tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post1831913692698348143..comments2024-03-17T09:14:13.950+00:00Comments on John Wells’s phonetic blog: Glis glisJohn Wellshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13684304410735867148noreply@blogger.comBlogger49125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-36008664595787733282020-06-13T10:42:22.014+01:002020-06-13T10:42:22.014+01:00Haloo pak^^
Kami dari SENTANAPOKER ingin menawark...Haloo pak^^<br /><br />Kami dari SENTANAPOKER ingin menawarkan pak^^<br /><br />Untuk saat ini kami menerima Deposit Melalui Pulsa ya pak.<br /><br />*untuk minimal deposit 10ribu<br />*untuk minimal Withdraw 25ribu<br /><br />*untuk deposit pulsa kami menerima provider<br />-XL<br />-Telkomsel<br /><br /><br />untuk bonus yang kami miliki kami memiliki<br />*bonus cashback 0,5%<br />*bunus refferal 20%<br />*bonus gebiar bulanan (N-max,samsung Note 10+,Iphone xr 64G,camera go pro 7hero,Apple airpods 2 ,dan freechips)<br /><br />Daftar Langsung Di:<br /><br />SENTANAPOKER<br /><br />Kontak Kami;<br /><br />WA : +855 9647 76509<br />Line : SentanaPoker<br />Wechat : SentanaPokerLivechat Sentanapoker<br /><br />Proses deposit dan withdraw tercepat bisa anda rasakan jika bermain di Sentanapoker. So… ? tunggu apa lagi ? Mari bergabung dengan kami. Pelayanan CS yang ramah dan Proffesional dan pastinya sangat aman juga bisa anda dapatkan di Sentanapoker.yessy haryantohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16503331838637071246noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-83415386317305056122013-01-04T17:59:43.527+00:002013-01-04T17:59:43.527+00:00David Crosbie wrote : "Although it's pret...David Crosbie wrote : "Although it's pretty rare now, I bet it's still used in offices where people work for two brothers.". It most certainly still was used in the 1970s, when two brothers, one of whom was named Desmond, ran the company known as Molin's. "Mr Desmond" was the standard form of address on the shop floor. As regards Wojciech's "'Mr Wojciech' (when 'W' is someoone's first name) used to be a form of address to young, not-yet-quite-adult persons", I understood from a Polish former girlfriend that (e.g.,) "Pani Ela" was the polite form of address normally adopted when one was not sufficiently close to address her as Ela (or as Elżbieta) but still close enough not to need to address her as "Pani Kuczyńska".<br /><br />Philip TaylorChaa006https://www.blogger.com/profile/00007714578401273047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-78127860536770930052012-12-17T12:34:42.623+00:002012-12-17T12:34:42.623+00:00I feel with you; I think this should really be lim...I feel with you; I think this should really be limited to a schoolmistress introducing herself to little children.<br />Technically, I'm not sure it's necessarily useful to say the <i>Dr.</i> part can't be considered part of the name, though.<br />And finally, the name of <i>Doktor</i> isn't very common, but it does exist (Lithuanian-Jewish?).Phillip Mindenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16801818752833289089noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-12204206313801333222012-12-17T11:31:09.663+00:002012-12-17T11:31:09.663+00:00I can live with I am Dr. Jones, though I think it ...I can live with <i>I am Dr. Jones</i>, though I think it pompous even in a medical doctor, and doubly so in any other kind. But I get all prescriptive about <i>My name is Dr. Jones</i> — nobody's <i>name</i> is <i>Doctor</i> anything (though there are people with the given names <i>Earl, Duke</i>, and <i>King</i>, but hardly <i>Doctor</i>). On the other hand, my mother introduced herself as <i>My name is Mrs. Cowan</i>, though perhaps that doesn't count, as she was a native German-speaker despite her near-native command of English (except in her phonology).John Cowanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11452247999156925669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-35584413435778554432012-11-10T16:19:43.175+00:002012-11-10T16:19:43.175+00:00Probably gli-, on the basis of http://www.dizionar...Probably <b>gli-</b>, on the basis of <a href="http://www.dizionario.rai.it/poplemma.aspx?lid=53418&r=279705" rel="nofollow">http://www.dizionario.rai.it/poplemma.aspx?lid=53418&r=279705</a>.Steve Doerrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18210787261745134371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-57268940375508437272012-11-10T12:52:37.954+00:002012-11-10T12:52:37.954+00:00To make the beast appear more Italian than it dese...To make the beast appear more Italian than it deserves: Glire Glirini. I already see---in my mind's eyes---questions flowing to pundits like John Wells or Alex Rotatori as to how the initial 'gl' ought to be pronounced.