Slashdot Mirror

Primarily, no matter how many dictionaries managed by non-mandated bodies it's added to, it's an incorrect word, until the Royal Spanish Academy decides otherwise.

Spanish is a prescriptive language, meaning a word is not officially a part of that language until the official regulatory body responsible for accepting or rejecting modifications of language approves it. You can't willy-nilly change it, like you can do with English, a descriptive language, just by coining a new word or a new grammar rule and getting some people to use it. And the current stance or Royal Spanish Academy is a simple "no".

In other words, unironically using "Latinx" is a plain, generic spelling error.

They have explicitly come out against it, but apparently quite a few people aren't listening.

... because the men in suits who sign the cheques are really not going to go a bundle over something called Cockroach. No doubt it sounded amusing after a few beers on a friday night, but I'm struggling to think of any current IT products with a worse name.

Look up "Adobe" in Spanish.

According to RAE, it means bricks made out of clay (and sometimes straw). Soft mixed clay, sometimes with straw, molded in the form of a brick and dried in the air, which is used in the construction of various types of walls.

I would add that adobe is typically sun-dried, not just air-dried, but the point is that they are not fired.

As of 2010, "ch" and "ll" aren't individual letters of the Spanish alphabet anymore.
That was one big pet peeve of mine for a long time. They're digraphs, not letters!

http://buscon.rae.es/draeI/SrvltConsulta?TIPO_BUS=3&LEMA=lumia

It's in the DRAE. Might not be used much, but it's a perfectly cromulent word.

Except for, you know, the Real Academia one: http://buscon.rae.es/draeI/SrvltConsulta?TIPO_BUS=3&LEMA=lumia

But as a Spanish speaker I was just as surprised to find out as you are so I guess this is used in a different country than either of us live in.

In which spanish-speaking region means that? Never ever heard it myself. Acording to DRAE is rarely used.

From the Dictionary of the Royal Academy:

http://buscon.rae.es/draeI/SrvltConsulta?TIPO_BUS=3&LEMA=lumia

lumia.

(De or. inc.).

1. f. p. us. prostituta.

From the Maria Moliner dictionary, the other great reference for Spanish language:

http://www.diclib.com/lumia/show/en/moliner/L/2306/2160/36/37/49938

lumia f. Prostituta.

rae.es a tu alluda: http://buscon.rae.es/draeI/SrvltConsulta?TIPO_BUS=3&LEMA=mensa
---------------
menso, sa.

1. adj. coloq. Ec., El Salv., Hond., Méx. y Nic. tonto (â- falto de entendimiento o razÃn).
---------------

In other word's is a colloquial word for Dumb, stupid, idiot... in Ecuador, Mexico, El Salvador, Honduras and Nicaragua.

Perhaps ladino is avoided because the word also came to mean "sly", "untrustworthy":
http://rae.es/ladino

The worst, I've found, in Spanish is "wikipedear". I've noted that these neologisms (googlear, wikipediar etc.) only get used in the participle or gerund, never as the usual first/second/third person etc. conjugations (you see things like "Lo he googleado..." but never "lo googlearé" etc.

Interestingly, "cederrón" - which means CD-ROM - is actually in the Diccionario de la Real Academia Española ( http://buscon.rae.es/draeI/SrvltConsulta?TIPO_BUS=3&LEMA=cederr%C3%B3n, so long as slashdot doesn't butcher the URL)

Well that ends the discussion as far as I'm concerned. You're claiming the term is ambiguous, yet you clearly recognize that it is not.

Oh dear. It is ambiguous because it refers both to the USA and to the continent called America. You'll surely appreciate the fact that these are not two countries, but a country and a continent. As I said before, I never claimed that anyone used the word America to refer to other countries apart from the USA: I did claim, though, that people use America to refer to the continent. This introduces an ambiguity. I have no idea where you got the idea that I do not recognize this as an ambiguity.

Anyways... I'll just carry on using whatever term I want, as you will yourself. I do not really mind your using America for the USA, not at all: I find it in line with other usages, as I mentioned before, like "World Series" and many others.

