English Language & Usage: Multi-Layered Discourse Room - 2017-03-02 (page 1 of 2)

« first day (2303 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (2915 days later) »

Tonepoet

02:15

Ugh, maybe I shouldn't be flagging when I'm on the brink of illness. Have I terribly misinterpreted this question? I think I have at least a little, but I'm not sure if it's on topic.

Færd

02:40

@Mitch Thinking about these compulsory(?) whole-book literature assignments make me feel uncomfortable. I'm glad we don't practice it here.

Færd

03:01

In Iran, lemon (لیمو: /li:mu:/) by default (or usually) means sweet lemon and if you mean to say sour lemon you normally have to specify. I think the reverse is true for English speaking countries, or even the West, right?

How often do you have (any kind of) sweet lemon? And what do you call it?

Citrus limetta, alternatively considered to be a cultivar of Citrus limon, C. limon 'Limetta', is a species of citrus, commonly known as mousambi, musambi, sweet lime, sweet lemon, and sweet limetta It is native to South Asia and Southeast Asia and also cultivated in the Mediterranean Basin. In Iran it is called Limu Shirin (لیمو شیرین, meaning “Sweet lemon” in Persian). In North India, it is commonly called mousambi, mosambi, or musambi (मुसंबी)(موسمبى) (in Hindi/Urdu and Marathi). In East India, it is known as Musumbi, Musombi or Musambi. In South India, it is called Musambi in Kannada a...

Mitch

03:41

@Færd there's a thing that is a lemon that is sweet? I have a hard time imagining that. I'd call it a really strange lemon, or a citrus fruit that looks like a lemon but is strangely sweet, like an orange that is colored yellow.

@Færd in high school here, that's all literature is, is full novels (or maybe poetry). Uncomfortable is right.

SmokeDetector

03:53

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Mostly non-Latin answer: "Material world", "Physical world", "Corporeal world" - what's the difference? by Lakatos Pan on english.SE

4 hours later…

Mari-Lou A

07:36

@tchrist Just a brief "thank you" to all the mods (and devs?) who investigated into the spat of downvotes my account had.

It ended well, for me, thank you.

2 hours later…

englishstudent

09:39

@Mitch Yes that, exactly.

@Tonepoet Feel better soon.

2 hours later…

Færd

11:53

@Mitch Why should that be so surprising? There are sour and sweet kinds of grapes, oranges, and many other fruits and things. Lemon is no exception.

Færd

12:16

M-W doesn't have /ʃər/ or /ʃɜr/ for sure. I like /ʃʊr/ better, but I hear /ʃər/ a lot.

Færd

12:27

Just compare the first five: forvo.com/word/sure/#en

The ones from the UK sound all alike (except for the last one).

2 hours later…

Mitch

14:57

@Færd in my (limited) experience, I have grown up knowing only oranges that are sweet, lemons that are sour, grapefruit that are sour, limes that are somehow in between both sweet and sour (but not very) at the same time. Sour grapes are just sweet grapes picked too early. But produce (fruit and vegetables) in the US is known for being somewhat limited in variety. So I blame the US.

skullpetrol

We even use the the word "lemon" to describe a "sour deal" on a car.

M.A.R.

Citrus limetta, alternatively considered to be a cultivar of Citrus limon, C. limon 'Limetta', is a species of citrus, commonly known as mousambi, musambi, sweet lime, sweet lemon, and sweet limetta It is native to South Asia and Southeast Asia and also cultivated in the Mediterranean Basin. In Iran it is called Limu Shirin (لیمو شیرین, meaning “Sweet lemon” in Persian). In North India, it is commonly called mousambi, mosambi, or musambi (मुसंबी)(موسمبى) (in Hindi/Urdu and Marathi). In East India, it is known as Musumbi, Musombi or Musambi. In South India, it is called Musambi in Kannada a...

Also hi

Mitch

hey

M.A.R.

This was the errors' post I was babbling about yesterday

1

Q: In how many ways can something not be right?

There's this large source of confusion among learners and sometimes even native speakers. They tend to think if something doesn't sound right to their ears, it must be ungrammatical, while that's at times not the case. Why don't each of these utterances get it right? foon speeding ...

grammaticality terminology

Mitch

So we'll have to add that taste to our food replicator machine.

M.A.R.

