1238: "Enlightenment"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

O10infinity
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 6:14 pm UTC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby O10infinity » Wed Jul 17, 2013 4:05 am UTC

What is this comic trying to say? That magic spells break computers? Or is Randall hinting that typo on the internet are in actuality part of elaborate magic spells that sufficiently intelligent text processing algorithms will one day reveal?

brenok
Needs Directions
Posts: 507
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:35 pm UTC
Location: Brazil

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby brenok » Wed Jul 17, 2013 4:11 am UTC

I think the implication is that she tore the computer apart in anger or agony and left. Because she was not "enlightened" enough to get over it.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9843
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby addams » Wed Jul 17, 2013 4:39 am UTC

by neremanth » Tue Jul 16, 2013 11:04 am UTC
I make it "uc you you uc ing uc ." and "You i goo on, I .". (I am a strict literalist ).

No. No. You are not a literalist.
You are a Savant.

O10infinity wrote:What is this comic trying to say? That magic spells break computers? Or is Randall hinting that typo on the internet are in actuality part of elaborate magic spells that sufficiently intelligent text processing algorithms will one day reveal?

oh. Good point.
I have no idea what the comic was attempting to communicate.
I saw it as a test. I think I passed. I was able to write the sentence.

Why is the computer broken in the strip?
Is the computer broken or are the pieces on the floor the security apparatus?
The female form is Long Gone with the Hardware?

Enlightened? The Enlightened do not steal computers, even if they can.
Because, the Enlightened know A) It can be tracked. B) It can be set to Detonate. C) It's not nice to take things without permission. D) Do we really need more reasons to not take other people's stuff? E) Is not a real number in Academic circles. F) I have no idea.

Spoiler:
Sometime having a friend in a harder Science can leave a mark on the Soul.
In Physical Chemistry in some places a lecture is given that states, "There are five correct answers to every problem."

Well; Somebody may not have understood the Lecture.
I think that somebody was me.

I am not qualified to think about Physical Chemistry.
I like to hear the stories. They are K2 stories.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K2
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

arthurd006_5
Posts: 98
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 9:49 am UTC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby arthurd006_5 » Wed Jul 17, 2013 6:26 am UTC

Ilze123 wrote:I get the twitch when "!"and "?" are overused and I think I am not the only one. Still, it feels like I am fighting windmills when I point this out to other people. They just don't understand (or dont want to).

I know at least one person who uses exclamation marks to paper over the cracks in written arguments.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9843
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby addams » Wed Jul 17, 2013 6:59 am UTC

arthurd006_5 wrote:
Ilze123 wrote:I get the twitch when "!"and "?" are overused and I think I am not the only one. Still, it feels like I am fighting windmills when I point this out to other people. They just don't understand (or dont want to).

I know at least one person who uses exclamation marks to paper over the cracks in written arguments.

Really? You Twitch?
!!That can be important!!

?!Does this Make you Twitch?!

!? Well? What!? About! !THIS!
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Ilze123
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 6:15 am UTC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby Ilze123 » Wed Jul 17, 2013 10:30 am UTC

addams wrote:
arthurd006_5 wrote:
Ilze123 wrote:I get the twitch when "!"and "?" are overused and I think I am not the only one. Still, it feels like I am fighting windmills when I point this out to other people. They just don't understand (or dont want to).

I know at least one person who uses exclamation marks to paper over the cracks in written arguments.

Really? You Twitch?
!!That can be important!!

?!Does this Make you Twitch?!

!? Well? What!? About! !THIS!

A post like this is humorous and makes me smile (thank you for making me smile). I twitch when people don't know the proper way to finish a perfectly fine sentence. Those people make me question their sanity and it makes me wonder if it is even worthwhile to continue reading.

I would love to post a diagram which shows what I mean. But because I am a new poster, alas I can not for it is flagged as spam.

Therefor a quote from my favorite author (Pratchett) which says the same:
'And all those exclamation marks, you notice? Five? A sure sign of someone who wears his underpants on his head.' -- in Maskerade

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2876
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby orthogon » Wed Jul 17, 2013 10:56 am UTC

arthurd006_5 wrote:
Ilze123 wrote:I get the twitch when "!"and "?" are overused and I think I am not the only one. Still, it feels like I am fighting windmills when I point this out to other people. They just don't understand (or dont want to).

I know at least one person who uses exclamation marks to paper over the cracks in written arguments.

