Just a quickie:

What is to sound, as show is to sight?

Hi Wid. Welcome to the board.

How do you mean exactly? Is it "show me the sights, play me the sounds", or "to see the show, hear the sounds"?

Hi Maverick,

Play the sound is closer. However, it only works if you are 'doing' the sound, ie I could play you the Pathetique on the piano, but it doesn't always substitue.

If I took you to a Rothko gallery last Saturday, I showed you some Rothko piantings.

If I took you to a Waits concert last Sunday, I (?) you some Waits.

Is that clearer?

I hope I'm not nit picking, as a phonophile I find I often get left back-tracking and trying to reconstruct entire paragraphs, or substituing with the cumbersome phrase: auditorily demonstrated.

Greetings wideeyed!

An 'aural showing' perhaps? Well, perhaps not. In your example, the only possibility I could think of was '.. I introduced you to Waits', but I guess that doesn't help much. When someone wants you to listen to something on the piano, they just say 'Here, I'll show you'.
Anyway, don't worry about the peeves and nit picking, we have a Language Nitpicker's Club here, or should I say Nitpickers', or Nit-Pickers',... oh, sod it.

If I took you to a Waits concert last Sunday, I (?) you some Waits.

waits?? as in *tom* waits? he is my absolute favorite. [swoon-e]. hi c

as for your query, it does seem strange that there's no auditory equivalent for "show", however whenever "play" isn't appropriate, i would simply substitute "show", eg "i showed the technician the sound that my engine was making".

oh, and welcome a-Board =)

there's an old Scottish word that might work for this:
kithe - to make known by action, appearance, etc.; to manifest, show, prove, demonstrate, indicate.

an old Scottish word

Ay, pal, d'ye kithe the swirlin' pipes Jimmuh?

But with this useful exception, is there nothing more normal - how weird, for a basic sensory faculty!

(and yeah, Tom Waits is Dog.)

Thanks for kithe Maverick, you've earnt me some much needed points against an old Glasgie foe.

Thinking about it, none of the other senses have the 'show' word, which I guess isn't all that surprising given we're visual animals etc.

Two questions: is sound deserving of a 'show' word - do people feel the need for it?

and, if so, is kithe resurrectable, can we pinch one wholesale from another language, or would coining a new word be possible...like 'aude' perhaps?

Can I aude you some music???

PS any music recommendations along Waits lines gladly received (if this is a faux pas, apologies, but please bear in mind the fact that I'm strange )

Welcome, wideyed:
Hmm - a bit of a problem. As a lecturer, I "present" lectures which are often mainly an auditory experience (I do use visual aids at times, but not always!)
I also commission other lecturers to present lectures, so I use the term not only in an auto-descriptionary (!) fashion.

How would you feel if you were to tell me you were going to "present" Wait, or any other sound, to me? I guess you would have to make it clear, contexturally, that I was not about to have a personal meeting with a person.

Firstly, sorry to tsuwm for the mis-attribution of my thanks for kithe . (I shan't withdraw my thanks from maverick as I'm sure you'll prove your mettle)

RC, thank you for providing a more elegant alternative, but d'you not think there is a void worth plugging? Maybe I'm just lazy, but I think (in my humble wumble opinion) sound is worthy of it's own 'show' word .

'Present' also infers ownership/control which may not be applicable.

NB Call me thick, but I didn't realise till now that audit meant audience/hearing once upon a time. Ho hum.

Present also suggests itself to me in its "to introduce" sense. "Introduce," on its own, implies for me a novelty that can't always be counted on.

wideyedd'you not think there is a void worth plugging? ---- I think ---- sound is worthy of it's own 'show' word .


OK, so it's invention time.

You show me the sights of London, wideyed, and I'll list you the sounds of Lancaster?
Or maybe I could asound you the melodies of the birds at dawn? (Nah! I'd have to get up to early)

Or maybe I could [a]asound you the melodies of the birds at dawn?

Perhaps that's just it, RC.... you can sound something for someone. atomica provides:

1.To cause to give forth or produce a sound: sounded the gong.
2.To summon, announce, or signal by a sound: sound a warning.
3.Linguistics. To articulate; pronounce: sound a vowel.
4.To make known; celebrate: “Nations unborn your mighty names shall sound” (Alexander Pope).
5.To examine (a body organ or part) by causing to emit sound; auscultate.i'll thank those prone toward ribaldry to leave this one alone

OTOH, 'sounding' must, by definition, contain an element of causation, so i don't suppose one could sound birdsong, except in imitation. hmm, well it sounded reasonable as i started this post.....[trailing off e]

Thanks B96-- i had forgotten about definition 5 5.To examine (a body organ or part) by causing to emit sound; auscultate. i'll thank those prone toward ribaldry to leave this one alone

I am sure Dr. Bill knows it-- and I know i have been "sounded"-- it is done when you have pneumonia-- a doctor will tap on your back -- and see if your lungs sound hollow (good) or not (bad--filled with fluid)– the opposite is true if done to your head–hollow (empty is bad)- dull thud – full is good

i wonder if the term for the same process when baking bread-- you know when its done by the sound of the loaf-- a hollow sound is done.

and its done (or was done) to barrels.. And boats.. The sound that returned indicates something–hollow is bad for a barrel but good for a hold on a boat.

