User talk:Æ&Œ/archive

Pronunciations
It is normal practice to place indications of stress at the beginning of a syllable, rather than immediately before a stressed vowel. See for example the change I made to your edit at gentlewoman. This may require considerable re-editing, as you seem to have been adding lots of pronunciations lately. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:57, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The Pronunciations are from WolframAlpha. If it pleases you, I can stop using that as a Resource for Pronunciations. Sorry for the bad Edits. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 00:25, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * All correct, I modified the English Pronunciations I included. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. Please let me know if these are Improvements ; I shall not include more Pronunciations unless I get your thumbs-up.
 * The French ones I am less certain about. They were copied directly from the French ‘Wiktionary’ out of good Faith. They may possess different Rules for Pronunciations over there. Since my French is still quite poor, it could probably be best if I compromise them. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 01:05, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No, I can see a number of errors immediately in the English pronunciations you've added. I know very little about French, and can make no recommendations there.  I add French pronunciations here only when they exist already on the French Wiktionary, which I too take on good faith.  French has a number of differences from English, such as not having phonemic stress, so stress is not marked in French.


 * For the English, you're adding secondary stress markers sometimes that shouldn't be there, and also are adding incorrect vowel sounds. You're also putting the primary stress in the wrong place sometimes.  Some of the pronunciations you've added are using US-specific phonemes, and so should marked as "(US)".  See indenture, for one example where I've corrected three problems in the pronunciation.  I'd gather than the source you're using is inadequate, as are a number of electronic sources I've come across (the one that came with my computer consistently misuses the secondary stress marker to indicate primary stress, among other problems). --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:22, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree with EncycloPetey, but it might be easier to modify the pronunciations rather than outright delete them, no? The one at rapidly looked pretty close to me. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:30, 7 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Ah blast. I am quite sorry sir, I hope that you will not hold this against me. I shall stop referring to WolframAlpha for pronunciations. However, I believe that I will continue copying the French pronunciations unless you suggest otherwise. I thank you for bringing this to my attention, as I detest including inaccurate content on the project. If you would still like for me to include pronunciations, feel free to recommend me a good resource. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 23:35, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I know of no online source on which I'd rely, but there is a relatively cheap paperback, the Cambridge English Pronouncing Dictionary. It is excellent for UK pronunciations, and mostly adequate for Us pronunciations, with certain caveats.  You have to keep in mind that this volume marks vowel length, but that vowel length is not phonemic in the US (and so should not be marked for US pronunciations). There are also a number of omissions, oddities, and occasional errors I find with regard to US pronunciation. Additionally, phonological experts now feel differently with regard to a number of British phoneme values as used in the book, but as long as you learn which ones these are and how to modify them, the volume makes a good starting point. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:18, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Rhymes
Hi. Rhymes must rhyme on the stressed syllable. MED-i-cine, i-MAG-ine, do not rhyme with a strong IN. Equinox ◑ 00:49, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for calling my attention to the missing ===Noun=== headings. I'm also supposed to possess Asperger's syndrome, by the way, though I do dispute this folk diagnosis. --Pereru (talk) 02:02, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

¿Son estas palabras sinónimas?

 * I don’t think so. I would say that synonyms of include:
 * Synonyms of include:
 * ,, , , , , , , , , , , , —Stephen (Talk) 00:18, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * ,, , , , , , , , , , , , —Stephen (Talk) 00:18, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

WT:RFC
We appear to be having digraphic difficulties. Given your interests, I think that you may want to weigh in, or at least be aware of the discussion. Thanks --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 01:12, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

orden
¿Sabe que se dice «habla usted» o «usted habla» en el español? comment by Æ&Œ


 * You can use either one in most cases. In questions, «habla usted» is more common, and in statements «usted habla» is more common. However, there are exceptions, and not infrequently «habla usted» may be heard in statements, and «usted habla» in questions. The order in Spanish is not a very important consideration in formulating questions, in contract to English. In Spanish, it’s more about focus and emphasis. The first word draws more attention and emphasis than the second word, so put the more important word first. —Stephen (Talk) 10:36, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

cuchillito
¿Pueda vuestra merced traducirla al inglés? comment by Æ&Œ


 * cuchillito = small knife, little knife. —Stephen (Talk) 05:27, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Ligature spellings at RFV
Hi, just wanted to inform you of a couple ligature spellings at WT:RFV that ought to be saved if they are possible to cite. Thanks --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 00:32, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Medicide
You're about to be done. - Jeff Knaggs is about to use his authoritarian wisdom and do your fat ass.


 * Stop spamming my talk page with more shitty, petty complaints. You are annoying, but the orangish message I receive is even more annoying. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 22:45, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

mille
No comprendo la diferencia entre un « mille » y un « millier ». ¿Es un mille especifico mientras un millier es aproximado ? comment by User:Æ&Œ


 * That’s right, « mille » is the basic French word for thousand, while « millier » is a derivation of it that means "about a thousand." —Stephen (Talk) 07:02, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

lenguas eslavas
¿Poseen artículos definidos en las lenguas eslavas? comment by User:Æ&Œ


 * The only ones that have definite articles are Bulgarian and Macedonian, which have definite articles in the form of enclitics: (table),  (the table). —Stephen (Talk) 16:58, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

le mien
¿Cuál es la diferencia entre « mien » y « le mien » en el français? comment by User:Æ&Œ


 * is the strong possessive (as opposed to ). In almost all cases it needs the definite article (there were times in Old French where it might be used without the definite article, but this originally adjectival form was eventually nominalized, so it needs the article). Sometimes in a very familiar style of French, is used with  or  instead of : un mien livre = a book of mine. In a familiar style of negative, you may encounter "ce n’est pas mien" (it’s not mine). But normally the strong possessive  needs the definite article, and the weak possessive  does not. —Stephen (Talk) 19:54, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry
Please keep up the good work. I didn't mean to hurt your feelings.

I get very annoyed at even being reminded about all the typographic problems that bedevil our efforts to use older works for citations. We all have to pay attention to typography at least as much as is required to understand what Google gives us. I'm expecting typographic problems for example in searching for the sometimes obscure origins of some of the older taxonomic names, often based on classical words with the "ae" and "oe" digraphs. I've noticed that both a search using the digraph and one using the modern spelling can include the same passage. Is that something that can be relied on? DCDuring TALK 12:18, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * No hard feelings. I appreciate your kindness and your labours. About opposing forms together: I would personally say ‘yes,’ specially if both forms are common through‐out the book. If one is rare and the other is common, we could hazard a guess to say that the rare form is a misspelling, but we can only suppose, otherwise it is difficult to determine why both contradictory spellings are used together. (If I recall correctly, Shakespeare used both ‘music(k)’ and ‘musique’ in Romeo and Juliet.) --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 13:08, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I obviously departed from kindness - and not for the first time.
 * Well Shakespeare, his possible co-authors, his editors, or their typesetters. It is often simply impossible to sort it out. We tend to favor 'conservative' interpretations, which favor the conventional - probably appropriate for language, which is not much more than convention. DCDuring TALK 15:24, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Cuáles problemas
¿Es mi español aún malo? ¿Cuáles problemas estoy haciendo? comment by User:Æ&Œ


