posted
During computer class we were checking out the foreign book covers, and then we came across enders game i think, in islam, and there was the star trek ship, what is up with that!
Posts: 262 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
I believe the cover you are referring to is the cover of the edition printed in Israel and translated into Hebrew.
Every publisher gets to put whatever cover they feel will attract the audience they are hoping for. I think in this case it says "Here is some American Sci-Fi."
Posts: 780 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Can't believe you are fighting over the language of his post - and not even mentioning the grammar of his thread title that is making me cringe... *grin*
posted
I have confirmed, from a Muslim, that "Islamic Language" is appropriate to use. And as long as we are nitpicking...
Observe the first reply in which Mrs. Card says, "I believe the cover you're referring to.."
Did the cover actually tell her something that she's supposed to believe? I'd like to know what the cover (a non-living organism) told her, because the last time I checked, inanimate objects cannot speak. If they can, well, that's remarkable.
Posts: 39 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can't tell if you think the quoted portion made you think Mrs. Card was stating that the cover told her something or if it's an attempt to be clever about 'I think in this case it says "Here is some American Sci-Fi."'
If the former, then I have no idea what you're talking about.
quote: 6. a. To indicate; show: The clock says half past two. b. To give nonverbal expression to; signify or embody: It was an act that said “devotion.”
And Islamic can be used to indicate the languages of various islamic cultures: Arabic, Persion, etc. can all be considered Islamic languages. But if you are referring to a specific language - say, the language on the cover of a particular book - then it's at best imprecise.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: I can't tell if you think the quoted portion made you think Mrs. Card was stating that the cover told her something or if it's an attempt to be clever about 'I think in this case it says "Here is some American Sci-Fi."'
I was nitpicking on the portion in which Mrs. Card writes:
posted
I thought nitpicks pointed out insignificant errors. There would have to be an error for there to be nitpicking. Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The error is that she should have included the word "THAT" after "believe" and before "the". That is an insignificant error. So insignificant, that it is qualified for extreme nitpickery.
Posts: 39 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
These two terms are used, along with others, to describe the common and perfectly acceptable practice of omitting the relative pronoun from a restrictive clause or restrictive modifier: Here’s the dress Mother brought me. There is the woman I’m going to marry. Two centuries ago people argued that all relatives ought to be stated, as in the dress that Mother brought, or the woman whom [that] I’m going to marry, and a few people still insist that omitting relatives be limited to Informal or Semiformal writing and the Conversational levels, while others consider the omission suitable only to conversation. It is a matter of tone or style, not of correctness: sometimes omitted relatives can sound a bit more relaxed than the situation may require, and on other occasions including the relative pronoun may seem a bit ponderous or stiff. Standard English accepts either.
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: And Islamic can be used to indicate the languages of various islamic cultures: Arabic, Persion, etc. can all be considered Islamic languages. [/QB]
Ridiculous; you might as well refer to English as a Christian language.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Back when virtually all English-speakers were Christians, that may well have been as appropriate as calling England a "Christian Nation" during the same period. English in particular has become a much broader, more widespread language than it once was, so the particular counterexample you've picked is misleadingly appropriate to the point your'e trying to make. Ie, most languages in the world ARE directly associated with a particular culture, and most of those cultures are associated with a particular religion.
That said, I do think it's silly to call a language by the name of a religion that is loosely associated with it ... but if there is an established convention for doing so in the particular case that Dagonee is citing, then why quibble about it?
