« first day (167 days earlier)      last day (3067 days later) » 
01:00 - 21:0021:00 - 22:00

Anonymous
1:17 AM
I've been told that's a common problem :-(
 
Anonymous
How would you transcribe the audio on that site?
 
4:59 AM
@dennylv Though I agree that we can understand the sentence with ellipsis, I don't think we have to. For example, consider another simple sentence: The coffee was served hot. You might find more information about this construction on ELL; look for "adjunct" or "subject complement". — Damkerng T. 41 secs ago
I hope I didn't post anything misleading.
 
5:48 AM
@Nihilist_Frost I must've missed something because they seemed to match well to me.
 
6:07 AM
Some other words don't seem to match that well.
For example, father /ˈfɑðər/, contradiction /ˌkɑntrəˈdɪkʃ(ə)n/. But the vowels in the first syllables of the two words don't sound the same to me.
 
Anonymous
How would you transcribe the audio in those clips?
 
Anonymous
I'll play devil's advocate: two vowels don't have to sound the same to be the same phoneme. Each vowel has a fairly wide range.
 
Anonymous
Phonetically we should expect the ɑ in each word to be different.
 
Anonymous
Each one is coarticulated with the consonants surrounding it.
 
@snailboat I'm not sure, but the one in father sounds more like /a/, and the one in contradiction sounds more like /ɔ/. Though neither sounds exactly like /a/ or /ɔ/.
 
Anonymous
6:16 AM
Do you mean /ɑ/ rather than /a/?
 
Now I'm confused (by the IPA symbols)!
 
Anonymous
Yeah, it was a bad idea putting both of those symbols in the IPA with different meanings :-(
 
But I tried to mean the "ahh" that a dentist would ask us to make when I wrote /a/.
 
Anonymous
That's /ɑ/
 
What about /kɑn/ for con? Is it the same /ɑ/?
 
Anonymous
6:19 AM
Seems like an okay /ɑ/ :-)
 
It's not quite like the one in father to my ear!
 
Anonymous
Well, we should expect it to be phonetically different.
 
Anonymous
It's between a different pair of consonants.
 
Anonymous
They honestly all sound like /ɑ/ to me, though.
 
nods -- Interesting! -- I may check them in spectrogram later.
 
Anonymous
6:22 AM
They'll certainly be different.
 
Anonymous
At a minimum, you'd expect [ɑ̃] before /n/.
 
nods
 
Anonymous
Wait, let me try this: Stack Overflow
 
Anonymous
It worked! I typed [so] and it turned into a link to Stack Overflow.
 
Anonymous
[japanese] [ell] [english]
 
Anonymous
6:30 AM
:-(
 
Anonymous
No love for the natural language sites.
 
Yeah, i know..that's why is just stuck to 'F'. Because "Elephant" is like one of the first words we learn right ? So this question has been left unanswered for over 2 decades. — Varun KN 10 mins ago
 
Oh! the chat didn't update anything for me for several minutes!
 
Anonymous
Olifants!
 
6:32 AM
(BTW, isn't elephant a Sanskrit word?)
 
Anonymous
Yay!
 
Congrats!
 
Oh! That's really interesting!
Maybe it's everywhere!
Hmm... ibhah? I think it's erawan in Sanskrit.
 
Anonymous
6:35 AM
> [ME. olifaunt, a. OF. olifant, repr. a popular L. *olifantu-m (whence Pr. olifan; cf. MDu. olfant, Bret. olifant, Welsh oliffant, Corn. oliphans, which may be all from ME. or OFr.), corrupt form of L. elephantum, elephantem (nom. elephantus, -phas, -phans), ad. and a. Gr. ἐλέϕας (gen. ἐλέϕαντος). The refashioning of the word after Lat. seems to have taken place earlier in Eng. than in Fr., the Fr. forms with el- being cited only from 15th c.
 
Anonymous
> Of the ultimate etymology nothing is really known. As the Gr. word is found (though only in sense ‘ivory’) in Homer and Hesiod, it seems unlikely that it can be, as some have supposed, of Indian origin. The resemblance in sound to Heb. eleph ‘ox’ has given rise to a suggestion of derivation from some Phœnician or Punic compound of that word; others have conjectured that the word may be African.
 