<br /><br />'Glire Glirini Comestibile' could be a good pseudonym---alas, our host does not any longer tolerate such.<br /><br />Full name---See ProfilePodpora społeczeństwahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08339088245843399386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-49228939386830739092012-11-10T12:23:49.217+00:002012-11-10T12:23:49.217+00:00English has the two adjectives gliriform and gliri...English has the two adjectives <em>gliriform</em> and <em>glirine</em>, so <em>Glis gliriformis</em> or <em>Glis glirinus</em> would be possible alternatives!Steve Doerrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18210787261745134371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-38927692592200107692012-11-09T22:45:36.954+00:002012-11-09T22:45:36.954+00:00I'd suggest a similar solution for our creatur...I'd suggest a similar solution for our creature: let's rename it 'Glis Gliris'. That would be in line with the above Italian nomenclature, as the -i is (widely?) believed to be a remnant of the Latin genitive singular desinence.<br /><br />Full name---see ProfilePodpora społeczeństwahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08339088245843399386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-45178179388172712712012-11-09T06:42:19.396+00:002012-11-09T06:42:19.396+00:00There are Italian names descended from patronymics...There are Italian names descended from patronymics that are nearly reduplicative: Galileo Galilei is a well-known example, and also Michelangelo's younger brother, Buonarroto Buonarroti.John Cowanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11452247999156925669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-76128775939575663522012-11-08T12:05:38.936+00:002012-11-08T12:05:38.936+00:00Ah, I see. Well, I must have assumed it was endemi...Ah, I see. Well, I must have assumed it was endemic to Hertfordshire (it being the only place in England where it has not been extirpated or 'eaten up'). The linguistic point I was trying to make was that the frequency of use would have eliminated the 'edible' part of its name (perhaps in favour of 'glisglis', paroxytone, plural 'glisglis')---just as no-one normally says 'domestic pig' but just 'pig', even though the animal IS domestic ('stiestic') and ... well... rather seriously edible.<br /><br />Full name --- v. ProfilePodpora społeczeństwahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08339088245843399386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-56934768157458793142012-11-08T09:50:12.812+00:002012-11-08T09:50:12.812+00:00No - the edible dormouse is (i) not native to Brit...No - the edible dormouse is (i) not native to Britain and (ii) very rare here -- in fact, as I said in my original posting, it is found (only) in a part of Hertfordshire, where specimens escaped from a private collection a century ago, established themselves, and became a pest.John Wellshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13684304410735867148noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-78924656742457451292012-11-07T20:23:09.325+00:002012-11-07T20:23:09.325+00:00Thank you, John. So let me guess: in the UK, in &#...Thank you, John. So let me guess: in the UK, in 'real life' situations, you have not very often an opportunity to speak of (specimens of) the species? In other words, British attics and cellars do not exactly abound in edible dormice or glisglis? Wrong? (If they did, in the long run, I'd suppose, 'glisglis'---plural 'glisglis'---would supplant (displace) 'edible dormouse'. Maybe it's on its way to so doing, the first symptom of which being the unusual stress-pattern of 'glis glis' and its thoroughly Anglo-Saxon plural form?).<br /><br /><br />Full name: See ProfilePodpora społeczeństwahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08339088245843399386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-9268558181146920592012-11-07T19:48:51.412+00:002012-11-07T19:48:51.412+00:00If in the UK you refer to a dormouse, with no qual...If in the UK you refer to a dormouse, with no qualifying adjective, it will be assumed you mean <i>Muscardinus avellanarius</i>. So yes, we do call the species under discussion "edible dormouse" or "gligsglis".John Wellshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13684304410735867148noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-30466732295749695452012-11-07T15:18:29.328+00:002012-11-07T15:18:29.328+00:00David, thank you for this really surprising (me) i...David, thank you for this really surprising (me) information, which truly widens my linguistic and social-lore-related horizons. I should have (another) go at Miss Jane's novels and older English literature in general and be more alert to various social nuances in them. That I could have been so ignorant amazes me---I start feeling like a(n) (edible) dormouse. <br /><br />I of course knew about 'Sir Bertrand (Russell)' or 'Sir Karl (Popper)', though. Is Prof. Wells not a 'sir John' too? I think it's high time he should become it.