Welcome to the language section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

Select a section:

WP:RD/L

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
Note:
- We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
- We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
- We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
- We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

January 5

Name of Nova Scotia?

Is there any historical explanation of why the name of the Canadian province of Nova Scotia uses Latin. Is it an oddity with no explanation? Do you know of any other European colony (especially of the form "new something") that uses a Latin name instead of an equivalent in a modern European language? 178.51.8.23 (talk) 13:57, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The semi-Latin name Nova Zembla was until fairly recently^[1] the most commonly used English exonym of Новая Земля. (It is still the preferred exonym in Dutch and Portuguese.) --Lambiam 14:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is "Nova Zembla" semi-Latin or just a garbled version of the Russian? 178.51.8.23 (talk) 14:42, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In this borrowing, Zembla is clearly a phonetic adaptation, but (although this would be hard to prove), I find the most plausible explanation for the component Nova that it arose by alignment with the then many Latin geonyms found on maps and atlases starting with Nova. In any case, the evidence is that Nova Zembla used to be seen as a Latin name, as from the use of the accusative case Novam Zemblam here, in 1570, and the genitive case Novæ Zemblæ here, in 1660. --Lambiam 20:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was named in 1621, when James I made William Alexander, 1st Earl of Stirling lord of the area. This lordship was granted in the royal charter, written in Latin. Praefato Domino Willelmo Alexander ... nomine Novae Scotiae. Though he left his own name as William and didn't change it to Willelmo, he apparently took the instruction to call the place Nova Scotia very literally. Card Zero (talk) 14:38, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Was Nova Scotia the only Scottish colony ever? Maybe it is a Scottish thing to use Latin? 178.51.8.23 (talk) 14:45, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There was also the Darien scheme, i.e. New Caledonia.--2A04:4A43:909F:F990:E596:9C8F:DF47:1709 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And re-used for New Caledonia by James Cook in 1774. -- Verbarson ^talk_edits 18:25, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And Sir Francis Drake claimed New Albion (or Nova Albion) in the California area in 1579. -- Verbarson ^talk_edits 18:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Back then (the 17th century) it was a European thing to use Latin in a lot of contexts, particularly in law and academia. Consider for example Isaac Newton's magnum opus, Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 18:10, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are the Carolinas (Latin for Charles). Matt Deres (talk) 17:31, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And Australia, from Terra Australis (Southland), for a while also known as New Holland. PiusImpavidus (talk) 09:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thule (Greek/Latin, location uncertain) and Ultima Thule Peak (in a former Russian colony or territory; I don't know whether the Russians named it, but the Alaskans did in 1996). -- Verbarson ^talk_edits 17:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, I am grateful for all your answers. I just want to point out that my question was not about names in Latin (there are other exmples btw: Virginia, Georgia, Columbia/Colombia, Argentina, maybe Guinea, etc.) but specifically names in Latin where an equivalent in a modern European language seems to be more natural. I was simply curious as to why "Nova Scotia" instead of "New Scotland". All your examples are great but for very few of them (if any) an equivalent into a modern European language comes readily to mind. For example "New Caledonia" would have no "equivalent into a modern European language". Caledonia is itself a Latinism. So is "Batavia" say. There are many places in Europe with classical equivalents. Using one of those is not exactly the same thing as using a Latin translation of a modern name. Clearly it is not always clear cut. "Hispania" and "Austria" would be considered Latin translations of "Spain" and "Austria", but "Lusitania" and "Helvetia" would not be considered Latin translations of "Portugal" and "Switzerland". Does it depend on whether the Latin and the modern language equivalent are related etymologically? Of if that relation is commonly perceived? If the city of New York had been named instead "Novum Eboracum" would we be in one case or the other? I'll let you decide. The two names are linked but it is pretty involved. 178.51.8.23 (talk) 18:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

'Caledonia' is no more of a Latinism than 'Scotia', and is sometimes used as a near synonym for 'Scotland' in modern British English (including Scots English, not to be confused with Scots, or Scottish Gaelic in which it's called Alba). It would be rather confusing if we called two different places "New Scotland" – I suppose Cook could have named his discovery "New Pictland", but I'm not sure if that would have gone down well.

