« first day (489 days earlier)      last day (4419 days later) » 

4:00 AM
Hehe.
Now I realise that morphology is boring, but...
 
Alright, so if I want to say "you send," I say mittit as well?
@Cerberus No, I like it!
 
No, because the regular endings still apply.
What was the "you" ending again?
 
Oops, that's an s.
 
Yup.
 
That was my typo.
 
4:01 AM
Haha OK.
 
Well, we'll go with that, at any rate.
Heh.
Alright, so mittis.
 
Yes.
And they send?
 
Mittunt.
 
Ding!
Fun fact: the original Proto-Indo-European ending for the first person sg. was -m. You can still see that in "I am".
I think.
 
Haha, you think.
 
4:04 AM
Well, the English -m in "am" may be accidental, but I believe not.
In any case it is an easy way to remember.
 
Fun fact: lactose intolerance is caused by a lack of the enzyme lactase, which normally breaks down lactose. In lactose intolerant people, it is attacked by bacteria, which creates gas.
So, nasty farts and bloating, to put it bluntly.
Sorry, back to Latin!
 
Ahah!
Haha, interesting fact.
In language, there is a common phenomenon called vocalisation, where certain consonants are turned into vowels to make them easier to pronounce.
 
Interesting.
Would you provide an example?
 
The nasals (n, m) normally turn into a or o or na/no/ma/mo.
 
When conjugating verbs?
 
4:06 AM
So the Proto-Indo-European ending -m turned into -o in the present tense in Greek and Latin, but the -m is still there in other tenses.
@Mahnax Anywhere.
 
@Cerberus Oh, I see.
 
So the imperfect is lauda-ba-m.
But we won't bother with that now.
 
Heh.
 
On to nouns.
 
I just learned imperfect French, remember?
Yes, nouns.
 
4:08 AM
I know!
 
Yes?
 
There are three main declensions, which end on 1. -a, 2. -us/-um, and 3. a consonant. There are two minor declensions, and a few pseudo- or semi-declensions.
We will only bother with the three main declensions.
Take a noun like puella, "girl".
 
Alright.
Je la prends.
 
In English, we have about two cases. When a word performs a certain function, like subject, or object, or whatever, we use a specific case and/or a preposition.
The same applies to Latin, except that they use fewer prepositions, and they have more cases.
 
Fantastic.
 
4:12 AM
When you see a word in a dictionary, it is always in the nominative case, the case mainly used for subjects.
So puella is nominative.
 
Alright, that's declension 1, then?
 
Ehh no and yes.
 
Alright, carry on.
 
The declension of the English word "I" is "I, me".
 
Oh!
That sort of thing.
 
4:14 AM
But, if we had a word "ki, ke", we could say it was of the same declension, because it used the same endings.
 
But the endings are different.
 
Ehm yes, true.
 
Or so it would appear to my untrained eyes.
 
So we don't really have functional declensions in English any more.
 
That may be why I don't really understand the concept right now.
 
4:15 AM
You can usually smuggle a bit if endings resemble each other a lot, but, yes, in English it just doesn't work.
 
Okay.
 
So a declension is a giant group of nouns that get the same ending in the same situation.
All words of the first declension end on -a in the nominative.
Of the second, on -us or -um.
Of the third, there is great variety in the nominative (but not in the other cases).
 
Hold on, I thought you could apply each declension to each word.
 
So can you think of an English word coming from a Latin word of the second declension?
 
is confused
 
4:17 AM
@Mahnax Nope: each noun is only of one declension.
 
@Cerberus Okay, that helps.
@Cerberus Radius?
 
Ding!
 
Yay!
 
*Radia can never exist, nor *puellus.
 
I would also like to say that I got 98% on my french unit exam.
 
4:18 AM
Wow!
That is high.
 
I was pleasantly surprised, to say the least.
 
What is your average for French now?
 
I am checking that as we chat.
97%.
 