<br /><br />In Poland, 'Mr Wojciech' (when 'W' is someoone's first name) used to be a form of address to young, not-yet-quite-adult persons, but since a decade or so has been gaining ground among peddlars and sellers of all sorts (insurance polices e.g.) who using it create an 'intimacy' between them and their prospective or actual customers. I find this irksome because that intimacy is so clearly false.<br /><br /><br /><br />Full true name---see Profile.Podpora społeczeństwahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08339088245843399386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-59067281542481377862012-11-07T11:51:38.351+00:002012-11-07T11:51:38.351+00:00Wojciech
OK, so you Britons not always say '...Wojciech<br /><br /><i><br />OK, so you Britons not always say 'Mr./Mrs./Major etc Such-and-Such'. But you NEVER say so if 'Graham' is someone's FIRST name.</i><br /><br />Another casualty of our acute class consciousness. It was in the past quite common to speak of and/or address <i>Mr David, Mr Wojciech</i> etc. However, this was reserved for somebody much higher in the hierarchy than the spacer, but not quite as high as <i>Mr SURNAME</i>.<br /><br />If you read jane Austen, you find a hierarchical distinction between <i>Miss SURNAME</i> the eldest unmarried daughter and <i>Miss FIRST NAME</i> for any younger unmarried daughter.<br /><br />The last context in which <i>Mr FIRST NAME</i> lingered on as a norm was between servants and the children of the employer's family. Although it's pretty rare now, I bet it's still used in offices where people work for two brothers.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-36228180102144474122012-11-07T09:59:43.730+00:002012-11-07T09:59:43.730+00:00I am still 'benieuw'd', as the Dutchma...I am still 'benieuw'd', as the Dutchman says (curious as a result of having been taken aback by something 'nieuw') about the 'edible' part of the English common name of the animal referred-to by Prof. Wells.<br /><br />However, this etymological entry:<br /><br />http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=dormouse&allowed_in_frame=0<br /><br />seems to prove me right as regards the 'sleepy' (dormir(e)) part of the critter's name and the probable 'volksetymologisch'ness of the '-mouse' part. Seems to be a very hypothetical area, anyway, as the word seems to be poorly attested. Anyone knowledgeable about the etymology of 'glis, gliris, 3rd decl., masc.'?<br /><br />As T.S. Eliot once put it: 'The hippopotamus's day is passed in sleep'. Not only hippopotamus's, clearly. (I almost wrote 'hippopotamouse's).<br /><br />Full true name---see my ProfilePodpora społeczeństwahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08339088245843399386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-83651465937254070702012-11-07T08:02:36.667+00:002012-11-07T08:02:36.667+00:00Thank you, (Mr.) Crosbie. I have much more experie...Thank you, (Mr.) Crosbie. I have much more experience with Americans (who tend to be more conservative in linguistic matters) than with Britons. One freshly-baked American PhD once introduced himself to me with the words 'I am Doctor Such-and-Such'. I thought at first he was not in his right mind (in Poland that would be the implication) but after several months in the States I realised that was an (certainly not 'the') received way.<br /><br />OK, so you Britons not always say 'Mr./Mrs./Major etc Such-and-Such'. But you NEVER say so if 'Graham' is someone's FIRST name. In my country, by contrast, we often prefix with such titles given names too (there are stylistic nuances to't, of course) so if someone is addressed or referred to as 'Dr Wojciech' there might be no telling if 'Wojciech' be his first or family name. This is why 'Wojciech Wojciech' is rather avoided---there are several hundred individuals called 'Wojciech' by their surname in Poland, but I seriously doubt if any of them has 'Wojciech' for his first name, too.<br /><br />Any intuitions as to the proper stressing of John MacTaggart Ellis MacTaggart or Ford Maddox Ford? In the first case, the ONLY given name was 'John MacTaggart' (a single name made of the full name of his uncle), so leaving out the first surname he would be called 'John MacTaggart MacTaggart'.<br /><br />Full name: See ProfilePodpora społeczeństwahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08339088245843399386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-13708344178148960452012-11-06T23:01:15.426+00:002012-11-06T23:01:15.426+00:00Wojciech
