« first day (1863 days earlier)      last day (3109 days later) » 
00:00 - 23:0023:00 - 00:00

12:00 AM
Damn it.
I missed the deadline.
I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to get this hat.
Oops, what happened? Hats?
Which hatalot?
It is UTC 0000 now.
I have to vote something like 36 times a day for 7 days.
@tchrist Vote Early, Vote Often.
250 votes in 7 days.
I keep forgetting to max out my votes.
Trigger finger, trigger thumb, or trigger digit (also a sub-set of stenosing tenosynovitis) is a common disorder characterized by catching, snapping or locking of the involved finger flexor tendon, associated with dysfunction and pain. A disparity in size between the flexor tendon and the surrounding retinacular pulley system, most commonly at the level of the first annular (A1) pulley, results in difficulty flexing or extending the finger and the “triggering” phenomenon. The label of trigger finger is used because when the finger unlocks, it pops back suddenly, as if releasing a trigger on a gun...
12:01 AM
I will wait for the Santa hat.
A: Possible exception to the subject-verb agreement rule

Kit Z. FoxYou cannot make movements singular by force of preference, but you could substitute a singular noun that means the same thing. Such as Slight variation/oscillation/deflection in the resonant peak is attributed to the changes in the refractive index. or whatever is appropriate to describe th...

Are you impugning my integrity gets one vote and are you doubting my integrity gets no votes? LOL
Accepted in less than two minutes.
@KitZ.Fox Strange no upvote there, LOL
12:05 AM
Can he upvote? Don't you need a certain rep for that?
He has 30 points so I think he can.
I have 6 hats, LOLLOLLOL
I am not even actively trying!
Oh, you have 19...
I see 6 is quite a small number...
12:07 AM
I thought I had the biggest number...
Hello @Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 if you want to discuss the increasing sequence question with me, you can.
I don't have much to add. He mentioned a reference which I don't have anymore and can't be bothered to look up.
"increasing sequence" is so common in math books that its meaning is clear in that question.
Sure, one can define a cat to be a dog. But nobody I know of defines "increasing sequence" the way he did in his answer.
That's what I figured
12:13 AM
I don't have that book with me, but either he misread it or the author defined it a very special way for a very special situation in his book.
There is some variation though in math books about the definition of "increasing sequence"
Sometimes, equality is allowed, the inequality need not be strict.
But that is not relevant to the post.
If you define a cat to be a dog, what exactly have you said is what? :-)
I am confused LOL
12:16 AM
«"How do you know that you're mad?" "To begin with," said the Cat, "a dog's not mad. You grant that?" "I suppose so," said Alice. "Well then," the Cat went on, "you see a dog growls when it's angry, and wags its tail when it's pleased. Now I growl when I'm pleased, and wag my tail when I'm angry. Therefore I'm mad.”»
I like your guillmettes. Or what ever those things are called.
Where's @tchrist when you need code points?
My PC gives them the unfortunate name of "left- and right-pointing double angle quotation marks."
I know about parentheses, brackets, braces and chevrons.
<<These oughta do>>
12:19 AM
Wikipedia says they're "guillemets".
I think they are used in Chinese too.
˙ʇɐq ǝɔᴉN
mac(tchrist)% unichars '[\p{Pi}\p{Pf}]'
Is tchrist a bot?
= left guillemet
= chevrons (in typography)
• usually opening, sometimes closing
→ 226A ≪  much less-than
→ 300A 《  left double angle bracket
= right guillemet
• usually closing, sometimes opening
→ 226B ≫  much greater-than
→ 300B 》  right double angle bracket
@JohnNash That's such a limiting term.
Aren't we all bots?
When we're not bats.
12:25 AM
I think deadrat is probably a student in English or something. Just my guess.
@JohnNash If you define a deadrat to be a student in English, what exactly have you said is what?
@MετάEd You made the hat yourself right?
@JohnNash Which hat?
I don't see anyone else with a Santa hat yet.
The red one you are wearing.
12:29 AM
The brown hat is an SE hat. The Santa hat behind it is my hat.
I suspect Kit is talking to deadrat now, lol
@JohnNash backs further away
1 hour later…
1:40 AM
Hi. Can anyone lead me to any pages that discuss the difference between "such that " and "for which"?
2 hours later…
3:38 AM
'punk' = rotten sticks used as tinder vs young leather studded rapscallion, is interesting but gen ref. Started as rotten wood used as tinder, then rotten, then prostitute,then catamite, then worthless person, then youn inexperienced person, then young criminal, then sex pistols.
Q: Etymology of "punk"?

fzwoI was wondering where the noun punk stems from. Obviously, it's used for members of a certain subculture, but has the word been in use before the invention of said subculture and been adapted for it, or has it been made up specifically for it?

