🙅 THE BAD IDEAS THREAD
-
We don't exactly have a "quixotic idea with implementation but that doesn't matter because it will never have mass adoption anyway" thread.
Easily fixed.
Yes, I could Jeff them away but I'm not figuring out which of these posts of largely gibberish belong here and which don't.
-
Yes, I could Jeff them away but I'm not figuring out which of these posts of largely gibberish belong here and which don't.
Anything mentioning Go or Lojban would be a good starting point.
-
All I can find is "allegedly Mark Twain".
@Pablo Picasso said:
Good artists copy, great artists steal.
-
The one thing I love about this stupid language of mine is that it's actually phonetic. There are some cases in which different phonemes are being produced when using the same graphemes, but it's mostly the case of you doing it naturally when pronouncing it (just more natural of a transition between what your mouth and tongue are doing), but those are really minor.
Of course, then you get to grammar and sweet Chomsky make it stop!
-
Of course, then you get to grammar and sweet Chomsky make it stop!
English is pretty simple in the grammar department compared to a lot of other languages. But we make up for it with the spelling.
-
English is pretty simple in the grammar department compared to a lot of other languages
Massively helped by English being a genderless language
-
I'll take the spelling over this shit. At least we have spellcheckers to help. I direct you toward my hideous one-liner in the Status thread that pluralizes a message in Croatian and works for that specific case and not many more.
The Polish one looked @Maciejasjmj wrote looked a bit more sensible. But not by much, so I guess it's just that all of us Slavs are just masochists.
-
Of course, then you get to grammar and sweet Chomsky make it stop!
We have the phonetics problem the other way - using different graphemes, same phoneme is produced, and lots of kids (hell, adults even...) have problems with rz/ż, ó/u, h/ch, and so on. You thought your/you're was bad? Think again.
Grammar, on the other hand, well... three tenses, which is nice, but there's also declension, and pretty much everything is realized by suffixes. And those rival Discourse with their level of consistency - there are technically some rules for that, but they're complex as fuck and half the time you have an exception anyway.
-
Massively helped by English being a genderless language
Genderless. In what way is a table female?
Adjectives don't have to agree. How, how is anyone's understanding helped by an adjective or adverb being plural or female if the noun is?
Verbs are much simpler: present tense has only two forms, for plural and singular subjects, and other tenses just one, as opposed to the six (unless I've forgotten any) for each tense that Romance languages tend to have, half of which all sound the same anyway.
And we lost the singular second person pronoun in favour of just being polite to everyone.
-
Jás aplái anoder lánguaig'es otográfic rúls.
-
We have the phonetics problem the other way - using different graphemes, same phoneme is produced, and lots of kids (hell, adults even...) have problems with rz/ż, ó/u, h/ch, and so on. You thought your/you're was bad? Think again.
That is crap. We only have č/ć to contend with, which are similar enough to get confusing when talking, and we do have pretty strict rules for those, but people still keep doing it wrong. Can't imagine what kind of awful I'd see if we had that many.
In general
e / je /ije
sequences are the worst though. Especially since they keep changing this shit to the point where it changes the word completely (Germans used to be Njemci (yes, that's a digraph there, which has it's phoneme) to Nijemci, which is pronounced completely differently).three tenses, which is nice
5? Hold on, let me count... No, 7.
but there's also declension
7. In 3 genders with separate ones for singular and plural.
and pretty much everything is realized by suffixes
Declensions or in general? Adjective degrees combine prefixes and suffixes here.
And those rival Discourse with their level of consistency - there are technically some rules for that, but they're complex as fuck and half the time you have an exception anyway.
QFT
-
ás aplái anoder lánguaig'es otográfic rúls.
Dh problem wiv dhat iz dhat difurent langwajes hav difurent foneemz. Awlsoe f*k daiakritikz wiv a rustee broom handul, dh beisik Latin alfabet shud bee plentee.
-
I thought you were returning to normal English?
