Look up Wiktionary:Information desk in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

I have a few questions about Māori toponymy in New Zealand. In particular about these places: Auckland / Tāmaki Makaurau, Christchurch / Ōtautahi, Hamilton / Kirikiriroa, Napier / Ahuriri, New Plymouth / Ngāmotu, Wellington / Te Whanganui-a-Tara, Westport / Kawatiri.
1) Was there already a Maori village with a Maori name that was later colonized and given a new English name?
2) Was the city / town created by Europeans and was later given a Maori name? In this case when did the usage of the Maori name start to be officially used? Was it already in oral / traditional usage for the city / town or for the general area? thank you! 79.42.126.115 (talk) 08:57, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This might be somewhat prejudiced speculation, but the whole idea of a named town area sounds more colonial than Maori to me. What do the Maori names mean? I guess that some of them might be calques from or phonetic approximations of the English names. Other might be based on some famous natural feature, such as a river, I guess. Natural features and bigger tribes might have names, supposedly. I'm not sure on whether the pre-colonial Maori population would be primarily nomadic or resident, although apparently, there was a widespread tradition of building fortified settlements on impregnable hills. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 09:51, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article goes into many of the questions you asked for the specific case of Ōtautahi / Christchurch: [1]. There were several Māori settlements and place names within what became Christchurch, but Christchurch was not founded by taking over those existing settlements. There can be some disagreement over which (if any) of the existing place names should be used for the modern city. —Amble (talk) 14:56, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello what does it mean 𠀀𠂇𡈼 𠆢𡃁 𠜎𠜱 𠮷𡅁. ? 176.183.129.225 (talk) 14:54, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Those characters are obsolete and not in use in modern Chinese. They don't mean anything cohesive. If anything, I think whoever typed that is testing support for Unicode.

In detail:

• 𠀀 is a variant of the character 一 (meaning "one")
• 𠮷 is an old form of the word 吉 ("lucky") and is commonly used in Japanese surnames
• The others you included, like 𠂇, 𡈼, and 𡃁 are obscure and won't really be seen in daily use. Most of them haven't seen daily use for centuries.

Hope this helps. Gommeh 🎮 14:59, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The use of various obscure CJK ideographs makes me think this might be mojibake. -insert valid name here- (talk) 20:18, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This must be the same random foreign gibberish troll again that we had here a few years ago, just like with the "Chinese" thread above. Let's just roll them back when they post again. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:31, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps an Arabic speaker could advise if this is human gibberish or AI gibberish. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:26, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like random-hacking-at-a-keyboard type gibberish to me, given the numerous near-identical repetitions of letter sequences. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:30, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ok, passes the Turing Arabic gibberish test, then. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:38, 7 July 2025 (UTC) "I was in Afwica", began Tarquin Maynard Portly. "Don't want to talk gibbewish, but I spent some time in the land of the Gibber, and believe me, those Gibbwoes could get a budgewigar to phone Hawwods."[reply]

Posted by the same troll: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Mathematics § unsolvable equation.  ​‑‑Lambiam 08:47, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All three geolocate to various parts of France. Maybe they've had too much goat cheese. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:04, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well reportedly, sub-pontine dwellers are caprally antagonistic, so I suppose they might indeed suffer adverse reactions to chevre. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.5.172.125 (talk) 08:44, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1. In Finnish, a night between Christmas Eve and Christmas Day is called jouluyö, literally "Christmas night". Is that term also used in English to describe the same thing?
2. In Finnish, 23 December is called jouluaatonaatto, literally "Christmas Eve's Eve". But does English refer to that day any other than "23 December" or "December 23"?
3. In Finnish, a night between New Year's Eve and New Year's Day is called uudenvuodenyö, literally "New Year's night" and the whole period around New Year is called vuodenvaihde, literally "year's change"? Vuodenvaihde is commonly used in expressions like vuodenvaihde 2024-2025, meaning a period covering last days of 2024 and first days of 2025. Also a change from one month to next is named in type [first month (without -kuu)]-[second month], like kesä-heinäkuun vaihde, meaning last days of June and first days of July. Does English know any such expressions?
4. In Finnish, a night that is about to come a few hours' time is referred to as keskiviikkoyö, literally "Wednesday night"? But why English usually refers that as "Tuesday night", despite that most of it falls during Wednesday instead? The current time of the day when I am writing that in Finnish timezone can be referred to as "tiistai-ilta". Does English say "Tuesday evening" for that time (about 22:50)?
5. In Finnish, the transitions from one season to next are referred to as compounds consisting the names of the first and second season. These are kevättalvi, kevätkesä, syyskesä and syystalvi. Does English have similar words? At least Swedish has some similar ones.