15:01

@Mitch It tastes nice, and kills cold fast, but turns bitter fast

Hey, that rhymes

Oh, doesn't actually

RegDwigнt

@Robusto 迷うなぁ～！セクシーなの？キュートなの？どっちが好きなの？

M.A.R.

15:20

user image

Mitch

15:43

@M.A.R. Eating citron on rice, what a blast, it'll never last

You just need to extend your rhyme scheme to more than one line and then it'd work, just like Bruce Springsteen.

>With a boulder on my shoulder
Feeling kinda older,
I tripped the merry-go-round
With this very unpleasing,
sneezing and wheezing
The calliope crashed to the ground

Oops, that was by Manfred Mann

@M.A.R. It totally does

M.A.R.

@Mitch Well, I prolly mixed Persian and English rules

In Persian, sometimes the end words are the same, but that alone isn't enough for the thingy to rhyme

There has to be similar ending syllable(s) in different words

Same word doesn't count

This is only high-level nitpick though, a lot of poetry are around that aren't poetry according to the rule

Mitch

@M.A.R. Same word at the end is too easy. the rhyme 'rule' should not be 'reflexive'

@M.A.R. is there an English explanation of the Persian poetry rhyme and meter 'rules'?

M.A.R.

Dunno, lemme search

Mitch

@M.A.R. I didn't get what the point is here. Were you disingenuously asking a question that you answered yourself in order to exposit on the main ways you can have language mistakes?

M.A.R.

@Mitch Wut . . . It's just meant to be a question with an answer. Prolly I'll CW it later and make it a canonical post

+100. This should be a Canonical Post on grammaticality. — StoneyB 16 mins ago

@Mitch A lot of people say stuff like "I know it ." in ungrammatical because there shouldn't be a space before the period

Mitch

15:54

It's very useful, but I can't imagine how anybody else could answer, and I also can't figure out what detail should be there beyond "there are broad areas of language learning where mistakes and their analysis are of the same kind: phonology, syntax (with morphology), semantics, pragmatics."

@M.A.R. Is that the main point of the question (and answer(s))?

how to label errors?

M.A.R.

Yes

Mitch

oh.

M.A.R.

Or semantics vs. syntax

Mitch

then you need to be more specific.

if that's what you want.

M.A.R.

People say "I need to eat some water." is ungrammatical. It's not ungrammatical. It's poor word choice.

@Mitch How? What do you mean?

Mitch

15:56

So you really want to say something like "errors in syntax are called 'grammatical errors' (ie syntax is grammar), but errors in pronunciation are mispronunciations or bad accent"

@M.A.R. OK I get it.

M.A.R.

I wanna say "not everything that sounds off is ungrammatical. Here's why"

If there's any way to improve my wording, please advise :)

Mitch

@M.A.R. You need to be explicit that this question and answer are about what to call these different areas and their errors. Otherwise it sounds like you're just listing phonology, syntax, semantics, etc

M.A.R.

I do think the crux of the answer felt buried deep; but I don't see a way to emphasize the most common errors and slips unless the answer becomes even longer

Mitch

the Q should be "What do you call these areas and what are their errors called?"

M.A.R.

And ELL doesn't like long answers much, so

Mitch

16:00

And give a for example ' "This, is, a, sentence:" What is the error called? Is it bad grammar?'

Or just do it for 'grammar':

M.A.R.

That's a good idea.

@Mitch This one would conflict with the way I started the answer

Mitch

"I asked a question on ELL about this sentence "This, is, a, sentence:" and how to correct its grammar. But then people yelled at me saying it is not bad grammar. That sentence is very wrong. How can it not be bad grammar?" then answer " Punctuation errors are not bad grammar. Grammar refers only to syntax"

That's a short Q and short A

M.A.R.

@Mitch That's short, but the downside is it's only HNQ-y, not canonical-y

Mitch

So it is entirely a question of word choice: 'grammar' is not the appropriate word in this situation.

Tonepoet

Except it is...

M.A.R.

16:03

@Tonepoet That was the most dramatic remark I read today

Dum dum dum dum

Mitch

@M.A.R. But the existing ELL question, as useful as it is, doesn't address what you really want which is the common poor usage of the word 'grammar' applied to punctuation mistakes.

M.A.R.

@Mitch Editing

please wait

. . .

Mitch

or instead of editing write an entirely new Q and A

Your main question "Why don't each of these utterances get it right?" should be "What do you call the error in each of these utterances?"

Robusto

@RegDwigнt Stop talking like a girl in a harem anime! (But, for the record, I am cute and sexy.)