I once wrote a request to the IT helpdesk that said something like:
I wrote:Please could you assign an IP address for my PC, whose MAC address is 01:23:45:67:89:AB?

When I chased up whether it had been done, the guy said "No, you didn't seem too sure of the MAC address so I was waiting for you to confirm it". I had to go back and look what I'd written, then try to explain that a sentence that begins "Please could you ..." is a question and therefore requires a question mark at the end.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

arthurd006_5
Posts: 98
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 9:49 am UTC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby arthurd006_5 » Wed Jul 17, 2013 11:32 am UTC

orthogon wrote:I once wrote a request to the IT helpdesk that said something like:
I wrote:Please could you assign an IP address for my PC, whose MAC address is 01:23:45:67:89:AB?

When I chased up whether it had been done, the guy said "No, you didn't seem too sure of the MAC address so I was waiting for you to confirm it". I had to go back and look what I'd written, then try to explain that a sentence that begins "Please could you ..." is a question and therefore requires a question mark at the end.

I think we need a new piece of English grammar, for sentences like this one:

Could you please consider this thing? which has these supporting non-controversial details.

Kit.
Posts: 1042
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 5:14 pm UTC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby Kit. » Wed Jul 17, 2013 12:20 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:I once wrote a request to the IT helpdesk that said something like:
I wrote:Please could you assign an IP address for my PC, whose MAC address is 01:23:45:67:89:AB?

When I chased up whether it had been done, the guy said "No, you didn't seem too sure of the MAC address so I was waiting for you to confirm it". I had to go back and look what I'd written, then try to explain that a sentence that begins "Please could you ..." is a question and therefore requires a question mark at the end.

Well, OK, would you feel better had the guy just answered "yes" to your question?

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2876
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby orthogon » Wed Jul 17, 2013 12:36 pm UTC

Kit. wrote:
orthogon wrote:I once wrote a request to the IT helpdesk that said something like:
I wrote:Please could you assign an IP address for my PC, whose MAC address is 01:23:45:67:89:AB?

When I chased up whether it had been done, the guy said "No, you didn't seem too sure of the MAC address so I was waiting for you to confirm it". I had to go back and look what I'd written, then try to explain that a sentence that begins "Please could you ..." is a question and therefore requires a question mark at the end.

Well, OK, would you feel better had the guy just answered "yes" to your question?

Well, quite. Politeness be damned, the only safe option is to use the imperative.

Edit: Please+imperative would also work.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Znirk
Posts: 174
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 9:47 am UTC
Location: ZZ9 plural Z α

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby Znirk » Wed Jul 17, 2013 1:30 pm UTC

mathmannix wrote:Maybe homophones which are heteronyms (aka fair/fare) are rare in Spanish, but there are some, especially if you consider adding/removing accent marks to be different spellings (papa, si, etc.). I myself was confused when learning Spanish between "pero" and "perro", but apparently they do not sound the same to a native. But I'm sure there are other pairs of words that do.

However, homonyms are much more common - as they are in English as well (same spelling and pronunciation but different meanings, like the multiple meanings of run or green, or the less common ones with completely different roots, such as bay, log, or... troll.)

Or maybe you never tried to confuse someone who is just learning Spanish with the sentences "¿Cómo se llama?" (What is your name?), "¿Cómo es su llama?" (How is your llama?), and "¿Como llamas?" (I eat llamas?)

And now the prescriptivist inside me gets a turn at the keyboard.

One: You may want to distinguish between homophones (same sound), homographs (same spelling) and homonyms (a more general term for the union of both sets).

Two: While in some cases Spanish spelling distinguishes words by an extra accent (si 'if' vs. 'yes', mas 'but' vs. más 'more', que the relative pronoun vs. qué the interrogative etc.), papa ('pope' or 'potato') has first syllable stress and thus is not a homophone of papá ('daddy').

Three: If you want to train yourself to hear the difference between pero and perro, focus mainly on the sound and length of the e-sound. With many speakers the difference in the preceding vowel is more noticeable than the difference between the single-tap and the multiple-tap r.

Four: For the second one, you want "¿Cómo está su llama?" (unless there's a European/American difference here that I don't know about). And note that llama also means 'flame' - I'm sure there's something you can do with that :)

User avatar
PM 2Ring
Posts: 3635
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 3:19 pm UTC
Location: Mid north coast, NSW, Australia

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby PM 2Ring » Wed Jul 17, 2013 1:35 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:I once wrote a request to the IT helpdesk that said something like:
I wrote:Please could you assign an IP address for my PC, whose MAC address is 01:23:45:67:89:AB?