--40bus (talk) 19:49, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1. In British English, the 00:00–23:59 period before Christmas Day is called Christmas Eve; the night period until midnight is called Christmas Eve Night if a distinction is required.

2. In British English, no (other than "the day before Christmas Eve").

3. In British English, "New Year's Eve" is the 00:00–23:59 period before New Year's Day. The whole period around New Year is called "New Year". Scottish English may have other special names which a Scottish user might tell us about. There are no specific names for the change from one month to the next.

4. Because it does. Your assertion that most of the night falls within the following day is not necessarily true. "Tuesday evening" in British English refers to the time period after Tuesday afternoon, and becomes "Tuesday night" in the dark period up to midnight.

5. In British English, no. Bazza 7 (talk) 20:19, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard the phrases "Christmas Eve Eve" and "New Year's Eve Eve" many times in the UK. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:24, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad we're specifying British English, because terms vary across the anglosphere. When I was getting to know my Sri Lankan-born partner, I was befuddled by his references to "31st night". That's their way of referring to New Year's Eve. He still says that, even though he's now spent almost 65% of his life as an Australian resident and citizen. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:43, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do English speakers ever refer to period around 23:00 as "evening"? In Finnish, it is called myöhäisilta, iltayö or alkuyö. Does English ever say "late evening"? --40bus (talk) 20:58, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I can come up with sentences where you might refer to 2300 as "evening" that don't sound too weird. "Well, my friends, the evening is coming to a close. Thank you all for coming and we hope to see you again." But it's not exactly usual. I don't see anything wrong with "late evening". --Trovatore (talk) 21:39, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The (American) Old Farmer's Almanac refers to the hours preceding midnight as "late evening", and the aftermidnight part of the night as "predawn". 73.48.233.128 (talk) 01:31, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On question 4, this might be controversial, but for me, if I've been up all day Tuesday, it doesn't become Wednesday just because the clock clicks 12 (or 0). I know it's "technically" Wednesday, but in my thinking it stays Tuesday until I get up for good the next morning. This is a recurring source of confusion between me and my wife, who will refer to things we did "yesterday" that I'm still thinking of as "today". But I'm getting used to it and can figure out what she means. --Trovatore (talk) 22:01, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are technically incorrect, the worst kind of incorrect. Well, joke's aside, I can mentally understand you. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 00:30, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It occurs to me that it works just fine if you allow non-unique names for times, which of course you should. I could say it's 26 o'clock Tuesday night, and if you insist on calling that "morning" even though it's dark, you can say it's 2 o'clock Wednesday morning, and there's really no conflict, just two different names for the same instant. This could become important in the (very) distant future, if first, we get rid of the idiotic idea of leap seconds, which of course we should, and if they keep the same time system tens of millennia from now, which I see no reason why they ought to. Then you might have the sun setting at, I don't know, 0600 or something, and of course you'll want to keep the same day number for as long as you're awake, so no problem, just say you're going to bed at 34 o'clock and Bob's your uncle. --Trovatore (talk) 05:28, 9 July 2025 (UTC) [reply]

Apparently Japanese anime fans regularly watch their nighttime shows to 26.00 and 27.00 or so, and the official programmings have followed suit. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 11:04, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's a simpler way to do so: just continue shifting to more easterly timezones. For 7 months per year, a number that has been increasing, I'm now in a timezone 1:34 ahead of mean solar time. Some people want summer time the whole year, then we can make a new summer time 2:34 ahead of solar time. In the west of China, official time is already 3:04 ahead of mean solar time (although for slightly different reasons). This has already caused the date change to shift away from the time when most people are asleep. The only thing you need are lawmakers who try to make people get up earlier than their natural rhythm; lawmakers who like to get up earlier than non-lawmakers. PiusImpavidus (talk) 08:58, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree that's "simpler". Frankly I'd prefer to do away with time zones and have a single time coordinate for the whole planet, so people stop attaching so much significance to particular nominal times, and just adjust their schedules to the Sun in the way that best suits them. Call it "free market time". --Trovatore (talk) 17:39, 9 July 2025 (UTC) [reply]