Ya feelin' lucky?
3:58 AM
@cornbreadninja麵包忍者 Hey.
I often dream about sleeping with men, funny right?
I just woke up from such a dream.
7 more days to Xmas, good.
Yeah? Was he snoring?
4:12 AM
No, we were both awake.
@anongoodnurse Hi medica.
So ah, when do we get the chat bot back?
4:23 AM
Oh, maybe you can ask Kit about that?
Time to saw logs.
For Xmas tree?
For visions of sugarplums.
sawing logs = snoring
Goodnight, see you in your dreams.
1 hour later…
5:41 AM
@KitZ.Fox If you are free, you can delete those five accounts, thanks. Username is 'please delete me' and avatar is a monochromatic square, if you need to search.
9:11 AM
What do people think about the edit to this question's title by @Mari-LouA? I'm tempted to say that if someone asks "what's the word for this" then changing the title to "what's the word for word", i.e. making the question beg itself, is a bit pointless.
Also, yay for me for finding a proper usage for "beg the question" (I think).
9:43 AM
I'm not one to reopen unilaterally, but this question doesn't seem off topic
What does everyone think?
10:20 AM
@MattE.Эллен You might be right about the question, but I do think that the answer looks like spam.
10:42 AM
any chance of a +3 for my Q and A here? stackoverflow.com/a/34353705/724176 I'm still trying to come up with a Q for EL&U but in the meantime that came up anyway.
@AndyT "What's this picture called?" is a bad title, "What do you call a “cropped image” on a website?" is much better.
@MattE.Эллен Closed as proof-reading. I think it's an ok question about grammar: Can you have multiple 'to's after a single 'from'? "From a to b, c to d, e to f...", or does each bit need its own 'from'?
the first version of the question was much worse. Current one is better.
11:05 AM
It's kind of silly to quote dictionary entries for every answer. Not really needed for common words.
@Hugo - I don't disagree that the original title wasn't great. But editing the question title so that it answers itself doesn't seem a good idea either.
True, but does "What do you call a “cropped image” on a website?" answer itself?
OK, the edit is done, let us leave it that way @AndyT and @Hugo.
@tchrist The answer is quoting the question in its original form
@MattE.Эллен I bumped the virgin post with an edit and someone downvoted me, LOL.
11:10 AM
@Hugo - I've just looked closer and spotted that the OP used the term "cropped picture" in his question body. Which I feel makes it fair game for adding to the title, and makes me agree that the title doesn't (necessarily) contain the answer. Objection removed.
@AndyT Even better!
I am now a navy square.
@JohnNash no accounting for taste
@MattE.Эллен He probably got irritated that I bumped it.
who knows? only the downvoter
11:14 AM
@MattE.Эллен I deleted my meta question because the question was reopened. I really disagree with Reg closure there.
I now have 7 hats.
I see a @snailboat.
11:26 AM
I am going to eat dinner, bye.
12:34 PM
@MattE.Эллен I agree, the question is on-topic
12:56 PM
@KitZ.Fox I think the results show that people want the chat bot back.
1:15 PM
or what is the quote?
Q: Did Einstein say "if you can't explain it simply you don't understand it well enough"?

RenanA very popular quote attributed to Albert Einstein but did he really say it? If so, what is the original document containing the original explanation of it?