[Incidentally, the fact that the term `americano' is used to refer to nationals from the USA in Spanish is recorded in the dictionary of the REA http://rae.es/ but was added only in the last edition: the one from 1992 does not include that meaning, nor any of the other 30 or so going back to the first edition of 1770. `Estadounidense', on the other hand, has always only been recorded as meaning `natural from the US' (the word was included in 1952); `America' is not in the dictionary, which does not record proper nouns.]

For the people who may actually care: It is "no dinero", not "no denero", by the way. "Denero" doesn't mean anything in Spanish.
~~~~

For the people who may actually care: It is "no dinero", not "no denero", by the way. "Denero" doesn't mean anything in Spanish.
~~~~

Well, I'm a Spaniard and I do use cajón for big box. My little cousin has a cajón where she puts all her toys (it's not a drawer). She also plays on the cajón de arena (a big box filled with sand).
If it's on the RAE dictionary, it's likely that somebody would use it. Go figure.

No, "Quijote" is correct, at least in Spain. Mexico and Texas is preferred over "Mejico" or "Tejas", but "Quijote" is correct Spanish

In fact, "Quixote" is not recognized in Spanish:

http://buscon.rae.es/draeI/SrvltGUIBusUsual?TIPO_H TML=2&TIPO_BUS=3&LEMA=quixote

(Not in the dictionary)

http://buscon.rae.es/draeI/SrvltGUIBusUsual?TIPO_H TML=2&TIPO_BUS=3&LEMA=quijote

(about "Don Quijote de la Mancha)

No, "Quijote" is correct, at least in Spain. Mexico and Texas is preferred over "Mejico" or "Tejas", but "Quijote" is correct Spanish

In fact, "Quixote" is not recognized in Spanish:

http://buscon.rae.es/draeI/SrvltGUIBusUsual?TIPO_H TML=2&TIPO_BUS=3&LEMA=quixote

(Not in the dictionary)

http://buscon.rae.es/draeI/SrvltGUIBusUsual?TIPO_H TML=2&TIPO_BUS=3&LEMA=quijote

(about "Don Quijote de la Mancha)

Although I have to admit the patent states that this method would give you the choice of different meanings in other languages, so this dictionary doesn't do "exactly the same as this patent describes" as I said before and that last +1 Informative I got is undeserved I'm afraid =P

You want this link.

By the way, if you read a little bit on computational linguistics, you'll find that even the mapping from "Have a sandwich" to "Eat" is part of common knowledge among the people in the know.

That's completely false. We don't usually write in all caps (fortunately), and when we do, we *have* to write with accent marks. (e.i. MELÓN)

It's true that some people don't put the accents but that's grammatically wrong. I think it's a mith from the times of the typewriters, when you couldn't write uppercase letters with accents because they overlapped. But the RAE (Royal Academy of Spanish) dicts the rules, and they are very clear about this.

Merriam-Webster? I have a better source.

Clearly, this is an assault on Romance langauges by the Wintel crew! First, they try and steal "vista", and now, they come out with this thing that kinda looks like "vive" but isn't quite.

What's next? Windows Cabrón? That would probably be more appropriate.

Albeit it has been noted that "vista" has a meaning as an English word (my choice is Volunteers In Service To America) it actually means a lot of things in Spanish and has a very strong Spanish feeling in it.

I've been intrigued for a while for the increasing use of Spanish words in every day speek. Is MS name choice a deliberate attempt to make windows cooler? (well, obviously that is what all the branding thing is about but I meant asking, is there a coolness factor associated with Spanish or Latino things?). Are they trying to be sexier for Spanish speakers? Or is just because how it sounds?

All languages are "living" hence they are susceptible of change. That's good and necessary to be able to communicate new things, nevertheless it's fundamentally wrong to simply add to the dictionary whichever sound, onomatopoeia or misheard word that starts being used by many people, because the main purpose of language is to communicate ideas and to do it accurately, if that fails is just like having a buggy script. Language is a form of code for people and we all know what happens when you write a program with mistakes in the code. In my native language (Spanish) there is an organization created to regulate the "accepted" words called "Real Academia Española de la Lengua" they tend to accept just about everything that starts going around (I'm personally against that) but the good thing is they compile all those words, and if you are interested at least you have reference material just like the W3C does to web related programming languages. I don't know if there's a similar organization for English but I guess standards are indeed necessary.

