English Language & Usage: Multi-Layered Discourse Room - 2012-05-08 (page 1 of 4)

« first day (544 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (4382 days later) »

user19161

1:27 AM

1 year later...

Meysam رها در بند

3:30 AM

The last message was posted one year ago.

1 hour later…

4:34 AM

Hi!

4 hours later…

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

8:47 AM

Wow, disco is dead as this chat.

Let's get it started, then.

One bundle of sponduli to the person who finds the original of this:

0

Q: "I have no ..." vs "I don't have ..."

I have no house I don't have a house What's the difference between the phrases like ones above?

word-choice differences

Matt Эллен

9:03 AM

9

Q: "Have not" versus "do not have"

As a non-native English speaker, I have a little doubt about using, or not, the auxiliary verb "to do" with the verb "to have". Are there differences in meaning between "I have not" and "I do not have"? Is a British vs. American thing?

american-english british-english auxiliary-verbs

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

9:14 AM

Close. Not sure if there's a cigar in there.

Matt Эллен

nor me

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

Meanwhile, yet another question about me vs. I, and a wishy-washy one at that.

0

Q: Why is the accusative case used for a "topic"?

If I were to write a book about myself, Me would be a more natural-sounding title than I. Also, we say the us-vs.-them mentality instead of the we-vs.-they mentality.

pronouns personal-pronouns case

I left a comment.

Because I really don't get it when people ask "why".

Hello.

Matt Эллен

good morning @Cerb :)

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

Ahoyae's.

9:16 AM

Okay, the best sources I can find tell me that 1 GB of mobile data costs about $1. And certain Chinese telco guys are coming up with much cheaper ways, going as low as $ 0.25.

Morning!

So that's a profit margin of 90 % on most current mobile data bundles.

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

They must be starving.

Matt Эллен

or their cost to run the business is incredibly high

So the telco's yammering about how they lose money on mobile bundles is utter nonsense, i.e. they must be adding the lost sales in voice/sms to the costs.

@MattЭллен Like marketing?

Matt Эллен

licensing the frequencies isn't cheap

I presume that is all included.

Matt Эллен

9:19 AM

included in what?

> Daarnaast is China Mobile een van de ontwikkelaars van td-lte. Het voordeel van td-lte is dat het geen gepaard spectrum nodig heeft, waardoor een provider met onverkochte restjes spectrum van andere veilingen makkelijker een netwerk kan opzetten. De kostprijs van 1GB aan data kan daardoor worden teruggebracht van 1 euro naar 25 cent.

@MattЭллен In the $1.

tweakers.net/nieuws/77834/…

Matt Эллен

@Cerberus yeah, plus renting space on satellite bandwidth, and paying for technicians

@Cerberus I see

No, no, I really think all of that is included.

They are really making huge profits.

Matt Эллен

oh

Vodafone, for example, makes about € 10 billion in profits yearly.

Matt Эллен

9:21 AM

yeah, they are evil

And mobile data are about 10 % of that I think.

Matt Эллен

worming out of paying taxes

That, too.

Mainly just exploiting their oligopoly.

The state should do something, like nationalizing the network.

Matt Эллен

well, that was the case until the GPO became BT

BT were forced to sell of O2

to prevent a monopoly situation

What?

What are those letters?

Matt Эллен

9:24 AM

O2 used to be BT's mobile service

British Telecom?

And GPO?

Matt Эллен

GPO? General Post Office - they used to be a nationalised telephone company until the 1970s or something

Ah.

Okay, same thing happened here.

But at least they are forced to allow access to their land-line network at a low fee.

The same should apply to mobile networks.

Matt Эллен

I can send data from my mobile phone to a phone on another carrier

there's no doubt a fee, but it can't be all that much

plus i'd probably just upload to some shared space anyway

@reg how about this one:

3

Q: What is the difference in meaning between "I play" and "I do play"?

What is the difference between I play and I do play? For example: If someone were to ask to me, do you play soccer?

word-choice differences auxiliary-verbs

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

You mean it should be closed?

Matt Эллен

9:36 AM

I mean is it the dupe we were looking for?

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

Errr, no?

Matt Эллен

ok

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

We were looking for "I have no ..." vs "I don't have ..."

Matt Эллен

and it doesn't boil down to that?

since this is closed as a dupe of that:

2

Q: Difference between "does have" and "has"

Possible Duplicate: “did shoot” vs “shot” 'Did see' and 'Saw' “I understand you” vs “I do understand you” What is the difference in meaning between “I play” and “I do play”? What is the difference between does have and has? For example, compare she does have...

modal-verbs auxiliary-verbs

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

Matt, you are confusing the hell out of me.

