Okay, you could have named it "Shadow of the Giant, a problem" or something like that. So that those of us that haven't read the Shadow of the Giant (LIKE ME) wouldn't know Bean.... you know! I mean, jeez, all your posts are stupid (from what I have witnessed anyways). So please, in the future, get a brain synapse before you mindless go around carrying out your destuctive brain farts.
Posts: 141 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
As much as I am not a big fan of KOM, you may be a little off base. Card has said many times, "How do you know when my stories are over? The main character is dead." It is well known the SOTG is the last Bean book, so his death should come as no surprise, just as most every one knows that Alvin will die in the last Alvin book, Alvin Master.
posted
This is more than just a little off base, it's down right rude. Alex, if you're going to want me to take you seriously from this point on, please be sure to make your apology public. This is a rather bad impression to be making.
Posts: 9754 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok, I just didn't read the topic, because I thought it might ruin the plot more, I made a mistake. I am sorry King Of Men, I just thought that you had totally ruined the book for me. I am sorry once again.
Posts: 141 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Alex, his thread title is only a spoiler if you think you know what he means. And while I understand the frustration you're probably going through based on your assumption of what that thread title means, your post in this thread is unacceptable. While I will not require an apology (a forced one isn't of much use anyway), I think it would be appropriate.
--PJ
[Edit -- I'm slow on the draw again. Thanks, Alex.]
Posts: 441 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Did you read any of the Shadow series? I thought it was pretty obvious Bean was going to die as soon as we found out the extent of his condition. Card isn't the kind of author to pull a cheap trick, making us think Bean will die, and then saving him just to make us happy.
"I mean, jeez, all your posts are stupid"
This comment makes me think Alex made this post after seeing other members criticize KoM in other threads, and Alex tried to jump on the bandwagon by insulting KoM so he would be applauded by other members.
*Closes big book of psychology* Posts: 2054 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm trying to think what word all those asterisks could possibly represent? Maybe something Welsh.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
All the German I know comes from "Sie Liebt Dich", "Komm Gieb me dine hand", and Asterix. Also various Yiddish phrases, but those may not be actual German.
Posts: 866 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wonder if the term "germ" will ever become a big derogitory(bad spelling?)term for germans -shrug-
Posts: 110 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Also various Yiddish phrases, but those may not be actual German.
If they are indeed Yiddish phrases, then no, they are not German. They're Yiddish. Yiddish is derived from German, but it is not, today, equivalent to "German". It's a different language.
Posts: 1814 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The English word "water" is indistinguishable, in writing, from the Dutch word for the same thing. There's a very good reason for that--English and Dutch are very closely related, and the words derived from the same root. But that doesn't mean that if you see a sign saying "WATER" in Amsterdam it's because they wrote it in English.
Posts: 1814 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tch. I had a nasty snark all ready, and then he went and apologised! Nooblets these days. (Shakes head sadly) Now, when I was a noob, I would certainly never have let a perfectly good opportunity for a flamewar, like this one, get away from me. Especially not on the boring grounds of being totally in the wrong! Why, if everyone thought like that, how would we have discussions? Everybody would be reasonable and agree with me!
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Verily the Younger: But that doesn't mean that if you see a sign saying "WATER" in Amsterdam it's because they wrote it in English.
How could you tell if they HAD?
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Context. If there are other signs around that, for example, have the Dutch words for "beer" and "milk" on them (or whatever), then we can assume the "water" sign is in Dutch. Similarly, if the rest of the conversation in which these Yiddish phrases appear is in Yiddish, then we can assume the phrases in question are, in fact, Yiddish, and not German.
Posts: 1814 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
I just want to say that as difficult as you seem at times, when you let your humor and "it's not that big a deal" attitude come through in your posts, I think that you are brilliant and insightful.
I see that side of you more and more often and because of that, I actually read your posts.
Thanks for the laughs and the insights.
Posts: 2425 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
She referred to them as Yiddish phrases and then added that they may not be "actual" German. She did not provide examples of said phrases, meaning we don't know if they are, in fact, phrases that are indistinguishable from German. If they are not such phrases, then the whole debate is irrelevant. If they are, then context could be provided if we knew how she learned them. If they were taught to her as German by a German who said, "I think they also say this in Yiddish," then they are German phrases. If they were taught to her by a Jew who said, "We say this in Yiddish," then they are Yiddish phrases. For example.
At any rate, her wording implies that she was considering Yiddish as a kind of German, and my argument is that it is not. Even if some words and phrases are indistinguishable, that doesn't mean they are the same language. They are closely related, but different, languages.
Posts: 1814 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
First of all, there are a number of Yiddish sentences/phrases that are said exactly as they would be in German. And let me be precise: I mean High German (Hoch Deutsch), not Swiss German (Switzerdeutsch). At least, so says my mother, who speaks (some of) both. (I know only a handful of phrases in either.)
