Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2015 January 23

= January 23 =

Greek keyboard
(Maybe this belongs in Computing?)

I recently had some occasion to use a few Greek letters (as symbols in physics), using the Greek keyboard mapping in MacOS. There passed through my mind a memory of an episode of The Streets of San Francisco: the killer sent the police a note using a Greek typewriter, the detective obtained such a typewriter and determined what the output would be if a touch-typist hit the analogous keys on an English typewriter. (The encrypted sentence was "I worked with the Butterfly", the victim's nickname.)

Now, someone who commonly types in both languages would prefer that the key assignments correspond as nearly as possible, and here the match is quite good: the English letters ABGDEZH IKLMN OPRSTYFX correspond to ΑΒΓΔΕΖΗ ΙΚΛΜΝ ΟΠΡΣΤΥΦΧ, leaving only ΘΞςΨΩ (UJwCV) to be learned anew. But my memory of watching that TV episode is that there was very little such matching; the clue was nowhere near as transparent as "Ι ςορκεδ ςιτη τηε Βθττερφλυ".

Hence my cluster of overlapping questions. Can I trust a memory from no later than 1981 (as I probably haven't seen Streets since then)? Is the MacOS Greek keyboard layout the same as in Greek typewriters made before 1977? Were there multiple standards in Greek typewriters? Are there multiple standards for Greek computer input? —Tamfang (talk) 00:32, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * All I can help you with is the Keyboard layout seems to be standard across computing. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:25, 23 January 2015 (UTC).


 * this image and associated text are interesting. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:31, 23 January 2015 (UTC).

Proper verb tense
I was involved in a discussion at this Talk Page: Talk:Indonesia AirAsia Flight 8501. That article contained the following sentence: Iriyanto's name was a mononym, which is common for Indonesian names. I thought that sounded odd, so I asked this question:  Shouldn't that verb be "is", not "was"?  My thinking was: even if that individual is deceased, his name still "lives" in the present (so to speak). So, to back up my argument, I referred to a deceased person and stated: Richard Nixon's name is always going to be "Richard Nixon", whether he's dead or alive.  Another editor offered a counter-argument by stating: ''Which sounds more natural? Tricia Nixon's father's name is Richard Nixon. [or] Tricia Nixon's father's name was Richard Nixon.'' So, the question interested me enough to bring it here. What would be grammatically correct for a deceased person? I assume the context plays a role. But, strictly speaking from a grammar perspective, I assume there is a "correct" answer (i.e., the "proper" way to do it). As an example, would it be proper to say: "Richard Nixon's middle name is Milhouse."? or ""Richard Nixon's middle name was Milhouse."? Thanks.   Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 05:50, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I think it makes sense to use past tense in the phrase "X's father's name was Y" because the death of Y means that X no longer has a father. It has less to do with death than with a cessation of the role. A similar sentence might be "The name of the President at the time was George Bush."
 * Unless Indonesian custom is to have a different name in death, present tense is grammatically correct for the sentence in question. The features of one's name do not cease when one dies. — Æµ§œš¹  [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 07:19, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Unless you're a Japanese Emperor. --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  07:54, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Anybody with a Buddhist funeral takes a new name, even though they are commonly referred to by their old names (or their title, depending on who is doing the referring). As for the OP's question, I would use the past tense. Even though 'Iriyanto' is a fairly common given name in Indonesia, we are now referring to the deceased person's name, not the name itself, in my opinion. His name was a mononym, and not necessarily true for everyone else.  KägeTorä - ( 影 虎 )  ( Chin Wag )  11:42, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I strongly disagree. "X's father's name is Y" is/was/will ever be right. "Was" implies he later changed it. Now "X's father is/was Y" is a different question. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:43, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The phrase "His name was" is used to indicate/imply that someone is no longer around. What you describe makes some logical sense, but that's simply how people use English. If you infer from that, without greater context, that someone changed their name, then you will get quite confused with modern English — Æµ§œš¹  [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 23:38, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * By the way: would it be proper to say: "Richard Nixon's middle name is Milhouse."? or ""Richard Nixon's middle name was Milhouse"? Neither. His middle name was Milhous. --jpgordon:==( o ) 16:19, 23 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Put me down for "is". In this case, the name (which his father used) still is a mononym. It's a one-word name. Richard Nixon has no name. Has nothing. The name he had is still a famous one, but it was his name. If we're not talking about possession, it is always is. Names last forever, but nobody can have one for long. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:31, 23 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Oh wait, the apostrophe. I have no opinion now. Except that "Iriyanto" is a mononym. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:32, 23 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I think the "logical" questions alluded to in the above discussion are beside the point. They bring up arcane philosophical questions, like whether the past still exists in some sense (the question of presentism) or whether it makes sense to evaluate existential quantifiers in terms of tense logic.  If we all had to agree on these questions, just in order to make grammatical utterances, we'd be in trouble.
 * Still, I find my intuitions on this a bit surprising, and I don't know quite how to explain them. Richard Nixon's name was Milhous &mdash; that I'm quite sure about.  I would violently reject any attempt to put that sentence in the present tense.  However, Tricia is still alive (I think?) and for that sentence I really want to say "is", though I would also accept "was" after a slight hesitation. --Trovatore (talk) 17:41, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Spacing Modifier Letters
Where can some of them like caron, acute, grave, breve, ogonek be used? I've hardly seen them after or before letters not above or below.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 07:22, 23 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Accurately or otherwise, the WP article describes this block as "containing characters for the IPA, UPA, and other phonetic transcriptions". There's no mention of their use in what's the (or a) standard orthography for this or that language. Several of these are used above characters to indicate tone; the ogonek isn't IPA but it is (or was) used by Americanists for nasalization (says Pullum and Ladusaw, Phonetic Symbol Guide, 2nd ed). My uneducated guess is that attaching the nonspacing equivalents to IPA characters, however good an idea in principle, is far more likely to lead to problems when printed out or viewed online by others, and thus people separate them. Also, one might want to have two (or more!) doodads above or below a given letter, likely giving illegible results, so lateral separation would be wise. NB my knowledge of phonetic script (and phonetics in general) is minimal. -- Hoary (talk) 08:08, 23 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Is the ʻokina ( ʻ )considered a spacing modifier? If so, it appears before, after or between letters in Hawaiʻian and other Polynesian languages.  → Michael J Ⓣ Ⓒ Ⓜ 00:36, 24 January 2015 (UTC)