I really fail to see how they are related in the least. scratches head

Matt Эллен

9:41 AM

well, 67062 is asking about "I have no" vs "I don't have", and 64487 is asking about "I have" vs "I do have", the only difference is the negation. Is the negation a significant difference?

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

Oh my. That's a weird way to approach that.

Matt Эллен

Really?

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

Yes.

Matt Эллен

How so?

@MattЭллен How?

Matt Эллен

9:43 AM

@Cerberus mms

Don't those data just go through the internet?

Oh.

Yes, well, who uses MMS?

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

"I have a book" vs. "I do have a book" is an issue of emphasis. "I have no books" vs. "I don't have a book" is an issue of anything but emphasis.

Matt Эллен

@Cerberus I don't :D

Nor I.

Matt Эллен

@RegDwightΒВBẞ8 but the question is asking about singular, so it's "I have no book" vs "I don't have a book". Which is about emphasis

9:44 AM

So I calculated that T-Mobile Netherlands makes a stated average profit of 7.5 cents per MB on mobile data, or € 75 per GB.

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

Fair enough, but is that about emphasis? Are you saying "I don't have a book" is the emphatic version of "I have no book"?

That is assuming that 10 % of their profits came from mobile data in 2011.

Matt Эллен

@RegDwightΒВBẞ8 I'd say the other way around

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

Case closed, then.

Note that most companies try to down-play their profits, so the "real" profits are likely to be higher.

Matt Эллен

9:47 AM

@RegDwightΒВBẞ8 What is the question about to you?

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

Different word order. Choosing between two ways of negation.

The answer may very well involve emphasis.

Matt Эллен

and you can't interpret "I have" vs "I do have" in the same light?

I suppose then it's not about negation

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

Okay, let's start from scratch.

Here's the answer to that original question:

10

A: What is the difference in meaning between "I play" and "I do play"?

In modern English, auxiliary 'do' is used in five cases: Negative (obligatory for most verbs): "I don't like mushrooms". Interrogative (obligatory for most verbs): "Do you like mushrooms?" Emphatic: "Oh, you've done some cauliflower! I do like cauliflower!" Contrastive (a special case of emphat...

Please tell me, how, exactly, it tackles the issue of choosing between "I have no book" vs. "I don't have a book".

The other answer by Jasper is even less relevant. It is, however, even more relevant to the original question.

Matt Эллен

@RegDwightΒВBẞ8 OK fair enough, that question is not a duplicate. But this one that has been closed as a duplicate of "did play" does tackle "I have no book" vs "I don't have a book"

sort of

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

I must be blind or something, but I'm not seeing it.

At any rate, I was actually looking for a question specifically about "not have" vs "have no".

Matt Эллен

9:57 AM

well, really it's the opposite. I guess I'm clutching at straws

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

We have lots of questions that might or might not be construed to be tangentially related; I was looking for an exact dupe.

Matt Эллен

1

Q: "There is no point in" or "There is not a point in"

I was thinking about these negations. Do these mean the same thing? There is no point in ... There is not a point in ... or: I have no clue I do not have any clue etc.

differences negation

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

I even tried a number of different verbs, all to no avail.

@MattЭллен yeah something like that. Getting closer.

10:35 AM

orange.at/Content.Node/tarife/tarife-ohne-handy/…

Look at how cheap mobile plans are in Austria!

€ 7.50 for 1000 minutes voice, 1000 sms, 1 GB data. An extra 1 GB costs € 5 apiece that you can buy separately if you need it.

Matt Эллен

blimey

That pretty much proves that they have huge profit margins elsewhere.

Matt Эллен

indeed

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

Well of course they have that in Austria, where eve... ry... bo... dy t... a............... l.................k......s slooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

When 1000 minutes voice amounts to a "hello", €7,50 is still quite a rip-off.

Matt Эллен

do they also talk loudly? If so, I'm beginning to believe all Austrians are Brits on holiday

10:47 AM

@RegDwightΒВBẞ8 Haha, I see.

Is that what they are known as, slow speakers?

Does the same apply to Bavaria?

Hello

I have question about English language.

Who does/do the dishes at your house?

Why "Who do" is incorrect?

Matt Эллен

4

Q: "who doesn't" vs. "who don't"

What is the difference between "There will be users who doesn't buy something" and "There will be users who don't buy something"? Are they both grammatically correct?

grammar verb-agreement concord

Thank you :)

Matt Эллен

I think, then, that the activity of "doing the dishes" is assumed to be done by one person

11:02 AM

What he says.

Maybe, we have difference culture here. My wife and I usually switch does the dishes.