Heh.
Wow!
Impressive.
One other thing: Latin does not have articles. So "a girl" is puella, just as "girl" and "the girl".
 
Yay! I love it when languages have no articles.
 
4:20 AM
That's proof!
 
Yessir!
 
So you can basically add any article you like.
So what is "the girl sees"?
 
Puella videt?
 
Ding!
 
Yay!
 
4:22 AM
Notice how -s and -t are still the same in the French imparfait.
 
Yes, I was just about to say something like that.
 
Heh.
Okay, so you can only use the ending -a in "puella" if she is the subject.
 
I should be able to remember them better.
 
The typical letter of the accusative is -m.
So puellam.
So what is "I see a girl"?
 
Video puellam?
 
4:24 AM
Ding, except that you're hearing her.
 
Oops.
 
Hehe.
@Mahnax Ding!
 
There we go!
I had actually typed "Audio puellam?" and hit enter before I saw your question.
 
Haha you were thinking ahead nicely.
 
Just wanted to know if I was doing it right.
 
4:26 AM
One more thing: vowels can be long or short. You don't really need to know that, but, when a dictionary wants to show that a certain vowel is lōng or shŏrt, it goes like this.
 
Oh, neat.
 
Theme vowels are normally short, and verbal stem vowels long. So it is mittĕre but terrēre.
 
@Cerberus But those are both infinitives.
 
Yes.
 
I don't see how the e in mittere is a theme vowel.
 
4:28 AM
Well, the stem is mitt-, the ending -re.
And *mittre is ugly.
 
Huh.
So how does one know if it is one or the other?
 
Each verb is only of one conjugation. So there is no mittas or terras or audas.
So the verbal stem mitt- is a consonant stem.
 
Should terr- not be a consonant stem also?
 
Whereas the stem lauda- is an -a- stem.
@Mahnax No: the stem is terre-.
 
@Cerberus Then how would one know that mittere is stem mitt- and not mitte-?
 
4:31 AM
You need to learn that per verb, alas.
 
Ah, 'tis clear now.
 
So in a dictionary, it will say mittĕre, to show that it is a theme vowel, and hence a consonant stem.
So you know which conjugation it is.
 
Oh, sneaky.
That is certainly helpful, though.
 
Another way is to add the conjugation number: a = I, e = II (I think), i = III, cons. = IV.
Most dictionaries use the first person singular forms, so it will say "mitto IV".
 
@Cerberus Ah, okay.
This is good.
 
4:34 AM
And "laudo I".
 
Yes.
We have been doing this for almost an hour now!
Time flies.
 
Now what is "I send water to the girl"? Water = aqua, to = ad + acc.
Yay!
 
Mitto aqua ad puellam.
 
What are you mitting?
 
Heh.
 
4:36 AM
What function does the water carry out in this sentence?
 
Hmm... I guess it would also be accusatory?
 
Object, so, yes, accusative.
 
So, "Mitto aquam ad puellam"?
 
Ding!
 
Aha!
I wish my computer would play a little bell noise every time you say ding.
 
4:37 AM
So you should always look at your cases carefully. We tend to forget them.
Haha.
 
@Cerberus I will remember that.
 
Okay, so you saw that the accusative is used for objects, and after certain prepositions. Those are the main uses of the acc.
 
So accusative and nominative are noun cases?
 
The nominative is used mainly for subject and subject complement.
Yes, but that is a pleonasm.
 
@Cerberus How?
 
4:39 AM
Only nouns can have cases.
 
Oh.
> So accusative and nominative are cases?
 
"Noun" in the broad sense of nomen: a nomen (Latin "name") is a noun, adjective, or pronoun.
@Mahnax Ding!
 
FTFM.
Yay!
 
English is the only silly language that uses "noun" only for nouns.
 
Hmm, I have a bit more Biology to study.
 
4:41 AM
Heh OK.
 