Anonymous
> See Yule Hobson-Jobson Suppl., s.v. For the possible relation to this word of the Teut. and Slavonic name for ‘camel’, see olfend. The origin of the corrupt Romanic forms with ol- is unknown, but they may be compared with L. oleum, olīva, ad. Gr. ἔλαιον, έλαία.]
 
Anonymous
(OED)
 
I thought it was because Alexander met elephants when he reached India, that elephant started a journey to become an English word later.
A-ha! I can explain why I hear father and con that way.
 
Anonymous
6:45 AM
The chart on the top shows roughly where American English vowels lie.
 
It's because my ears are trained to be specialized at distinguishing [ä] from [ɔ].
nods
(The chart I posted above is for Thai vowels.)
 
@snailboat Initially I misread that as suggesting American vowel deception... which sounded perfectly plausible, all things considered.
Also, hi guys!
 
@snailboat The British English counterpart is interesting!
Hi! @NathanTuggy
 
Anonymous
@NathanTuggy Darn American English vowels! Can't trust 'em.
 
LOL
 
6:47 AM
It's true! ;)
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. Yes! Note that even though many of them are quite far apart, by convention we use the same symbols in transcribing both.
 
Oh! That could be confusing at times!
 
Anonymous
With the notable exception of oʊ versus əʊ
 
Anonymous
At its core the IPA is a phonetic alphabet, not a phonemic one.
 
Anonymous
Linguists press it into service as a phonemic one, but that requires a certain amount of departure from what each symbol is supposed to represent.
 
Anonymous
6:49 AM
Besides that, even in phonetic transcriptions linguists make certain customary departures.
 
Anonymous
I gave the example of ʌ the other day, didn't I? When linguists write ʌ while discussing English, the sound they're indicating isn't anything like what the IPA ʌ is really supposed to indicate.
 
Anonymous
Our English ʌ is really quite central! If we wanted, we could use that double-dot diacritic you used for a in Thai transcription :-) But we don't.
 
Not sure if I remember that one.
 
Anonymous
Did you ever wonder why, if the basic sound of schwa is the same as wedge, they appear in different parts of the chart?
 
I indeed wonder that!
 
Anonymous
6:53 AM
English wedge used to sound like wedge is supposed to.
 
Hmm... the book transcribes hire, fire as [haə], [faə] (page 95, at the bottom). I think it's strange even in BrE.
 
Anonymous
But these days, it doesn't really. Linguists still use the same symbol.
 
@snailboat For a historical reason?
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. Most people don't pronounce them that way.
 
Oh, right. It says "some speakers".
 
Anonymous
6:54 AM
They're just pointing out that some people actually do have that diphthong.
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. Well, there was never a time at which /ʌ/ suddenly changed. It was very gradual.
 
Anonymous
So although everyone knows English ʌ isn't really pronounced like cardinal 14, there was never a single point at which it started being confusing.
 
Anonymous
See, it's the same sort of problem non-IPA spellings have!
 
BTW, I just found my Webster's New World Dictionary (Third College Edition).
It uses a transcription system that I'm sure you're not fond of. :P
 
Anonymous
By the way, Ladefoged & Johnson follow the Longman Pronunciation Dictionary conventions, except that they use /ɛ/ rather than /e/. Reason being, they need to contrast with German later on.
 
Anonymous
6:59 AM
If all you're talking about is English, /e/ is perfectly fine, since there's no contrast between [ɛ] and [e] in English, and the diphthong can be represented with /eɪ/, so there's no need to make people type a special character.
 
7:11 AM
3
Q: What does the 'would' mean in this sentence?

redkey88 My dad let the bike go without telling me. My dad would let the bike go without telling me. What is difference between two sentences? Why 'would' is inserted in this sentence? what 'would' mean in this sentence? 'would' is somewhat difficult word to me(non-native) That is past form of ...

I have a hunch that, given that it's written by a native speaker, it could be epistemic.
I wouldn't use would in that sentence myself, but I think I won't say that it's wrong either.
 
Anonymous
It's a little weird. The sentence with would is fine, but it jars a little directly following My dad held my bike from the back and I rode it for an hour.
 
nods
 
Anonymous
Like, did the author's dad start letting go, then holding on again, then letting go again?
 
Anonymous
I guess it's fine.
 
Anonymous
I think it's aspectual.
 
Anonymous
7:15 AM
Oh, hey.
 
Anonymous
I guess there's another interpretation.
 