Tonepoet

I doubt this is a task we should be undertaking unless we can explain why this definition of the word is considered invalidated by modern scholars. Otherwise you folk are just complaining about people using a word the way it has always been used for no reason whatsoever.

M.A.R.

16:10

@Mitch how does it look now?

@Mitch I have to go now; I'll be back in four to five hours. If there's anything else I should fix, ping

Mitch

@M.A.R. All looks good to me .. except for the 'Why don't...?' question. 'Why' makes it sound like you're going to explain something, when all it is is a word choice problem.

@M.A.R. no hay problema! hasta luego

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

16:24

hasta Lego

RegDwigнt

@Robusto that's not what I asked, though. And unlike Google Translate, you should know.

Where's that stupid video. It's been like ten years now.

松浦亜弥 - ね〜え？　[PV]

There you go.

1 hour later…

Nick Alexeev

17:53

Folks, would this question be on-topic on any of the English language stack? It's being close-voted on EE.SE as off-topic.

0

Q: Where does the word 'booting' comes from when referring to electronic devices?

How did the word booting came to be in the field of computer science and electric engineering when referring to various electronic devices ? Does the word applies to more simpler electric devices also ?

power-electronics computers

Færd

I wouldn't object to its presence on EL&U, but let's see what the mods will say.

Cerberus

@NickAlexeev I think it would be fine on EL&U.

But you need only 5 grumpy old men to close a question, so...beware. We have a few hostile people on this site.

Færd

Sexist!

Cerberus

I love discrimination.

Andrew Leach

The word would seem to be related to "kick hard in a specified direction" [ODO]. That research should be in the question, which currently will probably be closed because that definition is so easy to find.

Cerberus

18:08

That's ridiculous.

I think the question is 100% fine.

It's not general reference.

Even so, only 5 ridiculous old men are what's needed.

Andrew Leach

In that case, it needs to absolutely clear what it's asking.

Cerberus

It is absolutely clear.

Any reasonable person can understand that question.

Andrew Leach

Oh. What is it asking, then?

Cerberus

Where does the word 'booting' comes from when referring to electronic devices?

Andrew Leach

It comes from "kicking it hard to start it up".

Cerberus

18:10

So?

Andrew Leach

That's GR.

Cerberus

Not at all.

Andrew Leach

How is it not?

Cerberus

The history of the expression cannot be easily looked up in a standard dictionary by a layman.

Especially the most interesting details, like perhaps who used it first and where.

But even without those details: a standard dictionary normally doesn't give etymology.

Andrew Leach

So the question needs to mention explicitly what it is after and show its research, in order that five grumpy men don't close it.

Cerberus

18:13

But it shouldn't have to.

This is a good question.

Færd

@Cerberus May you be fair in dispensing it.

Cerberus

There is nothing wrong with it.

Andrew Leach

It could be made into a good question.

Cerberus

It is good.

@Færd discriminates you

Andrew Leach

It needs to show its research explicitly.

Cerberus

18:14

No, it does not.

Færd

@Cerberus I'm rubber, you're glue

Cerberus

Showing research is only needed when the question is otherwise unclear.

@Færd Umm...is that an expression?

Færd

Sure!

user image

Cerberus

Well.

Andrew Leach

user image

Cerberus

18:19

@AndrewLeach That is a subsection of "questions should be answerable".

It only applies to questions that would otherwise be hard to answer, because they are unclear or discussion-like.

Andrew Leach

Those two bullet points are explicit instructions for all questions.

Cerberus

I disagree.

Andrew Leach

Well, that was the outcome of the Meta discussion. We'll have to ask Shog to change it to make that aspiration clearer.

Cerberus

251

Q: What is the origin of the sexual sense of "sleeping with someone", and is there a phrase for sleeping with someone without sex?

The phrase "sleeping with someone" often means "having sex." What is the origin of this sexual connotation? Is there a non-sexual equivalent of this phrase to express sleeping with someone without sexual intercourse?

etymology phrase-requests connotation

Look at one of our most-loved questions.

It it short and to the point.

terdon

@AndrewLeach I think the EE.se answer suggesting it comes from bootstrapping makes sense, actually.

2

A: Where does the word 'booting' comes from when referring to electronic devices?

"Booting" is a short form of the common English phrase "Lifting oneself by his boot straps". Bootstraps = shoe laces. A whimsical term that suggests an image that you are lifting your whole body by pulling up on your shoe laces & thus obviously defying gravity. Metaphorically, it means getting yo...