The name is not a very good omen. I hope that the people doing rincon
are better at progrogamming; choosing names there are a real disaster.

There should be "arrinconados" (put in a coner); from (arrinconar)

The name is not a very good omen. I hope that the people doing rincon
are better at progrogamming; choosing names there are a real disaster.

There should be "arrinconados" (put in a coner); from (arrinconar)

That's true for W only. K and Y are 'native' Spanish letters (kilo, yeso).

If you go to the Diccionario de la Real Academia Española de la Lengua and lookup "bluyin", you'll get a "No such word in the dictionary".

However, people from certain countries do use "bluyin" often (actually, most of us colombians call "blue jeans" "blue jeans", as in "me compre unos nuevos blue jeans", which should probably be written as "bluyins"). I remember reading that the Real Academia Española, the main authority was considering adding the word to the dictionary.

Similar things have happened with some words. For example, the word "cruasán" was recently added to the dictionary for the french word "croissant", very commonly used in spanish-speaking countries.

Alejo

Actually, RAE says that both puta and perra mean prostitute... but yep, you're right, I think that bitch does not primarily mean prostitute (if at all). Spanish is my first language, English third :)

The fun thing is that I just recently learned that bitch also means "female dog" (perra, in spanish). Made me chuckle.

Actually, RAE says that both puta and perra mean prostitute... but yep, you're right, I think that bitch does not primarily mean prostitute (if at all). Spanish is my first language, English third :)

The fun thing is that I just recently learned that bitch also means "female dog" (perra, in spanish). Made me chuckle.

That's more a words game than a mistake. The word Nova has a clear meaning in Spanish. It comes from Latin that means "new".

We are so smart that change Nova for "No va" (don't go)

forgot the link to the modern castilian form of quixote, search 'quijote' in the Real Academia" (on Dicccionario de la Lengua) using the 'busqueda escalonada' option, and then search 'quixote'.

According, again, to the Dictionary of the Spanish Academy, bicho is bug. It's not only in S.A.; it's the standard Spanish.

Quoting parent...

(in Spanish, "lumis" is a name for bad reputation women)

The Royal Spanish Academy doesn't register this word in its Dictionary of the Spanish Language. (KDE Users: to check this, type rae:lumis on the Konqueror location bar.)

And speaking for myself, a native Spanish speaker from South America, I didn't know about the word before reading this article.

Someone mod parent down, please.

In Spanish, "Lindos" is the plural for "cute"... But it does have other meanings as well...

While we're at it, please return the English, Spanish, etc. since they're European... and start speaking your own languages instead - thanks!

In Spain, there is a governmental organization which codifes the Castillian spanish, and thus its dictionary is the authority on Castillian spanish. Any word not present in it, isn't Castillian spanish. Period. Of course, South American spanish (not to mention Cuban spanish) has no such singular authority.

This institution, which is not governmental, is the Real Academia de la Lengua Española [Royal Academy of the Spanish Lenguage] (founded in 1713), and in fact it coordinates its activities (including the dictionary) with the other 21 Academies of the Spanish Language around the world, including the Academia Cubana de la Lengua [Cuban Academy of the Language], through the Asociación de Academias de la Lengua Española [Association of Academies of the Spanish Language], founded in 1951. (There's even a North-american one.)

So there is a singular "authority" for the Spanish Language, although the mission of the RAE is not to dictate what Spanish is, but to reflect its evolution while dampening the passing fads and trying to influence the word choices to keep them true to the language essence. It works more as a reference than as an authority, since a word not being in the dictionary doesn't mean that it's not Spanish, but that it hasn't proved to be stable yet. If the word sticks then it's added to the dictionary corpus, which includes the American and Philippine contributions.

Finally, you mention Cuban Spanish as if it was particularly different from the norm (which is coordinated as said above), but in fact it's quite close. In my experience, the Argentinian variant, which is heavily influenced by Italian, differs more.
Sure people use informal speaking every day, as in Spain, but we all share a common reference point on what our language is.

In Spain, there is a governmental organization which codifes the Castillian spanish, and thus its dictionary is the authority on Castillian spanish. Any word not present in it, isn't Castillian spanish. Period. Of course, South American spanish (not to mention Cuban spanish) has no such singular authority.