 * In general, it often still sounds a lot like English, as though you are thinking in English and then translating into Spanish. You probably should start regularly reading Spanish newspaper and magazine articles, and you should try to listen to Spanish TV (at least the Spanish news segments). You need to find materials that you can comprehend fairly well, but that are above your level of competence (news is usually a good choice because you are often familiar with the story already, so the Spanish is easier to comprehend). As you continue to read and listen to such materials, you will automatically start to make great strides without even trying. See Input hypothesis and Net hypothesis.pdf to see what I mean. —Stephen (Talk) 23:32, 24 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, sorry about that. I am poor, so most of my resources come from on‐line, and I do not surround myself with native Hispanophone friends. I personally think that I can generally understand it well, but I cannot use it well. The same likely goes for my French. I try to read Spanish in Spanish and not immediately start translating it, if that makes sense. I thank you for your advice, it is much appreciated. Can I enquire if it is O.K. if I listen to Spanish with Spanish subtitles, though? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 00:07, 25 October 2012 (UTC)


 * You mean listen to Spanish with English subtitles? I think the subtitles would be very distracting and I doubt that you would make any progress. If you listen to Spanish without subtitles, it might take a couple of weeks before the phonological structure starts to make sense, and then you’ll begin to understand it a lot better. —Stephen (Talk) 00:57, 25 October 2012 (UTC)


 * No, no. Subtitles in Spanish text, not English. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 01:09, 25 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I’ve never heard of anyone doing that. I think the only Spanish programs with Spanish subtitles that you will find are those with the subtitles created by a voice-recognition program, and those software programs make a lot of mistakes. I really don’t know if that would help, hurt, or just have no effect. Just be aware that the subtitles may not be correct. I have only seen English programs with English subtitles (for deaf people) and the mistakes were pretty bad. One time there were subtitles on a PBS program about Kristallnacht...the subtitles declared that Kristallnacht consisted of a tax on Jews. Of course, it should have said attacks. —Stephen (Talk) 02:00, 25 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Reminds me of this guy's subtitle howlers . "It must have taken a lot of footballs to come here." Equinox ◑ 23:04, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

avoir qu'un
¿Significa esto « have [more] than one »? comment by User:Æ&Œ


 * I can’t think of an example that does not have the negative . If I had to translate "avoir qu'un", I would say "have/be but one." An example of usage might be "il ne peut y avoir qu’un seul survivant" (there can be only one survivor). Or more literally, "there cannot be but one survivor." —Stephen (Talk) 07:45, 29 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks, but, y’know, you can talk to me in Spanish or French. I do not mind it. You can even talk to me in a Romance language I haven’t learnt yet; I like them all. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 19:30, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Si tibi latine dicam, intellegesne? Cum paucis quos cognosco ita possum. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:02, 1 November 2012 (UTC)


 * ¿Me estás preguntando si yo sé el latín? Je ne l’ai étudié. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 04:12, 1 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Io pensavo ti volevi qualsiasi lingua romanza (o ascendente)... Spero il latino è comprensibile. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:31, 1 November 2012 (UTC)


 * No comprendo mucho del latín clásico, lo siento. Je ne considère pas le latin être une langue romane, salvo si el latín se genere. Peut‐être que le latin reçut la peine de mort pour l’inceste ? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 04:45, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

réputer
¿Son las palabras sinónimos? comment by User:Æ&Œ


 * They are not the same language, so I don’t think you can say they are synonyms. The word réputer in French means reputar in Spanish and vice versa. —Stephen (Talk) 23:01, 31 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I didn’t believe that synonyms were exclusive to their respective languages. I thank you for your information again. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 23:02, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

pyaemia
I have just undone this edit because pyæmia is already in the alternative forms seciton. I assumed you had not noticed this. Having it twice is unnecessary and possibly actually detrimental as the reader may then miss the form they were really looking for. If there is some rule on layout or formatting that I am not aware of then please accept my apologies in advance and revert it back. Spinning Spark ''' 17:44, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

espresar
¿Acordaría contigo que esta palabra existía en el español moderno? comment by User:Æ&Œ


 * In Spanish, I would say that it is to be considered either misspelled or eye dialect. —Stephen (Talk) 04:08, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

*pictare
If this didn't have an -n-, how come so many of the descendants do? 04:20, 27 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Likely a re‐Latinisation based on pingo. I dun possess any source to ‘confirm’ this, though. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 06:01, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

argumentative
Is the Wiktionarian opposed to any debate or argument? The perception of mine is that the Wiktionarian would strongly favour the arguer to shut his bloody mouth up and immediately and unquestionably accept the opposing view given. Those who dare to debate or even enquire extensively about a matter are judged or attacked as being ‘stubborn;’ the action of being ‘stubborn’ is generally taken negatively on the website, perhaps because obstinance can be time‐consuming, regardless if the opposing force is not obliged to continue against the arguer. The arguer, whether seeking additional information, or defending a crux which, of course, he normally would not choose if it were unreasonable to him, is antagonized, regarded as misbehaving, and as a potential consequence the arguer may be damaged both in his own perception and in the perceptions belonging to others, perhaps with the latter causing the former, thus arguments in the future are less likely. With arguing being less common, their points of view are secured and unchanged as the editors continue modifying pages uninterrupted. Editors, obviously, arrive to the project to attempt to improve entries, not argue with anybody, hence those who distract them from their desired goal to an undesired goal are demonized. The undesired goal is, obviously, undesired (more so) because it detracts from their desired one. (Neither goal necessarily requires extensive consideration before accepting.)

It would appear to me that Wiktionarians are quite apparently opposed to innovation and deviation in their project, some potential consequences of debating, because they detract from their time, which they value over ‘significant’ change. The motives of these arguers, who need not be hostile, are hardly of interest to these editors, whom such editors unashamedly treat with contempt. The practices desired by editors are conserved not because they are intelligent ideas, but because they do not interrupt their editing, and by extension, they do not detract from their time.

I believe that expressing my views here could help me learn something. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 10:19, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

ex
La palabra del latín se era cuidando allí, y también se era muy común allá, ¿pero porqué no es en otras lenguas, como una palabra independiente? Puedo solo encontrarle del portugués «eis». comment by User:Æ&Œ


 * Sorry, I cannot make out your meaning. —Stephen (Talk) 05:33, 3 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh damn my lack of fluency. Well, I just want to know why this word doesn’t have more descendants in its daughter languages. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 05:37, 3 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Are you talking about, , or another word? —Stephen (Talk) 08:16, 3 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The former! --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 12:05, 3 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The Romance languages still have it. Spanish ex ministro (ex-minister); Italian ex ministro; Portuguese ex-ministro; French ex-ministre; Catalan ex-ministre; Galician ex ministro; Romanian ex-ministru. —Stephen (Talk) 01:50, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


 * To a degree, that is true. It still exists in phrases and as suffix, but I was referring more to independent instances as a lone word. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 03:03, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I always thought that it was supplanted by / (and/or mergers thereof) somewhere in Late Vulgar Latin. My reasoning for this is that by my understanding of the sound laws, it ought to become /ɛs/ or /eː/, both of which could be confused with, which had become something like /eː/ or /e/ by then, and , which had become something like /ɛs/ (even more reduced in Gallo-Italian, to something like /ɛ/). This is, of course, purely hypothetical, however. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:47, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Vmd.
¿Es este pronombre en español un arcaísmo? comment by User:Æ&Œ


 * The spelling is usually considered archaic if pronounced usted. The modern spelling is Ud. (less commonly Vd.). If it is to be pronounced vuestra merced (Your Grace, Your Worship), as when addressing royalty, some members of the judiciary, etc., then it is no more archaic than English Your Worship. —Stephen (Talk) 11:06, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Appendix talk:Vulgar Latin/montanea
What do you think? —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 06:54, 15 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh great, I apparently inserted more bullshit into the project. Now people shall hate me even more. Just make the tables, and I can replace the nonsense with the proper declension tables. Please don’t chastise me or insult me. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 18:41, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Don't take things so badly. I honestly just wanted you to get a chance to voice your opinion, because you've spent more time with Vulgar Latin than most of us. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 22:00, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

laziness
If it is not apparent by now, I am becoming lazy on Wiktionary (English), partly because I am less interested in English, and also partly because the…atmosphere…here is still not really comfortable for me. I’m not saying that I am ‘leaving forever,’ but from this rate it appears that I’ll be editing more sporadically (for the time being).