Cerberus

18:21

Everyone wants this kind of question.

No details, no research, but it's perfect.

Andrew Leach

@terdon So it's already been answered.

Cerberus

And people wonder why EL&U is considered to be extremely hostile.

terdon

Unreferenced. We can do better.

@Cerberus this isn't an ELU thing. All SE sites require research and lack of it is one of the primary reasons given for downvoting (hover over the downvote arrow).

Cerberus

Only a small number of people on EL&U are so hostile, no doubt; but only 5 are need to close questions.

@terdon No, no! Only when the question is bad because it doesn't show research: not just because it shows no research.

terdon

> "start up a computer," 1975, from bootstrap (v.), a 1958 derived verb from bootstrap (n.) in the computer sense.

Cerberus

18:23

2 mins ago, by Cerberus

251

Q: What is the origin of the sexual sense of "sleeping with someone", and is there a phrase for sleeping with someone without sex?

The phrase "sleeping with someone" often means "having sex." What is the origin of this sexual connotation? Is there a non-sexual equivalent of this phrase to express sleeping with someone without sexual intercourse?

etymology phrase-requests connotation

2 mins ago, by Cerberus

Look at one of our most-loved questions.

terdon

@Cerberus Yes, just as well.

Cerberus

Nonsense.

terdon

@Cerberus What about it? What's that supposed to prove?

Cerberus

2 mins ago, by Cerberus

Everyone wants this kind of question.

2 mins ago, by Cerberus

No details, no research, but it's perfect.

terdon

@Cerberus So?

@Cerberus Nonsense. To use your phrase.

Cerberus

18:24

QED.

But I don't want to have this discussion.

terdon

Nothing was demonstrated! Posting crappy but highly upvoted questions is not an argument!

Cerberus

As long as you know why so many people hate our site.

Færd

This one also:

245

Q: What is the rule for adjective order?

I remember being taught that the correct order of adjectives in English was something along the lines of "Opinion-Size-Age-Color-Material-Purpose." However, it's been a long time and I'm pretty sure I've forgotten a few categories (I think there were eight or nine). Can anyone fill them in?

adjectives word-order noun-phrases

terdon

@Cerberus It's because of the snark and snooty comments more than anything else, I think. What you describe is normal on all SE sites I frequent: no research, no service.

Færd

I always wondered why it is not closed for lack of research.

Cerberus

18:26

@terdon Not on the sites I helped shape.

terdon

@Færd Most sites have old questions that were posted before the site rules were clearly decided and which are kept around for historical purposes.

Cerberus

Before 5 grumpy old men were initiated.

Færd

@terdon That may well be it.

terdon

@Cerberus Except this one then. But what sites are these that allow questions with no research?

Cerberus

The non-hostile ones.

As long as the question is good, no research is required.

Tonepoet

18:27

@terdon Gen. ref. only became a thing in 2011 after the Are Some Questions Too Simple post was made.

terdon

@Cerberus How about being a bit more specific and a bit less judgmental? Might even end up having a useful conversation.

Tonepoet

I wish we weren't so hostile to questions where research would not have helped though.

Cerberus

@Tonepoet General Reference was specifically agreed on to be very specific; it's not "research is always required".

terdon

@Tonepoet Gen ref yes. But "search and research" has been a thing for much, much longer. Not to mention that 2011 is pretty close to the start of the site.

Cerberus

@terdon I'm too angry.

And I've had the same discussion too many times here.

terdon

18:29

@Cerberus That's your problem. If you can't have it constructively again, then don't have it. But giving me this "I know SE better than you" and "grumpy old men crap" is neither fair nor welcome.

Tonepoet

@Cerberus I know but now we have an entirely different close reason.

Cerberus

@Tonepoet Right, and, as you will note, it only mentions GR, not "research always required".

Andrew Leach

"Please include the research you've done" seems pretty explicit to me.

Cerberus

@terdon I am just making sure that the people in power don't forget that the opposition comes not only from the noobs who are shooed away, but also from many impartial and experienced users.

@AndrewLeach "You've done" is a defining relative clause.

Andrew Leach

@Cerberus And your point is...?

Cerberus

18:31

If you have done research, then we would prefer it if you included said research.

If not, then fine.

Andrew Leach

But don't forget that the requirement for research is in the Ask Question page (screenshot earlier).

