Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2017 April 30

= April 30 =

Opposites of Greek-derived words beginning with `H`
Hello, again!

I've been studying Greek-based words in modern English beginning with `H` (or "Eta"), such as "history," "hero," and "habit," and have now become bewildered on how one forms their opposites.

I've noticed that in some cases, the opposite forms by simply adding `A` (or "Alpha") to the start of said word.

e.g. "historical" ——— "ahistorical"

Other times, however, the `H` drops, and is replaced by `A-PH` (or "Alpha-Phi").

e.g. "helian" ——— "aphelian" ; "heliotropic" ——— "apheliotropic"

Is this simply lexically specified to modern English spelling conventions? Or is there an etymological rule to this that dates from classical usage?

Thank You. Pine (talk) 08:11, 30 April 2017 (UTC)


 * The "ap" is the Greek preposition apo απο, not a negative prefix... By the way, the "a"/"an" prefix is not too productive in English (i.e. not too commonly applied to words of non-Greek origin). Also, the "h" sound in Ancient Greek was not spelled with the letter Eta at Athens after the alphabet reform of 403 BC (the sound was not written at all in Athenian orthography after that, until the later invention of the "spiritus asper" diacritic)... AnonMoos (talk) 10:08, 30 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks, AnonMoos! I don't know what I'd do, without you!
 * Pine (talk) 10:30, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Alternatives to classifying speakers by number of languages
Beyond the classification of speakers as monolingual, bilingual, and so on, are there other more nuanced classification systems? For example, people who speak two languages as a native are different from those who grew up monolingual but learned a second one. And both are different from someone who can only read and understand a foreign language. --Clipname (talk) 18:50, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I think what you're getting at is that there are different levels of language ability. There are many ways to assess this; one common universal framework, often seen on Wikipedia userpages as well, is the CEFR. But if you're interested in something deeper than just how well somebody's learned a language, maybe you should look at Speaker types. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 21:39, 30 April 2017 (UTC)


 * See the ACTFL Oral Proficiency Interview which is run by ACTFL, which is the standard accreditor for foreign language proficiency in the US. (They also offer written and listening comprehension tests. Here is the scoring guide.  "Advanced Low" is the minimum score to be certified as a Spanish teacher.


 * I got an "Advanced High" with a practice-test proctor, and an "Advanced Mid" on the official test, which my proctor said was because they assume the person taking the test is in college, and asked me about campus life (I lived in apartment and was over 40) and asked me about a car accident, although I have never owned or talked about a car in Spanish. I expect I would get an "Intermediate Low" in French and German, and lower scores in Russian and Zulu and the written tests for Latin and Greek, but I have no incentive to pay the test fee, which began at $90 when I took it.  In any case, the test is considered quite objective, and they are very rigorous in how they score it. μηδείς (talk) 00:01, 1 May 2017 (UTC)


 * The OP might also look at Fluency, which mentions reading, writing, speaking, and listening, and distinguishes between fluid and slow, halting use of a language:
 * Someone is said to be fluent if they have a high level of language proficiency, most typically foreign language or another learned language, and more narrowly to denote fluid language use, as opposed to slow, halting use. In this narrow sense, fluency is necessary but not sufficient for language proficiency: fluent language users (particularly uneducated native speakers) may have narrow vocabularies, limited discourse strategies, and inaccurate word use. They may be illiterate, as well. Native speakers are often incorrectly referred to as fluent.
 * Loraof (talk) 16:11, 1 May 2017 (UTC)