Posts: 1539 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Arabic Language and Literature area requires thorough familiarity with standard literary Arabic as both written and spoken medium of communication, besides a second-year competence in a second Islamic language. In addition the student will be expected to demonstrate familiarity with the major periods and genres of Arabic literature. Possible major fields of study are: Arabic Language and Dialects, Classical Arabic Literature, Modern Arabic Literature, Literary Criticism, and Andalusi Literature.
quote:In addition, two or more years of work in a second Islamic language and a minimum of five further courses in Islamic religion, history, literature, culture, art history, etc. is normally expected.
quote:The Islamic studies program allows students to combine relevant courses from a number of fields—history; history of art; philosophy; Near Eastern Languages and Literatures; international studies; and others—with work in Islamic languages and literatures.
quote:No later than the end of the second year, each student must have passed an examination in advanced literary Arabic and must show the equivalent of two years of course work in Persian (Farsi). Under certain circumstances, a third Islamic language, such as Turkish or Urdu, may be extremely useful for research in the field as well.
posted
Certainly. A mere four universities, American, and their language and religious faculties at that? Hardly a match for the intuition of someone with a Cand. Mag. in physics from a real university. A European one, that is. Who do these dashed colonials think they are, anyway?
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Indeed, the ulema adapted Urdu not only for teaching but for writing their sermons and tracts to the extent that Urdu became associated with Islam in South Asia.9 Even the Burmese Muslims claimed it as an Islamic language and argued that their religious books were in it.
I have been known to make a successful quibble or two.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why are you arguing over that, im sorry that i made that mistake, i didn't want my teacher to yell at me for being on hatrack when i was supposed to be doing a project. The main point is just it confused us how they put stark trek on the cover.
Posts: 262 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh well, Oxford. *Sniffs* Bunch of rowdies who can't even keep their own faculty under control; honestly, riots to the point that people find it necessary to set up a rival university? And my point about language and religious faculties stands whatever university you drag in. After all, I studied a real subject.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey Postman -- don't worry. Everybody loves a good nitpick every now and then. We just gave them a chance to vent Posts: 780 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Speeking of Languages, and christianity; for the book, America was christian when it started. So were schools, hospitals, and many important inventions you take for granted. ~unbiased~
Posts: 46 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Careful talking about "Christian inventions" in front of King of Men. The opportunities for mockery are so thick in that phrase ...
By the way, what does "Cand. Mag." stand for? All I can think of are "Candy Magnums" or "Candid Magazines" ...
Posts: 1539 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Um, does it seem to anyone else that eyetell is dragging in Christianity, and the faith of the founding fathers (who weren't all Christian by any means) to an otherwise lighthearted thread in a way that would do credit to, say, me?
*Grins scary troll grin, showing big troll teeth* Get lost, noobie-troll. Dere only room fer one of us around here. Not enuff noobies to eat.
On the subject of degrees, I seem to have gotten mine mixed up; I actually meant to brag about my Cand Scient, the approximate equivalent of a Master's. Slip of the keyboard, or something. Also, while Dag's link (which appears to be down now?) is to the university I studied at, the degree program for physics is slightly different.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: Speeking of Languages, and christianity; for the book, America was christian when it started. So were schools, hospitals, and many important inventions you take for granted.
I'm baffled. Are you saying that schools, hospitals, and the like were "invented" by Christians? I think there may be a language barrier issue here, because that can't be what you mean.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Perhaps he's saying that modern universities started as places to study theology? I believe law has a prior claim, actually; I'd look it up, but I'm off to bed. Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are languages spoken in Islamic countries - that would include Persian (Farsi), Urdu, Turkish, and many other languages and dialects - including Bahasa Indonesia and others that have no linguistic relation to the others. In fact, Farsi and Urdu are Indo-european, Arabic is a Semitic language, and Turkish is from yet another group.
LINGUISTICALLY, there is no "Islamic language."
But since this thread has become a place for nitpickers to come out of the closet, let me be on record as saying: Lighten up. This is not a place where formal essays are published; nor is it a scholarly site subject to peer review.
Remember, though, that I was a copy editor and a very good one: I know all the rules, and those of you who start invoking them against others, I will punish by judging YOUR grammar <grin>. Especially when the "rule" you invoke is bogus, one of those latinate pseudorules from the 18th and 19th centuries that never described English as she is spoken or written.