You refer to 'modern European language[s]', but these (particularly English) have long since absorbed a great deal of Latin, both in assimilated and 'classical' form, so to me your attempted distinctions appears meaningless. Others may differ. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 10:18, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Austria" is a Latin coinage to begin with. Otherwise, there are a few languages which have calqued the native "Österreich" (Eastern Kingdom). Navajo has apparently the descriptive moniker "Homeland of the leather pants". 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:47, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And now I'm curious about place-names in sign languages. I dimly remember (or misremember) that the Trappist sign for Jerusalem means ‘Jew city’. —Tamfang (talk) 22:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, they're generally spelled out letter by letter, unless they are famous enough to get their own sign. Some might be "compound-signed" from their constituent parts if they're transparent enough, I guess. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 23:42, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 6

Lowercase L that looks like capital I with an extra serif

I just came across on Harper's Bazaar's website a lowercase L that looks the like capital I with an extra serif sticking to the left in the middle (kind of like ⟨I⟩ superimposed with text-figure ⟨1⟩). See e.g. "looks", "Viola", "Winslet", etc. here.

Is this style of lowercase L something found in existing typefaces? The font is SangBleu OG Serif by Swiss Typefaces and it appears to be the only typeface of theirs that has this type of L. Nardog (talk) 05:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Beats me why they're calling those all one typeface instead of five. Anyway, in the "OG serif" incarnation, they got the weird arm on the lowercase L from Romain du Roi. The long s also has one. This incunable (from incunable) also has the nub (arm? Bar? Flag?) on lowercase L in many instances, but for some reason not all of them.

Edit: I think the nub is missing only in ligatures, mainly el. And I think this is originally a blackletter thing. This handwritten bible shows a similar but less distinct effect, due I think to the minim (palaeography). The scribe first draws a minim, then extends it to write the lowercase L. Caslon's specimen has it, but only in the blackletter face (top right). I think the explanation is thus the same as the origin of the nub on long S. Card Zero (talk) 12:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The ⟨eſ ⟩ pairs in the Valerius Maximus incunable also have nubless ⟨ſ ⟩es. --Lambiam 00:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, so there is precedent. Nardog (talk) 09:17, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's a Swedish publisher, Modernista, that uses an st ligature in their logotype. I believe they also use it constantly and consistently within the books themselves, as a brand identity, which of course could come across as pretty strained. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In that Caslon specimen the ⟨b⟩ and ⟨h⟩ also have nubs. The letter ⟨k⟩ does not occur in the specimen's text, but here we also find the Caslon black ⟨k⟩ nubbed. --Lambiam 14:11, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unsatisfied, I dug up this brief discussion of Romain du Roi's lowercase L. The lowercase letter /l shows the most distinctive feature of the letters. It has a small serif on the left side at x-height, called ergot or sécante in French. The serif is a remnant of the calligraphic style which had not appeared in any previous typefaces. This serif makes the Romain du Roi unique. The reason why the Romain du Roi /l possessed the serif is not clearly documented. One theory says that this serif was used to distinguish it more clearly from the capital letter /l, which has the same height. The other theory claims that Louis XIV wanted to have an unmistakable feature in the /l, because his name began with this letter. Yeah. Thing is, Romain du Roi put the bars on the top and bottom of the glyph gratuitously, so if it then needed disambiguating from capital i, that doesn't seem like a very rational thing to have done. Card Zero (talk) 17:28, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You might not be satisfied looking for rationality. I think the aim was modernity and it might have been intended to be transitional. The /b and the /d have their strong upper serifs so the /l could not be without its own ( there still can be felt some of that era heavy cavalry dynamics - digging in up - in the double /l as in "brilliant"). --Askedonty (talk) 23:32, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet, I've updated Romain du Roi and L. Nardog (talk) 09:38, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The source (written in a sans serif font) falls into the same trap that it's describing. Taken literally, it says that the Romain du Roi needed to distinguish l from L, but we know what it means. Thank you for actually improving Wikipedia, I'll consider doing that sometimes too. :) Card Zero (talk) 14:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's a borrowing from calligraphy and tends to be called a "spur" in English (I'm getting this from Paul Shaw's book "Revival Type", page 86-7). It and the double-head serif on the el were fairly common in French typefaces until about the end of the nineteenth century. Swiss Typefaces, formerly BP Type, have several fonts influenced by it.