When I chased up whether it had been done, the guy said "No, you didn't seem too sure of the MAC address so I was waiting for you to confirm it". I had to go back and look what I'd written, then try to explain that a sentence that begins "Please could you ..." is a question and therefore requires a question mark at the end.


Oh, God. They actually pay that person to look after computers? Scary.

arthurd006_5 wrote:I think we need a new piece of English grammar, for sentences like this one:

Could you please consider this thing? which has these supporting non-controversial details.


When I was younger I thought it'd be nice to have "comma-ised" variants of the question mark & exclamation mark (i.e. replacing the dot at the bottom of those marks with a comma) that could be used inside a sentence. But we don't really need that, since if we need to make things clear and simple we can write

Please could you assign an IP address for my PC? The MAC address is 01:23:45:67:89:AB .

User avatar
mathmannix
Posts: 1410
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 2:12 pm UTC
Location: Washington, DC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby mathmannix » Wed Jul 17, 2013 2:27 pm UTC

Spoiler:
Znirk wrote:
mathmannix wrote:Maybe homophones which are heteronyms (aka fair/fare) are rare in Spanish, but there are some, especially if you consider adding/removing accent marks to be different spellings (papa, si, etc.). I myself was confused when learning Spanish between "pero" and "perro", but apparently they do not sound the same to a native. But I'm sure there are other pairs of words that do.

However, homonyms are much more common - as they are in English as well (same spelling and pronunciation but different meanings, like the multiple meanings of run or green, or the less common ones with completely different roots, such as bay, log, or... troll.)

Or maybe you never tried to confuse someone who is just learning Spanish with the sentences "¿Cómo se llama?" (What is your name?), "¿Cómo es su llama?" (How is your llama?), and "¿Como llamas?" (I eat llamas?)

And now the prescriptivist inside me gets a turn at the keyboard.

One: You may want to distinguish between homophones (same sound), homographs (same spelling) and homonyms (a more general term for the union of both sets).

Two: While in some cases Spanish spelling distinguishes words by an extra accent (si 'if' vs. 'yes', mas 'but' vs. más 'more', que the relative pronoun vs. qué the interrogative etc.), papa ('pope' or 'potato') has first syllable stress and thus is not a homophone of papá ('daddy').

Three: If you want to train yourself to hear the difference between pero and perro, focus mainly on the sound and length of the e-sound. With many speakers the difference in the preceding vowel is more noticeable than the difference between the single-tap and the multiple-tap r.

Four: For the second one, you want "¿Cómo está su llama?" (unless there's a European/American difference here that I don't know about). And note that llama also means 'flame' - I'm sure there's something you can do with that :)

As for #1, I had the handy dandy chart in front of me to refresh my memory:
512px-Homograph_homophone_venn_diagram_svg.png

Homonym is, I believe, the intersection of the two sets, not the union.

As for the Spanish, thank you for your corrections, as I only studied it at a very superficial level. (I would have thought, though, that the word for Pope would be the same as the word for Daddy, not potato...)

Oh, and speaking of flame, I might be a bit late to this subthread, but "inflammable" literally means "able to be inflamed." This is better in my mind than "flammable", meaning "able to be flamed" (or "able to flame") - both of which are valid constructions, but flame is usually a noun in English (at least outside the internet), which is why the word inflame was created to begin with. Note that, between the shortness of the syllable and the plethora (another great Three Amigos word!) of sources of the English language, the two-letter combination "in" has several meanings, not just "not" - I can think of at least two others!
I hear velociraptor tastes like chicken.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2876
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby orthogon » Wed Jul 17, 2013 3:41 pm UTC

PM 2Ring wrote:When I was younger I thought it'd be nice to have "comma-ised" variants of the question mark & exclamation mark (i.e. replacing the dot at the bottom of those marks with a comma) that could be used inside a sentence.

