Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2017 February 13

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

February 13

Handwriting

Are there any studies of variation of handwriting by demographic? Benjamin (talk) 06:04, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Chinese writing, for example, tends to be quite different from English writing. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:04, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Our article graphology and the references it contains might be a good place to start. Do note the 2nd sentence, however: "it is generally considered a pseudoscience".--William Thweatt ^TalkContribs 12:02, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Do you mean something like "people aged between 50 and 60 use a roundhand style of writing, whereas people aged 80 and over use copperplate"? --TammyMoet (talk) 14:43, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes. Benjamin (talk) 12:02, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Searching google scholar for "handwriting demographics" brought up a few references: . A more general search for the terms "penmanship" and "history" bring up discussions of the different scripts taught over time: See also Penmanship and the historical discussion in Cursive. 184.147.116.166 (talk) 22:08, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

How do I officially get a word changed?

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

I believe that a word should be spelt differently to how the Oxford English dictionary currently spells it. Can they 'change' a word upon request? --Ptkd OPPER (talk) 14:32, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

No. The Oxford English Dictionary is a greater authority on the English language than you are. --Viennese Waltz 14:38, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Note that they record how a word currently is spelled, rather than how it should be spelled. Now, if you could provide proof that a word is now spelled in a new way by a substantial portion of the population, perhaps they would take that into account and consider adding that as an acceptable spelling. If the old spelling is now rarely used, they might consider marking that as archaic or obsolete. Does anyone know if OED accepts such requests ? StuRat (talk) 15:25, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

They might at least be willing to look into it. What's the specific word you're questioning? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:27, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Spellings do change over time, and it's the job of dictionaries to acknowledge such changes. Sometimes such change comes about through gross error that is copied mindlessly by ignoramuses and gradually becomes so entrenched that it becomes accepted as the preferred spelling, relegating the old, formerly correct, spelling to the realm of the obsolete. Nevertheless, it's the fact of the change, not the reason for it, that interests the lexicographers. Some day, it may come to pass that "Your a fine fellow" will be considered the correct way to spell "You're a fine fellow". Or "The dog chased it's tail" instead of "The dog chased its tail". Or "The movie really effected her emotionally" instead of "The movie really affected her emotionally". Some day. But not yet.

On the other hand, dictionaries are compiled by humans, who are prone to error, and who can only record that which they have become aware of. Oftentimes that knowledge comes to them from conscientious contributors such as yourself. If there is a well-established word or spelling variant that the OED has not recorded, they will surely be interested in hearing from you about it. But if it's just a case of what you think should be the case vs. what actually is the case, I'm sure they have a standard response telling you, in effect, to please not bother them again with your irrelevant opinions. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 18:21, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

"We thank you for your contribution and assure you that it will receive all the attention it deserves." StuRat (talk) 18:31, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Please see Dictionary#Prescriptive vs. descriptive for why your project is impractical, Ptkd OPPER. --ColinFine (talk) 19:15, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

I wish to change the word totalitarian into tatolitararian. --Ptkd OPPER (talk) 19:55, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

In a word, why? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:03, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

I googled that fake word "tatolitararian" and it occurred exactly one place on the internet: here. Shall we box up this section? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:45, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

• The answer is you can't. Dictionaries such as the OED do not invent words, they document usage. Only once words have become used (for the OED, usually in writing) above a certain threshold does the OED add it to their dictionary. It is not an arbitrary process decided by a few people who decide what words are "real" words, but instead is based on the work of many experts who study English words as they are used by English speakers. For the Oxford dictionary, this page describes the process by which words are added. It should be noted that the OED does take requests to add new words; (as that link above shows) but whether they act on such a request depends on how well the word fits their criteria for addition. If you just made up a word and want them to add it there is zero chance of that happening. If however you are requesting that they add a word that is in wide enough use that you can reliably document said usage, you may have something. --Jayron32 20:25, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

The best Ptkd OPPER can do in this situation is start using this word himself and hope it catches on – to an extent that the OED may notice it and consider adding it. --Theurgist (talk) 23:11, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Ptkd OPPER can do slightly better if he can find a way to get the word published in WP:reliable sources (actually used in a sentence, not just mentioned), then at least Wiktionary might pick up the usage if it continues over 12 months, and the OED will eventually follow if the word continues to appear in print. I estimate that the probability of success is about one in a billion, but strange things have happened to uncromulent words. Dbfirs 00:15, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

In what branch of the English language is "tatol" a synonym of "total"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:13, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

OP has been blocked. Serial vandal, multiple accounts. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 02:16, 14 February 2017 (UTC)