I’m just saying. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 21:15, 7 February 2013 (UTC)


 * ☹☹☹ Who is going to be the archaist-in-chief if you leave? — Ungoliant (Falai) 22:26, 9 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Maybe Equinox. I’m sure that he can mimic archaic modern English better than I (sometimes) did. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 22:37, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Etymologies
Please note that we don't put etymologies on alternative forms' or rare forms' pages, preferring instead to host that at the lemma. Grazie! —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 01:30, 16 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Usually I could and did put some brief etymologies for terms that are combinations, so I don’t know when this ‘rule’ appeared, but whatever. I’m not going to argue to death over this nonsense. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 01:35, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * It's not about it being a combination. It's the fact that there ought to be a page which it is an alternative form of, which can host the etymology. It's the DRY principle, if you wish to read more. Gracias! —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 01:39, 16 February 2013 (UTC)


 * That isn’t the point. There are dozens of pages that are alternative forms but still possess etymologies. It seems like you ‘people’ were looking for a new way to annoy me again. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 01:51, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, we are inconsistent. I just try to keep the OCD-urges down, but in this case I couldn't help it. No, I'm not trying to annoy you, and I hope you realise that. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 01:54, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

WOTD
Now is your chance! I think you’d be a great WOTD setter because you nominate lots of interesting words, so if you want to take the reins I’ll support you. — Ungoliant (Falai) 21:33, 19 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Eh, não sei. Não seja ocupado, mas penso que já falto la maturidade ter la responsabilidade fazer isto. Também tenho la incerteza si me apoiariam porque minhas interacções aqui temem sidas cruéis. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 02:34, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Vamos cara! Isso era verdade em 2011, mas hoje já és um respeitabilíssimo contribuidor. (PS: do you want me to point out the mistakes in your sentences?) — Ungoliant (Falai) 02:52, 20 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Tal vez poderia aceitar esta proposição, mas todavia não. Por favor mostra‐me os erros assim que não os faria outra vez, senhor. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 03:04, 20 February 2013 (UTC)


 * (I will write in English, for clarity’s sake):


 * “Não seja ocupado” → “Não que esteja ocupado” because present subjunctive usually must be preceded by a que somewhere; and you must use estar, not ser here, since being busy is a temporary condition.
 * “la” → “a”.
 * “já falto la maturidade” → “ainda me falta a maturidade”: já here would translate as already; faltar in this sense is reflexive, so you must use the reflexive 1st person singular pronoun me. It translates literally as “to me it lacks”.
 * “maturidade ter la responsabilidade fazer isto” → “… maturidade para ter a responsabilidade de/para fazer isto.”
 * “si” → “se”.
 * “me apoiariam”: this is correct, but if you want to sound extra awesome you can add the pronoun to the middle of the verb: “apoiar-me-iam”.
 * “temem sidas” → “tem sido”: temem is a form of temer (“to fear”); Past participle used as part of a phrasal verb form is always masculine singular.
 * “Tal vez” → “talvez”: tal vez means “such time” or “once”.
 * “mas todavia não”: there must be a verb here, like “mas todavia não (o) farei” or “mas todavia não (a) aceitarei”.
 * “… os erros assim que não os faria …” → “… os erros, assim não os faço/farei/ cometo / cometerei …”: There must be a comma before the conjunction assim, otherwise it can be very easily confused with the adverb assim, or even with the conjunction assim que (“as soon as”) in your sentence. The que is unnecessary, the verb must be in the indicative present or future, and it’s much more common to use cometer than fazer with erro.
 * — Ungoliant (Falai) 03:51, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

categories
Thanks for the help filling up Category:en:Gender! - -sche (discuss) 18:57, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Portuguese studies
Hey Seth, I’m curious: are you serious about learning Portuguese, or are you just learning a thing or two while you study Spanish? — Ungoliant (Falai) 12:46, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Sou sincero sobre meu aprender de português. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 15:03, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Sua resposta está ambígua. — Ungoliant (Falai) 01:35, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * What I was trying to say : yes, am serious about learning Português. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 06:21, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok. Check your e-mail. — Ungoliant (Falai) 21:10, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

English /s/ vs /z/
Hey Seth, can you help me? I want to know if there’s a rule to predict whether a word final s is pronounced /s/ or /z/ in English. Why does is have /z/ and us /s/? — Ungoliant (Falai) 02:32, 13 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Na maioria vasta de casos, é quando um termino termina‐se com um consonante vocal (b, d, g, j, l, m, n, r, v or z) ou uma vocal, é /z/. Penso que há um fenómeno quando um /ə/ ou um /ʌ/ (u) ultimo significa que a s é silencioso. is se pronunciava silencioso até o sigilo XV. Está esse prestável?  --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 02:52, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Sim. Obrigado.
 * maioria vasta → vasta maioria; termino → ; um consoante → uma consoante; consoante vocal → consoante sonora; vocal → ; ultimo → ; a s → o s; silencioso → ; sigilo → ; está esse prestável → está prestável ou está esse(a) something prestável. — Ungoliant (Falai) 03:11, 13 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Wow, that was terrible. At least I was comprehensible…I think. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 03:13, 13 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Don’t worry about it. The first mistake is excusable, since Portuguese normally has the adjective follow the noun. Surdo and sonoro are phonetic terms, I doubt most native speakers would know what’s the correct term. Getting the genders correct is something that takes time. To get things like that last clause correct you will have to spend years reading stuff until the notion of what’s correct and what’s not is “carved” into your brain, and you might never be as good at it as a native, no matter how much you try (like I never know when to use on, in or at). Vocal and ultimo are minor mistakes. That leaves you with termino and sigilo as the only “major” mistakes. — Ungoliant (Falai) 03:32, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Labouratory
Hello Æ&Œ,

First let me remark that I have no experience in editing Wiktionary, so I seek your advice on this.

I just came across your entry for labouratory, which describes it as "Alternative form of laboratory." I notice that around the same time you added a lot of "ou" variant spellings, but mostly indicated they were rare or obsolete. I believe one of those qualifiers should be added to "labouratory." Possibly both of them.

The claim that it is a variant spelling raised my eyebrows a little, so I did some checking. It is not listed at all in several reasonably large dictionaries that I have consulted. I note that most "ou" vs. "o" variants occur in words imported from French, which does not appear to be the case for laboratory. It was coined from whole cloth from laboratorium, and its etymology never involved a "u".

Googling gets 38,000 hits; a small number, but admittedly not microscopic. However on checking the first few dozen of those, none give any confidence that this is a variant spelling rather than an error. About 40% of these hits are a single "ou" spelling in an article that otherwise uses "o": suggestive of a typo, "thinko", or the depredations of a misbehaving spell-chequer. Of the remainder, the great majority are evidently written by non-native English speakers. These are mostly Nigerians as it happens, but also quite a few Indians, and also much East Asian advertising material. (I am not going to accept a "variant spelling" from someone who offers me "labouratory equipments ... to help yuo perform ...", or whose offerings of "labouratory" supplies includes those for "filteration" and "plastcs".) A few are written by native English speakers who have generally poor spelling.

