Miscellaneous desk
< January 11	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 13 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

January 12

How is congea pronounced?

Does 'ng' in Congea sound like the 'ng' in angle or ranging? --Remadevil (talk) 03:30, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Language ref. desk may offer a better answer but I note that the speaker here uses the soft 'ng' form as in ranging to pronounce congéia in Portuguese, similarly to the unrelated English verb congeal. SdrawkcaB99 (talk) 10:45, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, probably neither. According to Latin spelling and pronunciation the latin velar nasal, if it occured in classical Latin, only occurred in words words that had "gn" sounds in them originally; the pronuncication would have been similar to the Italian pronunciation in words like Bologna or Emilia-Romagna if I read that right. Given that, the Latin name of this genus is probably more properly pronounced "con-gay-uh" or "con-gee-ah" with a normal "n" sound and distinct "g". --Jayron 32 11:57, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The classification name is given as Roxburgh 1820 - so probably refers to William Roxburgh whose work was published posthumously in 1820. Given that he was British, it seems very likely that when he identified and named this species he would have pronounced it with a soft G. Wymspen (talk) 17:24, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Scientists aren't classicists, so their pronunciation is going to have much more to do with the historical developments described at New Latin#Pronunciation than with classical Latin. That includes the regional developments, so there's no single standard from place to place -- but since we're on the English ref desk, ng as in ranging is the best answer. -165.234.252.11 (talk) 18:05, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a pronunciation guide for scientific names that may be helpful: [1]. To quote: Although scientific names are universal, their pronunciation may vary from region to region, especially between different countries. For example, European pronunciations are often different from those of most American botanists. There are no international agreements as to how scientific names should be pronounced. Very often, pronunciations are influenced by one’s native language. One should be flexible and adaptive with regard to pronunciations, as the overriding goal is communication. The rules cited in Figures 16.3 and 16.4 are recommended here. These generally use traditional English for pronunciation of diphthongs, vowels (long and short), and consonants and “reformed” academic pronunciation (based on classical Latin) for converting to syllables and for accenting. -165.234.252.11 (talk) 18:08, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, there's another thing you can tie together from "scientists aren't classicists", "no single standard from place to place", and "one should be flexible and adaptive with regard to pronunciations, as the overriding goal is communication": Latin is a dead language and nobody is going to care about the way you pronounce a scientific name. -165.234.252.11 (talk) 18:17, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ship's stem (or stern?)

On p. 279 of this book, we have:

Down flashed the vessel’s bows whilst her stem stood up as though she were making her last plunge.

The m is a bit smudged, but I think it's pretty clearly an m rather than an rn.

I gather than ship's stem is, essentially the bows; so is there any way that the text could be correct, or is it a misprint? (The author was a noted sea author and former sailor, and can be trusted to know the difference). Thanks, Henry ^Flower 12:35, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Henry Flower: See Stem_(ship) and Stern. The article Bow (ship) says: "The forward part of the bow, usually on the ship's centreline, is called the stem. Traditionally, the stem was an upright timber or metal bar into which side planks or plates were joined.". (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 12:38, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for telling me what I've already told you I know. Henry ^Flower 12:55, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Henry Flower: Thanks for acting like a dick to someone who is trying to help you. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 12:59, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Zooming in on it, it's definitely "stem", and a few lines later he uses "stem" again. I don't understand how the stem could be rising while the bow is falling. It's almost like it's either a misprint or else the author used the wrong term. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:06, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He didn't write that it was rising. He wrote that the bow flashed down, whilst the stem stood up. So at that moment the bow was on its way down while the stem was still angled upwards (not horizontal). (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 13:07, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

... so was the ship broken apart at that point? Dbfirs 13:39, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly but not necessarily. What the author writes can be true with a ship that is fully intact. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 13:52, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There's an English idiom, somewhat antiquated, ""from stem to stern" which means "the entire length of". It can be used with ships, but also to refer to the full size of anything. --Jayron 32 14:13, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

{{hat|Not relevent to answering the question --Jayron 32 16:32, 12 January 2018 (UTC)}}[reply]

Pretty sure that Henry won't be as impolite to you as he was to me.

Administrators are expected to lead by example and to behave in a respectful, civil manner in their interactions with others.

