@SebastianKoppehel Ratus sum istud nomen parum utile et dulce esse, quare versionem Arabiciorem elegi... Fortasse esse deberet simplicius camelopardalia? Nescio an similia exempla habeamus.
@SebastianKoppehel Scisne quomodo camelopardales Romam perlati sint? Navibus giraffatim?
I hereby declare that a valid adverb.
@Adam I have one attached to my keys. The bigger ones lounge around and travel less.
@JoonasIlmavirta Cuius generis vehiculo camelopardes Romam iter fecerint, memoriae, quod scio, non proditum est. Navibus vectas esse vero proximum videtur, nam si per Alpes perductae essent, certe aliquis historicus eam rem posteritati notam fecisset.
@JoonasIlmavirta I've always thought of them as the mammalian equivalent of a brontosaurus.
My favorite animal is the coyote. I know they're essentially just a small version of wolves and a nuisance or threat to some people, but I still like them anyway.
@Adam I doubt we'll ever know all the reasons they developed long necks, but apparently a recent paper suggests it's due to protection against head-butting.
Frankly, I'm dismayed that biologists still only ever think there's one driving reason for change.
@Cerberus Even in the Humanities I've encountered this far too often. "What one thing is the author alluding to?" Well, why can't they allude to multiple things at the same time? Regular people do that all the time, why can't authors, too?
There was no single reason Rome fell. It fell for a variety of reasons, and maybe a handful were more important the the dozen others.