You could call them the quomma and the emma.

mathmannix wrote:As for #1, I had the handy dandy chart in front of me to refresh my memory:

What about homotexts?, i.e. words with different pronunciations, spellings and meanings but typed using the same sequence of keys in predictive text. [Please mentally replace "?," with a quomma]. Pint, riot and shot are homotexts. My nun types them all the time. (The homophones hate the homotextuals, of course).
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
chridd
Has a vermicelli title
Posts: 814
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:07 am UTC
Location: ...Earth, I guess?
Contact:

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby chridd » Wed Jul 17, 2013 4:39 pm UTC

mathmannix wrote:Oh, and speaking of flame, I might be a bit late to this subthread, but "inflammable" literally means "able to be inflamed." This is better in my mind than "flammable", meaning "able to be flamed" (or "able to flame") - both of which are valid constructions, but flame is usually a noun in English (at least outside the internet), which is why the word inflame was created to begin with. Note that, between the shortness of the syllable and the plethora (another great Three Amigos word!) of sources of the English language, the two-letter combination "in" has several meanings, not just "not" - I can think of at least two others!
I haven't actually heard the word "inflame" used (in that meaning) that much, maybe not at all. I'd probably use "set on fire" or "burn" to mean that. So perhaps part of the confusion is that "inflame" isn't all that common (or at least not all that common in certain dialects); if you want a verb before "able", perhaps it would make more sense to use "burnable" instead.
~ chri d. d. /tʃɹɪ.di.di/ (Phonotactics, schmphonotactics) · she(?)(?(?)(?))(?(?(?))(?))(?) · Forum game scores
mittfh wrote:I wish this post was very quotable...
flicky1991 wrote:In both cases the quote is "I'm being quoted too much!"

Patrik3
Posts: 112
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 1:45 pm UTC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby Patrik3 » Wed Jul 17, 2013 5:38 pm UTC

Ilze123 wrote:I don't mind small spelling errors. Everyone makes them and we should be a little lenient. Punctuation on the other hand is a different matter.

I get the twitch when "!"and "?" are overused and I think I am not the only one. Still, it feels like I am fighting windmills when I point this out to other people. They just don't understand (or dont want to).


SERIOUSLY???? You too??? So do I!!!!!1

Also... in a post complaining about punctuation errors, I'm none too certain myself but I believe there should be: a semicolon between "spelling errors" and "Everyone"; "I think I am not the only one" should be "I think that I am not the only one"; the parentheses in the last sentence feel awkward; one of the instances of "don't" is missing an apostrophe and finally "to" is a pronoun and if I recall correctly, pronouns are bad form to end a sentence with.

Mostly I have given up the bad habit of correcting the grammar of others - except where it could benefit the person: if it's a bad mistake, then I'll genuinely want to educate them, and also save them from possible future embarrassment... or if I'm feeling particularly grumpy/troll-ish on that day. I only did it here because I thought it ironic that you made punctuation and grammatical errors in a post complaining about those very things.

Also, I'm really self-conscious of my own grammar, now.

User avatar
neremanth
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:24 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby neremanth » Wed Jul 17, 2013 6:49 pm UTC

Patrik3 wrote:Also... in a post complaining about punctuation errors, I'm none too certain myself but I believe there should be: a semicolon between "spelling errors" and "Everyone"; "I think I am not the only one" should be "I think that I am not the only one"; the parentheses in the last sentence feel awkward; one of the instances of "don't" is missing an apostrophe and finally "to" is a pronoun and if I recall correctly, pronouns are bad form to end a sentence with.

The only part of that I agree with is that the last "don't" is indeed missing its apostrophe (presumably as a result of a typo rather than ignorance due to the other instances having theirs; though I agree that it is a little ironic for that to happen in a post complaining about incorrect punctuation).

"To" is most definitely not a pronoun. I don't know off hand what part of speech it is (particle?), but I do know that it isn't a pronoun. Also, if anybody had ever considered that it was bad to end a sentence with a pronoun that would have ruled out sentences like "I like him", "She ate it", or "Please tell me". Many people did use to consider it was bad to end a sentence with a preposition (which "to" is when used in other senses, although not here, where it is part of the infinitive). Perhaps that's what you're thinking of*? But nowadays the consensus is that ending sentences with prepositions is fine, and often more natural and easier to understand than the kinds of rearrangements that are necessary in order not to do this**.

Your other points about changing the full stop to a semicolon, inserting a "that", and removing the parentheses are subjective; I think they look fine as they are but you could probably make a case for what you suggest, and find a stylistic manual to support you - and also make a case and find a supporting manual for the way they are.

*Incidentally, this is an example of a sentence that would not have been allowed under that rule; I suppose one would have to say "Perhaps it is that of which you are thinking?"
**Edit: I also note, in another nice example of irony, if the rule about not ending sentences with prepositions was indeed what you were thinking of, that your statement of that fact itself ends with one. ;)

Patrik3
Posts: 112
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 1:45 pm UTC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby Patrik3 » Wed Jul 17, 2013 8:14 pm UTC

neremanth wrote: Many people did use to consider it was bad to end a sentence with a preposition (which "to" is when used in other senses, although not here, where it is part of the infinitive).

