Wiktionary:Information desk/2018/November

What are Latin root words?

Category:Latin root words. DTLHS (talk) 21:38, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A category created by @Kc kennylau for no clear reason, which I suggest you should nominate for deletion. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:39, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have just asked myself the same after seeing 50639418. I see what was intended. It was meant as a category containing the basic stems one learns so as to derive the meanings of derived or related words from this. But I deny that this is of use in the very form of a category listing such words. If you want to do such things you should create an appendix.

On this occasion I would like to ask what Category:Kenny's testing category is for. Fay Freak (talk) 01:04, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's easy: it's the thing that holds things that don't go in Category:Kenny's testing category 2 yet. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:29, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An alternative meaning of an ethnonym, found in non-english bibliography

Hello to all, I hope this is the right place to put this question.

We have the entry Albanian, with 3 meanings for the moment. It is known that in Eastern Europe and the Balkans the equivalent term in local languages has/had also the meaning of "peasant". This is found in academic bibliography in german and english, however the authors do not use the exact english version of the word ("Albanian"). In the German source the term is "Albaner" (Schmitt Oliver, 2009, Skanderbeg: Der neue Alexander auf dem Balkan", p. 354), and in an english text is "Alvanos", as it is pronounced in Greek (Magliveras Simeon, "The Ontology of difference: Nationalism, Localism and ethnicity in a Greek Arvanite Village", Durham Thesis, Dhuram University, 2009 p.14.). It is obvious though that their subject is the term rendered in english as "Albanian".

I posted the german source (who is THE top albanologist) in the wictionary and certain user deleted it, with the explanation that this term "was used once" (this is not supported by the source), and that "Albaner" is not english: [1]. But there is one more source, and more can be found, proving that the term was not "used once".

Can someone suggest where this meaning should be? Thank you.

PS: I understand that some fellow users may not be happy about this meaning, but don't blame me for that. Anyway, the meaning is not derogatory.--Skylax30 (talk) 13:25, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Judging by your talk page, you still haven't grasped that we need evidence of 3 authors independently using the word Albanian with those meanings, not an Albanologist claiming them in a context where English wouldn't even be the language that was used. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 15:33, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I hope i will not be punished for not having grasped that. Can you point to the relevant Wictionary rule, please? If it is so, I will find more sources.

In addition to the above meaning of "Albanian", there is one more: "Mercenary", or "gunman from the Levant" or the similar, or just "foreigner". This meaning is historical and can be found in many old sources (dictionaries etc), mostly French, Italian and Greek. I can remember at least 4 of such sources. Can it be included here, as well?--Skylax30 (talk) 13:39, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The link to the relevant Wiktionary rule WT:CFI was given thrice on your talk page, and a fourth time in a reply to your posting on Talk:Albanian, together with an earnest admonition to read it three times over. WT:CFI stands for Wiktionary:Criteria for inclusion. By way of appropriate punishment, it has been decided that you must learn our criteria for inclusion by heart until you can faultlessly recite them. --Lambiam 14:55, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd rather read the whole WT:CFI, and particularly the point "For terms in extinct languages, one use in a contemporaneous source is the minimum, or one mention is adequate subject to the below requirements." However, it would take too much effort to explain here that the meaning in question is Late Medieval and is found in archival material in Venezian and other old languages. So, still the question is if this meaning can be transfered from german to english. But let me close this discussion with the wiktionarism that if "Greek means anal" (because it is attested more than 3 times), a good part of the global population are Greeks. Thanks for the answers.--Skylax30 (talk) 22:09, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The question is not if the meaning can be transferred from German or other languages to English. The question is whether it actually has been transferred to English. English is not (yet) an extinct language. Therefore, this question will be resolved in a positive sense if you present (a sufficient number of) attestations of the term Albanian in (durably archived) texts written in the English language in which the term Albanian is used in the sense of “peasant”, divorced from its original ethnic sense. This should not be particularly difficult to understand. --Lambiam 08:20, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Lambiam. this was the most meaningful answer.--Skylax30 (talk) 19:29, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Quarter taps night