Even introducing oneself, a Mr. Graham w...Wojciech<br /><br /><i>Even introducing oneself, a Mr. Graham will say 'I am Mr. Graham'.</i><br /><br />Rather unusual, Wojciech. For the most it's one of these three:<br /><br />1 <i>I'm Graham Graham.</i><br /><br />2 <i>My name's Graham.</i><br /><br />3 <i>My name's Graham Graham.</i><br /><br />Of course, [2] is ambiguous as it stands. However, we have pretty clear instincts whether fist name terms are appropriate with any particular speaker, so we would usually be correct in our interpretation of <i>Graham</i> as first name or surname.<br /><br />Yes it's true that one would nowadays address the chap as <i>Mr Graham</i>. When I was a boy, that wasn't necessarily so. Boys in school were invariably addressed by surname alone, and the practice was still fairly common among adult males — although dwindling and soon to be swept away in the Sixties.<br /><br />• SURNAME was often the chose appellation for addressing an acquaintance.<br /><br />• FIRST NAME was still reserved by more conservative speakers for close friends only.<br /><br />• MR SURNAME was the most formal. Whenever there was a power imbalance, the less powerful would say MR SURNAME while the more powerful would say SURNAME.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-80811588115396357332012-11-06T20:18:26.366+00:002012-11-06T20:18:26.366+00:00One more reflection on Prof. Wells' puzzling q...One more reflection on Prof. Wells' puzzling question whether we find names like 'Graham Graham' awkward.<br /><br />It seems to me that there are some extra-linguistic factors at play. In English (at least in the anglophone cultures superficially known to me) there seems to be a rather rigid rule to the effect that you should, while addressing someone by his or her surname, prefix the surname with a 'Mr.' or 'Mrs.' or 'Ms.' or 'Major' or 'Professor' or 'Reverend' or 'Citizen' or some such, and addressing him/her by his/her given name you must not. Even introducing oneself, a Mr. Graham will say 'I am Mr. Graham'. Therefore, the ambiguity as to whether 'Graham' is a given name or the surname is somewhat lessened, if not quite removed (if you overhear someone saying 'Mr. Graham' you know immediately 'Graham' is the person's surname.) In (linguistic) cultures in which no such (rigid) rule obtains, for instance the polonophone culture, an analogous prefix won't help much, as it can be put before a given name, too. This is why anglophones may find 'Graham Graham' (still somewhat awkward but) not so terribly awkward, while 'Wojciech Wojciech', though linguistically not impossible, would be rather very very awkward and unpractical in Poland.<br /><br />Talking of INTRAlinguistic factors, on the other hand---languages with some, all the more so rich, nominal flexion and affixation means, various hypocoristic etc. suffixes, easily form variants of given names, which can be subsequently used as surnames. The Polish surname 'Nycz' goes back, ultimately, to 'Nikolaos', and there are men called 'Mikołaj Nycz', which is a far cry from 'Nicholas Nicholas'. Italian -i, like in 'Galilei', some say the Latin genitive ending of the o-declension originally, is another example. In English, there is -s (genitive ending, too?), but that is about it (sorry, dear anglophones). That is why in a language like Polish, 'Wojciech Wojciech', rather than 'Wojciech Wojtach', 'Wojciech Wojtyła', 'Wojciech Wojcieszek' etc. etc. would stand out much more than 'Graham Graham' or 'Thomas Thomas' do in English, and seem all the more awkward and cumbersome.<br /><br />Ah, by the way: you know that most Continentals, even with good command of English, say 'Grarharm'?<br /><br />Full (non-repetitious) name: see ProfilePodpora społeczeństwahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08339088245843399386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-42964971291438387142012-11-06T19:50:48.499+00:002012-11-06T19:50:48.499+00:00do you chaps really call it EDIBLE dormouse? Like ...do you chaps really call it EDIBLE dormouse? Like 'there is an edible dormouse in my attic' or some such? Is that not, much rather, a semi-scientific name, like 'domestic pig'? We know it's called 'domestic pig', but we call it just 'pig'.