Linguistic Miscellany Thread

[Moose-tache]

I think this would work in some limited contexts in English:
"The cow is half-horned."
"The horse is half-shod."
This seemed to be based on an adjective "horned" or "shod," rather than a dual noun, but the result is the same.

[Rounin Ryuuji]

I kind-of interpret the first one as having half of each horn missing.

[Travis B.]

I kind-of interpret the first one as having half of each horn missing.

As do I.

[Rounin Ryuuji]

Also, half-shod could imply that the shoeing of the horse was... shoddy. Or that it was half-completed on all four feet rather than only completed on the forefeet.

[Ares Land]

One thing I find a bit irritating about Hungarian (and Japanese, while we're at it) is how they put the surname first in their own language, but put the given name(s) first when speaking or writing a Western language. They should be assertive enough to put the surname first when speaking or writing a Western language, too.

What bothers me is that it's somewhat inconsistent so you're never sure: Is Eiji Yoshikawa Mr. Eiji or Mr Yoshikawa?

Some French people tend to state the surname first too. It seems to be because names are listed that way on roll calls.

[Kuchigakatai]

Clearly the cool way to go is to state the surname both at the beginning and the end.

"Bond, James Bond."

[Linguoboy]

What bothers me is that it's somewhat inconsistent so you're never sure: Is Eiji Yoshikawa Mr. Eiji or Mr Yoshikawa?

This is why I like the convention (first introduced to me by an Esperantist though I’ve since seen it in French publications as well) of putting surnames in all-caps, e.g. Eiji YOSHIKAWA. It’s also useful when someone has multiple given names, family names, or both and it’s not immediately clear which is their primary surname.

[Raphael]

This is why I like the convention (first introduced to me by an Esperantist though I’ve since seen it in French publications as well) of putting surnames in all-caps, e.g. Eiji YOSHIKAWA. It’s also useful when someone has multiple given names, family names, or both and it’s not immediately clear which is their primary surname.

So you're telling me that when, a few years ago, I made a list of early rulers for my main conculture and put the given names in all-caps, I did it exactly the wrong way around? Argh!

[Linguoboy]

So you're telling me that when, a few years ago, I made a list of early rulers for my main conculture and put the given names in all-caps, I did it exactly the wrong way around? Argh!

I mean, it's a conculture, so maybe that's how they do things?

Another convention I think is really cool is the Hong Kong Chinese one of Western given name + surname + Chinese given name. So, for instance, the well-known (unrelated) actors Tony Leung Chiu-wai and Tony Leung Ka-fai. I've also seen this combined with the aforementioned capitalisation convention, i.e. Tony LEUNG Ka-fai.

And, honestly, I just like dual naming traditions in general. For instance, the Ashkenazi Jewish tradition of having a "Hebrew name", which, in some cases, isn't even Hebrew at all. (For instance, a friend of mine's "Hebrew name" was Faygle, which in origin is actually a Yiddish equivalent of the Hebrew name Zipporah[*]. That is, historically, women with the Hebrew name Zipporah were known as "Faygle" to Yiddish-speakers and gentiles alike. At some point, however, Faygles began adopting other given names for use among gentiles and the origins of this name were obscured to the point where it began being passed on as a "Hebrew name".)

[*] Hebrew צִפֹּרָה literally means "bird" and Faygle is a diminutive of Yiddish foygl "bird". This is a frequent pattern; common Hebrew names like Tzvi or Dov had conventional Yiddish equivalents (respectively, Hershl and Berel). These began to fall out of use with Emancipation and the resulting decline of Yiddish.

[Ares Land]

What bothers me is that it's somewhat inconsistent so you're never sure: Is Eiji Yoshikawa Mr. Eiji or Mr Yoshikawa?

This is why I like the convention (first introduced to me by an Esperantist though I’ve since seen it in French publications as well) of putting surnames in all-caps, e.g. Eiji YOSHIKAWA. It’s also useful when someone has multiple given names, family names, or both and it’s not immediately clear which is their primary surname.

I know of a French publishing house that uses that convention. They do specialize in translations from Asian languages. It is convenient!

Libraries uses the Last name comma First name convention: Yoshikawa, Eiji.

[vlad]

Another convention I think is really cool is the Hong Kong Chinese one of Western given name + surname + Chinese given name. So, for instance, the well-known (unrelated) actors Tony Leung Chiu-wai and Tony Leung Ka-fai. I've also seen this combined with the aforementioned capitalisation convention, i.e. Tony LEUNG Ka-fai.

And, honestly, I just like dual naming traditions in general.

In colonial Mexico, some Nahuas (mostly aristocrats) had Spanish given names and surnames, and also Nahuatl given names, which were written after the Spanish surname. E.g. don Domingo Francisco de San Antón Muñón Chimalpahin Cuauhtlehuanitzin.

Others (members of royal families) took the given name of their king as their family name (traditionally Nahuas had no family names), which would also be written at the end, after the Spanish surnames. E.g. don Diego de Mendoza, Austria y Moctezuma (not a descendent of Moctezuma -- Moctezuma's first cousin once removed).