What is "quarter taps night" in an American bar? Apparently some kind of special discount like happy hour. Equinox ◑ 19:33, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have not heard it before, but it looks like the weeknight when tap beer (draught beer) is on sale for 25 cents a glass. —Stephen ^(Talk) 20:38, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh yes, I forgot there is a coin called a quarter, and thought perhaps that all beers were sold at 25% price. Thanks! This doesn't seem CFI-attestable. Equinox ◑ 14:19, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am fairly familiar with the excise taxes on beer (and cigarettes, wine, hard liquor, and the bizarre tax on drugs that applies only if they are sold illegally, because medically necessary drugs are tax-free with respect to excise taxes) in the United States. Selling more than a tiny quantity of beer for a quarter (i.e. $0.25 US dollars) is illegal in the United States and has been illegal for a long time. You can give it away for free. For instance, at your private home, during a party. It is legal to sell a 12 fluid ounce (355 mL) can of beer for $1.00 USD, and this is occasionally done, but almost all of that dollar goes into taxes. This is most often done as a loss leader on nights when the bar is likely to have very few customers. It's actually a bit ingenious: Rather than saying "limit 3 per customer" or similar, they use a separate set of laws in the United States that make it illegal to serve somebody who is already drunk, because doing so is dangerous to public health. I am unfamiliar with a general term for this practice. Usually it is advertised on a sign that says something like "$1 Beers on Tuesdays from 2 PM to 4 PM", and then the only beer that is actually $1 is something that tastes bad and is warm. They have the normal beer at the normal price, they have one kind of beer for one dollar. Fluoborate (talk) 09:58, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I remember Ten Cent Beer Nights in the 1970s, and there are 25 cent beer nights in 2017 and 2018. If those prices are illegal, either a lot of places are breaking the law, or maybe it's not a federal law. It could be a state law or city ordinance. In any case, it's not unusual to see these prices advertised. —Stephen ^(Talk) 02:05, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

chappal meaning offensive and incorrect and should be removed

One of the meanings in this site for Chappal is "A type of footwear used by Indian or Asian parents to straighten their children. " This explanation that it is used to straighten children by Indian or Asian Parents is offensive and incorrect. It should be removed immediately.

It makes no sense and I have removed it. Equinox ◑ 14:18, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it was trying to say they are used to beat/throw at children to straighten them out, like chanclas? (That might merit mention on chancla so uses like "don't make me get the chanclas" would be more readily intelligible — I don't know, it's in a grey area between clearly lexical and clearly not lexical info — but I'm not familiar with it as a stereotypical use of chappals, though I can find a few instances of generic shoe-throwing in India.) - -sche (discuss) 14:46, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There can be little doubt, though, that the chappal is the instrument of choice for beating somone (not specifically children): [2], [3], [4], [5]. But I agree it is not a separate sense of the word, just like we should not add a sense to magazine with a definition like “Something used to spank naughty adults”. --Lambiam 13:22, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The original definition made no sense to me as a native English speaker, so I agree that it bears removal if only because it makes no sense. My initial thought was that "footwear to straighten children" would be special prescription shoes to fix crooked bones or something, thereby making them straight. The facetious "magazine" definition from Lambiam above actually makes a lot more sense, because it starts with the word "something" and not with "a small paper book published periodically used to spank naughty adults". I can easily see why that definition is offensive, but I suspect most readers are likely just confused and then ignore it. This is a major reason it may have gone a long time without being fixed. Fluoborate (talk) 09:20, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

English dialect entries

I have a bunch of books on English dialects and want to contribute. Do I need to provide references for the entries and are there any tools I can use to make mass edits? Thanks Uamaol (talk) 02:08, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Uamaol. That sounds great! Here, unlike Wikipedia, we don't rely on references for definitions. Instead, we require that each definition have three quotations demonstrating its use. If the reference books you are using are still protected by copyright and cite real examples of the word being used, feel free to use those examples and cite the reference book. Ideally, you should still look elsewhere for quotations, however. But don't let that scare you off if it sounds like too much work. You can always create the entries, and then find more quotations demonstrating the use of a word/definition if an entry is sent to RFV. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 03:49, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Creating entries without knowing whether or not a term is properly attestable sounds like a very bad idea...

If English dialects were treated as separate languages (that's how it's done with High German dialects), than one cite or one mentioning in an accepted source would be sufficient. Proposal for such treatings could be made at WT:BP. --Magic Ivan (talk) 17:11, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

gaff sail vs. gaffsail

Shouldn't these two really be listed as spelling variations of the same? Their respective definitions are almost - but not entirely - identical. My knowledge of sailing terms isn't good enough to just just carry out the suggested change.
- Teodor (d • c) 14:57, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I made my first page from scratch, "UHPC", please review it and the Talk page questions

I've taken a more adventurous step on Wiktionary, adding a page that was a redlink on at least one preexisting page. Here is my feeble attempt:

UHPC

The redlink on concrete has already turned blue, huzzah! However, do you see any raging tire fires of incompetence on my creation? Please let me know. If the tire fires are not obvious on the Wiktionary entry itself, then click on the Talk page, I left three unresolved questions there.

Thank you, Fluoborate (talk) 09:00, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me. —Stephen ^(Talk) 01:56, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]