Oh, nuts. Yes, that was the word of which I was thinking! I didn't know the bit about the infinitive, either.

often more natural and easier to understand than the kinds of rearrangements that are necessary in order not to do this**.


Yeah - as Winston Churchill once said: "These are the kinds of apocryphal quotes up with which I will not put."

Your other points about changing the full stop to a semicolon, inserting a "that", and removing the parentheses are subjective; I think they look fine as they are but you could probably make a case for what you suggest, and find a stylistic manual to support you - and also make a case and find a supporting manual for the way they are.


As I said, gone are the days when I was a self-righteous, pedantic arsehole. Nowadays I try to restrain myself from correcting other people's errors at all - but when I do it for the irony, I try to be as pretentious and picky as possible, for humour.

**Edit: I also note, in another nice example of irony, if the rule about not ending sentences with prepositions was indeed what you were thinking of, that your statement of that fact itself ends with one. ;)


I'm glad you noted that; it was completely intentional..!

rmsgrey
Posts: 3355
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby rmsgrey » Wed Jul 17, 2013 8:16 pm UTC

Patrik3 wrote:
Ilze123 wrote:I don't mind small spelling errors. Everyone makes them and we should be a little lenient. Punctuation on the other hand is a different matter.

I get the twitch when "!"and "?" are overused and I think I am not the only one. Still, it feels like I am fighting windmills when I point this out to other people. They just don't understand (or dont want to).


SERIOUSLY???? You too??? So do I!!!!!1

Also... in a post complaining about punctuation errors, I'm none too certain myself but I believe there should be: a semicolon between "spelling errors" and "Everyone"; "I think I am not the only one" should be "I think that I am not the only one"; the parentheses in the last sentence feel awkward; one of the instances of "don't" is missing an apostrophe and finally "to" is a pronoun and if I recall correctly, pronouns are bad form to end a sentence with.

Mostly I have given up the bad habit of correcting the grammar of others - except where it could benefit the person: if it's a bad mistake, then I'll genuinely want to educate them, and also save them from possible future embarrassment... or if I'm feeling particularly grumpy/troll-ish on that day. I only did it here because I thought it ironic that you made punctuation and grammatical errors in a post complaining about those very things.

Also, I'm really self-conscious of my own grammar, now.

There's one clear grammatical error in the post you're analysing and it's not one you pointed out - "Punctuation, on the other hand, is a different matter." should have commas to set off the interjected phrase "on the other hand"

goofy
Posts: 911
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 3:32 pm UTC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby goofy » Wed Jul 17, 2013 8:47 pm UTC

neremanth wrote:"To" is most definitely not a pronoun. I don't know off hand what part of speech it is (particle?), but I do know that it isn't a pronoun. Also, if anybody had ever considered that it was bad to end a sentence with a pronoun that would have ruled out sentences like "I like him", "She ate it", or "Please tell me". Many people did use to consider it was bad to end a sentence with a preposition (which "to" is when used in other senses, although not here, where it is part of the infinitive). Perhaps that's what you're thinking of*? But nowadays the consensus is that ending sentences with prepositions is fine, and often more natural and easier to understand than the kinds of rearrangements that are necessary in order not to do this**.


We can blame "don't end a clause with a preposition" prescription on Dryden.

rmsgrey
Posts: 3355
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby rmsgrey » Wed Jul 17, 2013 9:42 pm UTC

goofy wrote:
neremanth wrote:"To" is most definitely not a pronoun. I don't know off hand what part of speech it is (particle?), but I do know that it isn't a pronoun. Also, if anybody had ever considered that it was bad to end a sentence with a pronoun that would have ruled out sentences like "I like him", "She ate it", or "Please tell me". Many people did use to consider it was bad to end a sentence with a preposition (which "to" is when used in other senses, although not here, where it is part of the infinitive). Perhaps that's what you're thinking of*? But nowadays the consensus is that ending sentences with prepositions is fine, and often more natural and easier to understand than the kinds of rearrangements that are necessary in order not to do this**.


We can blame "don't end a clause with a preposition" prescription on Dryden.


As the line often attributed to Churchill goes: "This is the sort of nonsense up with which I will not put."