This institution, which is not governmental, is the Real Academia de la Lengua Española [Royal Academy of the Spanish Lenguage] (founded in 1713), and in fact it coordinates its activities (including the dictionary) with the other 21 Academies of the Spanish Language around the world, including the Academia Cubana de la Lengua [Cuban Academy of the Language], through the Asociación de Academias de la Lengua Española [Association of Academies of the Spanish Language], founded in 1951. (There's even a North-american one.)

So there is a singular "authority" for the Spanish Language, although the mission of the RAE is not to dictate what Spanish is, but to reflect its evolution while dampening the passing fads and trying to influence the word choices to keep them true to the language essence. It works more as a reference than as an authority, since a word not being in the dictionary doesn't mean that it's not Spanish, but that it hasn't proved to be stable yet. If the word sticks then it's added to the dictionary corpus, which includes the American and Philippine contributions.

Finally, you mention Cuban Spanish as if it was particularly different from the norm (which is coordinated as said above), but in fact it's quite close. In my experience, the Argentinian variant, which is heavily influenced by Italian, differs more.
Sure people use informal speaking every day, as in Spain, but we all share a common reference point on what our language is.

In Spain, there is a governmental organization which codifes the Castillian spanish, and thus its dictionary is the authority on Castillian spanish. Any word not present in it, isn't Castillian spanish. Period. Of course, South American spanish (not to mention Cuban spanish) has no such singular authority.

This institution, which is not governmental, is the Real Academia de la Lengua Española [Royal Academy of the Spanish Lenguage] (founded in 1713), and in fact it coordinates its activities (including the dictionary) with the other 21 Academies of the Spanish Language around the world, including the Academia Cubana de la Lengua [Cuban Academy of the Language], through the Asociación de Academias de la Lengua Española [Association of Academies of the Spanish Language], founded in 1951. (There's even a North-american one.)

So there is a singular "authority" for the Spanish Language, although the mission of the RAE is not to dictate what Spanish is, but to reflect its evolution while dampening the passing fads and trying to influence the word choices to keep them true to the language essence. It works more as a reference than as an authority, since a word not being in the dictionary doesn't mean that it's not Spanish, but that it hasn't proved to be stable yet. If the word sticks then it's added to the dictionary corpus, which includes the American and Philippine contributions.

Finally, you mention Cuban Spanish as if it was particularly different from the norm (which is coordinated as said above), but in fact it's quite close. In my experience, the Argentinian variant, which is heavily influenced by Italian, differs more.
Sure people use informal speaking every day, as in Spain, but we all share a common reference point on what our language is.

In Spain, there is a governmental organization which codifes the Castillian spanish, and thus its dictionary is the authority on Castillian spanish. Any word not present in it, isn't Castillian spanish. Period. Of course, South American spanish (not to mention Cuban spanish) has no such singular authority.

This institution, which is not governmental, is the Real Academia de la Lengua Española [Royal Academy of the Spanish Lenguage] (founded in 1713), and in fact it coordinates its activities (including the dictionary) with the other 21 Academies of the Spanish Language around the world, including the Academia Cubana de la Lengua [Cuban Academy of the Language], through the Asociación de Academias de la Lengua Española [Association of Academies of the Spanish Language], founded in 1951. (There's even a North-american one.)

So there is a singular "authority" for the Spanish Language, although the mission of the RAE is not to dictate what Spanish is, but to reflect its evolution while dampening the passing fads and trying to influence the word choices to keep them true to the language essence. It works more as a reference than as an authority, since a word not being in the dictionary doesn't mean that it's not Spanish, but that it hasn't proved to be stable yet. If the word sticks then it's added to the dictionary corpus, which includes the American and Philippine contributions.

Finally, you mention Cuban Spanish as if it was particularly different from the norm (which is coordinated as said above), but in fact it's quite close. In my experience, the Argentinian variant, which is heavily influenced by Italian, differs more.
Sure people use informal speaking every day, as in Spain, but we all share a common reference point on what our language is.

In Spain, there is a governmental organization which codifes the Castillian spanish, and thus its dictionary is the authority on Castillian spanish. Any word not present in it, isn't Castillian spanish. Period. Of course, South American spanish (not to mention Cuban spanish) has no such singular authority.