Because Nahuatl given names and Nahuatl surnames are both written at the end, it's not obvious that e.g. in the name don Hernando de Alvarado Tezozomoc, Tezozomoc is a given name, but in don Fernando de Alva Cortés Ixtlilxochitl, Ixtlilxochitl is a family name.

Both Tezozomoc and Ixtlilxochitl are authors, and they're usually cited as "Tezozomoc" and "Ixtlilxochitl" and sorted in the index under those, despite "Tezozomoc" being a given name, although I have occasionally seen them cited using their Spanish surnames (which seems more correct to me). There's also disagreement as to whether they should be treated as assimilated Spanish names and written with accents according to Spanish orthography, or if they should be treated as foreign and written without accents according to Nahuatl orthography. Of course today most people with Nahuatl names don't speak Nahuatl and treat them as Spanish names.

[Rounin Ryuuji]

I would say the "correct" form of spelling would be the one preferred by the individual.

[vlad]

I would say the "correct" form of spelling would be the one preferred by the individual.

The individuals are long dead.

[Rounin Ryuuji]

I would say the "correct" form of spelling would be the one preferred by the individual.

The individuals are long dead.

Presumably they spelled their names one way or the other when they were alive. The accents and other orthographic details presumably ought to match how the individuals themselves wrote them.

[vlad]

I would say the "correct" form of spelling would be the one preferred by the individual.

The individuals are long dead.

Presumably they spelled their names one way or the other when they were alive. The accents and other orthographic details presumably ought to match how the individuals themselves wrote them.

Accents weren't in use at the time. And now that they are in use, every Spanish name that could use them does. (Except, in some cases, when people with Spanish names live in non-Spanish-speaking countries.)

It's standard for names of historical figures to be modernized. Nobody spells Shakespeare "Shakspere".

[Rounin Ryuuji]

English spelling was notably erratic at the time. Many of the printed editions of his work, as I understand it, used the spelling Shakespeare (abbreviating personal names as things like "Wm.", "Jas.", and so on was also once far more common than it is now, especially in handwriting). That said, if there is any ambiguity, I do think the most legitimate thing to do is simply to write the name as they did, with no accents.

[Moose-tache]

Five minutes of observation would give you the ability to perfectly distinguish Japanese or Korean surnames and given names, so I'm not sure it matters how it's written in English. Hungarian, on the other hand, requires you to individually memorize what is a given name and what is a surname. If you encountered "Halász" and "Enikő," for example, you wouldn't be able to know which is a given or family name without speaking Hungarian. That might be why Orban and others still get the Given-first treatment in Western media.

[Ares Land]

So do the Japanese: Shinzō Abe, Haruki Murakami; but oddly not the Koreans: Yoon Seok-youl, Yeon Sang-ho.
Orban Viktor would feel weird, I think, because Viktor/Victor is a familiar name

Can people figure it out Korean or Japanese names on their own? I'm not as confident as you are. (I think I can, but 'm pretty sure you could find examples that would trip me.)

[keenir]

If you lose an arm, you have "half an arm" rather than one arm instead of two.

Traditional Irish works this way too, e.g. Tá sé ar leathláimh "He is one-armed" (literally "He is on half-arm").

That makes me wonder if the reverse(ish) exists somewhere: other than English, are there languages which replace a number with an...___? (the word escapes me; sorry)

ie, Bob put one cup of sugar in the bread mix. Tom is going to make double bagels. instead of Tom is going to make two bagels. Is this mostly pragmatics?

Yes, i know about dual-wielding, where someone has a weapon in each of their two arms...so its kiiiinda like it, particularly since there is also two-fisted drinking, with a beverage in each hand. (edit: adds "other than English" to initial question)

Does this make sense?

[Kuchigakatai]

That makes me wonder if the reverse(ish) exists somewhere: other than English, are there languages which replace a number with an...___? (the word escapes me; sorry)

ie, Bob put one cup of sugar in the bread mix. Tom is going to make double bagels. instead of Tom is going to make two bagels. Is this mostly pragmatics?

Yes, i know about dual-wielding, where someone has a weapon in each of their two arms...so its kiiiinda like it, particularly since there is also two-fisted drinking, with a beverage in each hand. (edit: adds "other than English" to initial question)

Does this make sense?

I think you meant to ask if there are languages that use non-cardinal numbers (e.g. multiplicative numbers, other derived numbers) in rather surprisingly "basic" ways where cardinal numbers are usually used in English?

Personally I've been surprised by how much Latin uses ordinal numbers... For example, you know how "AD" stands for annō dominī 'in the year of the LORD'? The number that follows that is ordinal: AD 2022 = annō dominī bis mīllēsimō vīcēsimō secundō. For another example, the ancients very often used an ordinal number in expressions of time "within", e.g. he'll do it (with)in four days -> "he'll do it by the fifth day" ("fifth" due to "inclusive counting"...).