Could we end class for today, Mr. Cerberus?
 
One last exercise:
 
Okay.
 
I, a girl, send water.
 
Humm...
 
4:42 AM
So here "a girl" is an apposition to "I".
I, who am a girl, send water.
 
Ego, puella, mitto aquam?
winces
 
Ding!
 
Whaat?
 
Though you could leave out "ego".
This is a rare type of sentence anyway.
Okay, good luck on your biology, and until next time!
 
Thanks so much! I will now be able to learn a bit more on my own.
 
4:44 AM
Yup!
 
Farewell, Mr. Cerberus!
 
There are three more cases...
 
 
1 hour later…
5:55 AM
@Cerberus We didn't used to. We had "substantive" nouns, and "adjective" nouns.
 
@DavidWallace Yes, those were the good times.
You fools should have kept them.
Makes everything so much easier.
Q: What would you do if you were the government of a country, and people were fleeing because you destroyed large parts of cities and killed many people.
 
6:11 AM
Am I the government all by myself?
 
6:50 AM
@DavidWallace Yes, why not?
The answer is: you would have course plant as many landmines as you could on the main escape routes.
Just as Assad is doing right now.
This friendly young man. His wife was born in England.
 
I would wonder what my agenda was, if I were a goverment doing this. But I feel you're trying to get me into another political confrontation with somebody.
 
No, I was rather pointing out the absurd, vicious cruelty that can be behind a clean-shaven face.
 
Never judge a book by its cover.
 
Indeed not.
 
@Cerberus That's what you can find behind every man's face, not only shaven blah ones.
 
7:03 AM
Wow! That's a bit misanthropic, don't you think Gigili?
 
Umm, maybe.
 
Or maybe you're right and there are no good men in the world.
 
Of course I am, I was thinking whether it's misanthropic or not.
 
Hey, I just emailed you. I haven't done the thing you asked me to; I'll do it later.
@Cerberus Did you actually want to talk about Assad? I'm afraid I'm not really an expert on happenings in that part of the world. As Robust 0 tried to say, I'm kind of isolated off here in my own little corner.
 
Very disappointing.
I'm AFK anyway.
 
7:11 AM
And it occurred to me that "misanthropic" isn't the right word. I want a word that means specifically man-hating, as opposed to hating all of humanity. I can't think of one right now.
 
@Gigili Yes, but it is sometimes harder to realize.
@DavidWallace There was a question about this.
 
On ELU?
 
Misandry.
Yes.
I even answered it.
 
Oh, I thought you meant about clean-shaven men having evil agendas.
 
7
Q: Is “misogyny” only applicable to men? What is the antonym of misogyny?

Yoichi OishiI came across the following sentence in New Yorker’s (February 23) article, titled “In Defense of Liz Lemon”: “She behaves as if Jack Donaghy (Alec Baldwin) is her daddy. She doesn’t trust her own judgment, she’s bad at her job, and there’s something awfully misogynist about all this! Liz...

 
7:15 AM
Actually, I remember reading it, shortly after it was posted. So either I forgot this word, or I read the question before you posted your answer. In any case, I have now learnt a new word, and I thank you.
I hope you don't now expect me to teach you a word in your native language.
 
Heh would be nice.
 
Yes, I hate everyone by default except when I do not.
 
7:32 AM
How nice of you.
 
Unless you're one of the default people.
 
Right, well, she didn't say the people she hates aren't nice. It may be a subjective judgement. Or she hates nice people.
 
@Cerberus tevredenstellen?
 
That's not really one word.
At least I'd write that as tevreden stellen.
Well, it depends. In any case it is not a rare word.
But nice try.
Where did you come up with that?
 
OK, I'll keep trying. As they say, Je kunt niet alles weten.
 
7:44 AM
Hehe, no indeed!
Maar je kunt wel veel weten.
 
Did you download it @Cerberus?
 
@Cerberus parthenogenetische?
 