This institution, which is not governmental, is the Real Academia de la Lengua Española [Royal Academy of the Spanish Lenguage] (founded in 1713), and in fact it coordinates its activities (including the dictionary) with the other 21 Academies of the Spanish Language around the world, including the Academia Cubana de la Lengua [Cuban Academy of the Language], through the Asociación de Academias de la Lengua Española [Association of Academies of the Spanish Language], founded in 1951. (There's even a North-american one.)

So there is a singular "authority" for the Spanish Language, although the mission of the RAE is not to dictate what Spanish is, but to reflect its evolution while dampening the passing fads and trying to influence the word choices to keep them true to the language essence. It works more as a reference than as an authority, since a word not being in the dictionary doesn't mean that it's not Spanish, but that it hasn't proved to be stable yet. If the word sticks then it's added to the dictionary corpus, which includes the American and Philippine contributions.

Finally, you mention Cuban Spanish as if it was particularly different from the norm (which is coordinated as said above), but in fact it's quite close. In my experience, the Argentinian variant, which is heavily influenced by Italian, differs more.
Sure people use informal speaking every day, as in Spain, but we all share a common reference point on what our language is.

In Spain, there is a governmental organization which codifes the Castillian spanish, and thus its dictionary is the authority on Castillian spanish. Any word not present in it, isn't Castillian spanish. Period. Of course, South American spanish (not to mention Cuban spanish) has no such singular authority.

This institution, which is not governmental, is the Real Academia de la Lengua Española [Royal Academy of the Spanish Lenguage] (founded in 1713), and in fact it coordinates its activities (including the dictionary) with the other 21 Academies of the Spanish Language around the world, including the Academia Cubana de la Lengua [Cuban Academy of the Language], through the Asociación de Academias de la Lengua Española [Association of Academies of the Spanish Language], founded in 1951. (There's even a North-american one.)

So there is a singular "authority" for the Spanish Language, although the mission of the RAE is not to dictate what Spanish is, but to reflect its evolution while dampening the passing fads and trying to influence the word choices to keep them true to the language essence. It works more as a reference than as an authority, since a word not being in the dictionary doesn't mean that it's not Spanish, but that it hasn't proved to be stable yet. If the word sticks then it's added to the dictionary corpus, which includes the American and Philippine contributions.

Finally, you mention Cuban Spanish as if it was particularly different from the norm (which is coordinated as said above), but in fact it's quite close. In my experience, the Argentinian variant, which is heavily influenced by Italian, differs more.
Sure people use informal speaking every day, as in Spain, but we all share a common reference point on what our language is.

In Spain, there is a governmental organization which codifes the Castillian spanish, and thus its dictionary is the authority on Castillian spanish. Any word not present in it, isn't Castillian spanish. Period. Of course, South American spanish (not to mention Cuban spanish) has no such singular authority.

This institution, which is not governmental, is the Real Academia de la Lengua Española [Royal Academy of the Spanish Lenguage] (founded in 1713), and in fact it coordinates its activities (including the dictionary) with the other 21 Academies of the Spanish Language around the world, including the Academia Cubana de la Lengua [Cuban Academy of the Language], through the Asociación de Academias de la Lengua Española [Association of Academies of the Spanish Language], founded in 1951. (There's even a North-american one.)

So there is a singular "authority" for the Spanish Language, although the mission of the RAE is not to dictate what Spanish is, but to reflect its evolution while dampening the passing fads and trying to influence the word choices to keep them true to the language essence. It works more as a reference than as an authority, since a word not being in the dictionary doesn't mean that it's not Spanish, but that it hasn't proved to be stable yet. If the word sticks then it's added to the dictionary corpus, which includes the American and Philippine contributions.

Finally, you mention Cuban Spanish as if it was particularly different from the norm (which is coordinated as said above), but in fact it's quite close. In my experience, the Argentinian variant, which is heavily influenced by Italian, differs more.
Sure people use informal speaking every day, as in Spain, but we all share a common reference point on what our language is.

If I am wrong here, I would love to be set straight by someone better informed.

You're wrong. In 1994 Spanish stopped considering ch and ll as separate letters for dictionary ordering purposes.