Probably the one I guessed. :D
 
Anonymous
Iunno.
 
Anonymous
Pretty tough question.
 
Anonymous
7:17 AM
I won't vote on an answer since I'm not sure exactly what would is doing there.
 
I guess that the dad let go without telling the writer, so looking back, the writer used would because at that time they didn't know for sure.
 
Anonymous
Hmm, I'm not sure if it can work that way.
 
@snailboat nods -- It made me think if a non-native speaker wrote it.
^Not a good sentence of mine. Probably ungrammatical.
2
Q: What does "For next to" mean?

onlyforthisI will start with the example I know to make it clear. In a TV show this conversation happened: Guy1: This car is crap. I'll buy it for next to nothing? Guy2: How next to? I guess the fans of this show will figure out what it is :). Anyway, what does "for next to something" mean? An...

What? What show?! I don't know what that show is.
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. Check out this highly useful exchange:
 
Anonymous
Where did this sentence come from? — snailboat ♦ Nov 24 at 20:23
 
Anonymous
7:28 AM
From manga. A girl kissed the cat. And one of the manga characters, who saw the scene, delivers this phrase. — Tabibito Nov 24 at 20:28
 
Anonymous
Where did it come from? From manga.
 
Anonymous
That's very specific.
 
Hehe!
 
Anonymous
Erf, that question didn't end up very useful.
 
I'm not sure that the texts in some Thai comics can be used as good examples of the language.
 
Anonymous
7:33 AM
Most comics in Japanese are well edited, I think, although clearly that's not always the case.
 
Anonymous
But even so, they conventionally contain transcriptions of highly colloquial language, and often things that people don't actually say in real life.
 
Anonymous
Japanese comics also use all sorts of orthographic conventions that aren't in general use.
 
For comical effects. (note the pun :)
 
Anonymous
So even if a comic is well edited, it might not always be the best source of information for a learner :-)
 
Anonymous
I say this as someone who's addicted to web comics.
 
Anonymous
7:34 AM
My latest discovery is this site comico.jp and their iPhone app!
 
nods -- It has one great virtue: it can be very attractive, and possibly even addictive!
 
Anonymous
They have a bunch of free webcomics and webnovels to read :-) They update weekly, different ones scheduled on different days.
 
Neat! Is it free?
 
Anonymous
 
Anonymous
Yes it is!
 
7:35 AM
Hah! The drawing examples look too good to be free!
 
Anonymous
And ad-free. Apparently they make money in other ways – selling books, merchandise, licensing.
 
Ahh
I wonder who are the mangaka. Do the mangaka know about or consent to publish their work on the site?
 
Anonymous
Yes, they make them specifically for the site.
 
Ahh... That's really nice!
 
Anonymous
I don't know if they actually make money yet with this business model, but they're owned by the Line people.
 
Anonymous
Comico is two years old now, but I only heard of them this year.
 
@snailboat Oh, they must be up to something.
Line was free at first. Soon it became everything stickers!
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. Well, I'm readin' for free while the readin' is good! ;-)
 
I'm still confused and usually think that Line is Korea-based. :-)
 
Anonymous
Apart from きみのこえ, I don't know any comics there to recommend yet.
 
Anonymous
7:42 AM
@DamkerngT. That sort of thing is really common!
 
Anonymous
Sometimes they even do it with things that aren't brand names, like potato chips.
 
Anonymous
I haven't seen that comic you linked to.
 
I just picked it randomly.
 
Anonymous
That's sort of what I've been doing :-)
 
Anonymous
Well, I only really picked one so far.
 
7:44 AM
Sometimes the cover looks way better than the inside, but the manga on this site look pretty good as far as I can tell.
 
Anonymous
But I finished it (at least, I'm caught up with the archives!) so I need to pick another if I want to keep reading.
 
I can't find きみのこえ.
 
Anonymous
I thought I linked to it!
 
Anonymous
 
Thanks!
 
Anonymous
7:46 AM
You can click 1話目から読む to start at the beginning.
 
Hmm... I have a problem figuring out the gender of one of the characters on the cover. :P
 
Anonymous
The one on the left is a girl and the one on the right is a boy.
 
Anonymous
They're on different sides of a thick glass wall.
 
Anonymous
The boy, ゆうひ (yūhi) lives inside a large dome, inside of which is an artificial purified atmosphere where he, and others like him, can survive.
 