Matt Эллен

but I don't know. there could be another reason

This is just an exercise, fill in the blank.

Who _____ the dishes at your home?

@MattЭллен Do you mean it usually done by single person one the same day, for example, one person usually does the dishes this morning. OR you mean it usually done by same person everyday?

How do you picture the “obumbrative beams” in And vþer planetis with bemes obvmbrative Sall on þair kynde schawe dolorouss countenans?

@Anonymous In this case, the exercise appears to be looking for a present simple (do or does). The present simple implies a habit, and the context also implies a habit, not a single event. So it implies that the same person or persons do the dishes every day.

11:08 AM

So, both "do" and "does" are correct answer for this question? Because it might be done by one person or more than one person, right?

So it could be either do or does, depending on whether the asker expects either one or more people do do the dishes every day. However, who prefers the singular when both are possible, so I'd prefer does — however, I would say do is also correct.

Thank you.

Matt Эллен

yeah, the way people would normally ask is definitely does

I think this is more about how people talk.

Does is the correct answer. :)

Matt Эллен

@Vitaly shadow-casting beams would be large. I picture such beams horizontal to the floor, holding up a ceiling or roof

11:11 AM

@Vitaly Is that and other planets with beams obumbrative shall on their kind show dolorous countenance?

@Cerberus Yeah.

What is the context?

None. It's a quotation from the OED for obumbrative.

I couldn't find the source on the Web.

There's also a later version: “Then Sunne and Moone obscured with anoyance, Yea other Planets with beames obumbratiue, Shall in their kinde shewe dolorus countenance.”

I have more question.

What does "I do drugs" means?

Matt Эллен

"I use drugs, for recreation"

11:15 AM

@MattЭллен I interpreted that as planets casting some sort of “(over)shadowing” rays.

Matt Эллен

@Vitaly yeah, that would make sense. I didn't understand the whole thing until Cerb explained it.

But how do you picture them?

Matt Эллен

sort of like rays from the sun, only dark

So, it's illegal to use drugs, right?

Drugs in my native language means medicines.

@Vitaly How abound a dark band across the planet's face?

Not really a ray or anything.

Matt Эллен

11:21 AM

@Anonymous no. it is illegal to use drugs in ways that have been deemed illegal

@Anonymous Depends on the drug and the country.

@Anonymous Medicines can be called drugs too, hence a drugs store.

@Vitaly What is that from?

Matt Эллен

@Anonymous yeah, that's what it means in English too, but some medicines are not drugs (e.g. physiotherapy)

Ahh, it has subtle differences.

Matt Эллен

@Anonymous for example - it is illegal in the UK for someone to possess heroin or administer it unless they are a medical professional and that medical professional has a valid medical reason for possessing or administering heroin.

11:26 AM

@Robusto oed.com/view/Entry/…

@Vitaly There's also the beam of a ship.

Not what they're talking about.

The beams are beams of light that illuminate something and darken others.

How do you know?

You know the text?

"Then sun and moon obscured with annoyance, yes [even] other planets with overshadowing beams shall after their own fashion present a dolorous [abjectly sad] face."

My best guess at translation into more modern English.

Not sure what the annoyance is there. Without context it's difficult to say.

Very.

11:30 AM

dolorous probably means "gloomy" more than sad there.

It could be some kind of biblical passage, or other religious reference, contrasting the light of the Christian deity to the heavens as it overshadows the celestial bodies.

@Cerberus No. I'm just used to parsing archaic texts.

Yeah, it's definitely some religious reference (the synnaris in Contempl. Synnaris/A Dial of Daily Contemplation is sinners, unless I am mistaken). I am not sure about that particular interpretation though.

Nor am I. The purpose is a guess, but I feel pretty good about the sense of it. I don't particularly like the word "annoyance" there, though.

Thanks.

BTW @Cerberus, does this tell you anything? →

"Obscured with annoyance" could well mean that the light was blocked out, and therefore harmed. Annoyance originally meant something like "harmed" or "attacked" ...

user image

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

11:39 AM

@Robusto that's interesting that English used "yes" that way. German still does.

@RegDwightΒВBẞ8 Originally given as yea, which is damn close to ja.

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

Aye.

@Vitaly If you can find the Latin version, that would help.

RegDwight ΒВBẞ8

I actually would have guessed the two ja's in German were from different sources.

I was searching for it already.

11:40 AM

@Cerberus I cannot. I can't even find the English version. And I have absolutely no idea what the title would be in Latin.

Nor I.

@Vitaly Given that, I'm even more confident that the meaning of the passage is that all the light that human beings see is overshadowed by the divine light.