Secondly, some linguists (admittedly the minority) consider Yiddish to be a dialect of German. It has almost as many words in common with Hoch Deutch and Switzerdeutsch as they do with each other, and they are both dialects of German.
Anyway, I think you were picking nits. And that's only polite behavior among primates who groom each other. Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
Pointing out that two different languages are different languages is not picking nits. Your stepping in and pointing out that some phrases are the same in both--as though that alone makes them the same language--was picking nits.
quote:Oh! And what if they were taught to her by a German Jew? What then, huh?
Irrelevant to the point at hand.
Posts: 1814 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lets face it. English is nothing but a Low German Dialect. So is Dutch and Yiddish. Since language tends to evolve from complicated to simple, give us a few hundred more years, and the whole world might be speaking Afrikaans.
Posts: 1167 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Lets face it. English is nothing but a Low German Dialect.
You know, linguists still debate about what exactly the difference is between a language and a dialect. It seems obvious enough at first glance, but the more one thinks about it, the more one realizes it's impossible to know exactly where to draw the line.
Nevertheless, I must argue that English is a language, and not a dialect of some form of German. In the early days, when the Angles and Saxons and Jutes were still settling the island, their languages were the same languages being spoken in their original homeland. In the sixteen centuries that have passed since then, however, the language that formed on the island has diverged far too much from anything spoken on the continent--not least because of the Norman conquest, but time has done plenty on its own as well--to make any argument that it is a dialect of some continental language convincing.
Even the closest relative of English, Frisian, does not look or sound much like English. Spanish and Portuguese are so similar that a person who speaks one can typically understand enough of what is said in the other to follow a conversation. But they are different languages. English is not even mutually intelligible with its closest relative, let alone with Low or High or any other kind of German.
Let's not confuse language families with languages. English, Frisian, Dutch, Yiddish, and German are all Germanic languages. That is not at all the same as saying they are all dialects of a single German language. They have all diverged from each other too far over the course of these several centuries for that argument to be meaningful today.
Posts: 1814 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Spanish and Portuguese are so similar that a person who speaks one can typically understand enough of what is said in the other to follow a conversation.
Factual clarification -- in general, native Spanish speakers unfamiliar with Portugese have a hard time following naturally spoken Portugese. But for some reason, it's much easier for native Portugese speakers to follow Spanish.
They are close enough that if you are literate in one, it's pretty easy to read the other langauge.
posted
Be careful Alex, especially when taking offencive action against another member (I once tried something similar) so be warned. Papa is watching you.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it should be noted that every time I read this thread title, no matter where I am I cannot help but waggle my fist in the air for emphasis.
posted
Waggle your fist all you like. <-- Big scary troll grin.
"A language is a dialect with an army and a navy". I think this is as good a defintion as any; for example, I believe there are linguists who consider Norwegian, Danish, and Swedish as dialects of 'Scandinavian', and it's not unreasonable since they are all inter-intelligible. But since each of those nations has an army and a navy, well.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It has nothing to do with any personal animosity towards you its just a weird reaction to the tone of the title.
Posts: 959 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
He wrote it strong deliberately just so he could draw us into a discussion about linguistics.
quote: Factual clarification -- in general, native Spanish speakers unfamiliar with Portugese have a hard time following naturally spoken Portugese. But for some reason, it's much easier for native Portugese speakers to follow Spanish.
Just to belabor what is probably a moot point to the argument, I agree with MPH. Portuguese seems to have the shortened or condensed form of many common Spanish words and phrases, and it seems to me that a native Portuguese speaker would find it easier to mentally shorten the Spanish than it would be for a native Spanish speaker to extrapolate the Spanish words and phrases from the almost abbreviated Portuguese ones. Also, many the soft and voiced silibants and fricatives in Portuguese aren't used anywhere in Spanish (not to mention the nasals, though they don't seem to get in the way of comprehension as much as some of the others), whereas it seems to me there are fewer sounds in Spanish which are not used at least somewhere in Portuguese.
[EDIT: I'm a grammar moron. In fact, I'm probably still a grammar moron, but at least I cought one.] Posts: 270 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Advent 115: Heres a question for you KoM, do you ever shut up about how damn smart you are?
It's hardly my fault if you can't tie your shoelaces without a diagram. But I must admit, it is not clear to me what I said to provoke this question.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry Papa. I'll leave him be, or at least I'll let others attack him without my interference.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Considering I didn't even read that thread, much less post in it, I must confess to utter bafflement.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
We declared a state of war against you (King of Men) before being forced to retract it (Papa deleted it) and then we disbanded to the farthest reaches of the Earth (i.e. we shall never resurect it).
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
KoM, I believe the comment "Check the Hatrack Supreme Court if you want to know that tale" was directed at Alex's post, not your question, which I don't think was ever answered.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
