Dronke's book is the original language, plus a translation and commentary? That's what I'm gathering from what I've read of it (along with high praise about the work as a whole).

@Adam Yep. It's your standard critical edition (good intro, including a breakdown of manuscripts and an app crit), side-by-side Old Norse and English, and then a commentary to boot.

I have several OCT commentaries of Greek and Latin texts, but none have the English, so it's a welcome surprise to see it there.

After some searching those pricey used copies seem to be it. I didn't search for PDFs but the only one I found incidentally wasn't great; it look like someone just flipped through and took pictures.

Tax returns? :P

@cmw Thank you. I can see why L&S did not attempt to translate this line and how it gave Seb a headache. Perseus didn't bother either. It's an ablative absolute, then? Here's another try, even if it makes me look stupid: "but with the transpositions of words not having been made more tedious than necessary...". Impersonal verb, "oportet", selects the accusative + infinitive, has this been glossed-over? The only acc.-infin. construction comes after the subordinate clause, "eam fecisse".

@cmw Do you have a thought on this translation? Should I ask this on the mainsite? Is this a nightmare unfolding?

@tony I'll take a look later and offer up a fuller translation.

Has anyone else noticed that the browser tab for chat no longer shows anything to indicate tags or new message? It used to append something like (1) for tags or an asterisk for new messages without tags.

@Adam Was it for all messages or only the ones that pinged you?

Either way, I agree that there used to be a red blob or something and I'm not sure if it's there anymore now that you mention it.

I still get that.

If I'm not looking at the page and there is a message, the tab will change from CONLOQVIVM to CONLOQVIVM (1).

I'm using Firefox here. Maybe Chrome or Safari changed?

@JoonasIlmavirta It varied. It was like what @cmw has above if I was tagged, otherwise just an asterisk.

Maybe I need to log out and clear cache/cookies.

@Adam I have been told that a cache of cookies ought to be in a tin in a cupboard and it is indeed good to clear it if it has been mistakenly placed within a computer.

@JoonasIlmavirta That is the best way to clear cookies, without question.

Also, logging out and clearing those within the browser seems to have resolved the issue.

@Adam The best way to clear cookies is to bring them to the office to share.

More difficult to do that working from home.

@cmw If I could, I would.

Well, when there were still cookies to bring. They have been eaten!

Btw, I emailed Oxford Press and asked if they were going to do a new printing of the first volume of Dronke's books. I just started with their basic contact, so they may or may not be able to answer.

@Adam Let me know if they do!

Their answer will likely be a cookie cutter response, though. I wouldn't hold my breath for anything good.

Also, the people who respond to that sort of thing generally don't even know the answer themselves.

I figured as much but thought it wouldn't hurt. I asked them to let me know if there's somewhere better to email since I just used the generic support email.

Who knows how well the various teams there communicate with each other. :P

I posted an answer under the recent meta post. I'd be very interested to see what others, especially non-moderators, think of the business.

I noticed that several SE sites have instituted policies against answers generated by ChatGPT. Do yoi believe we've had AI-generated answers yet?

I was wondering about the deleted answers to this and this question ...

@SebastianKoppehel Interesting that both are formatted exactly the same way. The formatting doesn't scream ChatGPT in particular to me, but I wouldn't be surprised either.

@JoonasIlmavirta I think your rationale and reasoning makes sense. It seems pretty clear to me that a general timeout was warranted. If they'd like to participate in the community again in the future there are clear directives on what they should or shouldn't do.

@SebastianKoppehel "in overall" also doesn't scream ChatGPT to me, but who knows!? We have actually deleted one post already for failing a ChatGPT checker test and suspicion was raised on a second.

@Adam Well, we've tried directives and constrained permissions, and no change resulted. I'd have been happy if it had worked out, but I've lost hope in this matter's ability to fix itself.

@cmw Right, “in overall” is strange. If these tools do something well, it is producing grammatical outout.

I have been putting some thought into what it is that makes a post welcome, and it might be of some use to spell it out. I don't think it's fruitful to entertain demands like "Show me exactly where I've gone wrong!", and I think I've deconstructed such demands to my satisfaction.

By the way, English speakers, do you think “I shall want for nothing” is proper English?

@SebastianKoppehel Yes, but it sounds stuffy. I'm sure i'd get a weird look if I replied to a server in a restaurant with that.

Excuse me sir, would you like another drink?

I shall want for nothing!

Stuffy, okay, but why “for”? Should it not be “I want nothing”? Maybe a question for English Language & Usage (or English Language Learners).

@SebastianKoppehel There are tools out there that detect AI generated text quite accurately. I recall testing at least one clear case.

@SebastianKoppehel That's what puzzles me too! It rings no bell as an idiom and I struggle to parse it grammatically.

oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/…

@Adam Thanks! I've learnt something.

I would parse it as something like, I lust for nothing, and just use want instead.

Those phrasal verbs do me in.

Thanks for attending my TED talk

@Adam It seems I am too stupid to use Merriam-Webster. You actually have to look up “want for,” not just “want.”

I've deleted my comment.

lol

I think you want for Merriam-Webster

They have cute features on their website. I am happy to report that the most looked-up word right at this moment is "woot."

I wonder if they have the alternate spelling of w00t. It's more l33t, afterall.

@Adam But of course.

@SebastianKoppehel It's a bit archaic, but not improper. I think "in want of nothing" might be slightly more common.

@Adam I don't think the youngins know about l33t anymore.

133t5p34k 4 LYF

(Honestly, glad we're out of that phase of the internet!)

@SebastianKoppehel If you want a real ungrammatical and confused malapropism, try "I am want for nothing."

Seems they blended together "I want for nothing" with "I am wont [to do]".

@cmw Which reminds of the quote that Oppenheimer used after they detonated the gadget: "Now I am become death".

I think Tolkien used something similar somewhere in LotR, and it still sounds goofy to me.

@cmw H4XX0rz everywhere cry out

@Adam Joy to the World, the Lord is come.

I think I got used to the archaism enough that it no longer feels goofy to me.

But definitely paused over it in my youth.

And perhaps the Latin equivalent erased the oddity of it.

be instead of have for verbs that denote movement or change of state – it's the German way!

Now I am become more educated!

Speaking of German, any recommendations on good books to learn German? I can use Rosetta stone but what they hell, apparently I like these strange bound collections of paper people call books.

I don't think I'd start right now but in the future.

@Adam No match for a clay tablet, but certainly beats the modern glass tablet.

@Adam For speaking or for academic reading? I only did academic German, so I have no opinions on any modern German textbook, sorry!