Barmaid? Most barmaids are astrophysicists trying to put themselves through college. Or the other way round.
So what is the real age cutoff? 8 years old? 10 years old? I feel like 13 because there is some basic sciency ideas (Not necessarily vocab) that you don't have until then. Like you don't want the kid saying 'I've never heard of DNA'
If you can't explain something to yourself, you don't understand it well enough
so, @Mitch, why does 1 + 1 = 2?
@Mitch I'm not allowed to say if I've heard of NDA
2:14 PM
@MattE.Эллен Oh thanks!
@KitZ.Fox When I last saw it, I thought it was just a block of text without a question.
I've voted to reöpen.
@MattE.Эллен "That's an excellent question. How about you come to office hours and I can explain in copious detail!"
I'll never see that student again.
@MattE.Эллен But in a single comment? I can do that.
"You see, the labels one (or 1) and two (or 2) we've all agreed stand for a number of tick marks like '|'. But also plus (or +) stands for a way of pushing these tick marks around (mostly just putting them side by side). So putting '|' next to '|' gives you '||' which is what we have labeled 2. 1+1=2 is obvious, asking why is not obvious, but it turns out the the explanation, '|' next to '|' gives '||' is kinda obvious as we would hope."
Just remember that 2 + 2 = 5 for large values of 2.
If you're three years old or someone who then says 'why' for everything, I can do that ad infinitum, but sadly this is off topic. "2+2=4" is a little more interesting of course.
@MετάEd If you start from 1, 2 is pretty large already.
2:29 PM
@Mitch Large, well if you want large, there's 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, ...
No thanks, I have enough of my own already.
They multiply like rabbits
Rabbits, well if you want rabbits, there's Peter, Flopsy, Mopsy, Cottontail, ...
I have some questions about the space station and astronauts, which room is the best place for asking these kind of questions?
@sky-light Questions like what keeps them from falling down?
astronomy? sci-fi? is there a space exploration site?
or world building?
2:33 PM
Linguistics in space?
@MετάEd some questions that not easy to imagine ..
@sky-light Space exploration? space.stackexchange.com
@sky-light Maybe it will be easier for us to help if we know what you want to ask.
@MετάEd First, why the Astronauts should leave from Kazakhstan, why not USA ?
I have one: how come farts go down instead of up?
@sky-light Because the Russians (who are running the space program in Kazakhstan) have all the equipment for putting humans in space (the Soyuz system) NASA currently does not.
2:38 PM
@sky-light Okay so I am going with Mitch's suggestion: Space Exploration.
@Mitch I question the premise.
@sky-light There's no 'world' space team. There are individual countries US, Russia, China, India (or coops like ESA for Europe) that put things in space, and Russia is the only one with manned capability.
@snailboat And INTERCAL was mentioned in the same article. That's, like, brilliant!
They also -land- there. I've always worried how bumpy that would be.
@Mitch I think it depend how you do it and the pressure of it.
@MετάEd gets a little quesy
@sky-light Well, good parachutes?
2:42 PM
Assume you are an astronaut and you are on the moon, holding a wrench. You let go of the wrench. What does the wrench do?
@MετάEd Isn't INTERCAL the programming language with the 'COME FROM' operator?
@Mitch Yes.
Very powerful.
@Mitch And no operator for addition.
@MετάEd turns into rainbow colored butterflies. Because if you're assuming you're an astronaut then you're hallucinating.
@MετάEd You use the square root function to manipulate the sign bit to increment to get 'ADD'
2:46 PM
@Mitch why US don't install their own space station I mean NASA. I think it is not related to cost. it is related to the location.
It is totally related to cost
It's all about cost
NASA are in a much better location to install a space station in the Smithsonian than they are to install one in orbit.
oh, sorry, it's also about a delivery system. We currently don't have a delivery system for humans. We (NASA) can send supplies, but not humans.
Live humans.
We haven't been able to send humans since the last space shuttle flew (which has been discontinued)
@tchrist Good point.
@tchrist I'd go see that.
US is in better position to make a movie about space stations than an actual one.
We know where our talents lie
2:51 PM
@Mitch We’ve parabolically talented, per Matthew 25.
looks it up
Wait... who're the foolish virgins in this story?
Wow...I got to the bags of gold parable. Very harsh, taking away from the guy who got the least.
gotta run...talk soon!
@tchrist How is your winter?
Heading to 50 today though.
Still have a foot of snow. That should change presently.
3:06 PM
So 10C? That's warmer than I expected.
It was 8F thisw morning.
It's 12C here, which is probably a record high.
At night, it is more like 7 here.
I'm not wearing gloves today.
I’ll see your 7 and unraise you 8.
That is the Dutch sound of shivering.
You could skate the canals at 8.
3:08 PM
Yeah, if the cold lasts.
The last time that was possible is I think 3 or 4 years ago.
3:42 PM
@Mitch thanks! I won't need to drop by your office, now!
@KitZ.Fox do two mods equal three users? :D
