What is polyglot that speak the greatest number of language?--158.148.178.254 (talk) 17:35, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's more difficult to count than you might think. Our article at List of polyglots gives you a good idea. See also Polyglotism. Matt Deres (talk) 17:56, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(after edit conflict) I have no definite answer, and certainly not for a living person. List of polyglots is interesting, though some of the people listed there only "claimed" they spoke that many languages (e.g. John Bowring "claimed he knew 200 languages of which he could speak 100. Many of his contemporaries and subsequent biographers thought otherwise."). See also this question asked here over twelve years ago (!) ---Sluzzelin talk 17:57, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What is the correct punctuation for professional titles, such as MD or DMD or DPM, etc.? Do they include or exclude the periods? Do they include or exclude spaces between the letters (and/or the periods)? I am asking for the conventions for American English (USA). Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:49, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No spaces. Periods may be used or left out: M.D., D.M.D., D.P.M., D.D.S., LL.M., S.J.D., J.D., M.S./J.D. or MD, DMD, DPM, DDS, LLM, SJD, JD, MS/JD. —Stephen (talk) 08:46, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Most mainstream publishers omit the periods these days; they don't serve any useful purpose. That is also the recommendation of the Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Abbreviations. --Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:51, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:11, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

What is the correct punctuation for telephone numbers? For example: 123 - 456 - 7890. Are those "dashes" simply regular dashes/hyphens? Or are they en dashes or em dashes? And, are there supposed to be any spaces or not? I am asking for the conventions for American English (USA). Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:52, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedia has an article on everything", including: National conventions for writing telephone numbers. 107.15.157.44 (talk) 22:44, 17 September 2018 (UTC) ... but, that article doesn't specifically answer your questions. Based purely on OR, (XXX) XXX-XXXX is still common, with space after close-paren, and regular dash→[hyphen or en dash (not em dash)], with XXX-XXX-XXXX becoming more common[reply]

Manhattan: New Years Eve 1985: 1 area code for 8 million people. 2017: 3 overlay area codes and 1 regular one for 1.6 million. 2100: 347 area codes and 2,197 overlays for 25 million people. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 02:20, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is also XXX.XXX.XXXX, which I've often seen on business cards. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:05, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:12, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

N.B. UK telephone numbers never use any punctuation. 86.187.174.4 (talk) 18:22, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What I am looking for, I suppose, are recordings of different people pronouncing the word, and the corresponding symbols representing each pronunciation.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:26, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wiktionary:dog has a couple of examples. Are you wondering about the difference between British and American pronunciations, or the variations within Canada? Dbfirs 20:44, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the differences are actually American.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:45, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't get the US pronunciation to work, but the UK version did, and yes, that's one of the ones. But I can't figure out what that symbol is.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:47, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

IPA vowel chart with audio explains the symbols. Dbfirs 20:54, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If I can't tell similar-looking symbols apart, that doesn't help much.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:08, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on where you are. In the Midwest, we say "dog" to rhyme with "log". In the South, it's often like "da-ohg". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:17, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in my part of the South (and my experience with Southerners from other states) "dog" is more or less pronounced "dawg", but it still rhymes with "log" (and "hog", but not "cog"). --Khajidha (talk) 10:57, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) Unfortunately the similarity of the symbols is the least of your problems. It's the meaning of the symbols that's complicated, because speakers with different accents may assign the same sound to different phonemes.

I still do not quite understand what is meant by /ɒ/, because it's a phoneme that I don't have — unless it's actually the phoneme that I think of as /ɔ/, which is possible, and complicates the evaluation of whether I have the cot–caught merger. --Trovatore (talk) 21:20, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The pronunciation I'm really looking for is the one from Boston. And I say dawg.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:33, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't that how some Southerners say it too? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 01:32, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In Boston, they "pahk the cah in Hahvahd Yahd" [paːk ðə ˈkaːɹ‿ɪn ˈhaːvəd ˈjaːd], so maybe they own a "dahg" (?) -- cf: Boston accent. Per that article: ... the Boston accent merges the "short o" with the "aw" phoneme ... [becoming] long and rounded [ɒː]. The [ɒː] = Open back rounded vowel 2606:A000:1126:4CA:0:98F2:CFF6:1782 (talk) 17:19, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See English Pronunciation 6: short "o" sound (British accent). Alansplodge (talk) 10:10, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely am not referring to "dahg".— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 14:43, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also [1] /dɒɡ/, which also gives the general American English equivalent as /dɔːɡ/, respelled as /dôɡ/. Bazza (talk) 15:16, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An hour or so ago I heard Rush Limbaugh say caught "coh-aht".— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking for a source as to who first said that following (paraphrased from memory, so I may have the wording wrong).

There are two kinds of people who walk through the door of a commercial airliner.

One kind of person turns right and sits in the passenger compartment. They just want to arrive at their destination quickly and safely without having to worry about the technical details.

The other kind of person turns left and sits in the pilot's seat. They want to have complete control over the aircraft, make all the important decisions, and make it so that the passengers can arrive at their destination quickly and safely without having to worry about the technical details.

--Guy Macon (talk) 22:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The way I heard it is not about sitting in the pilot's seat. The point is that if you turn right you enter economy class, whereas if you turn left you enter first or business class. The distinction is between people who sit in economy (the majority) and those who can afford to sit in first/business (or, more commonly, whose employer pays for them to sit there). --Viennese Waltz 07:23, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

With the new non-stop Heathrow-Perth QANTAS schedule more people are turning left. Its not so much a question of affordability but the impracticality of sitting for fifteen hours when legroom is being continually reduced as airlines squeeze in ever more rows of seats. 2A00:23C1:CD83:1F01:D536:2A6C:D8F2:9746 (talk) 10:30, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There may very well be a similar saying about luxury/economy, but lots of engineers and programmers tell the tale of the pilot turning left and the passenger turning right, and specifically about how much more training it takes to be allowed to turn left. I just don't know who said it first.

BTW, a quick search turned up planes where left=cockpit/right=passenger seating,[2] where left=first class/right=economy[3] and where the answer depends on which door you use.[4] --Guy Macon (talk) 12:29, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]