<br /><br />As far as I remember, the critter occurs several times in the novel Salammbo by Flaubert, where, however, it also is actually eaten.<br /><br />Full name: v. ProfilePodpora społeczeństwahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08339088245843399386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-66034995109970727922012-11-06T19:45:36.185+00:002012-11-06T19:45:36.185+00:00Not sure what you mean by calling ,David 'Davi...Not sure what you mean by calling ,David 'Davis "normal". In my system, or JWL's, or O'C&A, this, with a nuclear tone on David followed by an accent on Davis, is just not a possible sequence within one intonation phrase. "Normal" for two-word names and phrases is for the second item to bear the stronger stress (= nuclear tone). Putting the nuclear tone on David here, as you notation seems to imply, would put David in focus and take Davis out of focus, and would be appropriate e.g. if you meant \/DAVID Davis, not \PETER Davis; but not otherwise.<br /><br />Anyhow, "David Davis" is not a tautonymous name, so it's irrelevant to the discussion.<br /><br />Alex, your posting is at risk of being deleted. You know why. John Wellshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13684304410735867148noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-66622067209901464002012-11-06T17:39:00.724+00:002012-11-06T17:39:00.724+00:00The common name is apparently edible dormouse, mor...The common name is apparently edible dormouse, more specifically.<br /><br />I think that in addition to it being only one syllable, "glis" doesn't sound Latin. And even if we know factually that "glis glis" is a scientific name, that doesn't mean the language center of our brain knows it.Ellen Kozisekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16856539181411664278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-42321292096267998982012-11-06T17:01:18.390+00:002012-11-06T17:01:18.390+00:00On encountering a reduplicated name I always prono...On encountering a reduplicated name I always pronounce it with a double stress, for example 'Gris 'gris or 'Humbert 'Humbert. If it's clearly exotic or hyphenated, it will be 'tuk-tuk.<br /><br />Then again, if I was a political correspondent, I think I would soon get used to the novelty of the chap I now call 'David 'Davis and start calling him ,David 'Davis, as normal.Alexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01773966173117509466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-68259857195112980172012-11-06T13:25:18.273+00:002012-11-06T13:25:18.273+00:00Thank ou, Pete, you've put me truly at ease.
...Thank ou, Pete, you've put me truly at ease. <br /><br />well, being all of us language geeks here, we _are_ watchful for hyphens etc., and sort of presuppose the same in other human beings...<br /><br />The common English name seems to be 'dormouse', does it not? Plural: dormice, though this may be Volksetymologie, I\d rather suppose the 'dorm-' part is Latin 'dormire', sleep, the German name of the beast is 'Siebenschlaefer', 'seven-sleeper', as it is believed to sleep for seven months.<br /><br />OK, so we've got it finally.<br /><br />True name---see ProfilePodpora społeczeństwahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08339088245843399386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-72203023031284102642012-11-06T12:58:13.051+00:002012-11-06T12:58:13.051+00:00Good question, Alan. Though I obviously can't ...Good question, Alan. Though I obviously can't answer it for the English speaking, I imagine that under analogous conditions in Polish I'd (sometimes) try to make hear the difference. For instance, there are in PL a few persons call'd 'Chubert' ([x-]) by the surname. If any of them be called 'Hubert' bei the given name, I think I'd try to mark the oft-neglected difference between the voiced counterpart of [x], spelt 'h' and [x], spelt 'h'. H(voiced)ubert Ch(voiceless)ubert.<br /><br />Again, in all languages which I speak more or less I would stress now the first component now the second, depending on where the logical emphasis is on. TOM Tom (as distinct from his father Dick Tom) or Tom TOM (as distinct from his namesake Tom Jenkins). Might not work in languages with no word-stress (wordstress) at all.<br /><br />Full name--see ProfilePodpora społeczeństwahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08339088245843399386noreply@blogger.com