So they will have done some.

Færd

Even "Share your research" doesn't require you to do research. You can have not researched at all.

Technically speaking ...

Cerberus

@Tonepoet Yes. But it is intended for questions which are bad because they don't show enough research, not for any question that doesn't show research.

Andrew Leach

There you go. Any question which does not show research doesn't show enough.

Cerberus

@Færd Exactly. And it says "please": it doesn't say "it is always required".

Andrew Leach

18:33

After all, Google.

Cerberus

I disagree completely.

Tonepoet

Google is not General Refrerence.

terdon

@Cerberus have you ever read the "How do I ask a good question" help page on any of these wonderfully friendly sites you frequent?

Cerberus

Exactly.

terdon

Did you notice that every single one of them starts with this text:

> We’d love to help you. To improve your chances of getting an answer, here are some tips:

Search, and research

...and keep track of what you find. Even if you don't find a useful answer elsewhere on the site, including links to related questions that haven't helped can help others in understanding how your question is different from the rest.

Search, and research

Cerberus

18:34

Not required.

> To improve your chances

Andrew Leach

That's because it's difficult to get an answer once a question is closed for lack of research.

Cerberus

I am all in favour of encouraging research where appropriate.

That's not the issue.

terdon

@Cerberus Yes, I know you feel that way. That doesn't mean you're right though. ANd it doesn't mean you're wrong. How about you get to have your opinion on the subject and upvote unresearched questions and I get to have mine and downvote them?

Cerberus

@AndrewLeach I disagree. It doesn't say that.

Tonepoet

I can't really agree with the "not enough" research definition though, unless you can clearly define how much is "enough". Usually it's any amount that had a slight chance of answering the question...

Cerberus

18:36

@terdon What I want is for our site not to be known as hostile.

3

Andrew Leach

Point english. at ELL.

terdon

@Cerberus Me too. However, I don't feel the best way to achieve this is to waive the "search before asking" requirement but rather to eliminate the pretentious and snobbish tone so many of our users take with new posters.

Cerberus

Indeed, ELL was intended partly to take away some of the hostility from ELU, although things weren't as bad then as they are now. Now it's often 50% of the questions on the main site are closed here.

Andrew Leach

That's because they should be asked on ELL, but, well, don't migrate crap.

Tonepoet

@Cerberus Separating E.L.U and E.L.L. seems to have done exactly the opposite in my opinion. It gerrymandered the community into the more tolerant half over at E.L.L. and stricter half here at E.L.U.

Andrew Leach

18:40

That's because the questions which ELL was designed to field are still ending up on english.se.

terdon

@AndrewLeach Why does that keep falling through again? I don't remember the details.

Andrew Leach

People said "Whoa! Search results!" but I'm not sure it's ever been formally proposed. Perhaps it should be.

25

A: Has anyone thought about changing the name of this site?

Although I have no data to back this up, it's at least possible if not probable that people are simply using english as the URL because "There must be a Stack for English, right?" I would suggest swapping the URLs around, so english.SE goes to ELL and ELU gets ELU.SE. Or, if that's too much of ...

Cerberus

@Tonepoet That's kind of true perhaps. On the other hand, at least those questions are safe on ELL; and we have a lot of experienced users who are active on both sites.

@terdon Indeed, that is a big part of the issue.

terdon

@AndrewLeach It hasn't? I could have sworn I'd seen a proposal suggesting that english.stackexchange.com redirect to ell or anywhere but here.

Cerberus

One does wonder what EL&U's name should become, then.

Tonepoet

18:48

@terdon There definitely was one.

Andrew Leach

@Cerberus The name wouldn't change, necessarily. It wouldn't really matter what the URL was; it could easily be just elu.stackexchange.com

My thinking is in that answer.

Cerberus

If the name doesn't change, then won't most people still type in "English" in the search bar and end up here?

But I have to go.

Andrew Leach

No, because English would be linked to ELL.

Cerberus

But the search bar finds the name of the site?

Andrew Leach

Ah. We may have to get that ordered differently so ELL comes first.

Change the collation so & comes at the end.

That is something I hadn't thought of. I assumed people typed in the most likely URL directly.

Cerberus

18:53

I don't think I've ever done that.

If I were somewhere else than on an SE site, I would just google "english stack exchange".

Andrew Leach

And the top result is the one which has the URL english.? That would become ELL.

