lɪŋˈgwɪstɪks

HizHa

00:02

Instead, have him explain himself here:

1. (in his mind) -- What is my "understanding problem" ?

2. Did (Prof.) Greg Lee's answer " ( ... already brings the main issue of your understanding problem quite well to the point) " ? -- and if so, how?

I need a confirmation that the offensive "answer" will NOT be made longer, and thereby even more offensive and insulting.

lemontree

I added another paragraph to my answer, wrapping up my main point again. This should not make the post more "offensive", but hopfeully finally put an end to this discussion.

BTW, when this is clarified, I'd consider it appropriate for HizHa to apologize for all the insults against me.

4

HizHa

01:09

So, apparently, the 1st moderator has decided to allow the man to continue to humiliate me using such insulting language: (Prof.) Greg Lee's answer " ( ... already brings the main issue of your understanding problem quite well to the point) "

Note that he refuses to describe what (in his mind) that "understanding problem" is.

There must be SE "conduct" guidelines, and such insulting language must be (I'd think) explicitly listed as not acceptable.

I am new to Ling.SE and so I didn't know that it was a place in which a Ling. grad-student - type person was allowed to insult new-comers u…

Therefore, I ask the 2nd moderator the following :

Could you (or have him) remove the "answer" ? -- after which I'll remove the question, and I will try to have nothing to do with him again in the future. He can just post his text as a question. But if he does this, I ask that he make no direct or indirect references to me or to anything I have written.

HizHa

02:44

And I add that the insulting language: -- (Prof.) Greg Lee's answer " ( ... already brings the main issue of your understanding problem quite well to the point) " -- occurs in the opening paragraph , or the framing passage :

That is, his entire "answer" is framed in the notion that my "understanding problem" is so grave that his long tedious, uninteresting "answer" must be shoved into my face.

David Wallace

08:32

@lemontree I'm a bit lost myself. I thought the answer that's being discussed here was really good, and you were very kind to put such a good deal of effort into it.

HizHa

08:56

@Alenanno Anenanno wrote> He's disagreeing with you.

Alenanno

@HizHa I, or any other moderator, cannot delete lemontree's answer because there's nothing objectively wrong with it. Do you always take issue with people saying you're wrong?

HizHa

No, you're fundamentally mistaken. He wrote> To come back to your question: No, your predictions are not correct.<

If he's disagreeing with something i wrote, i could argue back, or talk about it. He's never specified which "prediction" are not correct. He just like the sound of saying "No, you ... are not correct"

Alenanno

@HizHa Ok, now we're getting somewhere. After he says "Your predictions are not correct", he gives examples. Is he not talking about something you wrote/said there?

HizHa

Note that he refuses to describe what (in his mind) my "understanding problem" is. If he described it, i could refute it, and show that i never expressed, and that Prof Lee never mentioned it, or touched on it.

He just likes the sound of (Prof.) Greg Lee's answer " ( ... already brings the main issue of your understanding problem quite well to the point) " because it sounds vaguely and broadly insulting.

Alenanno

@HizHa Lemontree edited his answer yesterday to further explain his point. Did you see it?

HizHa

09:06

His writing is extremely poor. So it's difficult, but let me try.

Re: new text -- it makes no difference -- it adds nothing because he just copied the old text in the comments.

My question is in 2 parts.

Speculation 1. So it seems that NONE of the noun phrases within the relative clauses (in that list up top) can be [further relativized].

Speculation 2. Except for such degenerate or base cases, it seems that NPs within RCs can't be [further relativized].

As far as i can tell, he doesn't even touch upon them. If either of them is false, then that falsehood would be shown with counter-examples. He doesn't present anything like that.

Alenanno

That is out of my job. I don't address wrong answers. That's your job. So, is your main problem about the sentence "already brings the main issue of your understanding problem quite well to the point"?

HizHa

> After he says "Your predictions are not correct", he gives examples. Is he not talking about something you wrote/said there? <

No, he is not responding to something i wrote. He's just repeating examples of what is and is not a good relativization -- something i already knew and Without knowing that i wouldn't have even asked my question.

It's like this, I ask a legitimate question about /using Sin and Cos, and he says [No, your predictions are not correct.] and gives me a definition of Sin and Cos.

At the very least, please have him delete:
1. the offensive opening paragraph.
2. all references to Japanese.
3. where he bluntly declares me "not correct". (because he's not even disagreeing with me, and not even refuting something i stated or speculated)

Alenanno

1- I may delete the part between parentheses, only.

2. I can't do that.

3. I can't do that.

HizHa

09:25

Thank you. I think it's better for me to ask a 2nd moderator. I'd much rather have the "answer" deleted. (After the appropriate deletions) if you or the 2nd moderator wants me to promise never to write in Ling.SE again, i'd probably make that promise. Ling.SE is just too hostile a place for someone of my supposed race.

Alenanno

@HizHa The answer will be the same. Moderators enforce the same rules.

The answer cannot be deleted because it's mostly fine.

I think you're taking things the wrong way.

HizHa

But i am glad you seem to realize how insulting this comment is: (which already brings the main issue of your understanding problem quite well to the point),

Prof Lee seems to be a gentleman. He would not take joy from exposing my "understanding problem" in public.

Who are the other moderators? I will ask them before taking, e.g. legal action.

lemontree

@Alenanno "Mostly fine"? What exactly about my answer is inappropriate now?

Alenanno

@lemontree The sentence between parentheses might not have been written with bad intentions (I know it wasn't), but it sounds ambiguous because you talk of an "understanding problem", which can be badly misinterpreted. Just a matter of bad wording, that's all.

