Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2010 July 16

Language desk
< July 15	<< Jun | July | Aug >>	July 17 >

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.

July 16

Turns the accusation around

I am looking for a word that describes the tactic of accusing someone else of doing what they are not, in fact, doing, but you are doing yourself. Children use it a lot. Bielle (talk) 18:12, 16 July 2010 (UTC)looking for word

Well, there's "the pot calling the kettle black". --Anonymous, 19:16 UTC, July 16, 2010.

Hypocrisy? Googlemeister (talk) 19:19, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

In psychology, it's projection. L. Ron Hubbard said that the proper response of any criticism of Scientology was to always accuse the critics of being criminals.[1] -- AnonMoos (talk) 23:14, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

That's very interesting, AnonMoos. It is possible that the person who is doing this is involved in Scientology. If that is true, it explains a lot. Thanks to all of you for your suggestions. Bielle (talk) 01:01, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

So projectors are necessarily accused of projecting projection? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 14:00, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Running a car race

Does one run a car race, or simply race it? Should it be "I'm going to run the Dakar Rally" or "I'm going to race the Dakar Rally"? AdamSommerton (talk) 20:55, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

In my idiolect, neither. 'Run' to me would imply running on foot, and I wouldn't use 'race' transitively, except perhaps with a rival as an object. I would say "enter", or "compete in", or "drive in". Others may have different answers. --ColinFine (talk) 21:01, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

(ec)If someone told me that they were going to run the Dakar Rally, I'd be impressed that they were organising such a major event. If you're taking part then I reckon you can only run things like marathons, otherwise I might say that I was 'doing' something like the rally. Mikenorton (talk) 21:07, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

(ec #2) : I agree. If there's a person who's in charge of organising the whole event, he/she might say "I run the Dakar car rally". -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:11, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm in the American South (North Carolina). I would easily know what you were talking about, even if it would be slightly unusual. We use "run" in the context of cars all the time, although running the NASCAR race would sound a little odd. If my mother (okay, she's from the Northern US), says "I'm running up to the store to get milk," it is implied that she is not physically running to the store, but driving. In terms of a race, I'd probably say "racing" or any of the others that ColinFine suggested. Falconus^{p t c} 01:10, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I would understand "running to the store" as walking to the store. Then again, I guess no one really drives to the store in Manhattan. Rimush (talk) 11:08, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Word that means goods and services

Is there a single word that means goods and services?--92.251.133.213 (talk) 21:12, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

In business-speak product or offering might work, depending on the context. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 21:16, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

(ec) There can be, but it wouldn't apply in all contexts. I might talk about my "purchases", referring to both the goods and services I've bought. But a provider of goods and services can't use that word. "Commodities" sometimes applies to both, but just as often means physical things only. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:17, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

"Offering"? Really? Just yesterday my co-worker asked me what I thought of the phrase "software offering" and I said it sounded like someone was going to lay a piece of software on an altar and stab it with a knife as a ritual sacrifice. +Angr 07:35, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

See The Musical Offering. -- Wavelength (talk) 16:02, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, that's not quite relevant. It's the name of a musical work, not a collection of goods and services. But I can confirm "offering" or "product offering" is used in business, to refer to exactly what it is that the customer gets, or potentially gets, for their money when they buy a particular product. I've only ever heard it in the health insurance industry, whose products are typically services, not goods (the services being payment of monetary benefits to cover or partially cover the cost of medical treatment). They sometimes provide goods such as mountain bikes, CDs etc as a gimmicky incentive to take out membership, and these are all part of the "product offering". Now, does this mean we can use "offering" as a generic collective term for goods and services? I'm not entirely sure. It's only ever used from the perspective of the seller, not the buyer, so I can't see it being used in non-business contexts. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:45, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

A lot will depend on context. In economics, "exports" can mean both goods and services. DOR (HK) (talk) 10:34, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

In economics, "goods" might in some context refer to both goods and services (in terms such as "public goods", for example) Jørgen (talk) 17:59, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Photon

I noticed that the Japanese word for photon is 光子 koushi, while each other language listed on the Wiktionary page uses a word which is phonetically similar to "photon. Where did this discrepancy come from? --138.110.206.101 (talk) 21:43, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

The reason is that it is common in Japanese (and Chinese) for borrowed concepts (or theoretically, native concepts which also overlap with non-native terms) to use a meaning-based substitute instead of a phonetically-based substitute. That said, Japanese uses a lot of phonetic borrowings in general (at least relative to Chinese, due in significant part to Chinese's lack of a phonetically based script like Katakana). However, note that other languages often use meaning-based borrowings as opposed to phonetic borrowings:e.g., German and Icelandic.--71.111.229.19 (talk) 00:36, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

What does koushi literally mean? --138.110.206.100 (talk) 01:07, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Light particle (particle of light). --Kjoonlee 02:20, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

An excerpt from a Bulgarian-Japanese phrasebook. The Bulgarian is given translated, and the fourth column contains the respective Icelandic terms, just for comparison.

computer monitor, display mouse keyboard printer hard disk file password modem hardware software server window icon to copy Internet site email

コンピューター モニター マウス キーボード プリンター ハードディスク ファイル パスワード モデム ハードウェア ソフトウェア サーバー ウィンドウ アイコン コピーする インターネット サイト E メール

konpyūtā monitā mausu kībōdo purintā hādo disuku fairu pasuwādo modemu hādowea sofutowea sābā windou aikon kopīsuru intānetto saito E mēru

tölva skjár mús lyklaborð prentari harður diskur skrá lykilorð mótald vélbúnaður hugbúnaður miðlari gluggi táknmynd afrita Internetið vefsíða tölvupóstur

By the way, コンピューター, konpyūtā, fails to match the Japanese Wikipedia interwiki for the computer article, which is コンピュータ, konpyūta. Why so? --Магьосник (talk) 07:47, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

If you can read Japanese, see ja:長音符#長音符の省略 (Omission of Chōonpu). It has been common practice to omit ending chōonpu in engineering and IT related writings and there is a general rule for the omission of chōonpu defined in JIS Z8301:2008; in a nutshell, you omit chōonpu if a word is longer than two morae. The Japanese article for computer follows it. Also note ja:サーバ and ja:サーバー are different topics and server (computing) links to the former. --Kusunose 10:12, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I can't read Japanese, but I'm certainly hoping this will change soon. So, could we say my phrasebook is wrong in the case given, in addition to being quite scanty as a whole? And yes, I noticed what Japanese article Server (computing) linked to, but the leading sentence of ja:サーバ gives both サーバ and サーバー in bold; I assumed they could be used interchangeably, and chose what the phrasebook was recommending. --Магьосник (talk) 11:05, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Your phrasebook is not wrong. They are interchangeable and unless you are writing for specialists, in which case it is better to follow the standard, it is fine to add chōonpu. In fact, Agency for Cultural Affairs recommends the use of chōonpu for English -or, -er, -ar and such as a general principle.[2] --Kusunose 12:23, 17 July 2010 (UTC)