@Vitaly There was talk about Eupolia or something, but then someone else said that was not at all the same work.

The question is also, does with belong to obscured or to shall show?

And how about dyall: is this passage is about a sundial, the "obumbrative beam" could perhaps be the shadow cast by the dial's needle?

Probably not.

user image

@Cerberus Now I want to have sexual relations with the moon.

@KitFox Isn't she a bit, you know, big?

user image

11:55 AM

I'm sure we could manage. draws up schematics

I know a certain stretching can be involved...

@Cerberus Do you think they could have mistaken diārium for diālis in translating that stuff from Latin?

@Cerberus I believe obscured there to describe the state of the sun and moon, not their actions, though I could be wrong.

What are you discussing?

Matt Эллен

53 mins ago, by Vitaly

How do you picture the “obumbrative beams” in And vþer planetis with bemes obvmbrative Sall on þair kynde schawe dolorouss countenans?

11:58 AM

I keep scrolling back and finding more stuff.

Oh, I see.

@Vitaly Uh, mistaken? Those words are pretty close (same root).

Beams that cause shadows to be cast?

@Cerberus Yeah, is there any chance that it should have been A Diary of Daily Contemplation?

@Robusto Yes, but that leaves the question as to whether they are obscured with these beams or show with these beams.

@Vitaly Sounds plausible.

I don't know what is meant by dial in the English title exactly, but it is basically the same word.

@Vitaly That's what I took it to mean.

@Cerberus the "dolorous countenance" is what is being "shewn" ...

12:02 PM

@Robusto So...

Do you understand my question?

@Cerberus Perhaps you could rephrase?

Is it the planets, obscured with beams obumbrative... or the planets shall show with beams obumbrative...?

I think it should belong with obscured, because show is so far off from sun and moon.

@Cerberus There are several versions of this passage on the page now. Give the one you're referencing.

> Then Sunne and Moone obscured with anoyance, Yea other Planets with beames obumbratiue, Shall in their kinde shewe dolorus countenance.

But it applies to both versions. It is the same text.

The Sunne and the Moone and the Planets are all the subjects of the sentence. They are showing [presenting] "dolorous countenance."

12:12 PM

So...if you worship other gods, baby Jesus will cry?

Here's something interesting I found, which is only tangentially related:

user image

From A transcript of the registers of the company of stationers of London (Volume 5)
(London : Birmingham : Priv. Print., 1875-77 ; 1894.)

@Robusto ...

That's not an answer.

Never mind.

@Cerberus It is an answer. But apparently I'm not understanding what you're asking.

There are two options: 1.) obscured, 2.) shall show.

It can be only one of the two.

I don't know how else to explain it.

It is basic syntax.

The with constituent has to be governed by something. A verb, in this case.

Matt Эллен

I think it's that the planets cast shadowy beams, and that they have unhappy faces. The beams don't show up the faces.

The Sunne and the Moone [are] obscured by beams of light that cast them into shadow.

Matt Эллен

12:19 PM

oh, well I guess not then

@Cer Just write the whole passages out, like this:
1. Then Sun and Moon obscured with annoyance shall in their kind show dolorous countenance. And even other Planets shall in their kind show dolorous countenance with beams obumbrative.

@Robusto Ah, that's better. So you picked 1).

@Vitaly Uh I don't think that is correct.

2. The Sun and Moon obscured with annoyance shall in their kind show dolorous countenance. And even other Planets are obscured with beams obumbrative.

The light of the sun and the moon are obscured and harmed [diminished] and even other planets, with beams so bright as to cast them into shadow, will present gloomy [darkened] faces.

@Vitaly Oh, yes. This is my option 1.

12:20 PM

@Cerberus I'm just writing out what you apparently mean. :P

@Robusto Ehh now you are removing the parallellism. That doesn't seem likely.

@Vitaly Yup I got it when 2. appeared.

I figured a partial writing-out would do.

Matt Эллен

so the passage says the planets are brighter than the sun or moon?

@Cerberus Not true. I'm giving you the sense of the sentence as I see it.

The "with" means more like "from" there.

@Cerberus You are thinking inside the box.

You do not feel that the two should be taken as parallel?

They are parallel in the sense that they are both subjects.

12:26 PM

We are talking about the with phrases.

John and Gary, yes even Bill and Ted, were overshadowed by John's athletic achievements.

@Cerberus with doesn't mean what you think it means there, I believe.

What do I think it means, then?

What I think it means is "by" or "from" — it does not imply that the planets are agents of the light, but are affected by them.

A is annoyed with X. B is obscured with Y. Together they shall show a dolorous countenance.

@Robusto Of course.