A-ha! Got it! Thanks!
 
Anonymous
7:49 AM
The air outside is toxic to him. But the air inside is toxic to most people outside.
 
I think I have to check it out later. My browser doesn't look good enough to handle it at the moment.
@snailboat An interesting plot!
 
Anonymous
But they've just finishing making it possible to see the outside world from inside the dome, due to advances in technology.
 
Anonymous
And the boy and the girl happen to meet – from opposite sides of the wall!
 
Anonymous
Anyway, I thought it was a cute story :-)
 
Is the dialogue good?
 
Anonymous
7:50 AM
I like it!
 
A-ha! I think I will check it out. It even has the app!
 
Anonymous
It's pretty funny sometimes.
 
Anonymous
I can't help but feel that all my contributions on this question are hopelessly academic and that they aren't really going to reach anyone: ell.stackexchange.com/q/74695/230
 
Anonymous
I'm trying, though! :-)
 
I think I get your point. I think shin gets it too.
 
Anonymous
7:53 AM
I was kind of conflicted leaving the comment because I don't think I can really write a proper answer to shin's comment without writing something answer-length.
 
Anonymous
The same thing is true if I suggest that the string in the second example in Jasper's comment beginning with who is a relative clause that's part of the focus, with the actual variable ellipted, that just happens to resemble the first example in surface structure. I can't think of a way to describe this briefly that doesn't involve a bunch of technical terms.
 
I think the only way to cleft it that I can think of is: It wasn't that anyone saw the thief.
@sgroves job! :) When linguists derive any word from any other language, they retain the meaning. It's irony that James Cameron used it first for its 'one' meaning and the natives have been following it ever since! Since native speakers seem to be interested in its meaning, let me tell you. The one that loses its original shape, traditional looks, size, or becomes entirely different is called 'avatar changed'. Now, it's your take -learn it or trash it. I won't call this 'job' for you at all! — Maulik V ♦ 3 hours ago
I think this is quite a misconception.
I'm pretty sure that James Cameron wasn't the first who use avatar in this meaning.
(Well, except for the bluish, tally beings)
 
Yeah, "avatar" was borrowed (and specialized, and made entirely native, with its own meaning) quite a while ago; I believe in sci-fi, yes, but decades before the film.
The first citation appears to be in the 1700s (!)
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. But that's not a cleft.
 
@NathanTuggy Hah!
 
Anonymous
8:07 AM
The things in the other answers aren't clefts, either.
 
@snailboat Argh! I have to review the definition of cleft sentences, I think! :-)
 
Anonymous
They're cleft in two.
 
Anonymous
> Snailboat ate the cake.
 
Anonymous
> It was Snailboat that ate the cake.
 
Anonymous
We took one thing out of the sentence, the subject in this case, and we focused it.
 
Anonymous
8:09 AM
There's a variable in this sentence.
 
Anonymous
Someone ate the cake. Who? Snailboat.
 
Anonymous
The focused element tells us what the value of that variable is.
 
We can't form a similar question for It wasn't that anyone saw the thief.
 
Well, you can, but only focusing on the wrong element.
>It was the thief whom no one saw
 
Anonymous
So we split the sentence into two parts: one part identifies a variable (X), presupposing that X ate the cake. The other part identifies the value of that variable (X = Snailboat).
 
8:11 AM
@NathanTuggy Oh, right!
 
Anonymous
The focus (Snailboat in this example) is usually presented as old information, by the way.
 
@snailboat ... must resist unwarranted snarky response!
(I should go to bed soon, really.)
 
Anonymous
cries
 
BTW, Is +66 (for the word crumple) the highest number of votes on ELL?
 
Anonymous
We've got an answer at +100 at least.
 
8:13 AM
@NathanTuggy I know that feeling!
 
Anonymous
But the key to remember with "clefts" is that the sentence is "clefted" into two parts.
2
 
Anonymous
The basic type (often just called a 'cleft') is the it-cleft. That's the type where you say It is/was X that/wh* . . .
 
Anonymous
The other basic type is the pseudo-cleft: [What confused me] was [the wording of the question].
 
Anonymous
This kind is reversible: [The wording of the question] was [what confused me].
 
Anonymous
We can relate these to un-clefted sentences, too: The wording of the question confused me.
 