-- a doctor will tap on your back -- and see if your lungs sound hollow (good) or not (bad--filled with fluid

Well - I suppose that if your lungs are full of fluid, a tap on the back might be a cure?

Well - I suppose that if your lungs are full of fluid, a tap on the back might be a cure?

> You're not a doctor, are you RhubarbC?

To sound or peal, only really works for chimes and gongs.

What about these:

The Berlin Philharmonie evinced Beethoven's 9th for my pleasure.

The teacher demonstrated Bach's use acciaccaturas for me.

And what about 'to exhibit'?

The teacher demonstrated Bach's use acciaccaturas for me.

This works for me, but only if the teacher is actually performing the music herself. It also has a didactic connotation for me -- I wouldn't say, "The Boston Pops demonstrated The William Tell Overture very well last night."

I think a coining is the only thing to plug the hole, but it's easier to just walk around it: "You should really listen to the new Poe CD. Let me play it for you."

Thanks everybody for help . I'm off for a long, hopefully nice weekend - and nothing that interesting

I think I agree with you flatlander that it's easier to walk round holes, but I guess I'm lazy/clumsy at walking around holes (see point 4), and this hole tends to be on a major road for me.

I've had four things sorted out:

1. There isn't a show word for sound.

2. There are other words to circumvent the problem, ie 'kithe' (tsuwm), 'evinced' (belleyouth) and 'sound' (B96) inter alia.

3. There are some potential hole fillers, ie 'list' (RC) and 'asound' (RC).

4. I should be concerned that my cranial barrel has ullaged and my pulmonary hull has flooded, 'though it does explain a thing or two...

Have a nice weekend all!!

PS what exactly are the sounds of Lancaster RC, and are they worth an 'ear?

-- and just to make the waters even muddier-- you can, of course, smell a sound (as in the fresh salt water smell of Long Island sound-- or Puget Sound-- (this is a YART-- there are other sounds that are less aromatic!

If you went to a meadow and recorded birdsong, you would have an auscultation of larks.

Just a final note:
I went to the cinema on the weekend and at the beginning of the film a booming voice announced:

This film is shown in ....(pop, bang, squeak) THX

I had to think of wideyed

One way around the "hole" has not been mentioned so far, and I find it nice enough: to share (the impression) with somebody (can also apply to smells and tastes).

>to share... (can also apply to smells and tastes)

unfortunately, the taste (and smell) of this has been ruined (at least for me) by the ubiquitous "let me share this with you" feel-good usage.
-joe bfstlk

incidentally,

in japanese it's very easy to turn the verb back on its object. it's the difference between "do something" and "have someone do something".
so, "yaru" (to do) "yaraseru" (to have someone do). most verbs go easily into this form.
it just doesn't go easily into english in most cases - and "have someone do something" sounds like it's against their will.
thinking about it in these terms (and looking at all the posts so far) it's plain there is no easy way in english to make this form, but
"I'll get you to do something" can sound okay.
it's kind of limited in use -only the "will" form sounds kind (and even then not necessarily):
"he got me to listen to his cds" has connotations (the japanese equivalent wouldn't).
"he played his cds for me"
"he took me to the tom waits concert"
are the ways we get around this lack.
don't kids make this mistake all the time: "he listened me his cds"?
just like the old "borrow/lend" confusion.

what can you do? it's language, and whatever we can't express easily we express with difficulty.

...whatever we can't express easily we express with difficulty.

...or conjure up a word for it!

Okay, this is the area of linguistics that I'm really interested in without having any special expertise. So, captive audience, pay heed!

English, to me, is a forward looking and indicative language. We have lots of ways of making the present and the future work well and easily, more than most languages. We seem to have about the same number of past tense formations as most other European languages. Please bear with me, I haven't much time, certainly not enough to give examples of what I mean by that last statement.

We handle the future with aplomb. Look at the awkwardness of German's future tense formation, and Latinate languages generally only have one approach to future sentence and verb formation. Yes, there are exceptions, but not as many as in English. We can muck around in the future with a will.

But English does handle some things very awkwardly and the double genitive issue discussed in this thread is one of them. If we had case agreement, I guess it would be easier. As someone (NickW? tsuwm?) has pointed out, the use of the possessive apostrophe is uncertain and failing To say the formation "a friend of Molly's" is correct based on its existence and usage since the 14th century is actually begging the question. Technically, "a friend of Molly" must be correct, because the double genitive formation is logically wrong, even though it has an honoured history and is seen as grammatically correct. Not trying to buy a fight here, just pointing it out.