But I'm not an expert on this. My impression is that the best sources are in French, Sebastién Morlighem's very good PhD thesis The 'modern face' in France and Great Britain, 1781-1825: typography as an ideal of progress, on types appearing in its wake, lists various sources on page 35 including a book Le romain du roi: la typographie au service de l’État. I need to cite that thesis in more articles. Blythwood (talk) 22:27, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 7

Examples of the use of "might" as a past tense?

The past form of "may", "might", is mostly used as a conditional: "He might have said that, then again might not have". Uses of "might" as a past tense meaning "was/were allowed to" seem to be much rarer: "He might not say that" is most often intended to mean (and understood to mean) "it is possible that he will not say that", not as "he was not allowed to say that".

But that usage is not completely unknown: for example Edna St Vincent Millay writes in her sonnet "Bluebeard": "This door you might not open and you did / So enter now, and see for what slight thing / You are betrayed".

Do you have other examples of "might" being used as a past tense of "may"? I mean examples from the literature, jounalism, etc. not examples made up by Wiktionary editors, or other dictionaries, not because I don't trust Wiktionary editors or dictionary editors, but because I'd trust more examples that were not produced specifically for the purpose of illustrating a dictionary definition.

I'm especially interested in examples where "might" is used as a past tense in affirmative constructions! The examples above are all with "might not". I have the feeling the use of "might" in a negative sentence would sound more natural than in an affirmative sentence (if there's any example of it at all). Do you agree?

178.51.8.23 (talk) 17:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He appointed twelve that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach. Mark 3:14 -- Verbarson ^talk_edits 17:13, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Thanks. Please keep all kinds of examples coming, but watch out especially for examples where "might" is used in a main (or independent) clause (rather than a subordinate clause such as "(in order) that they might..."). 178.51.8.23 (talk) 17:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In Francis Cottington, 1st Baron Cottington we find ...after the dismissal of the Short Parliament, he declared it his opinion that at such a crisis the king might levy money without the Parliament. --Trovatore (talk) 18:23, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another one, not directly subordinate in a that clause, though still notionally subordinate to a verb of speaking within a multi-sentence passage of reported speech, in a 19th-century summary of a parliamentary debate [2] "Mr BUCKNILL (Surry, Epsom) said, […] Member after Member had spoken of a particular company […] and, if he might use the expression, it had really in this Debate been ridden to death […]". Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:12, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just went to Google News and searched on the phrase "he might have done". Here was one of the hits, in the New York Times: "A former Marine who trained Daniel Penny to apply a chokehold said Thursday that images and video suggest that he might have done so improperly when he killed a homeless man last year." And this headline from Vanity Fair: "Trump's Missing Phone Logs Mean We Don't Even Know Half the Illegal Shit He Might Have Done on 1/6". And this from the Seattle Times: "Although there is an area he might have done better." And from the BBC: "But Peter persisted, and now he can reflect on the earlier disappointments and what he might have done differently". My native-speaker instinct insists that "might" is the only correct form in these cases and "may" is an error, although I know others use it. --142.112.149.206 (talk) 19:56, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To me "may have done" is usable if it is currently possible (that is, the speaker does not currently know it to be false) that it happened, whereas "might have done" is usable in that case and also in the counterfactual case (if this had happened, then that might have happened). Prescription alert: Saying "if this had happened, then that may have happened" is in my opinion an error.

But that isn't what the OP is asking about. The OP is asking about using "might" as a past tense of "may", in the sense that "A might do B" means "A was morally allowed, or otherwise had the permission or authority, to do B". This sense does exist but has become somewhat rare. --Trovatore (talk) 20:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Does this count: "I [...] did what I might."^[3]? --Lambiam 00:12, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also: "Then Titul took a knife from his belt and asked the Gaul if he could kill himself; and the Gaul tried, but he might not."^[4] --Lambiam 00:29, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. Both are past tenses. The first example is a relative clause. The second example is an independent clause. And both are affirmative constructions. Thanks. 178.51.8.23 (talk) 01:01, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Although the polarity is positive, the first of these uses sounds quite natural to me. The second use feels somewhat archaic, which, I think, was the intention of the author. --Lambiam 10:34, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Both of these examples seem to lose the distinction between "may" and "can", though. --Trovatore (talk) 19:36, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Like so many lexical terms, auxiliary may has several senses. These include "to be able to" (labelled obsolete on Wiktionary) and "to be allowed to". In both uses here we see the first sense. Note that can also has both senses ("Can you help me?" and "Can I smoke here?"). --Lambiam 00:19, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 8

