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.

May 4

"Could I have..."

I was taught that the polite way to ask for something in a grocery or take-away food shop was "Could I have such and such please." But the indolent youth of today seem to insist on saying "Could I get such and such please", which to me is an abomination and smacks of uncouth Americanisation. Or am I being too harsh? Are there regional differences, as I live in one of the better parts of England! 2A00:23C7:533:3C01:190F:C79:C9D2:D057 (talk) 12:14, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to me if a customer says "can I get" and the employee brings it to them, they can walk out witĥ it without paying.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 18:17, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Undoubtedly American, and uncouth. DuncanHill (talk) 19:06, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have plenty of get-off-my-lawn peeves of my own, but this is about the least motivated one I can imagine. What in the world is less polite about "get" compared to "have"??? One seems to emphasize the process of acquiring the item versus the state of possessing it, but that's about the only difference I can see. They're both peculiar circumlocutions, being in the conditional mood and asking whether something is possible rather than asking for the thing. Paraphrasing, it's something like "under unspecified but likely false conditions, would a possible world exist in which I have/acquire the item under discussion?" The answer "yes" does not seem to be an agreement to provide the item, merely an agreement that under such conditions, such a possible world would exist. --Trovatore (talk) 19:48, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Starting either sentence with "May I" would be better. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:06, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With "may", literally speaking, you're asking for permission to have/acquire the item. That doesn't make a lot of sense either. It's usually not about permission; you're requesting a service from the other person. --Trovatore (talk) 20:10, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Where are we, 1813 or something? It's all predicated on what the barrista asks. If she says "What can I get you?", the easy, simple and polite answer is just "A flat white, please." Martinevans123 (talk) 20:52, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Customer: "Can I get a flat white?" Waitress: "Not here, but I can get one for you. If you want to get it yourself go home." DuncanHill (talk) 21:11, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear. Now we seem to have Mr Darcy stumbling into the Costa Coffee in Tunbridge Wells... Martinevans123 (talk) 21:19, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Get" is one of the most overloaded verbs in the English language. I expect in any random large dictionary you'll find at least a dozen meanings. To be fair, a lot of those will be as part of phrasal verbs, which isn't under discussion here.

But one of the core meanings is "receive" or "acquire". When the barista gives you a coffee, you do get it. Otherwise how would you drink it? --Trovatore (talk) 21:27, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You just don't get it, do you? DuncanHill (talk) 21:36, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I get that you're trying to defend an indefensible position. --Trovatore (talk) 21:37, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That British English and American English work differently? DuncanHill (talk) 21:50, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That there's something inherently rude about saying "get a cup of coffee". --Trovatore (talk) 22:14, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uncouth. OED: "unfamiliar or strange... odd, uncomely, awkward, or clumsy... awkward and uncultured". I never said "inherently rude". It is, however, inherently rude to say I said something which I did not. DuncanHill (talk) 22:42, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, the original comment did (I presume half-jokingly) call us get-users "indolent", it wouldn't be too farfetched to interpret that disdain as being a result of finding the phrasing (and its perceived lack of manners) rude. GalacticShoe (talk) 07:51, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The youth in my part of Australia seem to say "Can I please have....", which seems somehow wrong to my ageing ears. HiLo48 (talk) 07:44, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"May I please have" is better. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:56, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Can" (or "could") is appropriate if there is some question of pracicality. —Tamfang (talk) 21:35, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My closest friend, born 1955 and raised in Beverly Hills (on the wrong side of the tracks), says "can I get". I, raised in Illinois, would never say that. —Tamfang (talk) 21:33, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Near the end of Animal House, one guy walks into a store, goes to the counter, and says, "May I have 10,000 marbles please?" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:00, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, lady ...

I was in a shop on Saturday, second in the queue. The woman in front was served, paid, and left. I stepped up, and discovered she had left her glasses on the ledge below the counter. I was moved to call out to her, and I was just about to yell "Hey, lady, you've forgotten your glasses" but I realised that would sound crass and vulgar, so I said "Hey, madam, ...". She heard me, and came back for her glasses, thanking me.

As I was basking in the sunlight of my kindness, I reflected that as a child, I was taught to refer to women as ladies, and that has pretty much always been my way. Ladies are obviously women, but there's something not quite right about referring to them as such. Don't ask me to explain it, it's subtle and probably culturally complex. Yet, to call out "Hey, lady" in public would be an even worse social sin. Nobody is ever called "Madam" these days (not even Ethel Merman), but that seemed the only choice I had left in that moment of crisis and high drama.