 * It's an independent consonant, not a modifier. —Tamfang (talk) 07:19, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
 * It's not important whether they are often used or not. Unicode simply includes them as standalone characters. The same with Chinese radicals. Most of them can't be used in practical context, but they are listed in Unicode. Then there are Combining Diacritical Marks, which are used to put any diacritical mark on anything. Wikipedia and Word, for example, use them. Just practical for computing. --2.245.174.209 (talk) 13:21, 24 January 2015 (UTC)


 * One use for such characters is in text about diacritics. —Tamfang (talk) 08:34, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Seeking a French translation
Hello, everyone. I apologize in advance if this isn't the right place to seek translation assistance, but it seemed most appropriate. I'm currently working on an article regarding a Frenchman, Aubin Olivier (though not that article itself), and I'm trying to accurately translate two titles which he held at different times. One is Maistre ouvrier, garde et conducteur des engins de la monnaie du moilin à Paris and the other is Maistre et conducteur des engins de la monnoye des Étuves. I have a rough idea what these mean via Google Translate, but I'm not sure it's accurate, and I need a pretty accurate English-language description to include in the article. If it helps, he introduced the screw press for coins to France, so I assume the titles must have something to do with engineering at the mint. Also, according to my source, "the King conceded to him the privilege of graver, fabricquer et monnoyer toutes sortes de pieces courantes, piedz fortz, médailles antiques et modernes, jettons et autres pièces de plaistir." Am I correct in thinking that this means "engraver, maker and moneyer of all current pieces, piedforts, medals antique and modern, jetons and other pieces in plaster"? Thanks in advance for any insight and translation help!-RHM22 (talk) 18:34, 23 January 2015 (UTC)