Pronunciation of "breen"

How do you pronounce the -breen that appears at the end of Svalbard glacier names? I went through all the Svalbard -breen glacier articles on Wikipedia at Category:Glaciers_of_Spitsbergen, and not a single one provides IPA. 2601:644:4301:D1B0:B94F:4C6C:A635:20B6 (talk) 02:32, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The -en ending is the Norwegian definite mascular singular suffix, and bre means "glacier", so, for example, Nansenbreen means "the Nansen glacier".

The pronunciations in Nynorsk and Bokmål would be slightly different, with also regional variations. I have no idea which variety of spoken Norwegian is prevalent among the roughly 2,500 Norvegicophone inhabitants of Svalbard.

Extrapolating from the pronunciations of other words, I believe the pronunciation of -breen to be:

Nynorsk: /²brɛːn̩/
Bokmål: /bʁe̞ːn̩/

For the meaning of the toneme [²], see on Wiktionary Appendix:Norwegian Nynorsk pronunciation § Stress and tonemes. --Lambiam 10:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Simultaneous editing) Here an example of Norwegian pronounciation, "Jostedaalsbreen" first mentioned around 0:06. Since Norwegian is a language of dialects I cannot rule out that there could be regional differences in pronounciation. -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 10:24, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This agrees with my extrapolation of the Nynorsk pronunciation. --Lambiam 10:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

However, I believe the two ee in the middle are being distinguished in the pronounciation rather than just pronounced as a long vowel. -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 11:40, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The long vowel represents solely the first ⟨e⟩. The definitive suffix -en is represented by [n̩]. The vertical understroke diacritic signifies that this is a syllabic consonant. --Lambiam 15:46, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, that would make sense. Not an IPA expert here. -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 16:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the dialect, I found this: https://munin.uit.no/handle/10037/14074. Excerpt from Google Translation: This is interesting because Svalbard has no local dialect. The language community on the archipelago is instead characterized by dialectal variation. The Norwegian population in Svalbard comes from all over Norway, and the average length of residence is short. . On Norwegian Wikipedia it stated that Nynorsk spellings have to be used for all town names in Svalbard but this probably has no bearing on the pronounciation practices. -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 17:58, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all for your input! So it's a monosyllabic /²brɛːn̩/. 2601:644:4301:D1B0:B94F:4C6C:A635:20B6 (talk) 21:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is it really monosyllabic if a syllabic vowel is followed by a syllabic consonant? By the way, I believe the common Swedish curse word fan often is pronounced somewhat similarly. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 21:45, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By definition, a syllabic consonant forms a syllable on its own. So we have two syllables, the first of which ends on a vowel. --Lambiam 00:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 9

Is there a term which categorises these phrases?

Is there a lexicographic word or term to describe phrases such as "out and about", "bits and pieces", or "nooks and crannies"? There are many such phrases which conjoin words which are less often used separately. I am not thinking of "conjunction", but something which describes this particular quirk. For example, where I grew up, no-one would say "I was out in town yesterday" but "I was out and about the town". 51.148.145.228 (talk) 15:29, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think a phraseme, also called a set phrase, fixed expression, is the term you're looking for for the phrase. Fossil word (for words not used outside set phrases) and Irreversible binomial (for phrases which have fixed order - you wouldn't say "about and out") may also be of interest. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 16:23, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All three examples above are irreversible binomials. --Lambiam 10:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you are thinking of expressions where a single meaning is carried by a conjunction of two near-synonyms, Hendiadys may be a fit. There is a narrow definition of that term where it covers only conjunctions of two terms that logically stand in a relation of subordination to each other, but there's also a wider usage where it's used for expressions like these, where the two terms are merely synonyms. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Such as "lively and quick". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:04, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And also Pleonasm. Card Zero (talk) 18:42, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's a similar concept in Legal doublets. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 15:00, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 11