Since HizHa seems to be having problems with that, if I was the author, I'd delete it and move on.

Or reword it

Certainly, @HizHa You're a bit taking things too far talking about "legal action".

I'm trying to de-escalate the situation, yet you're making things worse by escalating it.

You may find the other moderators by going to Users -> Moderators.

@lemontree Do you disagree with me or not?

HizHa

09:53

I have an idea. His "answer" doesn't respond to anything i wrote. It's just like copied from a textbook. He's just repeating examples of what is and is not a good relativization.

So could you make it into a Community Wiki page? That way, all references to me can be deleted and his efforts wouldn't been wasted -- he should be happy with this.

Alenanno

10:33

Well, that's not the intended use of the Community Wiki tool.

Hey @curiousdannii

curiousdannii

11:04

@Alenanno I added an "I think" to the parentheses - I don't think it warrants deletion.

Alenanno

@curiousdannii To Lemontree's answer?

curiousdannii

@HizHa Please give us the links to the racist posts so that we can ensure the racist users are quickly suspended.

@Alenanno Yeah to linguistics.stackexchange.com/a/19861/2555

@Alenanno You know I've read the post a couple of times and all the dozens of quotes in here and I only just noticed it was "understanding problem"! I thought it said "underlying problem" instead. Which would probably make more sense. Any chance that's what you mean @lemontree?

Alenanno

@curiousdannii I am not going to delete anything. I just suggested that that part between parentheses could be edited or removed because it's not really essential to the answer and it seems to be the one thing creating problems. I don't think Lemontree had bad intentions with it, but I can see how it could be misinterpreted.

curiousdannii

@Alenanno Yeah I meant even the part in the parentheses didn't warrant removal (though that was before I correctly read it as "understanding problem", which is more questionable.)

Hahaha, I just noticed that some of our "recent" starred messages are from over 4 years ago! I guess this chat room has always been fairly quiet

Alenanno

11:35

@curiousdannii Yeah :D

This site is taking so long to take off.

lemontree

12:44

I disagree. How is the word "understanding problem" racist?obviouslyIHizHa did have trouble understanding therelativisation issue discussed in the cited paragraph - otherwise (s)he would hardly have asked the question. If it makes any difference, remove it, but claiming that I made offensive, abusive, racist, ... assertions is just blatantly false.

Alenanno

13:54

@lemontree It's not racist. That's not what we and @curiousdannii were saying. But if you tell someone "Your understanding problem", it may sound more general than you think, something like "you generally have an understanding problem", or in other words "you can understand very little or nothing in general". Therefore a general, constantly present feature, like "I have a breathing problem" which is different than "I'm (currently) having problems breathing".

I hope it's a bit clearer now. It doesn't need to be removed, I personally think it would suffice to change the wording a little bit to make it clear that you're not judging his entire person, but just this particular subject. Adding the why (close to that sentence), will further help show that you're not making a personal attack, but rather that you have a reason to say it. Note again that I don't think you're attacking him. But I can see how it might look that way to someone else.

But that's the only point I can agree with. I think your answer doesn't objectively have any insults in it.

@lemontree Thoughts?

lemontree

Yes, that's what (s)he was insisting on all the time.
I think I understand what you mean, I wasn't aware of this meaning. I changed the part to "the problem".
As for the rest, I don't feel like I should add a disclaimer saying explicitly that I don't mean to attack the OP, because there is no need to spell out such a triviality - I didn't write anything personal so there is no reason to assume I meant anything personal. If HizHa still claims I did it's his turn to give a reasonable explanation for assuming so, not mine.

Alenanno

14:09

@lemontree Who talked about a disclaimer?

Thanks for the correction, by the way.

lemontree

Oops, I accidentally read an "it" before "will further help to ", assuming you were suggesting to add another sentence to my answer saying that I don't mean to attack the OP. Sorry, my bad.

Alenanno

@lemontree I meant that adding why you think he didn't understand it, might make the statement look less arbitrary, but I think you added that at the bottom of the answer, no?

lemontree

I already did that in my comments before this whole discussion even started. I stated that X is probably not what the paragraph wanted to say but instead that it wanted to say Y. This gives the direct reason for why I assumed the paragraph was misunderstood.

Alenanno

@lemontree Did you transpose that to the answer? Comments are not meant to hold information for a long time.

@HizHa If you want to leave Ling SE, it's fine. You may disassociate your account from the questions (they will be anonymized). But please don't go around asking people to delete their answers so you can delete your question, that's not how SE works.

lemontree

14:31

No, because whether I added this further clarification directly in the answer or as a comment (because I don't consider "You missed the point of my answer" much answer-like) is irrelevant to the fact that HizHa read this clarification before starting to make attacks against me.

Alenanno

@lemontree That's not the part I was referring to. I was referring to something along the lines of "I think you didn't understand that answer because..."... Just making up random wording now :D

And by the way

I think you have already added this (last part of your answer), I was just suggesting to move it to the start. But that's not really essential. It's just the editor in me.

I see you changed your avatar by the way. Is that supposed to be a ... lemon tree? :D

Alenanno

14:59

@HizHa meta.stackexchange.com/a/173311/176533

lemontree

20:25

If it's just about further improving the answer, then how is it relevant to the current discussion of what I did wrong?

Yes, it is. Nice to hear someone approves of my MS Paint skills ;) I was updating my profile info a little and thought this was somewhat nicer and more me-like than the boring default gravatar.

Transcript for