Is there a term for a word choice that is preferred in one context (not women, but ladies) but contraindicated in another (Not "hey, lady", but "hey, madam")? (Please don't get into whether "hey" was an appropriate choice, or whether it irretrievably outed me as the vulgarian I spend my life trying not to be.) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:22, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is not quite responsive, but it brings to mind a memory. One time I was out to dinner with my mother and sister. I think we were taking my mom out for her birthday or something. The waiter kept addressing my mom as "lady". It was clear to my sister and me that this was intended to be a term of respect — the waiter seemed likely to be Mexican (as in from Mexico, not just of Mexican ancestry) and was perhaps thinking in Spanish, translating the title "Señora". But it didn't come across to my Mississippian mother. --Trovatore (talk) 00:02, 5 May 2025 (UTC) [reply]

Some subtlety of politeness or manners. And I would use "ma'am", not "madam", which is kind of old-fashioned. For whatever reason, calling a woman just "lady" has come to be kind of insulting, even though referring to them indirectly as "ladies" still works. Similarly, I wouldn't call a man "mister", but "sir". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:23, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the various uses of "lady",[1] it occurs to me that in your context, even better than "ma'am", though much more old-fashioned, could be "me lady". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:27, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The use of ma'am versus madam varies by region; see Wiktionary:ma'am#Usage notes. ‑‑Lambiam 09:00, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I take it that the establishment in which this incident occurred was not one in which "Coo-ee, Sheila!" would have been appropriate? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.101.226 (talk) 06:36, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are no places where such a thing would be said. By anyone. Ever. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 08:40, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would just have said "excuse me" to get her attention. --Viennese Waltz 06:58, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I recall once when the women in the office were referring to each other as "girls". Like a good wannabe feminist, I questioned that, and the answer was, "Women are 'old'!" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:58, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But woe betide a man who calls them "girls" these days. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 08:38, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Grrlz ? ‑‑Lambiam 09:04, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would never, ever use "madam" due to one of its meanings having to do with procuring (prostitution). "Lady" is a bit unusual in these here parts, so IMO ma'am is the safest choice. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:27, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Hey, Lady, Hey"? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:24, 6 May 2025 (UTC) [reply]

I guess that's similar how to "colored person" is considered extremely offensive, while the correct term is "person of color". 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 15:41, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, aside from use at some high society events that I would never be invited to, calling a woman "madam" where I live would probably result in her slapping you. Or her husband/boyfriend (or brother or father) inflicting even more physical damage upon you. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 11:50, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Or old-fashioned formality, as with the opening lines of "Paperback Writer": "Dear sir or madam, will you read my book? It took me years to write, will you take a look?" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:22, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, sure, but some stuff hit differently depending on the mode of communication. The song is a quote from a letter and starting letters with Sir/Madam is not the same as starting a verbal conversation. For example, you wouldn't end your conversation with "With kindest regards..." either. Matt Deres (talk) 14:04, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ISMO has a routine about being called "sir" and how it generally means you're in trouble somehow. It's funny because it's true. --Trovatore (talk) 16:01, 5 May 2025 (UTC) [reply]

In an early Simpsons episode, Homer longs for the situation of being called "Sir" without having "You're making a scene" appended. FWIW, I call and am called sir many times a day; it just seems to be standard address among coworkers here. Matt Deres (talk) 17:56, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. What line are you in, if you don't mind sharing? --Trovatore (talk) 20:16, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's a regional thing. I have various American Facebook friends, some of whom called me "sir" when we first started interacting. I told them there was no need for such a deferential approach with me, but they said it's the norm where they live (mainly southern-ish states). -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:23, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. I did a postdoc at North Texas. One of my colleagues had a four-year-old daughter, and he would address her with "yes, ma'am" from time to time. But Matt, if I'm not mistaken, is Canadian, though of course it's conceivable he could have moved to the Southern US. --Trovatore (talk) 21:37, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, Canadian. A "sir" is going to be deferential by default, but this is not a worker to manager or employee to client kind of thing. And, AFAICT, the "ma'am" equivalent isn't used to the same degree. I do business analytics now, but most of my earlier jobs were more blue-collar and in those places "sir" was standard: between coworkers, manager to employee, you name it. "Catch the game last night?" "Yes, sir." It's hard to get perspective; maybe I just happened to work in a few places where that happened to have caught on, but I honestly started noticing it when I got to junior high. Before that, teachers were exclusively Ms/Miss/Mr/Mrs X, but in junior high, sir and ma'am suddenly became standard. That'd be mid-1980s, I guess. Matt Deres (talk) 01:19, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 5