The sole instance I have found that resembles an actual variant spelling is Staffordshire pots and potters, which quotes the spelling from a 1693 ledger entry by a potter. That would be entirely unconvincing except that this potter happens to have held an M.A. from Oxford.

The prevalence of Nigerian usages of "ou" had me wondering about other languages, so I checked on Google Translate for every language that I could read (i.e. those that use Roman, Greek or Cyrillic alphabets). Unfortunately, Google doesn't offer Igbo. However in none of the rest is the "ou" spelling used. All of them either use a different word entirely, or stick to something very close to the Latin (indeed, "laboratorium" itself is by far the most common.)

All pretty thin stuff to say that it is anything but an error. At any rate it is certainly rare, and as a modern, intentional usage by an educated native speaker it is either non-existent or extremely rare.

Thank-you for your time and consideration. -- 203.20.101.203 01:56, 24 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I considered it justified as an acceptable spelling since it is more consistent with the related term labour, but standardness need not be consistent. Given its extreme rarity amongst modern native Anglophones, you are correct that it is not an easily acceptable alternative. There is only one real citation available before the 19th century on Google Books. I do not feel quite comfortable marking it as rare since I usually reserve that for terms with less than one hundred results, and am not sure if it is really notable as on obsolete spelling, so ‘common misspelling’ seems O.K. to me, which I shall go change it to now. If you have any objections or comments you may let me know at any time. Thanks for the message, it’s definitely the most interesting one that I’ve had in a long time. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 04:55, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Woe art thou!
Eu ia postar isso em WT:REE, mas como você gosta de coisas arcaicas, ei-las para ti, se quiser. — Ungoliant (Falai) 01:38, 28 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Penso que é melhor dizer «woe is [pronome obliquo]» pra a consistência. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 09:03, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

*pissio
I think that it should be *piscio based on the descendants that are listed. 22:29, 9 June 2013 (UTC)


 * seems to be an acceptable spelling regardless, but it could be a degenerated form of . We could change pissio to an ‘alternative form of’ style entry and move the bulk of content to piscio. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 22:35, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * But why would it need to be -ss- at all? I think all of the languages that do have -ss- have a regular sound change -sc- > -ss- anyway, so there is no difference. On the other hand, Catalan has -sc- > -x- but not -ss- > -x- so only -sc- fits it. The same for most of the others. 22:37, 9 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, because I based the form on etymologies that I found in entries. (See Special:WhatLinksHere/Appendix:Vulgar_Latin/pissio) --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 22:40, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Spellings
The words æ, œ, ç, è, é, ê, ë, à, â, ô, î, û... in English are rare, mostly per cause of illiteracy and disrespect for languages from which words are borrow'd, but those spellings are, non the less correct, e'en more correct then those more widespreadly used. Slavić (talk) 22:43, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * We are descriptive, not proscriptive. We are not to be telling people what they should say, but instead what people do say. If the word cannot be attested in accordance to our criteria on that matter, they will be deleted. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 22:50, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Para vs. por
(Uma mensagem antiga que mandei para Metaknowledge, creio que lhe seja útil)


 * Para indicates destination where por indicates means:
 * Fomos para a estrada - we went to the street (the street was our destination). A can also be used.
 * Fomos pela estrada - we travelled on the street (we walked/drove/whatevered on a street until we got to our destination). ( note: pel[o/a/os/as] = por + definite article ).
 * Mandei a mensagem por correio - I sent the message by mail;
 * Mandei a mensagem para o correio - I sent the message to the post office.


 * Por indicates the author of a deed where para indicates for whom this deed was done.
 * O novo mundo foi descoberto por Colombo - The new world was discovered by Columbus.
 * O novo mundo foi descoberto para o rei da Espanha - the new world was discovered for the king of Spain.
 * O presente foi dado por mim para ela - The gift was given to her by me.


 * In some cases, they are used where English uses do vs. make:
 * Eu fiz isso por ti - I did this for you (I committed this act for your benefit);
 * Eu fiz isso para ti - I made this for you (I created this object, and I am giving it to you);


 * In some cases they have the same meaning:
 * “soon”ness: O rei está por/para morrer - The king is about to die.
 * future participle: Há trabalho por/para fazer - There is work to do.
 * goal, but para takes another verb: Lutamos [por]/[para conseguirmos] liberdade - We fight [for]/[to get] freedom.
 * but when the goal is expressed by a verb, only para can be used: Comprei uma andorinha para transportar cocos - I bought a swallow to transport coconuts.


 * Both terms have dozens of other meanings, but these are the ones that might confuse foreigners most, I think.

— Ungoliant (Falai) 04:30, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Avoid personal attacks
. --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:49, 27 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I was talking about Dan Patrick. Doyyyyy! --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 19:14, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Wow, Seth. You are indeed en fuego, as D.P. would say. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 00:44, 28 August 2013 (UTC)


 * His personal attacks are ongoing (and very childish!):, . Equinox ◑ 17:36, 7 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Cry me a fucking river. If you can’t take a joke, don’t even think about it. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 17:37, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed: . --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:48, 7 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Yawn. Do you need to document every single action that you don’t ‘like?’ Go elsewhere. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 20:22, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The large Arctic marine mammal related to seals was Paul. --Dan Polansky (talk) 20:29, 7 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I drink the blood of infants and wear their skin. You better record that super important information right now, buddy! --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 20:33, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Whether you like it or not, the unsmall Arctic marine animal characterized by being warm-blooded, having hair and feeding milk to its young and related to pinnipeds, particularly earless seals (true seals) or eared seals really was Paul. --Dan Polansky (talk) 20:38, 7 September 2013 (UTC)


 * So, what kind of car do you drive? —Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 20:45, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Baby, you can drive my car. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 22:32, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
 * is a bit of a mystery to me, were you attempting to provoke Vahagn to saying something racist and get him banned? Mglovesfun (talk) 21:01, 7 September 2013 (UTC)


 * It’s joke. Is absurd racism also against the rules? Plus, he’s more familiar with ethnic humor so he’s more likely to respond positively. But believe what you want to believe. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 21:17, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I wasn't accusing you of breaking any rules, so I don't know why you mention it. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:38, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Liliana: Gee. It sure is boring around here.

Equinox: MAH BOI! This peace is what all true nerds strive for!

Liliana: I just wonder what Ruakh's up to...

Mglovesfun: Your majesty, Seth and his minions have seized the website of Wiktionary!

Equinox: Hmm... How can we help?

Mglovesfun: It is written, only Liliana can defeat Seth.

Liliana: Great! I'll grab my stuff!

Mglovesfun: There's no time! Your sword is enough!

Liliana: How about a kiss? For luck?

Vahag: You've got to be kidding!

Mglovesfun: Squaddalah! We're off!

Liliana: Woah! What are all those accounts?