Tonepoet

@AndrewLeach When Jasper suggested that the websites be merged the top voted answer on his E.L.L. thread stated that scope overlap was not a problem, which I take to be an admittance that there is scope overlap. Probably too much. I'm not really sure what makes an E.L.L. question different from an E.L.U. question based upon the content of the question itself.

Cerberus

@AndrewLeach ELU is the bigger site, so it may come up on top.

Shog9

@terdon @Cerberus @AndrewLeach - instead of debating a few words in the sidebar, look to the longer guidance from which they arose

> Have you thoroughly searched for an answer before asking your question? Sharing your research helps everyone. Tell us what you found and why it didn’t meet your needs. This demonstrates that you’ve taken the time to try to help yourself, it saves us from reiterating obvious answers, and above all, it helps you get a more specific and relevant answer!

That's why sharing research - and doing research - is encouraged.

Cerberus

@Shog9 Oh, but I encourage the encouragement.

Shog9

18:59

The penalty for not sharing details is an unclear question being unanswered (or closed and also unanswered) (on EL&U, that probably means "a bunch of folks guessing at answers" more than it means literally zero answers, but same root problem)

The penalty for not researching is asking a duplicate (and possibly not even knowing the right terminology to find the original)

Cerberus

If the question is unclear because it doesn't show enough research, then it should be closed.

Shog9

Question is unclear if it lacks sufficient detail to be answered.

Cerberus

If the question shows no research but is otherwise clear and valid, it should not be closed.

@Shog9 Agreed.

But we were talking about a question that is 100% clear.

Shog9

Then there's no problem

Andrew Leach

I disagree that it was 100% clear, but I'm not going to retype it all again.

terdon

19:01

100% clear and also answerable with a 2 second google search.

Cerberus

0

Q: Where does the word 'booting' comes from when referring to electronic devices?

How did the word booting came to be in the field of computer science and electric engineering when referring to various electronic devices ? Does the word applies to more simpler electric devices also ?

power-electronics computers

Shog9

well, that's kinda painful

Cerberus

251

Q: What is the origin of the sexual sense of "sleeping with someone", and is there a phrase for sleeping with someone without sex?

The phrase "sleeping with someone" often means "having sex." What is the origin of this sexual connotation? Is there a non-sexual equivalent of this phrase to express sleeping with someone without sexual intercourse?

etymology phrase-requests connotation

Another example. No research but clear.

terdon

@Cerberus Yes, but that one can't be answered by simply searching "etymology booting" as the other one can. That's the point.

In the latter, the OP is also asking for a non-sexual term.

Shog9

edited.

Cerberus

19:03

If research is always required, then both questions should be closed.

The former question also has a sub-question.

terdon

@Shog9 You edited the closed one. It's been migrated.

Cerberus

@terdon I could answer 99% of the questions on ELU by Googling, but I don't think that's the point.

"Too basic" is a different closing reason than "unclear because no research".

terdon

@Cerberus Well you could, yes. But you know the right things to search for.

Cerberus

And "no research" by itself shouldn't be a closing reason.

terdon

The questions I object to are the cases where copy/pasting the question title into a search engine will find the answer.

Cerberus

19:05

@terdon And I know to search for etymology. Many people do not.

In addition, they don't know how to properly interpret etymological dictionaries. But etymological questions are often closed here.

@terdon I did so, but I didn't see the answer in the result snippets on the first page.

Nor do any of the research look like they will certainly give me an elaborate answer.

terdon

@Cerberus Second link (after us) on duck duck go was wikipedia whose first section is:

Cerberus

Not that I think any of that should be required: don't we want to be "the number 1 result for questions" on SE?

terdon

> Early electronic computers (like the 1401) had no operating system and little internal memory. The input was often a stack of punch cards. The computer was initiated by pressing a start button that performed a single command, read a card.
This first card then instructed the machine to read more cards that eventually loaded a user program. This process was likened to an old saying, "picking yourself up by the bootstraps", referring to a horseman who lifts himself off the ground by pulling on the straps of his boots. This set of initiating punch cards was called "bootstrap cards". Thus a co…

Cerberus

@terdon It wasn't in the snippet, and the title doesn't make it clear that it's going to explain the etymology.

terdon

@Cerberus Yes, but we also usually want to be their second stop, after a search engine.

Cerberus

19:08

Is anything on Wikipaedia too basic?

@terdon Which is why we have nice users who give elaborate answers.