Administrators should strive to model appropriate standards of courtesy and civility to other editors and to one another. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 14:25, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, was my answer rude? Can you explain please? --Jayron 32 15:31, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, you were not rude. Henry was (see above). (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 15:53, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, then why respond to me. If I wasn't rude to you, please do not involve me in such discussion. Your comment had no bearing on my statement. --Jayron 32 16:31, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Now you are rude. See my comment dated 14:25, 12 January 2018. Those quotes are from Wikipedia:Administrators, which is policy. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:36, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The word stem is a typo. It's supposed to read stern. The "huge roller came rushing at her from right ahead. Up she soared..." What part of the boat was "up"? The bow was up. "The vast liquid mass swept past the sides..." This is saying that the swell which came at the boat passed the sides, after raising the bow, before later raising the stern. A boat has buoyancy. A boat floats. The response to a moving upswell of water is for a boat, or part of a boat, to rise. As this wave first encountered the front of the boat, that is the part that rose first. When the wave reached the rear of the boat, that part rose. The rear of the boat is the stern. The writer is telling us this key fact: the wave came from "right ahead", thus we know the sequence of rising and falling parts of the boat. And the ship is not "broken apart at that point". The ship is intact. But it is being tossed badly on roiling seas. Bus stop (talk) 15:58, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Could be a typo/mistake, but we do not know for sure. I tried googling part of the sentence but I couldn't find any other sources. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:03, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we do know for sure. The stem is not so distinct, positionally, from the bow. They would both rise and fall in unison. Bus stop (talk) 16:08, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, we do not know for sure. Both versions of the sentence could be correct, but it is probably more likely that it is a mistake. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:09, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When would they NOT rise and fall in unison? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:11, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Even when they do the sentence could still be correct. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:13, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The idiom "from stem to stern" can mean "all the way from the front of a ship to the back".[2] (As already pointed out by Jayron.) Bus stop (talk) 16:14, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) See Jayron's comment dated 14:13, 12 January 2018 and my response to it. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:17, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is a very understandable typo because stem and stern look very similar. Bus stop (talk) 16:28, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:36, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Scanning "rn" as "m" is a very common scanning error, but the linked image definitely has "m". I suspect it's a printer's error. Is there any other edition of the book available? Only "stern" makes sense to me, since the "stem" is normally upright, but would be almost horizontal in the circumstances described. Dbfirs 16:42, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2014/may/01/scanner-ebook-arms-anus-optical-character-recognition (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:45, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Bus stop and Dbfirs. Henry ^Flower 16:51, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's a pleistocene pleasure. Bus stop (talk) 17:01, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

pdf download for old book

Can anyone find me a pdf download for "A booke of fishing with hooke & line, and of all other instruments thereunto belonging. Another of sundrie engines and trappes to take polcats, buzards, rattes, mice and all other kindes of vermine & beasts whatsoeuer, most profitable for all warriners, and such as delight in this kinde of sport and pastime" by author Leonard Mascall? It's a book written in the 16th century so (presumably) out of copyright. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:1838:37:2C8:0:0:0:B574 (talk) 18:36, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is an html version here. If you can't find anything else, you can always "print" them to pdf; many computers allow you to output a printed document to a pdf instead of sending it to a printer directly, so you could click each chapter and output each to its own pdf, if nothing else turns up. --Jayron 32 18:43, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And here you should be able to get a copy in various formats, including pdf. --Jayron 32 18:45, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Google Books has a scan of it here. --Jayron 32 18:46, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Archive dot Org also has two copies of the book (I think they're different copies of the same edition, from different libraries), in multiple formats, including pdf. here and [here https://archive.org/details/bookeoffishingwi00mascrich]

ApLundell (talk) 19:14, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What was the Coca Cola before Coca Cola

Regular Coca Cola is the most popular single brand beverage in America, as well as almost everywhere else in the world. And as far as I'm aware, it has been for decades. What was the most popular before that, and was it also a consistent front-runner? 146.90.9.139 (talk) 22:00, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be able to deduce an answer in Soft drink, particularly the history section. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:13, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably hard to say. The rise of Coca-Cola is coincidental to the rise of the mass market. Before Coca-Cola, and other brands of other products that developed at the same time period, the concept of a single national brand (of anything, really) didn't exist. Depending on your perspective, Coca-Cola either invented the idea of a nationwide branded beverage, or was invented at a time (and presciently rode the wave) of a time when national brands could first develop. If there was any precursor, it may be Bass Ale, whose red triangle was one of the world's first trademark (and officially the UK's first registered trademark) as a singular mass-market brand drink. While Bass had exist for a century before, it didn't become an international mass market branded beer (arguably, one of the first brands to do so) until towards the end of the 19th century, only a few years before Coca Cola hit it big. But I still think that there really weren't any Coca Cola analogues before Coca-Cola. The concept of a national or world-wide brand just didn't exist before it came around. --Jayron 32 03:44, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK, R. White's Lemonade (a bit like 7 Up for non-Brits) started in 1845, but at what point it became a national brand, I don't know. I expect it helps if your nation is a lot smaller than the USA. BTW, Coke wasn't widely sold in the UK until the 1920s. [3] I expect it took much longer to arrive in harder-to-reach parts of the world. Alansplodge (talk) 10:41, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The British head start in industry might've helped too. Our factories couldn't even satiate the gun demand in the 1860s after all, how are we going to make enough of those disposable bottles? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:03, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The original Coca-Cola bottles were not disposable. The were return-for-deposit. -Arch dude (talk) 02:02, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wales had Thomas & Evans' Welsh Hills soft drinks, mind. William Avery (talk) 14:16, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Celebrity endorsements may have figured in national brand awareness. Coke was endorsed in newspaper advertising by Ty Cobb, the greatest ballplayer of his day, who touted Coke's many virtues (leaving out the fact he was an investor in the company). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:23, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]