 * There are two issues. The spelling is archaic.  And the words will have technical meanings in the context.  What in the world, for example, is a "master opener"?  We do have contributers who speak at a native level, hopefully they can help. μηδείς (talk) 20:07, 23 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Ouvrier is ordinary French for "worker" ("opener" would be ouvreur). AnonMoos (talk) 20:13, 23 January 2015 (UTC)


 * You may be having problems with Google translate because those passages contain a number of archaic spellings (starting with "maistre"). The "-er" words in the last passage are infinitives, not agent nouns, so it's the privilege to engrave, manufacture, and mint.  Also, "courant" does not mean exactly current in this context, but more circulating as legal tender... AnonMoos (talk) 20:11, 23 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the thoughts, fellows! I thought it might be archaic usage, since the titles/descriptions are apparently from the mid-sixteenth century. Would it be correct to say that he was put in charge of mint operations?-RHM22 (talk) 22:34, 23 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure from the language whether he was a government employee as we would understand it, or a kind of contractor. AnonMoos (talk) 08:07, 24 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes, it is correct to say he was in charge of mint operations. This sentence "graver, fabricquer et monnoyer toutes sortes de pieces courantes, piedz fortz, médailles antiques et modernes, jettons et autres pièces de plaistir" means "engrave, make and mint all kinds of common coins, piedforts, antique and modern medals, jetons and other (plaistir) coins". I don't know what "plaistir" means, I'm not sure whether it could be an older form of the word "plaisir" (entertainment) or some jargon among coin makers. Akseli9 (talk) 10:20, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Maistre ouvrier, garde et conducteur des engins de la monnaie du moilin à Paris is misspelled. It is Maistre ouvrier, garde et conducteur des engins de la Monnaie du Moulin à Paris, which means "master craftsman, curator and operator of the machines at La Monnaie du Moulin in Paris". Akseli9 (talk) 10:33, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Maistre et conducteur des engins de la monnoye des Étuves is misspelled too. It is Maistre et conducteur des engins de la Monnoye des Étuves, which means "master craftsman and operator of the machines at La Monnaie des Étuves". Akseli9 (talk) 10:38, 24 January 2015 (UTC)


 * [EC] : First of all one should read: "Maistre ouvrier, garde et conducteur des engins de la monnaie du moulin à Paris" and "et autres pièces de plaisir". You can refer to page 15. "Maître-ouvrier [modern spelling], garde et conducteur des engins de la monnaie" is an office [same word in French and English], it was a personal charge given by the King to a person. This person can be seen as a government employee. Refer to French WP . According to my first reference, we can say that Aubin Olivier was in charge of mint operations. The "pièces de plaisir" were pieces engraved in small volumes and used to be given as gifts by the King.— AldoSyrt (talk) 10:33, 24 January 2015 (UTC)


 * This was pretty understandable although it's older French. I'm not a native, but modern "maître" and "plaisir" (today only found in the third person of the verb ["plaît"], not counting the controversial spelling reform) keep the circumflex, which implies that one or more letters have been left out. "maistre" is indeed much closer to English "master". A general development in French was the reduction of consonant clusters and diphthongs. --2.245.174.209 (talk) 13:45, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Plaisir is a noun, here and in modern French - the verb is plaire, and although "s'il vous plaît" is probably the most common use of it, all the other forms exist too (but I guess more commonly in the reflexive "se plaire"). "Plaire" itself of course does come from the Old French "plaisir" (and ultimately from Latin "placere"), but that's a much older form than this text. Adam Bishop (talk) 11:15, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you all for this excellent information! I'm going to copy everything down for future reference. I'm hoping to expand some of the information relating to French sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth century Mint officials and machinery, but some areas are difficult because I don't speak any French at all.-RHM22 (talk) 15:09, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Arabic question: Schmidt's Girls' College
http://www.heilig-land-verein.de/Einrichtungen/Schmidt-Schule/Logo_Schmidt-Schule.png has the Arabic for Schmidt's Girls' College in Palestine. What is the text?

Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 19:46, 23 January 2015 (UTC)


 * It doesn't have any equivalent to "girls". It just says كلية شميدت (where the second word is an unimaginative and not very phonetic transcription of Schmidt)... AnonMoos (talk) 20:02, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * That's fine. Thank you! WhisperToMe (talk) 20:13, 23 January 2015 (UTC)