Kit.
Posts: 1042
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 5:14 pm UTC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby Kit. » Wed Jul 17, 2013 10:02 pm UTC

chridd wrote:I haven't actually heard the word "inflame" used (in that meaning) that much, maybe not at all. I'd probably use "set on fire" or "burn" to mean that. So perhaps part of the confusion is that "inflame" isn't all that common (or at least not all that common in certain dialects); if you want a verb before "able", perhaps it would make more sense to use "burnable" instead.

Well, "set on fire" and "burn" is not exactly the same. And there is a formal difference between "[in]flammable" and "combustible", at least for liquids.

mathmannix wrote:As for #1, I had the handy dandy chart in front of me to refresh my memory:

Image

Synonyms don't necessarily have the same meaning. And polysemy is missing.

Patrik3
Posts: 112
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 1:45 pm UTC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby Patrik3 » Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:10 am UTC

rmsgrey wrote:As the line often attributed to Churchill goes: "This is the sort of nonsense up with which I will not put."


Patrik3 wrote:Yeah - as Winston Churchill once said: "These are the kinds of apocryphal quotes up with which I will not put."


Sorry, I got there first! :lol:

Ilze123
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 6:15 am UTC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby Ilze123 » Thu Jul 18, 2013 6:25 am UTC

neremanth wrote:
Patrik3 wrote:Also... in a post complaining about punctuation errors, I'm none too certain myself but I believe there should be: a semicolon between "spelling errors" and "Everyone"; "I think I am not the only one" should be "I think that I am not the only one"; the parentheses in the last sentence feel awkward; one of the instances of "don't" is missing an apostrophe and finally "to" is a pronoun and if I recall correctly, pronouns are bad form to end a sentence with.

The only part of that I agree with is that the last "don't" is indeed missing its apostrophe (presumably as a result of a typo rather than ignorance due to the other instances having theirs; though I agree that it is a little ironic for that to happen in a post complaining about incorrect punctuation).


Yes it was a typo and irony was not intended. I tried my best to eliminate all the mistakes in the post before I posted. It looks like I still missed a few.

I find that when you reread a certain text too many times you just don't see the errors anymore. Luckily other people will happily point out where you failed.

With English only as my second language I need other people to correct me where I went wrong (my first language is Dutch). English friends pointed out that I sometimes make odd sentence structures. Not that these sentences were wrong but it was almost Yoda-speak. I put the blame on the Dutch grammar rules which I sometimes inadvertently use on English.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2876
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby orthogon » Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:02 am UTC

Kit. wrote: ... And polysemy is missing.

That's because it's illegal in 42 states.

Would polysemy differ from homonymy in a way that could be represented on the Euler/Venn diagram? From two minutes of Google research it seems to come down either to etymology or something to do with the speaker/listener's perception, which surely inevitably has a fuzzy boundary. If it's etymology, I suppose you could add a "same etymological root" set; but even then, what would that mean? How far back do you go to find the common ancestor? What if saw (pt of see) and saw (the tool) come from the same root in Proto-World?
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby Klear » Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:04 am UTC

Ilze123 wrote:I find that when you reread a certain text too many times you just don't see the errors anymore. Luckily other people will happily point out where you failed.


What's worse (at least for me), you can see errors in other people's writing, but much less in your own.

User avatar
PM 2Ring
Posts: 3635
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 3:19 pm UTC
Location: Mid north coast, NSW, Australia

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby PM 2Ring » Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:49 am UTC

When attempting to correct other people's grammar, never underestimate the power of the Law of Recursive Pedantry, aka Muphry's Law.

User avatar
Znirk
Posts: 174
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 9:47 am UTC
Location: ZZ9 plural Z α

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby Znirk » Thu Jul 18, 2013 12:38 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:Would polysemy differ from homonymy in a way that could be represented on the Euler/Venn diagram? From two minutes of Google research it seems to come down either to etymology or something to do with the speaker/listener's perception, which surely inevitably has a fuzzy boundary. If it's etymology, I suppose you could add a "same etymological root" set; but even then, what would that mean? How far back do you go to find the common ancestor? What if saw (pt of see) and saw (the tool) come from the same root in Proto-World?

Not really. Your googlage pretty much got it: calling a pair polysemous or homonymic comes down to speaker judgement on whether the two are "related". Words can shift between the two categories (although more easily form polysemy to homonymy than the other way round).

The etymological root itself isn't that critical though. In your example, the proto-world for both versions of saw is irrelevant because the two words are well documented to have been different in between then and now. The etymology question boils down to "does the person doing the categorising recognise the two meanings as belonging to the same word?"