Mglovesfun: These are the Faces of Evil. You must conquer each! Here's the map. Where do you wish to go? -- Liliana • 22:58, 7 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I realize I've never participated in a discussion in my 5ish years here, but I had to break my silence to congratulate Liliana on the greatest comment in the history of Wiktionary. Cheers, Liliana. Back to my cloister now... Ultimateria (talk) 23:23, 7 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Nerdery…nerdery never changes. The trekkies raged nerdery to gather fanboys and lore. RPGcodex built an empire from its lust for criticism and threads. Google shaped a battered search engine into an even shittier search engine. But nerdery never changes. In the 21st century, nerdery was still waged over the resources that could be acquired, only this time the spoils of nerdery were also its weapons: egoium and funium. For these resources Wonderfool would invade Wikipedia, Meta‐Pedia would annex Wikitravel, and the Wiki bureaucrats would dissolve into quarrelling, bickering contributors, bent on controlling the last remaining e‐peen inches on the Internet. In 2013 the storm of Internet nerdery had come again. In two brief years, most of the Internet remained uninterested, and from the ashes of irrelevancy, an old website would struggle to arise. A few were able to reach relative safety in large, underground talk pages. Your fellow dweebs were part of that group that entered User talk:Æ&Œ. Imprisoned safely behind a small button on the top of the page, under a mountain of bullshit, a generation has lived without knowledge of the rest of the Internet. Life in the talk page…is about to change. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 02:23, 8 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd like to know what the hell all you guys are talking about. Especially since my name was thrown up. -WF

French translation
Is «vous rappelez que vous êtes romains» a good translation of ‘remember that you are Romans?’ email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * Not bad, but it should be written this way:
 * « rappelez-vous que vous êtes Romains »
 * I think a better translation would be:
 * « n'oubliez pas que vous êtes Romains » —Stephen (Talk) 12:53, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

rant
Wiktionary, having few official rules, is subject to inappropriate behaviour. While it may have been true at one point, I would no longer expect absolute civility, given that few people take this project seriously; I doubt that many scholars would recommend this dictionary, but that does not halt people from trying to enjoy it. Because of this, some feel obliged to provide this website with rules, and whilst some disagree with them, it is useful to make ‘axiomatic’ rules, fake rules which users claim are obvious so that they can insult the intelligence of the editors that they ‘don’t like;’ rules created so that disliked editors can be driven away. Any experienced user can create a fake rule.

The obligation of avoiding personal attacks, no matter how harmless the ‘attacks’ are, is another example of an axiomatic rule imposed on disliked editors. They can refer to this page, but it is clearly not universally agreed upon, and thus not important. Equinox can exploit the petty offences caused by editors to smear their reputations, but nobody (not even I) complained when he made this comment. In accordance with Wiktionarian relativism, petty offences by the complainers theirselves will be refused to be seen as valid, as it would be inconvenient; the editor would be willing to enforce an unofficial rule, but not when it would be disadvantageous to him personally (as history has proven). --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 18:49, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
 * You and Equinox are two of the editors on Wiktionary with whom I've found it easiest (and I daresay the most enjoyable) to work. I don't remember a single disagreement or misunderstanding I've had with either of you (there are some editors whose hard work and know-how I admire greatly, but am a bit wary of dealing with personally due to previous unpleasant interactions). So it's a bit surprising to learn that your interactions with each other apparently haven't been anywhere near as harmonious as both of your individual interactions with me. I admit I don't know the particularities of the history you two share, but since you've both gotten along well with me, it stands to reason (naively?) that maybe you do not have completely incompatible temperaments/viewpoints/etc., and that you might be capable of reaching an understanding.
 * But I do think this site's reliance on unwritten rules is problematic, as is the general acceptance and widespread use of communicatory tones which might, mildly, be described as "brusque." A stringent take it on the chin/shape up or ship out kind of mentality might work in certain settings — the military, for example — but on a volunteer-based wiki it only serves to alienate contributors and damage the project's viability in the long run. -Cloudcuckoolander (talk) 22:59, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Making trouble
You'd better stop making trouble, as in in relation to. --Dan Polansky (talk) 06:21, 8 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Votes/2013-09/Blocking of Æ&Œ. Go ahead. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 06:23, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
 * We don't need a vote to block people who persistently make trouble and make close to no contribution. --Dan Polansky (talk) 06:31, 8 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I just made a personal request. You can think of it as a Wikibreak, if it helps. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 06:36, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Italian translation
How do you say ‘wop’ in Italian? email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * The closest I can think of is «cafone italiano». The Italians I know in the U.S. use «dago». Wop is from guappo, but guappo isn’t understood in the same way. —Stephen (Talk) 05:45, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

philósopho
Citations:philósopho

Are these acceptable? email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * I made a few corrections. However, at the beginning it is marked ME, for Middle English. I don’t know how to fix that. It is Modern Spanish (with antiquated spelling). —Stephen (Talk) 21:28, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

culina
you have to admit, he's got a point. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:26, 17 September 2013 (UTC)


 * My God, you are right. How could I have missed it? This man is a pure genius. We need to elect him as bureaucrat for life. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 20:28, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

excavar
Are «excavar» and «minar» good synonyms of each other? email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * Yes, in one sense of . I’m not sure that I would use the adjective "good", though...maybe "passable". means to excavate or dig; one of the meanings of  is to mine (minerals), but (a), like English mine, has multiple meanings, and (b)  is not often used to translate the English verb mine (for minerals). More often, English mine is translated by . Spanish  means, primarily, to sap (sappers), dig mines under; rarely used for mining minerals; also, to lay military land or marine mines; figuratively, to undermine, destroy (health, confidence, etc.); and to wear away, erode. But strictly speaking,  is a synonym of  in one of its senses. —Stephen (Talk) 12:08, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

bois
¿Cuáles son los (buenos) sinónimos del francés «bois»? email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * ,, , , , , , , , , , . —Stephen (Talk) 04:46, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
 * There's a surname I'd never bothered to think about where it came from. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:00, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

espía
¿Cuáles son algunos (buenos) sinónimos de «espía»? email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * ,, , , , . —Stephen (Talk) 05:19, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

On a high
Are you on a high at the moment (by which I mean a manic period). Mglovesfun (talk) 09:39, 29 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Hmmm, je ne suis pas certain si suis légalement insane. Pour la plupart cela m’aide à détendre si je m’arrête de prendre quelqu’un au sérieux. (Si cela est compréhensible.) --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 09:53, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm I had to add the sense of manic and mania. Sigh. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:59, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

ganar
¿Cuáles son los sinónimos de «ganar»? email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * ,, , , , , . —Stephen (Talk) 18:08, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * ,, , , , , . —Stephen (Talk) 18:08, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Dr. Pasteur, Ph.D. Vs. Dr. Bechamp, Ph.D.
When it comes to the phrase "disease theory," I think it's time that we owe the latter an academic apology, ESPECIALLY when it comes to diverse and chronological phrasebooks (and near-death incidents, too, if needed). --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 03:57, 30 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Uh, O.K.? Did I make a mistake again? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 10:52, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

prendre la mer
¿Cómo se dice «prendre la mer» en español? email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * hacerse a la mar. —Stephen (Talk) 11:42, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

