Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2021 December 24

= December 24 =

Deaf term
I was listening to something about the Deaf community today. I heard a term that I'd not heard before and I wanted to look it up later. But now I can't quite recall the term well enough to find it. It was something like nuhana or suhana. I feel like it was three syllables with A sounds in the last two. Can you help me find it? † dismas †|(talk) 00:10, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * If you cannot find it then I guess it wasn't actually Suhana. I don't know anything about the deaf community but it might help if you have an idea whether it was an organization, condition, aid, or whatever. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:01, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * It wasn't a person. I want to say it was a method of communication with the hands. † dismas †|(talk) 11:09, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Signalong or Sign name? Probably not. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:58, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I listened to it again and it sounds like "sumane". And it's described as "people who communicate using their hands". My spelling of it must be wildly off though because Google doesn't know what I'm looking for. † dismas †|(talk) 14:56, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Do you remember the preceding and following words for context? 92.8.151.199 (talk) 15:12, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I edit-conflicted with your previous comment.  Looks like you can replay the programme. 92.8.151.199 (talk) 15:16, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * It's about 25 minutes into episode 185 here. † dismas †|(talk) 19:23, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Right, so it's sumain (a Spanish/French hybrid word). Card Zero  (talk) 20:16, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * In Spanish, 'Su' means 'Your' and in French, 'Main' means 'Hand'. 2603:6081:1C00:1187:9D35:4EEF:98A2:ACEC (talk) 23:17, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Excellent! Thank you very much!! † dismas †|(talk) 01:15, 25 December 2021 (UTC)


 * The term is mentioned in the last paragraph of the section . The source for the trivia in the podcast above is apparently our article, as the wording is identical. I have not found evidence that the term is in actual use in the signing community, and am very suspicious of the explanation as a Spanish-French hybrid. Is it remotely plausible that someone trying to come up with a new word for signer – someone who communicates by signing – would pick words meaning "your hands" (and not "our hands", while also entirely ignoring that not just the hands as in fingerspelling, but gestures and facial expressions are what makes the communication possible) and then form this weird hybrid compound? --Lambiam 08:39, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I've delved into this.  K L J Mason, Advanced Spanish Course, Oxford 1969 (not the University but Robert Maxwell's outfit which my sister worked in, antique ISBN 08 012271 X) page 236 says:


 * 28 Personal Pronouns (Subject)
 * These are best omitted altogether as being superfluous, except:
 * (a) For emphasis:
 * e.g. Nosotros no somos gente - somos tú y yo."

So the word for "you" is tú (a previous contributor has previously identified the word yo as meaning "I".

Page 237:


 * (c) Vd., Vds. for the sake of politeness:

So the polite form of "you" is Usted.

Page 246:
 * 35. Possessive Adjectives and Pronouns
 * (a) The short form of the Possessive Adjective (mi, tu, su) is replaced by the long form (mio, tuyo, suyo) after the noun...

Page 247:


 * (iii) to translate of mine, of yours, etc.:
 * e.g. un amigo suyo...
 * (b) The Possessive Pronoun requires the Definite Article:
 * e.g. Aquí están tus padres; ¿dónde estarán los míos?...
 * Contrast: Esta pluma es la mía;
 * la otra será la tuya
 * pronoun serving to distinguish).
 * (c) The Third Person adjectives su, sus, suyo, are replaced by de él, de ella, etc., when necessary to avoid ambiguity, especially de Vd. to be polite:
 * e.g. el hermano de Vd. rather than su hermano and even
 * su hermano de Vd.
 * Similarly, with the Possessive Pronouns, hence el de él, el de ella, la de Vd., etc.

So according to this, translating su as "your" is simply wrong. 86.163.187.48 (talk) 11:37, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

the Schickele catalog
Peter Schickele, as the sole expert on the works of P. D. Q. Bach, gives each of the latter's works a catalog number. Most such numbers are obvious jokes, like "98.6"; but the Concerto for Horn and Hardart is numbered 27, which got a laugh from the audience. For those of us unacquainted with New York in 1965: how does the number 27 relate to Horn & Hardart? I find nothing nontrivial in either article. —Tamfang (talk) 23:11, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The Horn & Hardart article contains a line starting "Beginning in 1927, Horn & Hardart sponsored a radio program, The Horn and Hardart Children's Hour...". I suspect that is the source of the number 27 --TrogWoolley (talk) 23:26, 24 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Surely, the audience was not aware of this trivia. And basing the catalog number on it is not very funny. The theory does not explain the burst of laughter and applause its mention got. --Lambiam 08:02, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The laughter was not triggered by the number 27, which is generic and has no special meeting, but by the concept of "Schickele number," which is being introduced for the first time, and is amusing in its mock self-importance. Newyorkbrad (talk) 11:57, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Indeed: according to our article Peter Schickele Presents an Evening with P. D. Q. Bach (1807–1742)?, this album is a recording of the first concert of the music of P. D. Q. Bach, and on the track listing the Concerto for Horn and Hardart is the first piece. --Lambiam 15:47, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Aha. —Tamfang (talk) 01:56, 28 December 2021 (UTC)