As for "Me and my friend are a little confused," I'd rather see THAT, which was a natural movement of the language and would have become the rule a century ago if not artificially prevented from it, than the hideous hyper-correction that led to "between you and I" and other atrocities which were NOT natural movements, but the products of incompetent pedagogy.
If you object to "Me and Jack were talking the other day," then why do you have no objection to using "you" as the subject of a sentence? The subject form of the verb is "Ye." "You" is the object form.
Ah, but you would reply, "Not anymore! We now use 'you' for BOTH positions in a sentence." To which I reply: That is my point. Sometimes words change in their grammatic usage. Sometimes rules shift. Sometimes new usages take over. But the shift of "you" to be subject as well as object (not to mention being singular as well as plural, replacing and driving out "thou" and "thee") took place BEFORE the bogus grammarians started trying to dictate to people how to use a language that they did not invent, did not own, and had no right to attempt to control.
Just for that, I'm going to insist that in all my books from now on, "through" will be spelled "thru" and "though" will be spelled "tho." I like it better, and I'm sick of having these simple little words take up so much stupid space when we're NEVER going to pronounce the "gh" again.
But I have no intention of being consistent and removing the "gh" from "thought" or "weigh." Why should I be the lone consistent person? Let the simplification of tho and thru be my little contribution (well, mine and a lot of gas stations and storefront signs and road signs) to helping foreigners figure out what we're talking about in our written language (and yes, it IS correct to call it "saying" or "talking" even if it's in writing).
Ha ha ha! I can out-diatribe anybody on grammar and usage issues!
Posts: 2005 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you for agreeing with me in some way or another (it was another). I was actually suprised to see that you too weren't nitpicking on me not saying Israel because i was rushed out of class and i wanted to say it but said islam. Next book you write, and i do see the newly written thru and tho im going to know that it was my topic that did it . O and the actual question, why is the Enterprise on the cover of the Israel copy of Enders Game?
Posts: 262 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by eyetell: Speeking of Languages, and christianity; for the book, America was christian when it started. So were schools, hospitals, and many important inventions you take for granted. ~unbiased~
quote:I blame the Dallas Independent School District.
*curious* My husband attended Richardson schools, and so did his brothers and sister-- and they all learned times tables to 10! Did you only learn times tables to 10? I was required to learn multiplication through 12 times 12 in third grade, and through 20 times 20 in 8th!
And for the record, I had an English teacher who instructed me that my writing would be much less awkward if I omitted most uses of "that". It's true, too; my writing got much more streamlined after I started taking out expendible "that"s.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, 1. For America, just look at any of head founding fathers. Every read Washington's goodbye address? Surely you can see the obvius. 2. Schools were started to educate people in the bible. Kind of Men said it himself, Universities were invented to educate preachers, and teachings of the bible. 3. Hospitals have been in flow allmost everywere in history at different unkown times. But, it was christian/catholic nuns who started the modern version of a public building that helps the sick.
Honestly, I present facts as I know them, I invite you to correct me with appropriate facts.
And if you want to know anything, ask me as well.
Posts: 46 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
eyetell welcome to the forum! 1) is debatable 2)Originally, you didn't say "bible", you said "Christianity" You didn't say "universities" you said "schools" Anyway, the pre-Christian Greek academies were certainly schools and were the inspiration for modern universities. 3)I did correct you, most historians would say hospitals are an Islamic invention.
BTW, I'm only picking on you because you jumped into this nitpicking thread. Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
1. The only reason its debatable is cause you think so, 2. When i say bible, i mean the chrisian bible and all other "christian-like" religeons, (some people would shoot me for that) 3. I mean both schools and universities, but mostly universities, 4. I appreciate that piece info as I heard that too, but i also heard of the "Public" "Modern Version", type of hospital.
Posts: 7 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Sleep]](graemlins/sleep.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
. O and the actual question, why is the Enterprise on the cover of the Israel copy of Enders Game?
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