In music, hemiola (also hemiolia) is the ratio 3:2. The equivalent Latin term is sesquialtera. == EtymologyEdit == The word hemiola comes from the Greek adjective ἡμιόλιος, hemiolios, meaning "containing one and a half," "half as much again," "in the ratio of one and a half to one (3:2), as in musical sounds." The words "hemiola" and "sesquialtera" both signify the ratio 3:2, and in music were first used to describe relations of pitch. Dividing the string of a monochord in this ratio produces the interval of a perfect fifth. Beginning in the 15th century, both words were also used to desc...
That's what we call an opus moderandi. :)
@tchrist I like them odds
If anyone upvoted me here, I'm editing the question so you can downvote. If you feel like it. meta.english.stackexchange.com/a/7432/8360
3:58 PM
A hemiola is also when you’re just about to say hi to somebody and get cut off.
I need views here, if folks don't mind refreshing once in a while.
4:35 PM
+1 hemiola
Can someone star that for
So which next duo lingo language should I learn? Turkish or Hungarian?
Klingon is idiotic
I don't watch GoT
nor do I
I am partial to Tolkien stuff but it's not in duo lingo so it doesn't exist
does it have Greek yet?
4:39 PM
I'm... I think only from Greek to others. So it works best if you already know Greek
doesn't look like it :(
I think that's the real test, to learn X -> Y then Y->Z then Z->Y
So you translate "out of sight, out of mind" and end up with "invisible idiot"
@KitZ.Fox Oh, a nice question about aspect!
Mahlzeit, wunderkind
Progressive be needing is perfectly grammatical but really quite restricted.
4:47 PM
> Unlike what Nobel Economics Laureate Milton Friedman had predicted, that nations don't need reserves under flexible exchange rates, economies in practice are needing more and more reserves today under a floating exchange regime than they ever needed under fixed exchange rates.
> Yeah, there's no question that exercise has a biological effect. It affects metabolism. It affects a lot of body biochemistry. We don't know if it effects endorphin levels, but it certainly affects other neurotransmitters, so they may be needing more and more and more exercise, but they talked about the psychological reasons, not only the physiological reasons, how it makes them feel about themselves.
One of the situations it's restricted to is this sort of "waxing/waning" type of use, as you can see from the examples above.
Whether progressive be needing works depends on whether you can successfully construe it as a dynamic verb rather than a stative one, as stative verbs don't appear in the progressive construction. And to do that, it has to be compatible with the type of dynamic meaning you want to add. The waxing/waning thing is just one example. There are other sorts, like indicating that a state is temporary, for example.
Is there already a question and answer that discusses this more generally somewhere?
I'm loving it!
5:07 PM
Which is fine, but different.
More and more learners are needing it!
Lexical aspect is, well, lexical, which means that one verb might work in the progressive with one kind of dynamic meaning, while another won't.
Or a verb might develop a new meaning that appears in the dynamic sense.
Let's play the game now!
so bored
"Stative verbs" don't really make up a class of verbs that all work the same way. They're individual and have their own lexical properties.
5:15 PM
So I'm lovin' it! fits into the same general category (verbs that are usually stative being used with dynamic meaning), but the details are different.
There is a link to the I'm lovin' it question on mine.
I'm glad you liked it.
I think I'll try to write an answer later :-)
Although I see it's already got lots of answers.
I'm happy to read more. It's one of my oldest questions.
I guess I need to get the chatbot back.
5:42 PM
thanks, Do You Even Lift? hatted!
I can't even.
I'm not sure exactly what, but not even.
I can't odd
What're the odds of that?
there should be a record for the highest liftedWeight/personWeight
hmm midgets would win
Ants would win
6:04 PM
yea hehe, the size/volume thing (it plays more a role for jump height for ex), small things beat us for that
@snailboat Do you feel that the progressive construction adds much in those examples, over simply need?
6:30 PM
I think this Q and this A both deserve to get to +10: meta.english.stackexchange.com/questions/7461/…
OR: the Q deserves +10 and someone's answer deserves +10 :)
Going for a hat?
7:29 PM
so now the world has given in to literally meaning figuratively is the next fight going to be over legitimately meaning ... well ... it seems to be either actually or very.
7:40 PM
@MattE.Эллен legiterally?
@Mitch illegiterally cromulent
"The word's incorrect meaning cromerulently pushed out the original meaning."
trying for my first bounty at Linguistics.SE: linguistics.stackexchange.com/a/15335/702
7:59 PM
I think it's legitimately worth a question if I can source a few more examples...
8:16 PM
just found this: findwords.info/term search for a word, get a definition from the OED. I'm guessing they're from older editions of the OED than OED.com as they look a bit older, but could be very useful for those without OED.com access
Q: What meaning is "legitimate(ly)" gaining?