-
Eh, I don't know about that; besides, it's hard enough reading some of the posts here already, without having to learn a whole new spelling system. That, and my typing's starting to get as bad as a certain someone's…
If you had only been taught to write with a pencil glued to the tip of your nose, a keyboard would seem pretty uncomfortable at first. But it would be stupid not to switch. Especially if your reason is "it's hard enough reading some of the messages already", because that's exactly why you'd want to use a better system.
-
Awlsoe f*k daiakritikz wiv a rustee broom
Bah! Diacritics. I got digraphs as well, yo!
dh beisik Latin alfabet shud bee plentee
You have a problem with the letters
U
andV
being separate?
-
Especially if your reason is "it's hard enough reading some of the messages already", because that's exactly why you'd want to use a better system.
I'm sure @Accalia would still hit the wrong keys in the wrong order in fonetikz.
-
@CarrieVS said:
dh modern beisik Latin alfabet shud bee plentee
FTFM
I thought you were returning to normal English?
I am, mostly.
-
'm sure @Accalia would still hit the wrong keys in the wrong order in fonetikz.
I have no doubt of that. my brain moves faster than my fingers.
-
-
In what way is a table female?
He's male in Polish.
And we lost the singular second person pronoun in favour of just being polite to everyone.
Heh, that always throws me off in English - we pretty much title everyone we don't know well "Sir". Except for my workplace, and even after almost a year here it's still a bit awkward.
5? Hold on, let me count... No, 7.
Technically 4 (we have an equivalent of past perfect, but it hasn't been used since like 1800s).
7. In 3 genders with separate ones for singular and plural.
Yeah, that too. Except 2 genders in plural (masculine-ish and non-masculine-ish - yeah, that makes no sense to me either).
Declensions or in general? Adjective degrees combine prefixes and suffixes here.
"Pretty much". Adjective degrees go
???y
-???szy
-naj???szy
, withy
differing depending on gender, and hundreds of changes in the stem. Oh, and the usual x - more x - the most x variant, with no clear rules as to which to use other than "if it's long, it likely uses the long rule".
-
-
He's male in Polish.
I just have to respond to this to throw the wrench into the works and say it's female in Croatian. I don't mind that it's whatever-the-hell it is in German, that's a different family of languages. But we can't even have this shit consistent within the family?
Yeah, that too. Except 2 genders in plural (masculine-ish and non-masculine-ish - yeah, that makes no sense to me either).
o.O Well.. At least I have it symetrical... I guess?
Adjective degrees
That matches. Finally, commonality!
Awesome job, Discourse.
Yeah, I had to escape the period, quoting ate my backslash.
-
o.O Well.. At least I have it symetrical... I guess?
Actually that's a clusterfuck of epic proportions, because in school you get taught there are 3 singular (masculine/feminine/neutral) and 2 plural (roughly masculine and non-masculine). But then the actual rules don't make much sense in other declensions, and that masculine actually subdivides into three in plural (in addition to the two other) - masculine-personal (technically for people), masculine-vital (technically for animate objects) and masculine-articular (technically for inanimate objects). And those definitions are obviously totally wrong (a word for "dead body" is masculine-vital).
Oh, and we also used to have dual in addition to singular and plural. Because reasons.
I just have to respond to this to throw the wrench into the works and say it's female in Croatian. I don't mind that it's whatever-the-hell it is in German, that's a different family of languages. But we can't even have this shit consistent within the family?
Well it's not like it has any rhyme or reason in the first place.
-
clusterfuck
This... just... My condolences.
Well it's not like it has any rhyme or reason in the first place.
It would be nice if it were consistently stupid though.
-
This... just... My condolences.
Well, by third grade or so you're already like "fuck the rules, either you know the word and how to use it, or you check the dictionary". So it's not that big of a deal.
-
I'm sure @Accalia would still hit the wrong keys in the wrong order in fonetikz.
And they'd probably come out accidentally as proper English.