¿Y «prendre la mer» en portugués? email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * sair para o mar. —Stephen (Talk) 19:29, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

loss of cases
¿Porqué no tienen casos la mayoría de las lenguas románicas? email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * The modern languages evolved from Vulgar Latin. Vulgar Latin underwent sound changes that caused some cases to sound the same as other cases, so some of the cases merged together. In 1st-declension feminine nouns, by the 5th century, the nominative, accusative and ablative had merged; and the dative had merged with the genitive. Therefore, by the 5th century, the Vulgar Latin word had rosa as the nominative, accusative, and ablative; and rose as the dative and genitive. In the 2nd-declension masculine, the accusative, ablative, and dative merged, so the Vulgar Latin muros had muros as the nominative, muro as the accusative, ablative, and dative, and muri as the genitive.
 * This obviously led to a lot of confusion, so prepositions evolved to sort out the different cases, and with the burgeoning lexicon of prepositions, noun cases lost their importance. By the 11th century, there were only two cases remaining (rosa = nominative/accusative/ablative, rose = dative/genitive; and murs = nominative, mur = accusative/ablative/dative/genitive). The process continued until there were no cases left.
 * Modern Romanian declension shows the state of Vulgar Latin noun declension in the 5th century. Most other Romance languages lost all traces of declensions. —Stephen (Talk) 12:23, 8 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Ah, that is interesting. The usual explanation seems that nouns and adjectives no longer have cases because the speakers weren’t well educated enough to use them (properly). This article also seems to imply that the destruction of cases occurred because the foreigners were not used to them. I do like the explanation that the loss was for phonologic reasons. The only problem is that you did not mention the pronouns.
 * P.S. I am sorry for the incorrect number usage with tener. That tends to happen when I do not totally reconstruct sentences. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 13:17, 8 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Pronouns retained their case forms better, and that’s why there are still some vestiges of declensions in the modern pronouns. In Vulgar Latin, the pronouns were probably:
 * Nominative: 	1st: 	*eo 	*nos 	2nd: 	*tu 	*vos
 * Dative: 	1st: 	*mi 	*nobe(s) 	2nd: 	*ti/*tebe 	*vobe(s) 	3rd: 	*si/*sebe 	*si/*sebe
 * Accusative: 	1st: 	*me 	*nos 	2nd: 	*te 	*vos 	3rd: 	*se 	*se

Si escucho
¿Si escucho al español (o português, francés etc.) oral más, me hará mejor consigo? email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * Speaking, hearing, reading, and writing are four separate skills. Each one should be practiced. It is entirely possible to be able to read a language as well as any native, yet not be able to speak it or understand it orally. More commonly, people can speak a foreign language well, yet cannot read it or write it. —Stephen (Talk) 11:14, 11 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Perhaps I should rephrase myself. Can simply listening to a language make you better at understanding it as it is spoken? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 11:21, 11 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes. Even if you don’t figure out what is being said, the sounds will become familiar, and eventually you’ll even learn to distinguish words and phrases. If you can listen to familiar topics with video, such as news broadcasts, you will make much better progress. —Stephen (Talk) 12:54, 11 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Foi assim que melhorei meu inglês. Semprei me obriguei a assistir filmes e seriados em inglês, sem legendas. No começo tive dificuldade, mas agora consigo assistir qualquer coisa e entender 99% do que falam. — Ungoliant (Falai) 22:00, 11 October 2013 (UTC)


 * A persistência é a chave, eh? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 22:31, 11 October 2013 (UTC)


 * É sim. — Ungoliant (Falai) 22:34, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

și iarăși
¿el mismo = și iarăși? email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * If I understand your question, no, they don’t have the same meaning: el mismo means "the same"; și iarăși means "and again." El mismo = același. —Stephen (Talk) 23:50, 11 October 2013 (UTC)


 * ¿Cómo se dice «și iarăși»? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 11:26, 12 October 2013 (UTC)


 * y de nuevo, una vez más, y otra vez. —Stephen (Talk) 13:40, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

genitive
O italiano tem um caso genitivo? email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * No, no genitive case. There are possessive pronouns, but that’s not the same as a genitive. —Stephen (Talk) 19:48, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

italiano
¿Cuáles son los buenos sinónimos de «in conclusione»? email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * ,, . —Stephen (Talk) 20:44, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

mensaje comprensible
«Y de nuevo doy tu reinado información sobre el hecho de los turcos, como yo oí que el emperador se quitaron de la Sofía y por lo demás no es. Y se llevó hacia arriba en el Danubio.»

(Véase también http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrisoarea_lui_Neacșu)

¿Es mi mensaje totalmente comprensible? email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * No, I could not understand much. —Stephen (Talk) 00:40, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * It’s probably because I still need to learn more Romanian. I could show you the verse that I attempted to translate, but I am guessing that your Romanian i’n’t superb neither. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 01:06, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

O.K., how about this:

«Y de nuevo doy tu reinado nuevas sobre la cosa de los turcos, como he oído que del emperador que han salidos de la Sofia, y de otra manera no es, y fueron encima del Danubio.» --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 01:36, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I still can’t understand it. —Stephen (Talk) 05:16, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, unless you want to see the Romanian version, I’m beaten. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 05:21, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * What’s the Romanian version? —Stephen (Talk) 05:54, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * «Și iarăși dau știre domnie tale despre lucrul turcilor, cum am auzit eu că împăratul au ieșit den Sofiia și aimintrea nu e. Și se‐au dus în sus pe Dunăre.» I’m assuming that this is truly modernized. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 05:55, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * That has some archaic terms (and apparently usages) in it that makes it very hard to understand. Ric could probably understand it. —Stephen (Talk) 06:34, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Ah, entonces no es un problema con mi español, es solo que el mensaje es demasiado anticuado…todavía, siento triste cuando ustedes no pueden entenderme. —Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 06:46, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

ça commence à bien faire
¿Cómo se dice «ça commence à bien faire» en otras lenguas románicas? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 01:36, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Catalan: ja n'hi ha prou
 * Italian: ora basta,
 * Portuguese:, já chega, já basta
 * Spanish: ya es suficiente, ya basta. —Stephen (Talk) 07:09, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

originel et original
¿Son grafías alternativas? email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * No, they are different words. The adjective means original (text, version, etc.); also, original, odd, singular, peculiar (character, driving, person, etc.); also, inventive, creative, novel, fresh. It means the first as opposed to a later reproduction (original painting, original idea, etc.). As a noun, it means original (work, painting, text, etc.); also, prototype, model, pattern; also, eccentric character, oddball, oddity, queer customer.
 * The adjective (no noun) means original, innate, fundamental, essential. It means pertaining to the origins, the very beginning (as in original sin, the original habitat of a species, etc.). —Stephen (Talk) 08:39, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

capirote
¿Es «capirote» una buena traducción del francés «chaperon»? email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * I wouldn’t say "good", but sometimes. The Spanish adjective capirote refers (1) to cattle that have the head a different color than the body; (2) and the noun can mean hood worn by mourners, scholars, etc.; and (3) in falconry, the leather hood for the bird. I think it only works as a translation for (2) and (3). French has other, more common meanings, and capirote does not translate those.
 * Someone who accompanies young people, especially young ladies, is an . Other frequent translations of include:, , ; and , , , , . —Stephen (Talk) 06:35, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

livret
¿«libreta» y «livret» son buenas traducciones de la una a la otra? email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * No, they are not really good translations. is most commonly translated as, but in addition it has these translations, in descending order of appearance:
 * , on the other hand, is almost always translated as, and only occasionally as or . —Stephen (Talk) 19:37, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * , on the other hand, is almost always translated as, and only occasionally as or . —Stephen (Talk) 19:37, 29 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Is libreto an O.K. translation of livret? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 20:07, 29 October 2013 (UTC)


 * is usually translated by, , or.
 * is also translated by sometimes. —Stephen (Talk) 23:52, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

stand for
Me gustaría si podrías traducir este idiotismo, si quieres. email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * The abbreviation CIA stands for "Central Intelligence Agency" = La abreviatura inglesa CIA significa "Central Intelligence Agency" (Agencia Central de Inteligencia).
 * We won't stand for that type of behaviour = No toleraremos ese tipo de comportamiento; No vamos a soportar tal comportamiento. —Stephen (Talk) 01:38, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * We won't stand for that type of behaviour = No toleraremos ese tipo de comportamiento; No vamos a soportar tal comportamiento. —Stephen (Talk) 01:38, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * We won't stand for that type of behaviour = No toleraremos ese tipo de comportamiento; No vamos a soportar tal comportamiento. —Stephen (Talk) 01:38, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

affichage
¿Cómo se dice en español? email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)



videojuegos
¿Ya jugaste vídeos juegos? Por que tenía un sueño que jugaste. email comment by Æ&#38;Œ (talk)


