Language desk | ||
---|---|---|
< January 20 | << Dec | January | Feb >> | January 22 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
Particularly in English, but in other languages as well, non-noble surnames such as Robin's Son, or, Plumber or Smith were once used to describe an invidual by their parent's names, or their profession, or other notable features. At some point these surnames became frozen and were passed on down the ancestral (male) line. Peter may have originally been Robin's son but generations later David Robinson was probably not the son of Robin.
Was there a cultural or historical event that prompted this fixing of surnames and about when did it occur?
Bill Case ( talk) 06:05, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
The article on Welsh surnames gives a history of the fixing of patronyms which happened later there than in England. Alansplodge ( talk) 18:02, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes. One can see the utility of names becoming fixed; but it still seems to me some particular cultural event must have percipitated it. A cultural event doesn't have to be a specific historical event that occured on a given date. But something in the late sixteenth century happened that had a widespread impact which is still rippling through a few remaining tribal cultures. Perhaps, only guessing here, it was the creation of the first tax roles or the creation of baptismal documents for commoners as well as nobility. Whatever was the driving force I think it would be interesting to find out. Keep in mind that even if growth in population were the impetus, various medieval cultures could have chosen various other ways of distinguishing individuals. Fixing surnames is only one possible solution. -- Bill Case —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bill Case ( talk • contribs) 18:40, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
I think I remember hearing years ago a word used to describe the motion of birds or fish. The word I am looking for (it may be a biological specific term) is used to describe the motion in unison of large schools of fish or flocks of birds. The word was used to capture the three dimensional and beautiful unison that herd animals show, bobbing and weaving, when trying to escape from a threat or just gathering together in large numbers.
"Undulation" comes close; but is not the word I remember. Bill Case ( talk) 06:26, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Too bad. It looks like 'flocking' and/or 'schoaling and schooling' along with 'swarming' for insects are the correct words. I was hoping for a less mundane more evocative sounding metaphor which captured the rhythmic motion. - Bill Case —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bill Case ( talk • contribs) 18:17, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm posting this question for us to discuss it just for fun, I don't need the information badly. If this is unacceptable here, I won't bother if it's deleted.
I just read Angr's essay on which form of which English word should be preferred when there exist multiple forms of the same word. I found that quite interesting. When using English, I observe the British rules of spelling and pronunciation because I was taught so, but I admit some American forms are somewhat more appropriate to use. Anyway. One of the items is followed by the explanation that the inflected forms "disked" and "disking" reflect the pronunciation better than "disced" and "discing". However, I do remember being taught that if an English verb ends with a "c", it receives a "k" in its participle forms in order to prevent the occurrence of a soft "c". Therefore "to panic" becomes "panicked" and "panicking". So shouldn't the British inflected forms of the verb be spelt "discked" and "discking" respectively? I know the combination of a consonant followed by "ck" is quite unusual in English, but the rules should be observed. Could you tell me if that particular verb makes an exception? Also, I once started collecting English verbs ending with "c" and I managed to find a total of five. One of them was "to panic", which I already mentioned, and the others were "to picnic", "to traffic", "to tarmac", and "to bivouac". The verb "to disc" makes them six. Can you think of more verbs that end with "c"? -- 62.204.152.181 ( talk) 12:29, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
I imagine the verb "to disc" will eventually come into common use. When moving images were first invented, they were done on film, so one was "filming" something. Then videotape was invented, so you were "videotaping" (later just "taping") something. Now that video discs are a more popular format, my assumption is that you would be "discing / disking /discking (?)" something. — Michael J 16:12, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
I already know the answers to these, but hey, if you can't have fun on the Language desk once in a while, where welse can you ?
- Capital in Czechoslovakia (4) - Sweet. When mixed, hot sauce cools me (9,6)
doktorb words deeds 15:49, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
[I asked this question at the computing desk, but was advised to repost it here.]
I have a Mac using OS X 10.4. I'd like to use the characters "barred small capital i" (U+ID7B, ᵻ) and "barred Latin upsilon" (U+1D7E, ᵾ), which I've heard are available on newer versions of Lucida Grande, but on my version they just show up as boxes. See this not so enlightening exchange that I had with John Wells:
Lazar said... I'm still waiting for barred small capital i and barred Latin upsilon.
John Wells said... Lazar, didn't you like the ᵻ (U+ID7B) I gave you yesterday? Or have you not got the current Lucida Grande font installed? The other one you ask for is ᵾ (U+1D7E).
Lazar said... Oh, I have an older version of Lucida Grande. I must look into that.
These characters show up fine on the computers at my university using Vista, but on my Macbook, they don't. How do I go about getting them? Do I need to buy Leopard or Snow Leopard? -- Lazar Taxon ( talk) 16:49, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Does "Virtus, Fortior, Honorem" sound right to you guys? The context is a motto...It's the "Honorem" that's bothering me... Thanks ; )-- 217.227.73.237 ( talk) 19:47, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Is there some sensible reason why we use "un-" with "just" but "in-" with "justice"? "Incomplete" and "incompleteness" both use the same prefix. Is there any general rule by which one decides when "in-" is used an when "un-" is used, or would a foreigner learning English merely have to memorize all the separate instances? Michael Hardy ( talk) 22:34, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Two of "Marco polo"'s examples use "-ity" and one uses "-ice". But there's also "-ness" and a whole slew of other suffixes and forms for making a noun out of an adjective; that's one of the ways in which English is a hodge-podge among languages. Might the choice of suffix or other change in form have some bearing? Michael Hardy ( talk) 06:07, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Language desk | ||
---|---|---|
< January 20 | << Dec | January | Feb >> | January 22 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
Particularly in English, but in other languages as well, non-noble surnames such as Robin's Son, or, Plumber or Smith were once used to describe an invidual by their parent's names, or their profession, or other notable features. At some point these surnames became frozen and were passed on down the ancestral (male) line. Peter may have originally been Robin's son but generations later David Robinson was probably not the son of Robin.
Was there a cultural or historical event that prompted this fixing of surnames and about when did it occur?
Bill Case ( talk) 06:05, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
The article on Welsh surnames gives a history of the fixing of patronyms which happened later there than in England. Alansplodge ( talk) 18:02, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes. One can see the utility of names becoming fixed; but it still seems to me some particular cultural event must have percipitated it. A cultural event doesn't have to be a specific historical event that occured on a given date. But something in the late sixteenth century happened that had a widespread impact which is still rippling through a few remaining tribal cultures. Perhaps, only guessing here, it was the creation of the first tax roles or the creation of baptismal documents for commoners as well as nobility. Whatever was the driving force I think it would be interesting to find out. Keep in mind that even if growth in population were the impetus, various medieval cultures could have chosen various other ways of distinguishing individuals. Fixing surnames is only one possible solution. -- Bill Case —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bill Case ( talk • contribs) 18:40, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
I think I remember hearing years ago a word used to describe the motion of birds or fish. The word I am looking for (it may be a biological specific term) is used to describe the motion in unison of large schools of fish or flocks of birds. The word was used to capture the three dimensional and beautiful unison that herd animals show, bobbing and weaving, when trying to escape from a threat or just gathering together in large numbers.
"Undulation" comes close; but is not the word I remember. Bill Case ( talk) 06:26, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Too bad. It looks like 'flocking' and/or 'schoaling and schooling' along with 'swarming' for insects are the correct words. I was hoping for a less mundane more evocative sounding metaphor which captured the rhythmic motion. - Bill Case —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bill Case ( talk • contribs) 18:17, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm posting this question for us to discuss it just for fun, I don't need the information badly. If this is unacceptable here, I won't bother if it's deleted.
I just read Angr's essay on which form of which English word should be preferred when there exist multiple forms of the same word. I found that quite interesting. When using English, I observe the British rules of spelling and pronunciation because I was taught so, but I admit some American forms are somewhat more appropriate to use. Anyway. One of the items is followed by the explanation that the inflected forms "disked" and "disking" reflect the pronunciation better than "disced" and "discing". However, I do remember being taught that if an English verb ends with a "c", it receives a "k" in its participle forms in order to prevent the occurrence of a soft "c". Therefore "to panic" becomes "panicked" and "panicking". So shouldn't the British inflected forms of the verb be spelt "discked" and "discking" respectively? I know the combination of a consonant followed by "ck" is quite unusual in English, but the rules should be observed. Could you tell me if that particular verb makes an exception? Also, I once started collecting English verbs ending with "c" and I managed to find a total of five. One of them was "to panic", which I already mentioned, and the others were "to picnic", "to traffic", "to tarmac", and "to bivouac". The verb "to disc" makes them six. Can you think of more verbs that end with "c"? -- 62.204.152.181 ( talk) 12:29, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
I imagine the verb "to disc" will eventually come into common use. When moving images were first invented, they were done on film, so one was "filming" something. Then videotape was invented, so you were "videotaping" (later just "taping") something. Now that video discs are a more popular format, my assumption is that you would be "discing / disking /discking (?)" something. — Michael J 16:12, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
I already know the answers to these, but hey, if you can't have fun on the Language desk once in a while, where welse can you ?
- Capital in Czechoslovakia (4) - Sweet. When mixed, hot sauce cools me (9,6)
doktorb words deeds 15:49, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
[I asked this question at the computing desk, but was advised to repost it here.]
I have a Mac using OS X 10.4. I'd like to use the characters "barred small capital i" (U+ID7B, ᵻ) and "barred Latin upsilon" (U+1D7E, ᵾ), which I've heard are available on newer versions of Lucida Grande, but on my version they just show up as boxes. See this not so enlightening exchange that I had with John Wells:
Lazar said... I'm still waiting for barred small capital i and barred Latin upsilon.
John Wells said... Lazar, didn't you like the ᵻ (U+ID7B) I gave you yesterday? Or have you not got the current Lucida Grande font installed? The other one you ask for is ᵾ (U+1D7E).
Lazar said... Oh, I have an older version of Lucida Grande. I must look into that.
These characters show up fine on the computers at my university using Vista, but on my Macbook, they don't. How do I go about getting them? Do I need to buy Leopard or Snow Leopard? -- Lazar Taxon ( talk) 16:49, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Does "Virtus, Fortior, Honorem" sound right to you guys? The context is a motto...It's the "Honorem" that's bothering me... Thanks ; )-- 217.227.73.237 ( talk) 19:47, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Is there some sensible reason why we use "un-" with "just" but "in-" with "justice"? "Incomplete" and "incompleteness" both use the same prefix. Is there any general rule by which one decides when "in-" is used an when "un-" is used, or would a foreigner learning English merely have to memorize all the separate instances? Michael Hardy ( talk) 22:34, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Two of "Marco polo"'s examples use "-ity" and one uses "-ice". But there's also "-ness" and a whole slew of other suffixes and forms for making a noun out of an adjective; that's one of the ways in which English is a hodge-podge among languages. Might the choice of suffix or other change in form have some bearing? Michael Hardy ( talk) 06:07, 22 January 2010 (UTC)