There was a Latin equivalent to “W”?
D G REX > T REX?
IIRC Elizabeth II was the first monarch not to take a regnal name, and Charles III has followed her example. Could that have something to do with it? Also, Latin today hardly has the same prestige and upper class associations (i.e. via the public schools) that it once did… Or does it still?
George V. (George Frederick Earnest Albert)
The English word “scold” is etymologically related to the Norse word skald, as in their version of scops or bards.
Sometimes, becoming the subject of a skald’s poetry could be quite unpleasant, because skalds’ skill at trenchant mockery was well known and freely exercised, if the occasion warranted. (Presumably, given the fact that the ‘victims’ were often important and powerful people, the skalds must have enjoyed a kind of immunity when it came to insulting them.)
Just want to throw in that canard is French for duck (canette is French for the female duck), and no, they do not have wings in front. But they do have the wings quite far at the back when in flight and a longish neck, and as most planes in canard configuration have delta wings there is some resemblance and the name has stuck.
As a matter of fact, the first plane to fly by the Wright brothers was a canard. Look at the design plan, the small rectangle was in front, not at the back, so it is not a tail but a canard:
They did include a tail (20 in fig. 1, 24 in fig. 3, 10 in the perspective view), but only for steering left and right, not up or down.
I cannot imagine a plane that cannot be stalled. You just have to climb too steeply and/or too slowly.
Which led to some misprinted license plates in Ohio. They wanted the design to include the Wright airplane towing a banner, but they got the plane backwards.
That is hilarious! Thanks!
I thought the idea was that the canard, the forward wing, would stall before the main wing, and the nose would drop. If you can’t get the wing above it’s maximum angle of attack, it won’t stall.
Today I learned that the modern name Jennifer is a derivative of Guinevere, an old timey name I associate with King Arthur.
I will think about why the canard wing should stall before the main wing, it is not evident to me at first glance. There are many factors to take into account, like position of the center of gravity, the lift ratio from the canard wing vs the main wing, how fast you change the angle of attack… Your theory may be right in certain configurations, but always? Not so sure.
I’m not sure if canards have to behave that way, or if it’s just a choice that their designers make. I can see why an unstallable airplane might be a good thing. If the canard configuration makes it possible, without compromising other desirable behaviors, then they probably design them that way on purpose.
Elizabeth II most certainly took a regnal name. In fact it went to court re: her cypher on the postboxes.
The Scots claimed since Elizabeth I was never Queen of the Scots that Elizabeth was legally Elizabeth II and I or at the very least the cypher should stand for Elizabeth I on Scottish postboxes. The court ruled that as part of their regnal name, the monarch can use whatever ordinal they feel is appropriate. The fact that her regnal name was the same as her first name does not make it not-regnal.
My main point was only to say it’s clearer with the fractions in the vertical format, not the horizontal.
The canard is designed to stall before the main wing so the nose will pitch down while there is still a center of lift on the main wing. Once the main wing stalls there is no center of lift anymore. When a plane with a conventional tail loses lift drag on the tail which is far aft of the cg will pitch the nose down. In canard designs the cg is very close to the center of the plane’s length so all of it’s surfaces are about the same distance from the cg so it doesn’t pitch nose down as easily. It’s counting on the main wing to resume lift in recovery so the forward loading will pitch the nose down. A further advantage of conventional planes is the engine in front adding weight forward of the cg while the canard design has engine weight behind the cg. The canard is intended to operate more efficiently in level flight by minimizing drag on control surfaces but reducing performance and control to fly at all attitudes.
My error then. I assumed that a regnal name was by definition different from the new monarch’s christened name, and was usually that of a past monarch whom they admired. I recall reading that Charles III might take a different name owing to some unpleasant historical events involving his namesake predecessors.
BTW that’s interesting about the legal case you mentioned. Ignorance fought (but not yet thoroughly defeated)!
Alexia is in English a form of dyslexia that that develops due to a traumatic brain injury, stroke, or dementia (other languages do not stress the acquired component so much). When you are using the vocative case with your amazon user interface you are practically saying: “Hey, you! The one that can’t read!” I imagine amazon has dropped the “i” to make it less evident to the users, but if you say “Alexia!” instead of “Alexa!” the device will react the same.
Dyslexia: δυς dys, i.e. bad, not right, difficult, mis like in miscalculation, λέξις léxis, i.e. way of speaking, style. Alexia, i.e. α- a- like in not, un like in unintelligible.
It’s a bit more complicated than that. There is a usual Latin equivalent for ‘ELIZABETH’, i.e. ‘ELIZABETHA’, although the former isn’t unknown. There was therefore some uncertainty in 1952 as to which it should be. The Royal Mint decided to use ELIZABETH on the basis that this is what had been used on Elizabeth I’s coins and that it wasn’t not Latin. ‘CHARLES’, in contrast, isn’t Latin and he is the first British/English monarch whose name appears on the coins unambiguously in English. There was a minor fuss about this - angry letters to the Times etc. - when the new UK designs were first made public.
What? “Charles” is French. The English form is “Carl”.
I think that’s a bit too much nitpicking. Hasn’t Charles been an established English name for centuries? And you might as well argue that Carl isn’t English, but German.