Evening and night

Does English refer a period from 22:00 to midnight as late evening? Does English ever say "late-evening shows"? And is a period around 17:00 known as early evening, and a period around midnight as early night? And do English speskers ever say "late in the morning"? --40bus (talk) 22:36, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We say "late evening". The exact time is probably after dinner time. It could be hyphenated if you like, but isn't. We say "early evening" and "late morning". The phrase "late in the morning" is fine, and not at all awkward, but is not engraved into our English-speaking minds as an idiom like "early in the morning". Our article on Shift work defines the evening as 14:00 to 22:00, so later than that may be night, but in common usage the definition is flexible, and "night" and "evening" undoubtedly overlap. Night shift workers live in a state of confusion about whether it is currently night or morning, and which day it is. Card Zero (talk) 00:59, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Style guides recommend hyphenation in attributive use to avoid the interpretation as "evening shows that are late". --Lambiam 09:58, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here are a few examples of "late-evening show": [5], [6], [7]. And here are a few examples of "late in the morning": [8], [9], [10]. --Lambiam 09:48, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In American English "late evening" is not a specific period of time but just a way of saying late in the evening. The distinction between evening and night has less to do with the exact time, and more to do with whether one is out with friends or at home preparing for bed. I would never consider 22-24 late evening (that's night) but others might. There are no "late evening shows"; late-night shows air at that time. "Early night" is not a common idiom. Eluchil404 (talk) 21:52, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Eluchil404: In British English, "early night" is commonly used to signify going to bed earlier than usual, as in "I'm really tired so I'm going to have an early night." Similarly, "I had a late night last night" suggests having not gone to bed early enough. See [11]. Bazza 7 (talk) 22:41, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We can use "early night" in that sense in American English too (though "make it an early night" sounds a bit more idiomatic to me). But that doesn't seem to be the sense the OP was asking about. --Trovatore (talk) 22:49, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This reminds me a lot of when Steve Martin said he would smoke marijuana. --Trovatore (talk) 22:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC) [reply]

My home Internet connection has failed. I reported it to my ISP. I had an email from them yesterday (Sunday) at 5.34pm telling me they would be calling me "today" about the problem. It's now past 10.00am Monday. Still waiting. HiLo48 (talk) 23:13, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so they didn't do what they said they were going to do. Imagine my shock. What does it have to do with the question? --Trovatore (talk) 23:17, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of "today" as a future time at 5.34pm. HiLo48 (talk) 23:01, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Or they'll call at 23:59, "late today". --Lambiam 23:52, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 12

Latin alphabet

Why did Khmer and Lao not switch to Latin alphabet during French colonization, unlike Vietnamese? --40bus (talk) 13:43, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you forgot a "not", and it might be since Chữ Nôm was a highly complex writing system only mastered by about 5% of the population. A Latin-based writing system would have been a lot more accessible at the time, both to French colonialists and the majority of the Vietnamese, themselves. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 13:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

40bus -- Khmer and Lao already had alphabets, since they had experienced significant Indic influence. The Vietnamese did not have an alphabet, since they experienced predominant Chinese influence. The Cham alphabet and Tai Viet alphabet were used in what is now Vietnam, but Vietnamese-speakers did not adopt them. AnonMoos (talk) 06:47, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 14

Nuevo!