Well, I mean, that's how I interpreted it, and you with your "by", but I was earlier considering (and rejecting) the possibility that with might instead signify the means by which the sun and the moon and the planets show a dolorous countenance.

A and B verbed with adjective, X and Y [verb elided] with nouns that are adjective, will in their own way verb with adjective noun.

12:33 PM

@Robusto Oh, yes, that's what I meant, I mislooked or miswrote with my "A is annoyed".

But surely you mean "A and B verbed with noun".

@Cerberus Yes.

The parallelism is still there, but it's obscured by the omission of a verb in the second clause.

OK. So that is a parallel construction.

Jinx.

Yes.

I thought you wanted to stick the first with with obscured, the second with shall show, which would break the parallel.

No.

12:36 PM

Whereas in fact they must both belong to obscured, which can be considered elliptical as you say.

This is a complex, periodic style of writing, as was common in the day.

D'oh. And keep in mind it is a translation.

And I mean periodic in the sense of containing many clauses that bear complicated relationships with one another.

D'oh.

And do you know what period actually means?

And the fact that it is a translation has less to do with it than you might think. Many, if not most, of the translations of the time started with a sense of the original text, but were more about creating a literature that would speak to the audience of the time and make points that were consonant with contemporary mores.

@Cerberus I use it in the sense it is used in rhetoric.

> Rhetoric a complex sentence, esp. one consisting of several clauses, constructed as part of a formal speech or oration.

12:41 PM

Not rhetoric specifically, but literature in general.

@Cerberus You are splitting hairs.

Anyway, do you know what it actually means etymologically?

If not, I think you can figure it out without looking it up.

It has to do with cyclical things, I would imagine.

Right.

Can you identify the two roots?

@Cerberus BTW, as etymology is a historic representation of words, use of the present tense there is kind of misleading. Nothing means anything etymologically. Etymology shows how things came to mean what they do now, even though they may have started somewhere far afield.

I would guess per is from peri which meant the border around something.

As in perimeter.

12:45 PM

Their present meaning includes any and all connotations, which in turn includes etymology.

Or perigee.

Correct.

Peri = around.

@Cerberus That's crap. Some words have the opposite meaning of what they originally did. How is that reflected in the current meaning?

It is.

We may not think about it in many cases, but it is there.

If it's reflected in the meaning, why bother to have etymologies at all?

12:47 PM

Eh.

Gotta shower. AFK.

I don't understand this way of thinking.

Matt Эллен

Chaucer used parody to mean period. He was an odd one.

If the etymology of a word is known, that is part of the meaning of the word. I don't know how else to say it.

@MattЭллен Really?

That's funny.

Completely different roots.

Matt Эллен

indeed :D

user image

12:50 PM

OK, I have the full text of the poem. Do you want it @Vitaly?

Also, the Latin.

What? How?..

I checked it out of the library.

I don't have a scanner right here, but I can do my best to transcribe it for you.

@Cerb, sorry, but @Robusto is right. etymology is not meaning.

@MattЭллен Wowie, that's funny.

It's one of Thursday's contemplations: Remembre the generall jugement.

12:53 PM

@KitFox Wow, your library has it?? I couldn't find it in my university's library.

@JSBᾶngs I didn't say "is" in that way.

Did you look for "Contemplacon of synners"?

But the etymology of a word is part of its meaning.

@KitFox I looked for "dial daily" and "dyall dayly".

It's a reproduction of block printing, so the letters are a little tough.

And syn the fyre of conflagracyon
All men as than whiche founden are on lyue

@KitFox Ah yes, they have it under that title.

Well done.

@KitFox Thanks. Telling us whether the “beames obumbratiue” are indeed cast by the Christian deity would be sufficient.

12:57 PM

What do you need it for anyway?

It shall consume by dyuerse condycyon
In to theyr dytees as doctours can dyscryue

@Vitaly It's only a few lines.

@Cerberus Again with the present tense. The best you can say is that etymology presents a history of the meanings of a word. If one of those meanings is obsolete, it is not reflected in any currently viable meanings. It may be of historical value in understanding historical texts, but for those contexts we would use past tense. Got it?

Dytees?

@Robusto I think you're using the narrow sense of "mean" here.

It's not that odd to talk about the original meaning of a word by mentioning "what it actually means".

« first day (544 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (4382 days later) »

Transcript for

May '128

English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…

Not for the faint of heart or those easily triggered by Englis...

phrase-requests pronunciation single-word-requests synonyms

join this room
about this room

00:00

06:00

12:00

18:00

all times are UTC

site design / logo © 2024 Stack Exchange Inc; legal

mobile