@DavidWallace Related to the birth of/in a girl?
@Gigili I tried your Javascript, but nothing happened.
 
No, not quite. Looks like I will be teaching you a new Dutch word after all!
 
Haha.
Is it a technical word?
There are loads of technical words I wouldn't know.
 
7:53 AM
It means "able to reproduce without having sex". Zoologists use it to describe animals that reproduce asexually. Theologians use it to describe the Virgin Mary.
 
@Gigi: I tried it again. It said all sorts of things were loading, but I don't see anything happening now.
@DavidWallace Ah, I see. But why?
 
Why what?
 
Parthenos just means a girl. Perhaps they interpreted it strictly as a virgin?
 
... oh, and it can also be used for plants. And yes, the etymology is from parthenos and genesis.
 
It doesn't make much sense, but OK.
 
7:58 AM
I thought "parthenos" meant "unmarried woman", and therefore could be freely (but not necessarily accurately) extrapolated to "virgin".
 
They should have just called it sexless conception!
 
Anyway, now we're even - parthenogenetische for misandry.
 
@DavidWallace Well, yes, but without context the "sexless" connotation is contingent, not the first thing one would think of. This is probably because "parthenos" is often translated as "virgin", which has a much stronger connotation.
But your word is technical!
I can come up with a technical word that you don't know in a second!
 
So, you think that I really ought to have found a non-technical Dutch word that you don't know? That's going to be much harder, I imagine.
 
Yes, probably.
But I wouldn't be the guardian of souls if I knew the word mercy.
 
8:01 AM
Are you sure that you can come up with a technical English word that I don't know?
 
Sure.
Most people don't know technical words outside their field. Which is only natural.
 
OK, I'm waiting. You said "in a second".
 
Oh. How about epallage?
Predicate frame?
 
That means when military people display their insignia?
And "predicate frame" is two words, both of which I know individually
 
@DavidWallace It is a kind of dragonfly.
 
8:06 AM
Epallage is not in the 1971 edition of the OED. Did you just make it up?
 
No.
But it may be too technical too count.
How about perispomenon?
Gnomic?
 
Hmm, I think you've made your point.
 
BRB doorbell.
 
Hello again.
 
'Ello.
@Cerberus What about now? $x^2+x+1=0$
 
8:13 AM
What is the significance of that polynomial?
 
It's my favorite quadratic polynomial.
 
What has it done to be so lucky?
 
It doesn't have any cruelty behind its clean-shaven face.
 
So it will never be president of Syria.
 
Who knows. It has my vote.
 
8:22 AM
@Gigili What am I supposed to see?
@DavidWallace Woohoo!
 
@Cerberus are you some kind of dragonfly enthusiast?
 
No...I actually thought the Greek word existed in English. Like apallage and synallage.
As a rhetorical figure.
But it turned out to be a dragonfly.
Not that I don't like dragonflies.
> Film producer Saul Zaentz owns the film, stage and merchandising rights to JRR Tolkien classics such as The Hobbit. Ostensibly to protect those rights, lawyers for the company are now threatening small businesses across the UK with ruinous legal action if they don’t stop using the term ‘Hobbit’ – a word that may not even have been created by Tolkien.
I hate American capitalism.
It has gone too far.
These people should be boycotted.
 
8:37 AM
@Cerberus Hum? A neat version of the equation
Or a big apple
 
@Gigili Ah, I had to whitelist cloudfront first. Now I see it!
Pretty cool indeed!
But I'm afraid there is no solution to your equation.
 
There is, don't worry.
 
> Richard O’Dwyer, the UK-based ex-administrator of the video linking website TVShack will be extradited to the US to face copyright infringement charges. Despite public outrage Home Secretary Theresa May approved the extradition order today. The 23-year-old student has never visited United States, but now faces several years in a US prison.
@Gigili Some imaginary number?
 
@Cerberus Uhum, complex solution.
 
I see.
 