-
Massively helped by English being a genderless language
eeeeh... not entirely.....
see blond v. blonde
-
eeeeh... not entirely.....
see blond v. blonde
English: The Language Of Exceptions
I think that's also unique, and only applies to hair/fur colour.INB4 'what about actor and actress': gender-specific they may be, but the words themselves are genderless ;)
-
I think that's also unique, and only applies to hair/fur colour
not unique, but most other examples are rare and no longer in common usage.
try another one. third person singular pronouns. How would you use one to refer to a person without mentioning gender?
could you use:
- he/his?
- she/her?
- it/its?
there is no way without being insulting in the traditional triad there.
INB4 the correct answer is "their"
-
there is no way without being insulting in the traditional triad there.
There is a way not to be insulted though.
INB4 the correct answer is "their"
I use it as a courtesy, but it's kinda silly IMHO.
-
We also have different articles for different words
- a/an
- the(long e)/the(short e)
-
Yeah, I know, gender-specific pronouns…
But that's the thing with English: it's only gender-specific when the object/person/whatever being described actually has a gender. After all, gender isn't a property of furniture or cars, it's only a properly of multi-celled organisms that have two distinct genders ;)
-
But that's the thing with English: it's only gender-specific when the object/person/whatever being described actually has a gender.
Or boats and often other vehicles and machines. But that's just anthropomorphism, more or less.
-
anthropomorphism
Yeah, I was leaving that little technicality out of the discussion for a reason ;)
-
Lots of types of connector also have male and female versions
-
There is a way not to be insulted though.
well yes, "their" works for that, although as you note below the quoted part it is a bit of an odd construct.
it's only gender-specific when the object/person/whatever being described actually has a gender.
hmm.... i know there's an exception in there somewhere. it's english after all! the language is full of exceptions!
but smoke me a kipper but i can't think of an exception there.
anthropomorphism
ah. there's an exception to the rule! :-D
-
Lots of types of connector also have male and female versions
which, when you think of it does make the act of plugging something in rather graphic.....
-
Lots of types of connector also have male and female versions
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbB-mICjkQM
-
Especially when you get the wrong hole.
Now that we've thoroughly destroyed @RaceProUK's point can we get a shared pendantry badge between us do you think?
-
Especially when you get the wrong hole.
Are you trying to make me burst out laughing in front of my cow-orkers‽
-
I use [singular they] as a courtesy, but it's kinda silly IMHO.
It's exactly the same as using 'you' in the singular, really.
-
Are you trying to make me burst out laughing in front of my cow-orkers‽
always.
you've done it to me often enough.
-
you've done it to me often enough
Yeah, there was no way in all of Hades I was going to pass that joke opportunity up!
-
Yeah, there was no way in all of Hades I was going to pass that joke opportunity up!
<I see the typo. i'm not fixing it.>bit of a stretch though, isn't tit?
-
well yes, "their" works for that, although as you note below the quoted part it is a bit of an odd construct.
No, I mean if someone gets it wrong I'm a strong believer in taking it as such and correcting people, not thinking they are being offensive, be it accidental or not.
It's exactly the same as using 'you' in the singular, really.
Only because every damned language ever is broken!
I will admit my formal education in English is lacking, but I never heard that being taught anywhere (at least not to people whose mother tongue isn't English). They was always taught to me as a plural form only.
-
Trying to find information on VHDL's "std_match" function using Bing.
[spoiler] [/spoiler]
-
bit of a stretch though, isn't tit?
Maybe. But then I did think of it in under two seconds, so… that probably says a lot more about my dirty mind than anything else
-
No, I mean if someone gets it wrong I'm a strong believer in taking it as such and correcting people, not thinking they are being offensive, be it accidental or not.
and that's why you're cool. unfortunately i have to deal with the unwashed mobs and they are not, geneally speaking, cool about that.
-
using Bing
FTFY
I know someone will say it so I'm replying to myself before that happens.
-
I will admit my formal education in English is lacking
You still use the language a lot better than many of the natives, so you're doing fine ;)