Anonymous
8:16 AM
But see CGEL p.1423 for discussion of why these might be called "pseudo-" clefts and not considered real clefts.
 
Anonymous
(Sometimes we can't find an equivalent "un-clefted" sentence for a pseudo-cleft!)
 
@snailboat Does a pseudo-cleft always have to begin with a Wh-word?
(BTW, I should read about it myself, having my own CGEL a few feet away. :-)
(Probably a little longer than just a few feet. More like a few yards.)
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. Yes, but who doesn't work.
 
A-ha! Thanks!
 
Anonymous
That's because who doesn't work in fused relatives more generally, and that's what we've got here – remember, a fused relative looks like a relative clause, but there's no head noun before it to be modified, and the entire constituent is functionally like a noun phrase.
 
8:23 AM
Hmm... Whoever probably works in pseudo-clefts.
 
@DamkerngT. Yes.
but as informative as this all is, it really is time for me to head to bed
good night!
 
Anonymous
Rest well!
 
Good night!
 
Anonymous
Oh, I shouldn't still be up.
 
Anonymous
8:32 AM
I also shouldn't be Stack Exchanging right now ;-)
 
I'm going to be off the room soon myself too. :-)
 
9:02 AM
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. It was fine to me too, I hope you didn't get annoyed.
 
1
A: What does the 'would' mean in this sentence?

Varun KNYes, 'would' tends to confuse many people. In the above sentence, an event is being reported to somebody as an extract from the subject's past. While reporting the event in a particular timeline, the listener tends to understand it as if happened just now (For his better of the event, based on vi...

A curious questions and an answer that I had to read twice to understand.
 
nods -- Snailboat and I have different opinions on this one.
I thought it should about epistemic (possibility), which seems to be in the same direction as modulusshift's comment: ell.stackexchange.com/questions/74696/…
It was a strange would for me as well. I mean, in the context.
 
As evidenced by some Asian script on the margins, this is a textbook. The text was probably written by a non-native speaker who used would inappropriately (for the context)
 
9:34 AM
I just heard about the shootout. My condolences to the families.
 
 
1 hour later…
10:55 AM
@DamkerngT. I've read that part in PEU but it's still cryptic to me. It seems that the question is of the "complement" type, so the word order should be what it is.
"This is why I am so interested in the biographies of those early people: I want to understand what is it that allows non'alcoholics to understand alkies."
What is it that allows them understand alkies? - It is their intellect
Not "their intellect is it that allows them to understand alkies"
O_o
I'll try to read up on this in Quirk et al.
 
@CopperKettle I understand it as "I want to understand what is it, and if their intellect is it, then it is what it is".
I think if there is no that clause after what is it, it'd always be phrased as I want to understand what it is. Hmm... maybe this is related to cleft-sentences.
With the that-clause, it would sound odd to move is to the right, I think.
> ?I want to understand what it is that allows non'alcoholics to understand alkies.
> *I want to understand what it that allows non'alcoholics to understand alkies is.
 
Thank you for your musings. My brain refuses to work today, along with the body. (0:
 
Mine doesn't work very well, either. :D
 
I noticed that the simple "I want to understand what is it" is a no-no.
 
nods -- I think it's because the speaker knows it and uses it as a pronoun.
But in what is it that ..., it sounds pretty much like a dummy it. Just my opinion, though.
(So the question is more about what, not about it.)
> Having admitted that it cannot know what it is doing, the relatively autonomous self might begin to wonder just what it is that keeps it together as a unified, more or less stable, and generally continuous entity throughout the day.
We can remove the ? in my first example now.
 
11:13 AM
0
Q: why no I want to understand what is it

CopperKettleFrom "The Collected Ernie Kurtz" (2008), page 120: This is why I am so interested in the biographies of those early people: I want to understand what is it that allows non'alcoholics to understand alkies. Why is it "what is it" and not "what it is"? According to the so-called "Penthouse ...

Lest I forget later, I'd better have a question answered and answers stashed at (in? on?) ELL. (0:
 
Wow, it's much harder to find what we want in the results of what it is that. Too many results of another kind.
> For right now concentrate on the end, what is it that you truly desire.
This is another common way to phrase it, as an in-situ question.
> Before you can know what you would be willing to do because of your convictions, you have to know what is it that you're convinced about.
> You know what is it that you will do?
> but my daddy, he wants to know who was it I went to hell to see, and I said the guidance lady from school, but you know I didn't mean you.
But all in all, it seems like <verb> what|who|which <be> it that is in the minority.
The pattern <verb> what|who|which it <be> that is much more common.
 
nods
BBL!
 