(Just don't ask a linguist what a "word" is ...)

User avatar
PinkShinyRose
Posts: 832
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:54 pm UTC
Location: the Netherlands

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby PinkShinyRose » Thu Jul 18, 2013 5:16 pm UTC

Znirk wrote:(Just don't ask a linguist what a "word" is ...)

This makes me very curious... Although it's a bit off-topic.

goofy
Posts: 911
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 3:32 pm UTC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby goofy » Thu Jul 18, 2013 6:12 pm UTC

PinkShinyRose wrote:
Znirk wrote:(Just don't ask a linguist what a "word" is ...)

This makes me very curious... Although it's a bit off-topic.


Some linguists answer the question "what is a word?"

Kit.
Posts: 1042
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 5:14 pm UTC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby Kit. » Thu Jul 18, 2013 7:02 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:Would polysemy differ from homonymy in a way that could be represented on the Euler/Venn diagram?

To about the same degree as the difference between synonyms and just "related words".

orthogon wrote:From two minutes of Google research it seems to come down either to etymology or something to do with the speaker/listener's perception, which surely inevitably has a fuzzy boundary.

It's a mix of both. It's like when an "extended sense" of a word gets its own stable and well-defined independent use. Of course, there are confusing cases where the "original sense" for some distantly related meanings obsoleted and got lost.

orthogon wrote:If it's etymology, I suppose you could add a "same etymological root" set; but even then, what would that mean? How far back do you go to find the common ancestor? What if saw (pt of see) and saw (the tool) come from the same root in Proto-World?

You might be thinking about saw ("saying", saga in Old High German vs sega in Old High German for the tool).

At lest in the linguistic schools of my native language, once the word changes its lexical category, it's no longer a polysemy.

User avatar
PinkShinyRose
Posts: 832
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:54 pm UTC
Location: the Netherlands

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby PinkShinyRose » Thu Jul 18, 2013 7:27 pm UTC

goofy wrote:
PinkShinyRose wrote:
Znirk wrote:(Just don't ask a linguist what a "word" is ...)

This makes me very curious... Although it's a bit off-topic.


Some linguists answer the question "what is a word?"


Wow, I didn't expect such a short answer. Thank you for the link

Kit. wrote:
orthogon wrote:Would polysemy differ from homonymy in a way that could be represented on the Euler/Venn diagram?

To about the same degree as the difference between synonyms and just "related words".

orthogon wrote:From two minutes of Google research it seems to come down either to etymology or something to do with the speaker/listener's perception, which surely inevitably has a fuzzy boundary.

It's a mix of both. It's like when an "extended sense" of a word gets its own stable and well-defined independent use. Of course, there are confusing cases where the "original sense" for some distantly related meanings obsoleted and got lost.

orthogon wrote:If it's etymology, I suppose you could add a "same etymological root" set; but even then, what would that mean? How far back do you go to find the common ancestor? What if saw (pt of see) and saw (the tool) come from the same root in Proto-World?

You might be thinking about saw ("saying", saga in Old High German vs sega in Old High German for the tool).

At lest in the linguistic schools of my native language, once the word changes its lexical category, it's no longer a polysemy.


However, are we sure that the words really changed lexical category. If the words split before or while the lexical categories split would that be considered a change in category? Do we really know whether saga/sega split after verbs split from nouns in the ancestor of proto-indo-germanic?

goofy
Posts: 911
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 3:32 pm UTC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby goofy » Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:47 pm UTC

PinkShinyRose wrote:
goofy wrote:
PinkShinyRose wrote:
Znirk wrote:(Just don't ask a linguist what a "word" is ...)

This makes me very curious... Although it's a bit off-topic.


Some linguists answer the question "what is a word?"


Wow, I didn't expect such a short answer. Thank you for the link


That page has 4 different replies. Look at the bottom, there are links to the other linguists' replies.

Kit.
Posts: 1042
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 5:14 pm UTC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby Kit. » Fri Jul 19, 2013 1:40 pm UTC

PinkShinyRose wrote:
Kit. wrote:
orthogon wrote:From two minutes of Google research it seems to come down either to etymology or something to do with the speaker/listener's perception, which surely inevitably has a fuzzy boundary.

It's a mix of both. It's like when an "extended sense" of a word gets its own stable and well-defined independent use. Of course, there are confusing cases where the "original sense" for some distantly related meanings obsoleted and got lost.

orthogon wrote:If it's etymology, I suppose you could add a "same etymological root" set; but even then, what would that mean? How far back do you go to find the common ancestor? What if saw (pt of see) and saw (the tool) come from the same root in Proto-World?

