Language desk
< December 3	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	Current desk >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language 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.

December 4

Palatalization in Hunsrückisch?

Section Hunsrückisch § Phonology states:

"Palatalization also occurs, with Dorf (village) becoming Dooref, Kirche (church) becoming Keerisch, and Berg (mountain) becoming Beerisch."

I see no palatalization. The preceding sentence describes the vowel lengthening. Is it correct to describe the further change as the insertion of an epenthetic [ə] or [i]? Pinging @NeorxenoSwang:. --Lambiam 13:16, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose what the original author meant was the change from [ç] to [ʃ] implied in "Keerisch" and "Beerisch", but that's of course not really palatalization, but a fronting from palatal towards palatal-alveolar or thereabouts. And I can't see how the "Dorf" example would fit in with any of that, except with the vowel lengthening described in the previous sentence. But yes, the extra vowel would properly be described as epenthesis, I guess. Pity the whole article is unsourced. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:51, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some digging strongly suggests the statement is based on: Roland Martin, Untersuchungen zur rhein-moselfränkischen Dialektgrenze, Deutsche Dialektgeographie Vol. 11a, Marburg, 1922. I could not find online access to this monograph. --Lambiam 22:14, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved in an old edition at de:Hunsrückisch:

Überdies tritt Sprosslautung ein: Dorf wird zu Dooref, Kirche zu Keerisch, Berg zu Beerisch.^[1]

--Lambiam 07:37, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is the possessive form of "works" in the sense of a factory?

The word "works", in the sense of a factory, looks plural in form but can be singular or plural. What is the possessive of "works" in that sense? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.242.92.97 (talk) 15:28, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See apostrophe. Probably works's. "The works's managers". Card Zero (talk) 17:55, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I can't imagine anyone actually saying that. /wərksɨz/. That would sound very strange.

I think I would go with works' for that reason, whether it's precisely grammatical or not. --Trovatore (talk) 19:12, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, as does the British Parliament in 1886; ...a Bill relating to the Metropolitan Board of Works' Fire Brigade Expenses... [2] Alansplodge (talk) 20:55, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I guess you can't imagine me, then. Sounds perfectly normal to me.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 13:41, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm with Trovatore here. How does one even pronounce works's? Worksers? That's ugly. HiLo48 (talk) 00:12, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How is it any weirder than 'roses' or 'poses'?--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 01:37, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There was a mummy passed off as the daughter of king Xerxes that turned out to be a modern corpse, and a false claim that Xerxes himself was an 8 foot tall giant. These are the Xerxes hoaxes. Card Zero (talk) 06:55, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Works's sounds fine to me (pronounced workses [where did you get the "r"?]). Clarityfiend (talk) 03:02, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added the "R" to write something that would be pronounced the way I thought you would say this. I've never heard workses. HiLo48 (talk) 06:02, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably a non-rhotic R. I remember learning skat from the (British) Penguin Book of Card Games, and teaching it to my folks. The book said it was pronounced "scart", and I couldn't convince my dad to stop saying it that way. --Trovatore (talk) 20:50, 7 December 2024 (UTC) [reply]

About the same as "works is". --Amble (talk) 05:13, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's a grammar rule English acquired from Gollumish. Clarityfiend (talk) 14:12, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We use Juniper Networks's several times in the article Juniper Networks. In Skunk Works we have Skunk Works' once.--Amble (talk) 05:24, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And in Karl Marx, we use Marx's nearly 100 times. --Amble (talk) 17:50, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marx's sounds fine to me, works's doesn't. Couldn't tell you why.

Or to borrow a cadence from Karl the Marx/A biting chipmunk never barx

--Trovatore (talk) 19:16, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly because your sense of grammar fails to see works as a singular. --Lambiam 10:24, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That could be it. --Trovatore (talk) 20:44, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]