 * Only those few that have always come with Windows: hearts, minesweeper, freecell, solitaire. And when I had an Apple Macintosh, it included Tetris. Back before Windows even existed, the only DOS games I remember were pong, pac-man, and nibbles. Pac-man and nibbles were okay, but pong got old very quick. —Stephen (Talk) 03:42, 2 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Lo siento por escribir mal «videojuegos». --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 04:51, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

babysitting
¿Cómo se dice «babysitting»? email comment by Æ&Œ


 * cuidado de niños en el hogar
 * cuidado de niños
 * cuidado de menores
 * trabajo de niñera
 * cuidado de bebés
 * tareas de niñera
 * cuido de niños —Stephen (Talk) 17:50, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Also "hacer de canguro" --Back on the list (talk) 11:22, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

jogging
Quels sont les synonymes du mot «jogging» email comment by Æ&Œ


 * , (the exercise)
 * , (clothing worn in the exercise) —Stephen (Talk) 21:20, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

caballo
¿Cuáles son los sinónimos del vocablo «caballo»? email comment by Æ&Œ


 * —Stephen (Talk) 22:18, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * —Stephen (Talk) 22:18, 14 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Is equino a good synonym? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 22:38, 14 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I don’t think so. To me, can be the adjective equine (but not the noun), or it can be the noun equinus (a convex molding just below the abacus of a Doric capital), or it can mean sea urchin. I guess it’s possible that there are examples of  being used as a noun for horse, but I have not encountered one. —Stephen (Talk) 23:55, 14 December 2013 (UTC)


 * --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 08:51, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * That says that the noun also means equid, or any animal of the Equidae family, order of Perissodactyla, so not just horses, but all Equidae. I’ll leave it up to you to decide if an equid is synonymous with horse. —Stephen (Talk) 09:24, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

spelling
Pourquoi l’orthographe est‐elle conservatrice ? email comment by Æ&Œ


 * Because it is written and therefore recorded for others to see. When any language is first written, spelling is usually all over the place. But other people, trying to learn how to read and spell, look at what has been written and are impressed by frequent spellings, and adopt those spellings. Rather quickly most common words settle into a set spelling. Then, as centuries go by and the pronunciation changes, the spellings no longer reflect the sound of the word. Then some societies pick a few scholars to reform the spelling. Spanish and Portuguese spelling are reformed quite often. In the case of languages where the writing is mostly reserved for a royal or priest class, reforms rarely occur, and the spelling eventually becomes extremely unphonetic (as has happened in Tibetan and Khmer).
 * English spelling became set about the time that the printing press was invented, and since hundreds of thousands of books were soon printed using a certain spelling, people were loathe so allow any changes in the spelling because it would eventually lead to problems in reading old books.
 * In Chinese, the spelling is not only conservative of itself, it also creates conservatism in the spoken language, because most Chinese characters contain two parts, one part hinting at meaning, and the other part giving the pronunciation. For example, 馬 (mǎ) means horse; 媽 (mā) has the horse character on the right-hand side, which reveals the pronunciation of the character, and the left side is 女 (nǚ), the character for woman...in other words, a sort of woman that is pronounced "ma", like the word for horse. The kind of woman that is pronounced "ma" happens to be mother, so 媽 means mother. If the pronunciation of the character for horse 馬 changed, then all of the very numerous other characters that contain the horse character to show pronunciation would have their pronunciations changed as well. It means that you can’t just change the pronunciation of horse, you have to change all of the words that sound like horse simultaneously. This results in a huge inertia that tends to freeze Chinese pronunciation, and it becomes exceptionally conservative. —Stephen (Talk) 07:58, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Feliz Natal
— Ungoliant (falai) 02:59, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Latin
«possum Latinam loqui» est‐ce bon latin? email comment by Æ&Œ


 * No, latinus is an adjective, so that would mean «I can speak latiny». You need the adverb:
 * possum loqui latine.
 * Or you could use the ablative of the noun phrase. And it would actually be much better to use the verb (I know how) instead of possum. Using possum is something you would find in the modern Romance languages...it probably would not be used in this way in Classical Latin. So:
 * Scisne latine loqui? Latine loqui scio. (using the adverb)
 * Scio lingua latina loqui. (using the ablative) —Stephen (Talk) 07:10, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

«Scio pauco linguae latinae loqui.»

Est‐ce bon latin ? email comment by Æ&Œ


 * Not that. Instead say:
 * Latine paulum loqui scio. —Stephen (Talk) 22:42, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

francés
¿Acuerdas que el francés tiene más en común con las lenguas germánicas? email comment by Æ&Œ


 * I don’t think so. There is an appearance of commonality between French and English, and also between French and Dutch, but only because English and Dutch have borrowed so much vocabulary from French. The dialects of French (including Walloon and Occitan) and all those of Italy make up a single dialect continuum. It means that French and Italian are two standardized poles of the same language. You could speak a message in any French-speaking place of France or Belgium in the local dialect, and the listener could transmit that message to each of his neighbors, and each neighbor could then relay the message to each of his neighbors, on and on, until the message spread throughout the nation of France and passed into Italy, and the message would continue to be repeated from neighbor to neighbor all throughout the country of Italy, until the message was ultimately spoken to each citizen of France and Italy, and at no point would any receiving neighbor have the feeling that he was hearing an unfamiliar dialect. (Italian and Romanian are almost that close as well, but since there is a significant geographic gap between the two, there would be a very noticeable jump between the dialects or languages. However, there is excellent mutual comprehension, so Romanian can almost be included in the Franco-Italian dialect continuum.)
 * But if you compare French with German, there is really little in common. German has adopted a good many Latin words as technical vocabulary, but nowhere near the amount that Dutch or English have borrowed. Sometimes French may seem a bit out of step with the other Romance languages because of its pronunciation, but that quirk is due to the fact that the Gaulish people who came to speak French were not Roman expatriates, they were a Celtic people who spoke with a very heavy Celtic brogue, and so they generally massacred the Vulgar Latin pronunciation when they tried to learn it. —Stephen (Talk) 10:29, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

caso acusativo
É na verdade que a maioria dos substantivo e adjectivos são do caso acusativo, em Românica ocidental? email comment by Æ&Œ


 * Yes, they are formed predominantly on the Vulgar Latin accusative case (singular as well as plural). Vulgar Latin had lost the accusative -m. Italian plurals formed from the Latin nominative plural. —Stephen (Talk) 13:28, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

fresco
¿Cuáles son los (buenos) sinónimos de «fresco»? email comment by Æ&Œ


 * —Stephen (Talk) 07:53, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * —Stephen (Talk) 07:53, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * —Stephen (Talk) 07:53, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * —Stephen (Talk) 07:53, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * —Stephen (Talk) 07:53, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * —Stephen (Talk) 07:53, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * —Stephen (Talk) 07:53, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * —Stephen (Talk) 07:53, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Does ‘cool’ here mean ‘of good quality?’ --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 08:28, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


 * No, more like ‘interesting’. —Stephen (Talk) 08:44, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