11:29 AM
See you later!
 
Ha. (0: I've just read a nice joke.
"Только в русском языке можно составить предложение из трех гласных букв:
- Э, а я?"
"Only in Russian you can compose a full-fledged sentence from three vowels"
2
"Э, а я" - means Hey, how about me?
 
11:57 AM
A little awkward but may be passable: It was everyone who did not see the thief.
(Hey, I can imagine that being said by the father in Brave: It was everyone who did not see the bear!)
 
12:10 PM
I agree that it should be "what it is" but one hears (sees) the inversion often. If I had to say what it was, I'd say it was a sort of rhetorical "audience-attention-grabbing" flourish, because in speech, the "is" in such inversions typically gets emphasized. ...I want to know, what is it.... It's almost as if a question were being posed. It's halfway between a question and a statement. — TRomano 2 mins ago
 
 
3 hours later…
2:55 PM
1
Q: Article in the phrase "Added [article] basic support ..."

ixSciSuppose I've written some code and added a feature which now allows our application to support some Apple device (I've made it all up just to provide some context). Now I'm writing a concise report for what I've done. How would I write the phrase? Added basic Apple support ... Added a basic App...

This cat needs an eyepatch:
 
 
1 hour later…
4:18 PM
Hi, @Catija!
I'll admit that spelling 30th out as "thirtieth" looks weird to me!
Maybe it's just that I don't write this word very often.
 
4:30 PM
Nah. Usually if it's over tenth, I write it with numerals 30th.
 
 
2 hours later…
7:25 PM
I wonder if this is trolling
0
Q: How do i say this? In a single phrase

user27200I want to say that women's freedom is because of us.we,men, have given all those liberty that they have in today's time.earlier we used to keep them from freedom.we ,men, are the ones who will bring them back to thier level,if neccessary.we tell them what to do or what not to do.

 
7:44 PM
Oh wow. I was wondering if there was a message system in this site.
I really, really don't think that was trolling.
Hey, I made it in the chat about the thing I was looking for the chat about before I even knew there was a chat! That "would" question was mind-blowing to me, and also kinda a terrible thing to realize at 1:30 in the morning.
 
8:02 PM
Good past-midnight, @modulusshift!
I wonder how do we call the "flat crust" when we bake a cake.
A cake consisting of four round crusts connected together by some creme and stuff.
Good night, @Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ.!
 
\o
Hullo @Modulus! Welcome!
 
I wonder how we call the process of mixing baking soda with lemon juice. Neutralization?
In Russian, the word is "extinguish" (verb).
Take half a spoon of baking soda, extinguish it with some lemon juice or vinegar.
 
@CopperKettle Yah.
"Neutralization of acid–base"
^ That endash, @Snail
 
Nice, thank you, Muhammad!
 
Wow, this is a really fancy chat. reply/replied markers, username mentions without the full username, rich links...
 
I guess I shouldn't expect any less from Stack Overflow. :)
 
I personally favor it to all chat interfaces I've seen.
And BTW @Modolus I started chatting here n ELL's chatrooms. :)
 
... all these features pale in comparison with Snailboat (but today she's not here)
 
This @Dam dude is really hospitable.
And @Snail goes without saying.
@CopperKettle She's watching.
 
I'm much more used to bare IRC, with maybe a kinda gimmicky auto mod bot.
 
8:17 PM
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. Hello!
Welcome to the room! @modulusshift
 
@Modulus if you felt you'd like to continue to hang with us, there are chat intros.
@DamkerngT. \o
Oct 21 at 21:59, by inɒzɘmɒЯ.A.M
@VictorBazarov OK, chat intro, level 2: @Dam is a robot, @TCh is something worse than a robot, @Stoney is a guy from the past millennia, I'm a chemical, @Snail is a snail vehicle, @Jim is the judge in Judge and Jury, @Copper is a Russian bike biker, and we're yet to see a normal human here.
 
o/ I just drop in to say hi. Still a little busy with something else, and it's a rather late hour for me now.
 