You might be thinking about saw ("saying", saga in Old High German vs sega in Old High German for the tool).

At lest in the linguistic schools of my native language, once the word changes its lexical category, it's no longer a polysemy.

However, are we sure that the words really changed lexical category. If the words split before or while the lexical categories split would that be considered a change in category? Do we really know whether saga/sega split after verbs split from nouns in the ancestor of proto-indo-germanic?

Who cares? saga/sega aren't even homonyms.

While there might be different linguistic schools with different ideas about what polysemy means exactly, a separate category for "homonyms whose roots once had a common ancestor in some other language" seems to be lacking any practical utility.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9843
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby addams » Sat Jul 20, 2013 12:01 am UTC

Klear wrote:
Ilze123 wrote:I find that when you reread a certain text too many times you just don't see the errors anymore. Luckily other people will happily point out where you failed.


What's worse (at least for me), you can see errors in other people's writing, but much less in your own.

This is true.
So, very true.
Jeeze.

The personalities that type into this forum write well.
Should that be a question?

Do you, the xkcd posters, write in English better than the average adult citizen of the US?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby Klear » Sat Jul 20, 2013 8:09 am UTC

addams wrote:Do you, the xkcd posters, write in English better than the average adult citizen of the US?


If I do, it's kinda sad, since English is not my first language.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2876
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby orthogon » Sat Jul 20, 2013 9:27 am UTC

Klear wrote:
addams wrote:Do you, the xkcd posters, write in English better than the average adult citizen of the US?


If I do, it's kinda sad, since English is not my first language.

The average adult citizen of the US probably doesn't speak English as a first language either.

(I'm not sure what that means. Maybe that the mean ordinality of English as a language is closer to 2 than 1. Citation needed.)

Klear, your written English is way better than the average for the UK. I thought for a long time that you must be an ex-pat.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

Patrik3
Posts: 112
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 1:45 pm UTC

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby Patrik3 » Sat Jul 20, 2013 11:03 am UTC

I feel ashamed to have posted already in this topic and as yet have forgotten to mention about how I have the one true way of seeking enlightenment. I learned it whilst taking a dump.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2876
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby orthogon » Sun Jul 21, 2013 7:16 pm UTC

Patrik3 wrote:I feel ashamed to have posted already in this topic and as yet have forgotten to mention about how I have the one true way of seeking enlightenment. I learned it whilst taking a dump.

I think that's what has upset my karmic balance. I used to seek enlightenment whilst taking a dump, but now I browse (and occasionally post in) xkcd fora on my smartphone instead.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9843
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: 1238: "Enlightenment"

Postby addams » Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:45 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:
Klear wrote:
addams wrote:Do you, the xkcd posters, write in English better than the average adult citizen of the US?


If I do, it's kinda sad, since English is not my first language.

The average adult citizen of the US probably doesn't speak English as a first language either.

(I'm not sure what that means. Maybe that the mean ordinality of English as a language is closer to 2 than 1. Citation needed.)

Klear, your written English is way better than the average for the UK. I thought for a long time that you must be an ex-pat.

Yes. I do think the posters that write into xkcd write better than most adults in the US.
No. I do not believe most Americans speak English as a second language.

It is a bit of a 'pet peve' of mine.
My people do not speak English.
They don't Speak Any Other Language, Either!

The gutteral Filth we speak is English, at its roots;
The way English is German at its roots.

See? Pet peve.

oh. And; For the posters and their potty talk.
eewww. Too Much Information.
Did you wash your hands?
Did you wash your phone?

eewww. Note to self:
Carry those little electronice wipes.
Every male phone may have his poop on it. eeewww.

Is it a Man Thing? It IS a developmental stage.
4th grade. 10 year old people do potty humor.

It is a normal stage in human development.
Not everyone gets it.

There are some people that will stop at every developmental stage.
Some get potty mouth and never grow out of it.

The US elevated Arrested Development and used it on TV for yucks and giggles.
Is it funny to you? I don't like poop on phones. yuck.

That pooping type is all type.
All Talk and no action; I hope.

Yes. That last sentence leave a door wide open for Potty Mouth to explain the Action and All the gorry details.

What did the Wise Men say?
Teach them to read. That is where your responsiblity ends.
Teach them to write. That is where your responsiblity ends.
If they read and write well; Quiet Pride is ok.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests