Could someone please capitalize the title on the "subjunctive" page? I don't know how, but it bothers me makes Wikipedia look bad and un-professional. — This unsigned comment was added by 216.114.41.41 (talk) at 22:32, 4 November 2014 (UTC).
I have a question about a word. I specifically would like to know the history of this word. I am doing an essay on this word as a punishment. here is the word - SKANK. I know it's a derogatory word but I need to know some history, or a place to start my search on it's history. — This unsigned comment was added by 50.53.21.79 (talk) at 22:19, 7 November 2014 (UTC).
I know that we're not supposed to help people with homework questions, but my life goal is to spread knowledge, so I thought, why not? At least this person could learn something about this, and that's probably what the person who assigned this was hoping for. Tharthan (talk) 16:59, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
--Romanophile (talk) 09:08, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm not an expert here, so I was wondering why there is a red link inside the box at Category:Ancient Greek language. The ancient Greek Wiktionary was deleted or it never started? (I am sorry, I have not learnt how to properly put wikilinks inside a text yet) Nikolas (talk) 22:24, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
First time wanting to edit a page here, and I've come up with a complex task that is way beyond me at the moment, so I'm wondering if someone would like to adopt it.
On the page randon there is currently a quotation from Spenser that is misplaced in the Noun section. It needs to be removed (a pity) or moved to the Adjective section, which needs then to be created.
I have a quotation that does belong in the noun section. It is from Halley, and I suspect (but don't know) that in the short (again, I suspect ...) period between the beginning of scientific ballistics and this word becoming obsolete (likewise, I think, the word 'random' used in this sense) it is therefore an important and valuable quotation.
"half the Parameter is the greatest Randon, and that that happens at the Elevation of 45 Degrees"
A Discourse concerning Gravity, and its Properties, wherein the Descent of Heavy Bodies, and the Motion of Projects is briefly, but fully handled: Together with the Solution of a Problem of great Use in Gunnery. By E. Halley.
Miscellanea Curiosa, Vol. I, 2nd Edition, 1708 p.316
(An ebook version is in preparation for Project Gutenberg.) --Alkhowarizmi (talk) 03:57, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
I realize these words are not in the dictionary. So what best describes the act of ovalizing, say "ovalizing" a hole during manufacturing, or oblonging, "oblonging" a round object by placing it in a press. I know once the object has been deformed, per se, it is oblong. Please advise. Thanks!
It used to be that one could use {{suffix}}
with lang=- to keep it from adding a category in cases where the suffixation occurred in a language other than that of the entry. Is there any way to do this now, and if not, why not?
I'm asking this because I'm not quite sure how to get rid of bogus categories such as Category:Middle English words suffixed with -k, which contains only the English term crash- but no Middle English terms at all.
The template can be useful for formatting in etymologies, which makes replacing it in cases like this a bit of a pain. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:04, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
nocat=1
. lang=-
doesn't work because if it did, then the template could no longer format the text and the link correctly. Even if it's not supposed to add a category, it should still know the language. —CodeCat 02:16, 12 November 2014 (UTC){{suffix}}
, {{prefix}}
and {{confix}}
, so I won't be asking this again in six months. Feel free to improve on my efforts- they're just a first draft. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:20, 12 November 2014 (UTC)This is a phenomenon I've always found curious, but I hadn't really considered just how unusual it was until I saw the reaction of someone who wasn't aware of it at all (diff).
It consists of certain words that are accented on the second syllable elsewhere, but instead are accented on the first syllable in Southern English. It's not just that the first syllable is accented, though. The second syllable retains a strong secondary accent, to the point that it sounds like the first syllable is a separate word, and the second syllable retains its full, unreduced pronunciation. The first syllable is also lengthened quite a bit, but I'm not sure if that's separate from the strong stress.
The examples that will no doubt be most familiar are guitar (/ˈɡɪːˌtɑɹ/) and police (/ˈpoːʊˌliːs/), but w:Southern English also lists behind (/ˈbiːˌhaɪnd/),cement (/siːˌmɛnt/), Detroit(/ˈdiːˌtrɔɪt/), display (/ˈdɪːsˌpleɪ/), hotel (/ˈhoːʊˌtɛl/), insurance (/ˈɪːnˌʃəɹɨns/), July (/ˈd͡ʒʊːˌlaɪ/), motel (/ˈmoːʊˌtɛl/), recycle (/ˈriːˌsaɪkəl/), TV (/ˈtiːˌviː/) and umbrella (/ˈʌːmˌbɹɛlə/). A couple more examples that come to mind are Arab (/ˈeːɪˌɹæb/) and Italian (/ˈaːɪˌtæljən/). I've also caught myself doing this with a word or two like default (/dɪˈfɑːɫt/), but I'm not Southern and I'm not sure where I picked it up.
I'm curious as to whether anyone has ever studied this, and whether anyone knows more about it, especially whether there's a pattern to which words have it and how far beyond the Deep South it extends. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:05, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
Why did אלעזר become Λάζαρος (Lázaros) with no initial (glottal stop or) vowel? Does Ancient Greek not allow initial vowels or something?—msh210℠ (talk) 19:37, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
--Supersonic414-On Wikia 13:52, 18 November 2014 (UTC) Hello! I just want to ask how to reply to peoples post! — This unsigned comment was added by Supersonic414 (talk • contribs) at 13:52, 18 November 2014 (UTC).
:
s or *
s under someone else's post, type your reply, ~~~~
and submit. — Keφr 14:03, 18 November 2014 (UTC)~~~~
. — Keφr 14:07, 18 November 2014 (UTC)Hello all, I wanted to ask, should pop-culture terms be here? This is a dictionary for pretty much everything, but really, should media terms be here? It's not that I have anything against them, but it would help if there was, say, a specific portal that led to any, if not all, terms caused by the internet, IM slang, pop culture references, etc. Of course, if this is already handled,then disregard this message.
Thanks Muaadth on fire (talk) 17:34, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
I always have know about the general usage of this phrase as a poker term, and as an expression of firm resolve. I don't have the resources to look deeper into the origin of the second word, but wondered if it could be derived from "patent" as in "letters patent", suggesting a proven right to occupy a place or position. Betsinoregon (talk) 20:59, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
I couldn't get templates {{RQ:Mlry MrtArthrP1}}
and {{RQ:Mlry MrtArthrP2}}
to work properly, though the code worked alright when I shortened their names. Would someone please delete these two templates or tell me how to do it. — ReidAA (talk) 11:23, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
{{RQ:Mlry MArthrP1}}
and {{RQ:Mlry MArthrP2}}
to work. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:48, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Why is the new colloquial definition (post 2000), which is not only a misnomer but also misuse of the term (nonsexual is a word that already meant that, and far less confusingly), listed as first and second? Especially when there is a concrete scientific definition for the term. http://en.wiktionary.orghttps://dictious.com/en/asexual --Mr.BloopBloop (talk) 20:23, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
In regards to my original question, I'm still wondering why it was ordered the way it was. I don't know the policy, and in my mind it seems logical to keep the most solid, longest currently used, concrete definitions at the top. In reference to the reply, the wiktionary page only gives post 2000 quotes, and the link you sent was in German. Not sure if that translates, or how that would work since this is not the German version. So I'm a little confused by that admittedly. Asexual is a common term in biology and as such I suspect it is used far more often, though in different circles. Though we are ultimately both speculating on that point. No way to tell, but it's still absolutely the current term for that meaning in biology. At the very least it has been written in more professional contexts, over a much longer period. Furthermore, as defined elsewhere, e.g wikipedia, the definition is actually more fluid. IE some asexuals can experience sexual attraction, which is why it frustrates me. A definition is put forward, and then it's basically picked apart until it doesn't mean anything remotely like the original definition. The only consistent element is some level of disinterest, ie the definition of nonsexual. Everything else is conditional. Finally it's semantic to say nonsexual doesn't mean that, and then assert asexual does when it was just an arbitrary decision someone made. The first person to do so did it in error, or colloquially by definition. That and it's only time and repetition that renders a word not colloquial; and since it's in direct conflict with the original meaning, the construction of the word (etymology), and it's concrete scientific definition (which can't be said of nonsexual), I'd say it is misuse (rampant as it is). In the context for the original meaning all humans are by definition sexual, it's a characteristic of our species, not an aspect of an individuals identity or sexual orientation which varies by birth. Though none of this really matters since deliberate misuse is how language works, and evolves, but that is essentially what has been done.--Mr.BloopBloop (talk) 21:25, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
I'm trying to provide references for the new word AquaStretch using the following links and the editor won't let me save them.
<URLs redacted>
Hi, could you delete the entry of "αντέξα" ( http://en.wiktionary.orghttps://dictious.com/en/%CE%B1%CE%BD%CF%84%CE%AD%CE%BE%CE%B1 ) as this form does not exist. Instead "άντεξα" (note the accent mark) is the correct "First-person singular, simple past form of αντέχω". (I already added the entry for "άντεξα".)
178.25.191.74 21:21, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
{{delete}}
on a page with your reason. In this case, done. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 21:38, 30 November 2014 (UTC)This template is now frozen. However it needs to be able to be used without a parameter so that it can be used on a quotation that hasn't yet been narrowed down to a chapter, as is the case with most of the existing Moby-Dick quotations. Furthermore, M-B has very many chapters and this deters people who use Wikisource from trying to narrow down a quotation's chapter. The code is very simple, as will be seen for example in Template:RQ:Bronte_Wuthering. Could this be fixed, please. — ReidAA (talk) 09:17, 1 December 2014 (UTC)