But we put up with this stuff because of the other freedoms that English sentence formation allows us. The orient/orientate argument could hardly exist in many other languages because of their more rigid syntactic structures.

But, hey, it's what makes English such an interesting critter!

to buy a fight... an interesting critter

Shoulder to shoulder, CK.

Thanks everybody for help . I'm off for a long, hopefully nice weekend - - -
PS what exactly are the sounds of Lancaster RC, and are they worth an 'ear?

I hope you had a good week end and that it is now getting stronger
As to the sounds of Lancaster - they are the low and awful groan of a long-oppressed people, serfs, suffering under the heel of the capitalist overlords as they suffered under the feudal John o'Gaunt, who dream of the day when they will rise and conquer the whole world. No doubt to oppress it in their turn. (says he, cynically)
Mostly, in fact, it is the sound of silence, except on a Saturday night, when it is the sound of breaking glass, obscene shouts, the depositing of pavement pizzas and the wail of police sirens.
So they tell me!

But not forgetting, Rhuby, the fine sounds of Shakespeare in the Park when the Dukes goes promenading?

You're right, of course, mav - I'm in a down mood today, my first back at work after a five day break. I could also have mentioned the sound of wind whistling through the rigging of our wondrous new Millenium Bridge, of cormorants drying their wings under Carlisle Bridge, the screaming of prisoners in the torture wing of Lancaster Castle - - -

Ooos - there I go again.

Thanks bridget96, auscultate with its chest tapping meaning was in this weekend's UK Times Jumbo crossword. I would not have known it but for this post!

Rod

PS The Times letters page has been discussing mondegreens, and the word was aired.

Auscultate shouldn't have a chest-tapping meaning, only a chest-listening one.

Which is nothing like a chestnut.

Auscultate shouldn't have a chest-tapping meaning, only a chest-listening one.

Why, doc? All the meanings of auscultate I can find involve "causing to sound" rather than listening.
Rod

Doc: Auscultate shouldn't have a chest-tapping meaning, only a chest-listening one.

Rod: Why, doc? All the meanings of auscultate I can find involve "causing to sound" rather than listening.

Because ascoltare means "to listen" in Italian? And it sounds (!) almost the same as auscultate!

A doctor's innkeeper father tapped his kegs of wine to tell how full the kegs were, by the difference in sound when tapping over air-filled part, compared to sound when tapping over liquid filled part. The doctor realized he could tap patient's chests to detect areas where air in lungs had been displaced by fluid, pneumonia, or tumor growth. This is called percussion and auscultation.

We're taught (and not allowed to suggest otherwise) that the examination of the chest (and abdomen for that matter) has four components, namely:

Inspection
Palpation
Percussion - the tapping part
Auscultation - the listening with (or without) a stethoscope part

I have only ever used auscultation in this context. [lives-a-sheltered-life-e]

Auscultation of the cranium has been suggested, but neither dullness nor hyper-resonance of the head holds up well in court.

neither dullness nor hyper-resonance of the head holds up well in court

Worked OK for Dubbya

Well, not to sheltered a life if Palpation is part of your examination of a chest!

(just joking, i have been lucky, and never encountered a Doc who was less than professional-- the only slip i encountered, was while working in a Hospital, one of the interest i worked with was responsible for giving out flu shots-- to make life easy--he had "pre filled" most of the form (and photocopied it)--and he made everyone "age: 30-- i told him i'd take the flu shot if for no other reason that to restore my youth!)

A few moments ago on National Public Radio I heard our feckless leader, in discussing his hare-brained scheme for a national missile defense system, say, quite clearly, "nucular." (Note: although cleverly disguised as a political polemic, this was about words.)

Palpation

It was a temptation for many a medical student to expect his girlfriend to allow him to study anatomy in Braille.

my mother as child had chorea- (st vitus dance)-- pre antibiotic age-- and end up with a heart murmur.. she was poor, so she recieved all of her health services from a teaching hospital. Her murmur was unusual-- and as she matured, she came to hate doctors, since every year, a new crop of them would be called in to listen to her murmur.. it was a very rare sort of murmur.. and from her discription, it seems most 99.9% of the doctors were more interested in her murmur than the external anatomy of her chest-- but she was non to thrilled to have doctor after doctor be excited about examining her.

Forgive me for repeating an anecdote I think I may have posted before. On the pediatric ward of the Boston City Hospital I saw a young black girl with a heart murmur produced by a mitral stenosis so severe that the vibrations produced were sufficiently powerful that they could be felt on palpation just below her left breast.this phenomenon is called a "thrill'" Students from three medical schools were lined up to examine her, because they might never again have such an opportunity.There's a horse's ass in every large group. The line moved so slowly that one bored student put his hand in the wrong place, and said disgustedly to the guy behind him:"I don't get any thrill!"
The girl,outraged by the idea of couple hundred guys wanting to feel her breast just to get a thrill, jumped out of
bed and locked herself in the toilet. .

Forgive me for repeating an anecdote…

It bears repeating, Dr. Bill.