A lot of areas of the Spanish Empire in America had a name in the pattern of "New XXX" where XXX is usually a Spanish province or city. Some examples are: Nueva Andalucía, Nueva Castilla, Nueva España, Nueva Extremadura, Nuevas Filipinas, Nueva Granada, Nueva León, Nueva Navarra, Nuevo Santander, Nueva Toledo, Nueva Vizcaya. I'm not able to recognize any pattern or obvious motivation for them to select precisely these names. Why call some place New Extremadura and not, for example, New Catalonia? Where they chosen randomly? Is there any reason behind them? Thank you? 195.62.160.60 (talk) 10:10, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the answer, but Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor would probably have been the one who decided, or at least approved, some of these names. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.8.29.20 (talk) 10:22, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just the Spanish. An early name for the British part of Australia, and now one of its states, is New South Wales. Apparently Captain Cook thought it looked like South Wales. Then just across the ocean is New Zealand. That one came from the Dutch. HiLo48 (talk) 10:31, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not to forget New Amsterdam/New York and New Orleans. However, these things aren't consistent as the Spanish also copied names without the Nuevo/Nueva in front, like Córdoba and Valencia. Would be interesting to see if this was a time-dependent pattern. As to the choice of names, this could well have to do with the individuals involved. E.g. a lot of the Conquistadores came from Extremadura, including Hernán Cortés and Francisco Pizarro, and Castilia, Granada etc. aren't far from that area either. -- 79.91.113.116 (talk) 11:18, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They decided to follow the rule, "Nuevo say neuvo again." Clarityfiend (talk) 21:04, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The English were in a habit of omitting 'new' too. In the US there's Durham, Manchester, Washington. In Australia there's Newcastle. What's notable is all of these are distinctly English names, very old ones with meanings that make sense only to historians. It's highly unlikely they arose the same way in AUS and the US. ~~----

Indeed. In 1940, the Royal Navy was able to rename fifty old US destroyers after British and American towns that share a common name. Alansplodge (talk) 12:12, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The whole Australian mainland was previously known as New Holland. Anything less like Holland it would be impossible to find, but there you go. But at least this recognises that the Dutch were the first Europeans definitely known to have landed on Australia, in 1606. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:12, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They probably weren't chosen randomly. Possible reasons include:

Naming after the namer's homeland. Nueva Extremadura (Chile) was named by Pedro de Valdivia, who was from Extremadura
Naming to honour a patron, e.g. New York was named after the Duke of York
Naming after a resemblance (New South Wales, as stated above).

AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 11:15, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nuevo say nuevo again. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:04, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A variation - Within the town of Moe, Victoria, Australia, is what is effectively now the suburb of Newborough. It apparently gained that name because when it was established, Moe had just become a borough. HiLo48 (talk) 22:53, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also the London Borough of Newham, a 1965 merger of East Ham and West Ham. It was originally intended to be pronounced "New-ham" but is now universally called "Newum". Alansplodge (talk) 12:04, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not obvious to me how "Newum" would be pronounced. It could be "Nee-wum". HiLo48 (talk) 23:04, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

/ˈnju(w)əm/ ColinFine (talk) 23:25, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ni! Peng! —Tamfang (talk) 21:39, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Curious that there was a Nueva Castilla in the New World when there was already one in Old Spain. They could have called it Tercera Castilla. —Tamfang (talk) 21:42, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 18

Conlangs allowed here?

Is discussion about conlangs permitted here or is it solely for natural languages? If you reply here, please ping me. Thanks, TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 02:14, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably you're referring to Constructed language. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:45, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe they are. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:06, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In the past, there's occasionally been a little discussion of Esperanto, and I don't remember anybody complaining (see here for example). Workshopping or promoting your own personal stuff might be perceived differently (depending on how you approach it). AnonMoos (talk) 13:27, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Was it here or on Wiktionary someone discussed a fable about a goat written, first in some conlang and second, in some Low German dialect between German and Dutch? 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 19:04, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you thinking of Schleicher's fable? I imagine that has been translated into many languages, constructed and otherwise. —Tamfang (talk) 21:41, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly. It appeared as if some amateur conlanger had constructed something similar, first written in the conlang, and then, for some reason, in that particular German-Dutch dialect. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 00:22, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why wouldn't or shouldn't it be? --Theurgist (talk) 15:27, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Since Wikipedia is not a general discussion forum, the reference desks themselves are controversial. As long as this page is allowed to be active, conlangs per se are within its scope, but note any question that has little relevance to improving our articles will be frowned upon by at least some, especially if you post multiple such questions within a short period. Nardog (talk) 16:38, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Reference desk attempts to provide services similar to those of a library reference desk. It should be viewed as a supplement to the encyclopedia. Users who are seeking information on a topic post questions here, and the respondents try to find answers to these questions. If you have a question about conlangs for which you cannot find the answer in our articles on the topic, you are welcome to post the question here.

Next to being a service to our users, this can also help to signal lacunae in our coverage of encyclopedic topics. --Lambiam 19:04, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 19