"Bidirectional" language instruction

Is there a term for a language class where speakers of two languages each learn the other's language? And is there a pedagogical tradition of this anywhere? 71.126.56.251 (talk) 16:03, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Language exchange seems somewhat close to what you have in mind, although the article doesn't look particularly good. --Wrongfilter (talk) 17:14, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In Sweden, I have heard about tandem meetups, but they're rather just two persons meeting than regular classes. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 17:43, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, there even is a Wikipedia article; Tandem language learning. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 22:08, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 9

Has served v has been serving..... since 1000 BC (lol)

Why are some editor saying that I can't write "He Has been serving as mayor since 2024" on politician page because its a Biography. I have to write "He has served as mayor since 2024" M1rrorCr0ss 10:59, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why not a simple "He has been mayor..."?--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 12:10, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A related issue is that '. . . serving . . .' is present tense, which might be true on the day that edit is made, but which may not be a week (or whatever) later, meaning the article will then be making an incorrect statement unless and until an editor (you?) remembers to correct/update it.

It would be better to use different phrasing, for example something like "He began serving as mayor in 2024 . . ." so that after he's stopped (for whatever reason), the sentence is not stating a falsehood.

For more details, see MOS:CURRENT and its on-links. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.101.226 (talk) 12:42, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, both forms are present perfect, so they imply that the serving started in the past and continues at present. That in itself is not a problem for Wikipedia, assuming that articles are regularly updated. I guess the issue is rather that the progressive aspect is simply unnecessary. Taken literally, the progressive aspect conveys the notion that the serving is continuous and uninterrupted by weekends and vacations or even a good nights sleep. The non-progressive form is perfectly adequate to describe the situation and is simpler. --Wrongfilter (talk) 13:43, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Claiming that a politician has actually been "serving" could be a POV violation. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:48, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I assumed that becoming a mayor involved extra servings of weekends and vacations! Gammon fritters, anyone? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:50, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why isn’t there a laughing react on Wikipedia? I’d be using it way too much! M1rrorCr0ss 14:07, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Like this? 🤣 ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:28, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Appears as a little rectangle on my screen. You could try some old-school typed emojis like this :D or :-) Alansplodge (talk) 22:13, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kashmiri_language#Gender

Hello,

Could someone explain how a word like "basket" can have a masculine and feminine form in Kashmiri? It doesn't seem to make much sense in English, but perhaps it's not this exact meaning in that language?

Thank you 87.88.155.10 (talk) 19:30, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If we knew the Kashmiri forms we might (perhaps) give a specific explanation, but it is by itself not unusual that a term for something inanimate has several genders in some gendered language. For example, German Brezel is most commonly masculine but can also be neuter, and its Frenchified form bretzel can be masculine and feminine. Another ambigender French term is the slang word clope ("cigarette"). Dutch terms with multiple genders include matras ("mattress") and schilderij ("painting"). Latin flasco ("bottle") can be masculine and feminine, and so can Ancient Greek ληΐς ("booty"). ‑‑Lambiam 21:56, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lambiam: Yes, I know but here there are two different forms – one masculine and one feminine – for the same inanimate object, whereas all the other examples given are either living beings or adjectives changing forms according to the gender of the noun. 87.88.155.10 (talk) 22:24, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I know nothing about Kashmiri, so like Lambiam's this is another slight digression, but Italian has lots of pairs of words, one masculine and one feminine, meaning the same or closely related things. Sometimes it's systematic, like with tree fruits, where the the tree is masculine and the fruit is feminine (melo/mela "apple", pero/pera "pear", ciliegio/ciliegia "cherry"). Sometimes it's a one-off that doesn't seem to generalize (cera wax, cero ~~waxen figure~~ large ceremonial votive candle). Sometimes it's really confusing, like tavolo/tavola, which both translate as "table" but are not exact synonyms, and I go crazy trying to remember when you use each of them. And sometimes they're exact synonyms (mattino/mattina, "morning"). --Trovatore (talk) 22:36, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Even more fun: Lots of words that come from the Latin second declension neuter are masculine in the singular but feminine in the plural, and the plural ends in -a rather than the more usual -i (masculine) or -e (feminine). Uovo/uova "egg(s)", labbro/labbra "lip(s)", lenzuolo/lenzuola "sheet(s)", as in on a bed. Some of these have the extra twist that the feminine plural is used only for a matched pair, whereas the generic plural is masculine. --Trovatore (talk) 22:44, 9 May 2025 (UTC) [reply]

I see, there are also examples in French, like jour and journée that, while not being strictly synonymous, have senses close to each other. 87.88.155.10 (talk) 22:54, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That one has an exact counterpart in Italian, giorno/giornata, and the difference in meaning is also the same, as near as I can tell. Roughly un giorno is a time interval, whereas una giornata is what you did with that time. I think that's more or less the same in French? --Trovatore (talk) 22:58, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 10