talk) 21:31, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Boyfriend is pretty normal. Japanese has 'sefure', which is short for the English words 'Sex Friend' - rather like 'friend with benefits', as we say in Br.Eng. KägeTorä - (影虎)  ( もしもし！ ) 21:34, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * "Friend with benefits" works in America too. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:36, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I wondered where she'd gone.... She must be busier than I thought. :) KägeTorä - (影虎)  ( もしもし！ ) 21:44, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Doesn't include all the details but lover may be sufficient from context. RJFJR (talk) 21:41, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * If you're looking for a close parallel to "keeping a mistress" (or "kept woman"), gigolo is probably the closest one of the choices above, not counting "fancy man" (which, as a Yank, I'd never heard before today). In the US, unless you're really trying to get at this "kept" bit, lover is probably the best general-use term. Boyfriend still usually implies "a romantic relationship". When I was younger, if you were using "boyfriend" or "girlfriend" beyond a certain age, it also had an implication of "we're at least exploring whether this is headed to marriage". But I don't think that's really the case any more. Friend-with-benefits definitely implies the opposite of that, though: we're friends, we're not taking this anywhere serious, but we like to play in bed. I don't know if that's exactly parallel to the Japanese term, or even to its use in the UK, but that's the usage here in the US. StevenJ81 (talk) 22:04, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

In certain subcultures, he's "her bull". Among the Inuit, the husband refers to him as "the other me".--William Thweatt TalkContribs 22:19, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * In English, 'paramour' is probably appropriate where adultery is implied or is known to have taken place, but it has become somewhat archaic. 'Lover' can be used in general. 'Gigolo' is a term for a man who is being kept financially by a married or single woman. The 'being kept' may include residing in the same living quarters, the eating of meals provided, and the permitted use of goods and services eg. vehicles, chauffeur. Akld guy (talk) 00:42, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * There is also 'toyboy' and 'sugar daddy', depending on the age of the lover (older or younger). What are the female equivalents of these terms?. KägeTorä - (影虎)  ( もしもし！ ) 05:04, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I thought a "gigolo" was simply a call girl or courtesan in reverse. 86.134.217.6 (talk) 12:22, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The "toyboy" is younger and the "sugar daddy" is older. Some men might run into a "bimbo" (younger) or "cougar" (older). 86.134.217.6 (talk) 12:30, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * A toyboy and sugar daddy don't just differ in age. A toyboy is an older woman's "kept man", whereas a sugar daddy is an older man who provides financially for a woman younger than him. — SMUconlaw (talk) 18:05, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * "Bimbo" is a weird one; it starts as an Italian word for "boy". I'm not sure how it evolved to its current English meaning. --jpgordon:==( o ) 18:49, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Italian bimbo or bambino is more often translated "baby", though it's true that it is applicable to lads a good bit older than would usually be called "babies" in English. My sense is the cutoff might be somewhere around six years old; that's just a very vague intuition and I'm not a native speaker.
 * Etymonline sez: [...] first attested in Italian-accented theater dialogue. Originally especially "stupid, inconsequential man, contemptible person;" by 1920 the sense of "floozie" had developed (popularized by "Variety" staffer Jack Conway, d.1928). --Trovatore (talk) 18:56, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * See and hear Jim Reeves - Bimbo 1954 (Novelty Country Music Songs) - YouTube (duration 2:51). (Warning: There is some profanity in the visitor comment section.)
 * —Wavelength (talk) 19:48, 4 August 2015 (UTC)