Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2015 October 15

= October 15 =

Spanish - "se las"
Hello,

I've understood that the form "se las" appears when "there should have been" two consecutive direct and indirect pronouns: "He give it (when "it" refers to a masculine noun) to her" --> "Él le lo da a ella" (wrong) --> "Él se lo da a ella". However, this rule doesn't seem to explain the structure of the following Spanish phrase: "las palabras se las lleva el viento". What is the purpose of "se" (does it imply a passive form?) and what is the purpose of the second "las"? can one also say "el viento lleva las palabras"? Thanks, 212.179.21.194 (talk) 06:16, 15 October 2015 (UTC)


 * The statement "las palabras se las lleva el viento" is somewhat ambiguous as to whom or what se refers; presumably the third person indirect object is provided in the wider context, while a reflexive se doesn't make much sense. The obvious English translation would be that "The wind brings the words to him/her (or even to Ustede(s) or them)" (Meaning something like "He heard it through the grapevine" or "A little birdie told him").


 * In this case the las refers to the words, and it is used as a form of redundancy to deal with the fact that the sentence as a whole is in the OVS word order, which is normally highly marked.


 * "El viento lleva las palabras" lacks the indirect object, so it means something like "the wind carries the words away". (If you said "el viento se lleva las palabras" it would imply personification of the wind, which would be carrying the words off for itself.) The core sentence is "se las lleva" and rather than "el viento lleva las palabras", the proper rewording would be "el viento lleva las palabras a el".  Forgive the capitalization and lack of tildes, but I was in a hurry. μηδείς (talk) 16:13, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Gracias! 31.154.144.146 (talk) 19:48, 15 October 2015 (UTC)


 * UPDATE. I have been advised this is a set idiomatic phrase:
 * It's a very very common saying. And it means that words don't matter, only facts. For instance,
 * "Te amo," le dijo Juan a Paula.
 * "No me lo digas, Juan. Las palabras se las lleva el viento. Si me amaras de verdad, no habrías echado a la basura mi colección de discos favoritos."
 * In other words, "even the wind could bring one such words", words are "mere air". μηδείς (talk) 04:46, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Describing the "c" sound in IPA
Is this a good description of the sound represented by "c" in IPA??

We know that "t" puts the tip of the tongue at the mouth and that "k" puts the back of the tongue at the mouth. If I'm right, "c" puts the middle of the tongue at the mouth. Is this right?? Georgia guy (talk) 14:54, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No. 'c' is the same as 'k'. KägeTorä - (影虎)  ( もしもし！ ) 15:19, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No, in IPA, it's not. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:20, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I misread the question. KägeTorä - (影虎)  ( もしもし！ ) 15:36, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * (ec) Yes, that's roughly correct, although what's really important is not primarily which part of the tongue is active, but which part of the roof of the mouth it approaches. But yes, again, the main idea is that it's in the middle between where [t] is formed and where [k] is formed, i.e. at the hard palate, behind the alveolar ridge but more to the front than the soft palate. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:20, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I know that "x" is a non-English fricative best known as German ch. It sounds disgusting. But how about q?? How can q be described?? (Remember that I'm talking about the IPA sounds.) Any other non-English consonant sound you can describe well?? Georgia guy (talk) 15:35, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * "Disgusting"? ¡Joder! μηδείς (talk) 19:04, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * As for the sound /x/ (in IPA): No, it's not the German "ch"; The German "ch" is pronounced almost like the English "y" in "yard" - but without being voiced, while /x/ is pronounced like the British "ch" in "loch", i.e. it's pronounced almost like the French "r" - but without being voiced, so that the difference between the fricative /x/ and the plosive /k/ is just(!) like the difference between the fricative /f/ and the plosive /p/.
 * As for /q/ (in IPA): No Indo-European language uses this sound (if we disregard few local dialects). The best known language having this sound is (Standard) Arabic, in which /q/ is indicated by ق . HOOTmag (talk) 17:27, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * That doesn't describe how the sound is made. Georgia guy (talk) 17:44, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually /x/ is one of the sounds that corresponds to German 'ch', when 'ch' follows 'a', 'o', or 'u' (except 'eu' or 'äu'), e.g., Bach. In other positions, German 'ch' is pronounced /ç/, e.g., ich. See Voiceless palatal fricative. Incidentally, /c/ is a voiceless stop articulated in the same position as /ç/.  See Voiceless palatal stop.  Marco polo (talk) 17:45, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * As for /q/, it is an unvoiced stop like /k/, but while /k/ is articulated with the back of the tongue against the soft palate, /q/ is articulated with the back of the tongue against the uvula. See Voiceless uvular stop.  Marco polo (talk) 17:56, 15 October 2015 (UTC)