Matt E. ЭлленI'm familiar with the following meanings of legitimately In a way that conforms to the law or to rules and In a way that can be defended with logic or justification; fairly (both from ODO) But recently I have seen legitimately and legitimate used to mean something else. I can't tell...

8:32 PM
No sign of Rob
Q: ''due to'' or ''because of''

Antonio NanuSo I stumbled upon this sentence: ''Aside from a flexible vagina which is due to the pelvic muscles' elasticity [...]'' And I wonder, shouldn't there be ''because of''? Because it modifies the adjective ''flexible'', and for ''due to'' to be right shouldn't it have been ''the flexibility of vag...

8:55 PM
@tchrist I think "due to" and "because of" aren't disallowed because they follow a noun/pronoun or verb in either case due to not finding either a problem in that question because of some ignorance I must harbour.
@MattE.Эллен I have provided a legitimate answer, hopefully, after much thinking.
@MattE.Эллен Seems like a legit use of the word to me :-)
You might compare words like real(ly), very, actual(ly), serious(ly), truly, or literal(ly).
It was after some legitimate thinking that I gave the answer.
Meanings of words are not well-defined. I just picked the best fit.
9:09 PM
@snailboat to me, it's synonymous with justifiable (or legally, but obviously that's not what she means), so that's why it doesn't fit for me. You can't look justifiably scared. Your fear can be justifiable, but the justification doesn't show in your face
@snailboat but, yes, I'm beginning to agree with Jasper and you
I am very proud that my answer is only one line.
Hot. I just can't agree with what you're saying. You're basically pointing out "there are tortured ways to correctly interpret the first two". You're missing the overwhelming everyday reality that idiots have started using "legitimately" as "very". — Joe Blow 15 mins ago
I like this comment. We should also do away with very meaning 'very'. It's a slippery slope!
This world is a slippery slope.
9:15 PM
Q: Chat: What is a Room Owner?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇I've been a room owner of various chat rooms: chat rooms I created myself, and now, the ELU main chat. But what IS a room owner? What can a room owner do, what can't they do, what should they do? Also, how can a regular user find or identify room owners?