Shog9

@terdon ok. So, this question is very, very nearly a duplicate. I refrained from closing it, but it illustrates how dangerous failing to research can be.

Cerberus

And the best answer will end up on top on SE.

Shog9

Note that the next person to ask this question will have no excuse

Which is reason enough to keep the question around

terdon

@Shog9 Nearly, yes.

Shog9

Anyone with access to (and y'all know how to get access to) a private beta should probably read this:

7

A: What is the best way to close a question that is fully answerable with a single google search?

Be careful about rubber-stamping questions with vague statements like "this can be found in a Google search" or summary accusations like "lazy question" or "not enough research". This doesn't actually explain (to the recipient of these remarks or anyone else) exactly what the problem is with th...

it's been said before, but this is a good summary and directly mentions this site

terdon

19:10

By the way, @Cerberus, personally I don't think I'd have voted to close that. I would probably have downvoted though, yes. For lack of research.

@Shog9 Do we need to sign up for the beta to see that?

Cerberus

In summary: showing research is always encouraged, but it should only be required when the question would otherwise be hard to answer. It's not itself reason enough to close any question. Many of our best question don't show much research.

@terdon Voting is a whole nother matter.

It's not nearly as hostile, and any woman is entitled to her own conscience.

@Shog9 Alas, I know of no way to access a closed beta that I haven't committed to.

terdon

Hey, @Cerberus you'll like this (emphasis mine):

Tonepoet

@Cerberus Surely you mean easy, rather than hard there Cerb. Am I right?

terdon

> The idea of questions being "too easy" started with our English Language site when we it was envisioned folks would flood the site with questions like "What does the word trivia mean?" — so we (preemptively) worked up a close reason about using a dictionary… then folks added the thesaurus… **other added Elements of Style**
which soon became a discussion on every new site about which "standard references" would warrant a question be closed summarily. When the Star Trek Compendium and Wookipedia became required reading, we removed the close reason entirely.

Grrr. Anyway, "other added Elements of Style"

I don't think our grump old users would be very happy with that. Yourself included :P

@Shog9 that is indeed a very helpful post. Maybe we should bring something similar to meta.elu.

Just without mentioning Elements of Style. We wouldn't want to anger our linguists ;)

Cerberus

@terdon Indeed, I agree with everything Robert says, and that is how ELU used to be.

But the grumpy old men don't agree.

terdon

19:24

@Cerberus You do? You did read the part where he mentions that such questions are indeed often closed, right?

Cerberus

I may be grumpy, but my grumpiness revolves around two principles: 1.) be welcoming to new users; 2.) don't restrict what other people can do, unless you really have to.

2

@terdon They are, but not as such, or not for good reason, he says.

M.A.R.

Oooh boy

Shog here means trouble :?

Cerberus

@Tonepoet I meant "research should only be required when the question is hard to answer without such research".

terdon

@M.A.R. Nah. Just a friendly argument.

Cerberus

@M.A.R. Trouble or bureaucracy!

M.A.R.

19:27

ELL vs. ELU

I'm tired of this

terdon

Dec 3 '16 at 15:23, by terdon

I think the main issue here is that for many years now, the ELU community has been trying to reach a homogeneous approach to what we want from ELU. This is very simply never going to happen. The community is just too heterogeneous with established users on both sides of the debate, some of which want this site to be an ivory tower, while others are more lenient.

Robusto

@RegDwigнt 変態じゃないのね？

Færd

19:45

Why is needs in this text (from KJV, Genesis 24) in the third-person singular form?

> And the servant said unto him, Peradventure the woman will not be willing to follow me unto this land: must I needs bring thy son again unto the land from whence thou camest?

terdon

Because archaic.

I think we had a question about that syntax around here somewhere.

25

Q: Explanation of "must needs"

Recently I ran across the sentence: "Just why the law prescribed thirty-nine lashes instead of forty or forty-one and so on, must needs remain unanswered." How did a plural verb like "needs" wind up as an adverb? Is it alone in this phenomenon, or are there other examples that appear to be...

Færd

Great. Thanks.

terdon

np

M.A.R.

@terdon concur

« first day (2303 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (2915 days later) »

Transcript for

Mar '172

English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…

Not for the faint of heart or those easily triggered by Englis...

phrase-requests pronunciation single-word-requests synonyms

join this room
about this room

00:00

06:00

12:00

18:00

all times are UTC

site design / logo © 2025 Stack Exchange Inc; legal

mobile