2. This might be partly due to the Nordic Countries having their main celebration on the 24th and Anglosaxon countries having it on the 25th, I guess. (Although the double eves aren't commonly encountered outside Finland.) 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 00:28, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Christmas Eve Eve is celebrated as Festivus, though there might be a Hesperus is Phosphorus issue lurking in here somewhere. --Trovatore (talk) 05:14, 9 July 2025 (UTC) [reply]

1. In my variant of American English, the period from sundown 24 December to sunrise 25 December is Christmas Eve. The daylight period of 24 December is just 24 December. Although I know a song about that period that calls it "the day before the night before Christmas".

2. 23 December is just 23 December. Or 2 days before Christmas.

3. New Year's Eve is sundown 31 December to sunrise 1 January. New Year's Day is the daylight portion of 1 January.

4. The night belongs to the day upon which the sun set. Today is currently Wednesday. When the sun goes down this evening, it will be Wednesday night. Strictly speaking, after midnight it will be Thursday morning.

5. We don't have a specific word for it, it's just the transition period from one season to the next. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 20:32, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In Finnish, yö belongs to the day when sun rises. It is about to be perjantaiyö ("Friday night") here now. And "kello kaksi perjantaiyöllä" is at 2:00 on Friday. --40bus (talk) 20:59, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

in the u.s. i hear 'christmas eve day' for the daylight hours of dec 24, the opposite of british usage

if you say '2 am wednesday night', it's clear that's the same as '2 am thursday morning'.

off-topic, but in tanzania clocks are turned so that 6 is at the top, because 12 is dawn and dusk and 6 is noon and midnight. — kwami (talk) 21:01, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The latter does not hold for all clock faces in Tanzania: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5].  ​‑‑Lambiam 03:51, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

one of those is for tourists, two are colonial, one was put up by coca cola and one by panasonic. domestic modern clocks put up for public use, such as at bus stations, are usually the other way around. — kwami (talk) 05:41, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You've got a photo? 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 10:57, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

possibly, but i doubt i ever bothered. — kwami (talk) 12:34, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found this "Swahili clock". Alansplodge (talk) 16:18, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

yes, that's it. that one is for teaching time to children. but you'll see that same orientation e.g. at the taxi/bus station outside the main post office in Dar. — kwami (talk) 19:51, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kwamikagami could you go a little deeper into the statement that "12 is dawn and dusk and 6 is noon and midnight"? Our time in Tanzania article says that the country observes UTC+3, which seems about right for 39 degrees East, the longitude given in the infobox for Tanzania. So I don't really understand why the Sun would rise or set at 12. --Trovatore (talk) 21:05, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

each day begins at dawn, so 1 hr after sunrise is 1 o'clock, midday is 6 o'clock, etc. the 'swahili clock' that Alansplodge found shows how it works. when you switch between swahili and english, you also adjust the time by 6 hours. — kwami (talk) 22:07, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, interesting, so it goes with the language? And our time in Tanzania article is talking about time specifically when speaking English, or at least not speaking Swahili? That must make code-switching complicated. --Trovatore (talk) 22:16, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

you quickly get used to it. saa moja is '7 o'clock'; you just don't translate the individual words.

the time zone's the same, so i don't know that it matters for that article, though it might at least be mentioned.

the swahili-style clocks i've seen are in places like bus stations where you'd expect people to be swahiliphone. banks and govt offices have english-style clocks. — kwami (talk) 22:29, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This 6-hour Swahili adjustment is mentioned in Date and time notation in Africa § East Africa.  ​‑‑Lambiam 05:27, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

In this paragraph, we can read "[...] in the proposed taxon Selabacteria, in allusion to their phototrophic abilities (selas = light)". I can't figure out in what language "selas" could mean "(sun)light" (the source text is not easily accessible). May somebody know?