Is someone supposed to provide an answer to this faq?
@MattE.Эллен The cake fits well into the mouth of the orc.
@MattE.Эллен I'm used to it being used that way, so it's unremarkable to me. Maybe I'm ahead of the curve on that one.
@snailboat or I'm behind!
@snailboat I think this meaning is something I have seen several times as well.
9:19 PM
@MattE.Эллен It's OK to be behind, just don't be the behind.
I was amused when I started noticing the phrase "what the actual fuck" popping up.
I'm always interested to see how words in that semantic class change over time.
I think fuck has like 50 meanings or something.
@snailboat which class is that?
9:21 PM
Words that describe the relationship between something and the truth or what is real. True, truely, very, verily, real, really, actual, actually, literal, literally, serious, seriously, legitimate, legitimately, etc.
You can figure out which words you think fit in the class. I'm not sure exactly.
I never put legitimate(ly) in the list until today. :-)
I'm sure it's very legitimately pleased!
It seems to fit, though, doesn't it?
9:23 PM
seems legit
Joe Blow's answer is poorly punctuated.
There are at least two commas that need to be removed.
Aurast's answer has at least one comma splice.
You're paying very close attention to punctuation lately, aren't you? :-)
Yes, hehe. I read Larry Trask's Guide To Punctuation long ago, but it turns out that the tips in it are not conventional.
9:38 PM
I haven't read that book.
Now that I have read it, I would recommend against it, because of the above.
He wrote one of the standard historical linguistics textbooks, though! :-)
That book is more like how Larry thinks punctuation should be, instead of how it actually is.
I think that's what a lot of books on punctuation are like.
If you try to describe actual usage, things get pretty tricky because there's so much variation.
9:41 PM
Most descriptive linguists try their best to pretend that written language doesn't exist.
And to the extent that it does, it's merely an imperfect way of representing real language, which is speech.
Wow, you sound like a first class linguist!
Geoffrey Nunberg wrote The Linguistics of Punctuation (1990), an attempt at a descriptive approach to punctuation.
Unfortunately, it's saddled with a sort of generative framework I'm not really fond of. But I think he makes some pretty good points in the introduction.
anyone need any votes?
9:44 PM
> As Bloomfield famously put it, "Writing is not language, but merely a means of recording language by means of visual marks." [ . . . ] The contrastive approach has militated against the development of the autonomous study of written language as a linguistic system in its own right. [ . . . ] Indeed, current approaches to writing presuppose that there couldn't be much to say about the subject. [ . . . ]
> It should no longer be necessary to defend the view that writing is truly language, [ . . . ] The contrastive approach makes it difficult to consider those features of written texts that have no obvious analogues in speech, or whose spoken-language analogues are either theoretically marginal or poorly understood.
> In particular, linguists have almost wholly ignored the graphical circumstances of the written language, [ . . . ] In a typical book, for example, written lexical expressions are presented in concert with punctuation marks [ . . . ] It can of course be argued that many of these conventions are not part of the written language itself, [ . . . ] But that argument has to be made on principled grounds.
That's starting on page 1 of The Linguistics of Punctuation.
I think that the vast propagation of internet communication disproves that writing isn't language. Things have evolved in written language that do not exist in spoken language :eggplant:
It's all a matter of defining language.
9:49 PM
language is a banana
Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana.
Genghis Khan but Immanuel Kant.
Jean Luc Picard but James T Kirk
Your question has 5 votes but my answer only 2, LOL.
@JohnNash any comments on the curly brackets?
9:53 PM
@Hugo Yes, it shouldn't be used.
I would like to mention that Oxford Dictionaries Online is an approximation of the Oxford Dictionary of English, the largest single volume English dictionary published by Oxford.
6 AM here.
yo guise
@KitZ.Fox Z is your middle name?
10:17 PM
@JohnNash I wish they'd label it clearly. They changed it from the ODO label you just used to "Oxford Dictionaries".
@PhonicsTheHedgehog Yes.
@KitZ.Fox Ah, interesting. Didn't know. Is it just Z like how Trueman just had S?
People mix up the "Oxford Dictionaries" website (ODE/NOAD) with the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) all the time, but they're completely different.
@Hugo I need views.
10:19 PM
@PhonicsTheHedgehog Yes, except it is Z for Zed, so it's confusing.
I need votes
@KitZ.Fox hahaha... (British pronunciation joke, right?)
Desperately hopes for it to be a joke
Zed as in Zed Zed Top
Oh, so I guess it was a joke.
10:25 PM
@snailboat are they completely different? I think they are associated.
@MattE.Эллен Your language eggplant isn't making sense
@Mitch How's it going m8
@KitZ.Fox maybe a bounty will help with views?
I wonder if it's realistic to get this to 10k?
@Mitch They're associated in that they have the same publisher.
They both have the word Oxford in the title.
That's about as far as the similarity goes.
10:41 PM
when new words are added to ODO the papers always say they've been added to the OED, so they made an OEDODOFAQ: public.oed.com/about/frequently-asked-questions/#oedodo
00:00 - 23:0023:00 - 00:00

« first day (1863 days earlier)      last day (3109 days later) »