O.K., here’s the thesaurus:. I suspect that it’s highly problematic. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 09:05, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I think it’s probably okay. That page seems to be in a very difficult and awkward format. —Stephen (Talk) 10:04, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

What are the synonyms for flanco? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 08:09, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


 * ,, , , —Stephen (Talk) 08:24, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, , , —Stephen (Talk) 08:24, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, , , —Stephen (Talk) 08:24, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

What are the synonyms for boca? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 14:25, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


 * ,, , , , , , , , , , , , , —Stephen (Talk) 13:26, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, , , , , , , , , , , , , —Stephen (Talk) 13:26, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

¿Cuáles son los sinónimos de jardín? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 07:09, 14 January 2014 (UTC)


 * ,, , , , , , . —Stephen (Talk) 00:36, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

¿Cuáles son los sinónimos de atacar? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 16:26, 17 January 2014 (UTC)


 * ,, , , , , . —Stephen (Talk) 19:52, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, , , , , . —Stephen (Talk) 19:52, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

¿Y de camisia? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 22:18, 20 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Do you mean synonyms of the Latin word?, . —Stephen (Talk) 11:32, 21 January 2014 (UTC)


 * No, I meant camisa. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 16:02, 21 January 2014 (UTC)


 * , —Stephen (Talk) 16:12, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
 * , —Stephen (Talk) 16:12, 21 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Is that all? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 16:21, 21 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Pretty much. You can always find a few more by loosening up the definitions. —Stephen (Talk) 16:46, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Quais são os sinónimos de pieza? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 19:37, 21 January 2014 (UTC)


 * ,, , , —Stephen (Talk) 20:08, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, , , —Stephen (Talk) 20:08, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, , , —Stephen (Talk) 20:08, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, , , —Stephen (Talk) 20:08, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

E de ropa? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 22:45, 22 January 2014 (UTC)


 * ,, , , , , , , , , . —Stephen (Talk) 01:15, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

¿Cuáles son los sinónimos de batir? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 21:22, 25 January 2014 (UTC)


 * ,, , , , . —Stephen (Talk) 22:46, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, , , , . —Stephen (Talk) 22:46, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, , , , . —Stephen (Talk) 22:46, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, , , , . —Stephen (Talk) 22:46, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, , , , . —Stephen (Talk) 22:46, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, , , , . —Stephen (Talk) 22:46, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

¿Cuáles son los sinónimos de marca y marcar? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 04:53, 10 February 2014 (UTC)




 * ,, . —Stephen (Talk) 06:07, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, . —Stephen (Talk) 06:07, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, . —Stephen (Talk) 06:07, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, . —Stephen (Talk) 06:07, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, . —Stephen (Talk) 06:07, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, . —Stephen (Talk) 06:07, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Quais são os sinónimos de toalla? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 10:02, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


 * ,, . —Stephen (Talk) 10:44, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

¿Cuáles son los sinónimos de zapato? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 08:14, 23 February 2014 (UTC)


 * ,, , , , , , , , , , . —Stephen (Talk) 10:25, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

¿Cuáles son los buenos sinónimos para danzar? --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 04:44, 26 February 2014 (UTC)


 * ,, , . —Stephen (Talk) 05:07, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, , . —Stephen (Talk) 05:07, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Cual?!
What the hell is this page, is it even a user talk page, how come the user is the one posting questions? --kc_kennylau (talk) 17:16, 29 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, it is a talk page as the title implies. Asking questions is allowed on talk pages. So is playing with other people’s talk pages, as we can clearly see yet again. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 18:44, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

fétal
Hi, please see this. --Fsojic (talk) 19:03, 4 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Déjà inspectais‐tu Google Livres pour instances d’usage ? Je peux encontre des elles ici. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 21:26, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry, it is used indeed. But I have created the French entry fœtus to make clearer what I meant to say. --Fsojic (talk) 23:10, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

irregular language
What is the most irregular language that you have ever seen? email comment by Æ&Œ


 * The most irregular one that I have ever found is Navajo. I’ve been studying Navajo for years and I still can’t devise rules for conjugating any verb. There are rules that govern how the conjugation goes, but they are multilayered and so complex that I don’t think anyone has ever made a serious attempt at describing them. People who learn Navajo as a second language have to memorize every form of every verb individually. There are some parts of a conjugation that one can eventually learn to recognize, but that only helps a little bit. That’s why it is said that Navajo (and the closely related Apache) are the most difficult languages known to exist. —Stephen (Talk) 11:39, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

langue vilaine
Qu’est‐ce qu’une langue vilaine ? Je liais messages d’hommes qui clament de langues hideuses, mais je ne sais pas la raison. email comment by Æ&Œ


 * It means an "ugly language." For example, in the French-speaking part of Switzerland you may hear some people complain that « le suisse-allemand est une langue vilaine » (Swiss-German is an ugly language). Some French-speakers think that Swiss-German sounds like animal cries and is very ugly with its guttural consonants.
 * Some languages are particularly beautiful to hear, such as French, Spanish, Italian, Hawaiian, Lakota, and Hungarian. Many people think that German and Dutch are ugly because of their guttural consonants, and especially because of the many World War II films wherein German leaders and soldiers scream angrily in German while making frowning or threatening faces. (However, if you listen to German or Dutch enough to become familiar with the sounds, and hear it spoken by normal everyday people in friendly tones, then German and Dutch are actually quite pretty.) —Stephen (Talk) 06:16, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

toucher
Qu’est‐ce que les synonymes de «toucher»? email comment by Æ&Œ


 * NOUNS


 * VERBS

la langue
Est‐il vrai que la langue français est pauvre ? email comment by Æ&Œ


 * Non, le français est une belle langue, riche et mélodieuse. —Stephen (Talk) 10:42, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Does my userpage belong to me?
Serious question, since I’m not yet certain if everything here is public property. Hypothetically, this gives users a licence to insert whatever crap they want in my userpage. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 23:26, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Not sure what you're asking. I don't think there's any particular policy saying it, but in general people tend not to consider it appropriate to modify other users' pages, except occasionally to deal with template moves or sometimes updates, if they can safely assume that the "owner" of the user page wouldn't object. (If you're asking about the legal aspect, the contents of your userpage are freely licensed under CC/GFDL, like everything else on the website.) --Yair rand (talk) 00:12, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

ಥ_ಥ
Please don't go. I know what it's like to feel unwelcome at times. But I think that if we let incivility drive us away, then the responsible parties will never have to acknowledge the impact of their behaviour, and nothing will change. -Cloudcuckoolander (talk) 09:47, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I have also felt unwelcome at times and you have inspired me to take the same route as yourself. Pass a Method (talk) 12:21, 27 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Why? You’ll just come crawling back up here everyday. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 03:40, 29 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Ah, as I expected, I was going to be unblocked. No matter how miserable I feel, I’m probably doomed to being eternally committed to this project, quite honestly. I do appreciate your sentiments, though. —Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 03:40, 29 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I might. But i defninitely want to get rid of my current account. I tried a name change but was flopped. So i might as well go for a complete disposal. Pass a Method (talk) 15:43, 29 September 2014 (UTC)


 * No, Kephir is just being arrogant today. You should be able to reapply for a fresh username. --Romanophile (talk) 15:45, 29 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Can you speak to Kephir for me please? I attempted to reason with him to no avail. Pass a Method (talk) 15:51, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I haven't had any problems with you at all so I would be sad to see you go. *hug* —CodeCat 15:56, 29 September 2014 (UTC)