8:52 AM
@Cerberus complete the square and it solves itself. The only interesting thing about this polynomial is that it's (x^3-1)/(x-1).
Apart from its even more interesting property of being Gigili's favourite quadratic, that is.
... which leads to the fact that its two roots are the two complex cube roots of 1.
 
9:11 AM
@Cerberus tochtgat?
 
9:40 AM
@DavidWallace Sorry, that's not a special word either.
Compound words are usually easy, unless they're technical.
 
10:00 AM
Can't blame a man for trying :-)
 
@Cerberus: Did you have a good bowel movement this morning?
 
10:19 AM
nepparterrestaalplaatserretrappen – fake stairways from the ground floor to the sun lounge, made of steel plate
 
can this old question please be closed as Gen Ref?
0
Q: Difference between "then" and "than"

ThursagenI am having difficulty trying to distingush between then and than. What I find confusing is their pronunciation, and when to use them. For example: He walked, stopped, than/then picked up a stone. Should it be than or then, and why?

 
@Cerberus Tru dat.
 
@Cerberus wow. that's just ridiculous
 
10:36 AM
@DavidWallace Just saw your email =\
 
An email that I regret sending. I'm just feeling overly sensitive.
I have replied to your reply.
 
Bah. Some new user went through the list of millenia-old SWRs and posted an answer to each. And then some other user flagged them all. And now I have to go through that list one by one.
 
SWRs?
 
Südwestdeutsche Rundfunks.
Or single-word requests.
Take your pick.
 
@RegDwightѬſ道 bless you Reg. you're too good for us
2
 
10:44 AM
so uncomplaining.
 
Yeah.
I only complain when I have time.
 
@RegDwightѬſ道 That other user was me, sorry about that! They'd shown up as flagged posts on the left of "review" at the top and it asked if I agreed with the flag or not.
 
Haha.
Helloes.
So this is how I summon you.
Simply by complaining.
Hm. I should complain more often!
 
@RegDwightѬſ道 :)
 
Anyway. I do think this illustrates rather nicely how low of a hanging fruit SWRs can be.
 
10:50 AM
I think they were just auto-low-quality flags I saw rather than other-user flags. Have they put some new system in to flag these? They weren't part of the normal low-quality-posts on the review tab, but actually showing as flagged...
 
BTW you only have thirty stars a day.
@Hugo I saw nothing unusual. The auto flags have been there for quite some time, saying "low answer quality score [number]".
It happens when an answer is too short, or doesn't pass some other criteria.
 
Aha! So how long should the answer to a single-word-request be?!
 
@DavidWallace It should at least try to give some reason why the proposed answer is the best one. There's some meta posts about this somewhere...
27
Q: Single word requests, crosswords, and the fight against mediocrity

Shog9A call to action This topic has been brought up here numerous times before, most recently by JSBangs: I'm now of the opinion that single word requests should be either disallowed entirely or subject to much more stringent requirements. The reasons are as follows: We get lots of...

 
at least one. SWRs are unpopular among some of the regulars
 
@DavidWallace Doesn't have anything to do with tags. The minimum answer length is 30 characters, to any question. If you barely scratch the 31, you'll get auto-flagged.
 
10:55 AM
why do I want among to be spelt amoung?
 
Because you're Briteash.
 
it doesn't make any sense
 
Become American, then.
 
NEVER!
 
You mean, never again?
 
10:56 AM
amoung, Obsolete spelling of among.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/amoung
You're keeping it real.
 
@RegDwightѬſ道 :D I never was, there's no proof!
 
Mind = blouwn.
 
:O
I wonder when it became obsolete. I'm guessing before 1981
 
Certainly before over 9000.
 
how is the usage of amoung cited in 1924, when it's from a publication of 1919?
 
10:59 AM
Wrongly. It is cited wrongly.
 
Only thirty?
 

« first day (489 days earlier)      last day (4419 days later) »