@DamkerngT. Does 'late' have a meaning for you?
2
 
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. My description looks good to me.
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. Sometimes it does. :D
 
8:21 PM
I'll probably drop in from time to time, I'm a seasonal ELL'er because I often get interrupted with classwork and forget about the site for a couple months.
 
@modulusshift You've got a cute avatar, by the way. :-)
 
Pinkie's the best. :)
Wow, I guess I've been using this avatar for four years now.
I probably don't even have the original file, so I'd have to go recreate it from the episode if I needed it again.
 
@modulusshift Don't forget that we have Winter Bash ahead!
 
We get hats again?
 
YES! \o/
 
8:27 PM
(Hi, btw.)
 
8:38 PM
Wait a sec: while we might find this humorous and a little far-fetched, this particular user is making death threats against another. I don't mean to sound alarmist but none of us on our worst day would even come close to sounding like that. — Jay Blanchard May 28 '14 at 17:25
 
I just saw Stoney float down into the users list. :) This chat system...
 
@Snail how I wish I could have access to that Crashtan . . .
 
The Winter Bash countdown is completely inscrutable.
Every time I look over at it, it seems to have gained another digit, or maybe letter?
 
That's the point.
@modulusshift Every minutes passing, those little guys feel some pain in the stomach and change their arrangements.
 
@modulusshift Just dropping in from past millennia. Second one last time I looked.
 
8:43 PM
Poor guys.
 
@CopperKettle In cooking doesn't the acid activate the baking soda?
 
@StoneyB but only past time travel, not future?
 
@StoneyB Activate? thank you! It was "extinguish" (like fire) in Russian so I thought it "neutralized" the soda.
 
@modulusshift From what I've seen of the future it doesn't look very welcoming.
 
@StoneyB That's not the perspective they chose to choose.
@CopperKettle No, it is neutralization.
 
8:45 PM
My surname is not Mendeleyev.
Ohhh..
 
@StoneyB Concerning.
 
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. Yes, chemically it's neutralization; but from the cook's point of view isn't the point of the effort generating the gas that puffs up the batter?
@modulusshift Not if you're not planning on going there.
 
@StoneyB weird - you discussing cooking here...
 
@StoneyB Oh, to be freely fourth dimensional...
 
Baking soda is basic, lemon juice is acidic. The result is kinda neutral.
@StoneyB I haven't seen cooks dare choose a different terminology than chemists . . .
 
8:49 PM
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. Which is what we cooks want - plus the bubbles!
 
@modulusshift Sorry, that's poetry's function, and LitCrit is off-topic here :P
 
I know, but it's called neutralization, no matter how we slice it.
 
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. Cooking is alchemy, and this science is more ancient than chemistry, hence it has precedence. (0:
 
LitCrit is OT, but talking about cats and dogs and snails and hearing and theology isn't.
 
8:51 PM
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. Would you care to double-check over at Seasoned Advice ;-)
 
@CopperKettle But they're really the same. Alchemy is Al-Chemy, from the Arabic.
 
I'll need to kill some cooks.
Preferably asking my cousin CO.
 
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. Well, slicing isn't going to work if you don't activate the leaven. You're gonna hafta take a chisel to it.
 
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. They must be neutralized.
 
@modulusshift nods
 
8:52 PM
Or is it activated?
 
@CopperKettle Funny how we prefer modern belongings but honor the past.
Wait what was the context anyway? Cooking or chem or something else?
 
I'm translating a recipe into English. (0:
 
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. I mean, Kettle. :)
 
So that my sister's friend in India could cook some Russian cakes. (0:
 
@CopperKettle I feel sad for you.
@CopperKettle I don't feel sad for you.
 
8:54 PM
(0:
You're acting bipolar!
 
@CopperKettle Then why are you asking a chemist? Come over to the Frying Pan!
 
what is it called when you hit your head and try to calm your pain by doing something like a massage on the skin? You rub it? Massage it? Or something else?
 
@Stephie Yes, probably I should. (0:
 
@Stephie That's one of the biggest exaggerations I've seen. Me no chemist. :)
 
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. Whack the other side of your head, on the counter-irritant principle.
 
8:57 PM
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. Assuage?
 
Not literally about the rubbing, though, I suppose.
 
Rub's the usual word.
 
@StoneyB Ay, there's the rub.
 
01:00 - 21:0021:00 - 22:00

« first day (167 days earlier)      last day (3067 days later) »