Thank you 176.159.12.72 (talk) 03:18, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient Greek σέλας.  ​‑‑Lambiam 03:53, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't know that word. Thanks. 176.159.12.72 (talk) 04:23, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Which term is more appropriate for the article on indigenous peoples of United States, Native American or American Indian? Would the term “indigenous” be more appropriate? 76.81.87.234 (talk) 20:41, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A complex question: see Native American name controversy. Any proposal to change the name of an existing article should initially at least be discussed on the article's talk page. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:47, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

'Native American' is a rather patronizing exonym. all Indians i know call themselves 'Indians'; 'American' is added for disambiguation. similarly, all Eskimos i know call themselves 'Eskimos' even when they're Inuit; this includes college professors. 'Inuit' is more a Canadian thing, as unlike in the u.s. all Canadian Eskimos are Inuit.

given our history, i personally don't think that white people should be telling Indians what to call themselves, although I'm so habituated to 'Native American' that it's hard to switch back. — kwami (talk) 02:25, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What do American Indians call people from India? HiLo48 (talk) 02:40, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indians from India are traditionally known in the Americas as "East Indians". Zacwill (talk) 03:29, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. That seems clumsy. And all because Columbus didn't know where he was. HiLo48 (talk) 03:51, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i tend to use 'hindian', though that has regional implications in india that make it inappropriate for the whole country. — kwami (talk) 03:55, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard "East Indians", and also "India Indians". And it's usually clear from the context. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:01, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In the States, if it's not clear from context, I think you might say something like "Indians, you know, from India". What American Indians specifically say I couldn't say. Where I live (historical Ohlone people land) there are a lot more persons whose ancestors came from India than there are Ohlones, so if you say Indian in a modern-day context you probably mean South Asian, whereas if you use it in a historical context you probably mean Native American. I'm not sure I ever noticed that exact discrepancy before. (Complication: there are a lot of persons of Mexican descent, and a lot of them have Aztec or Nahuatl blood, but it's unusual to think of them as Native American.) --Trovatore (talk) 05:15, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

in Mexico, you're only indígeno if you speak the language or otherwise identify as such. native americans who have given up their language for Spanish are considered mestizo -- though there are also a lot of mixtecs and other indígenos in the u.s., or at least will be until ICE rounds them all up. — kwami (talk) 05:42, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ User:Kwamikagami: We live in a crazy world where we're constantly being told that a word or expression that was in wide use yesterday is suddenly outrageous, offensive and unacceptable today. For example, the people we call "African Americans" today underwent a series of name changes (including at least two "n" words) before the current formulation took hold. Sensitive and respectful people try to keep up with these kinds of bewildering developments. So when we're told that "Eskimo" is inappropriate, and we should call these people "Inuit" because that's what they call themselves, we comply. When we're told that the people native to the North American continent are not "Indians", "Red Indians" or "American Indians", but Native Americans, we comply. When we're told that the people native to Australia are not blacks, blackfellas, or even necessarily aborigines (because some are unrelated Torres Strait Islanders), but indigenous Australians, we comply. Now you're telling us we're being patronising. From whom should we be taking our marching orders when it comes to cultural sensitivity? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:49, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i said the word - or at least its history - was patronizing, not that that people who use it are. it's similar to 'san' for 'bushman' -- this wasn't a case of the people themselves deciding what they want to be called, but of outsiders deciding what's best for them.

i remember a white southern u.s. woman who told a black man who'd done something nice for her that it was 'very white' of him. he got offended, and she was confused, because she'd never associated the word 'white' in that phrase with race, and had no idea that it was racist. the phrase was racist, but i have no reason to think that she was. — kwami (talk) 23:01, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

- In Joel Rosenberg's 1983 fantasy novel The Sleeping Dragon there is a major town called Lundeyll.

- In the 1980s/1990s Fighting Fantasy series of gamebooks there's a city called Royal Lendle.

- In the recent video game Elden Ring, the royal capital is called Leyndell.

Does this vague sound have some sort of etymological grounding which has led three separate writers to name fantasy cities after it, or is this just an odd coincidence? Dr-ziego (talk) 08:13, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lundeyll is also referenced in later books of the Guardians of the Flame series. "Leyndell" makes me think of Rivendell  ​‑‑Lambiam 09:18, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lundeyll reminds me of Lunedale, the valley of the County Durham River Lune, and Lunesdale, the upper part of the valley of the Lancashire/Cumbria Lune. But then I'm from that part of the world and Joel Rosenberg wasn't. --Antiquary (talk) 11:47, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The names remind me of Lendal (a road), Lendal Tower, and Lendal Bridge in York. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 13:43, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They're all secret tributes to Ivan Lendl, a high-ranking member of the WP:CABAL. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:51, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That sentence was added to Wikipedia, On 23 November 2005, in this version, and it's still there!

I suspect, that it's not English, and that the user who added it to Wikipedia meant: "there are D dimensions attributed to the thermodynamic space", or "the thermodynamic space has D dimensions", but since I'm not expert in Thermodynamics I don't want to change the syntax of a sentence in thermodynamics, before I receive a second opinion. 147.235.209.20 (talk) 09:17, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In ordinary speech we say that space has three dimensions, while a topologist would say that the dimension of space is three (so in maths speak, space has one dimension, which is three). So there is something funny about how the term dimension is used.

Further on in the article Thermodynamic potential the text has, "In all, if the thermodynamic space is D dimensions, then there will be D equations for each potential, resulting in a total of D 2^D equations of state because 2^D thermodynamic potentials exist." This was added in 2023 by another user. It is badder English than the other sentence.

In both cases, I feel it is an issue that the term thermodynamic space is not defined or explained, and neither is the term species. (The singular specie is also used, which I think is an incorrect back-formation.) In our article Thermodynamic activity the term links to Chemical species, and Component (thermodynamics) uses the full term chemical species. It seems to me – but I'm not sure – that D is the number of species – whatever that means – so that the use of the term thermodynamic space can be eliminated.

Perhaps the thread should be moved to the science section of the reference desk.  ​‑‑Lambiam 09:53, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking as a former science textbook editor, I don't see any problem with the sentence, which in full is

"If there are D dimensions to the thermodynamic space, then there are 2D unique thermodynamic potentials."

The term 'dimension' can refer not only to spacial dimensions (a recent narrowing of the word's application), but to any measurable property of something: my height is one of my dimensions, but so is my fat content, for example.

"Thermodynamic space" is the concept under discussion at this point, meaning everything to do with the possible thermodynamic properties of something. The actual number of its different thermodynamic-relevant properties, or 'dimensions', one could consider are (so far in the argument) uncounted, and the passage is proposing that if we consider D of them (which may not be all those possible) then there are 2D of a certain sort of relationship between those. In the context of defining D dimensions, saying there are D dimensions to the space is correct (if a little old-fashioned) English: adding a verb such as attributed would introduce an implication of intentionality that may not be appropriate.

The grammar here used may reflect the ultimately underlying sources of the concepts, given that thermodynamics had become highly developed by the 19th century.

I might also observe that formal English would hold "badder English" to be grammatically incorrect; "worse English" is the more usually acceptable form. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.5.172.125 (talk) 04:34, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Las night I saw two American TV shows where speakers pronounced peanut as if the second vowel sound, the u, didn't exist. Here in Australia we say two distinct syllables, pea and nut, so the second syllable rhymes with cut. The American version seems to be pea-nt, as if the u doesn't exist. Is this universal in the US, and how did it come about? Does it apply to peanut butter? Does it apply to the comic strip Peanuts? HiLo48 (talk) 03:51, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

American English speaker here, I pronounce the u (although the degree to which the actual vowel sound matches that of cut may vary), and everyone I know does the same. Just out of curiosity do you have any clips demonstrating the aforementioned missing vowel? I'm curious if it's just a byproduct of the vowel being clipped while speaking quickly. GalacticShoe (talk) 04:02, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, this doesn't ring a bell, and my mom was from the South, where you might expect this sort of thing. Could be a New England thing maybe? Not sure why but it just strikes me that way. The GA pronunciation is /ˈpiː.nʌt/. --Trovatore (talk) 04:05, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The two shows were American Pickers, based in Iowa, and American Restoration , from Las Vegas. HiLo48 (talk) 04:14, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HiLo48, I suspect that people on these shows were trying to parody an ignorant, "hillbilly" accent for humorous effect. Based on 73 years of experience, I feel confident in saying saying that over 99.9% of Americans pronounce peanut just like you do. Cullen328 (talk) 04:33, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I got no feeling that parody was intended. (Maybe hat's another linguistic/cultural problem.) HiLo48 (talk) 04:39, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Does that mean 99.9% of Americans pronounce peanut like /ˈpi.nɐt/?  ​‑‑Lambiam 05:07, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea, but to this maths (not math) teacher, pi is the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter. I DID ask is this universal in the US? HiLo48 (talk) 06:23, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]