English Language & Usage: Multi-Layered Discourse Room

Tonepoet

20:30

@Ghalib I would write "Why is the word stand in the phrase one night stand?" or I must conform to the sentence given as closely as possible, I think it would be more natural to include "Why is there a stand in one night stand?" It sounds just a little off if there isn't a grammatical definitive to start off the noun phrase.

However, that is not to say I would have otherwise noticed if you had not just asked us the question.

Also, regarding the example, my off the cuff hypothesis is that the stand means encounter in this case,, and may be derived from a phrase like General Custard's Last Stand.

user288256

@Tonepoet Your wording is pretty good, it is bringing the results I wanted on Google search. So for me it is like hitting the jackpot and I often do, I mean my search results aren't always bad.

user288256

@Tonepoet And thanks for pointing out the mistake. A good sentence is required indeed.

Tonepoet

Also, by include i meant write. 'Twas an editorial error. >_>

user288256

Where? Your writing is so perfect I didn't even notice it. >_>

user288256

Oh, in the second line. Gotcha!

Tonepoet

20:43

" I would write "Why is the word stand in the phrase one night stand?" or I must conform to the sentence given as closely as possible, I think it would be more natural to include "Why is there a stand in one night stand?" – Foolishpoet

user288256

@Tonepoet But you don't use inverted commas while searching like that right? I only use them when looking for a set of particular words.

user288256

You will search it like this I'm guessing: Why is the word stand in the phrase one night stand?

user288256

Because that's how I did it and it brought the results I wanted.

Tonepoet

Search engine queries do not need to be grammatical sentences. It'd probably be better if you used keywords and boolean search operators.

Mitch

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 but the other person who is asking probably doesn't.

as to standing, there's the classic:

> I know we are not supposed to "go there." But then, let's take STAND. You STAND on a corner, you STAND rather than sit, you STAND up. One can STAND pat -- even in an argument. That is, one can STAND up for a thesis, the point can STAND to reason, one can STAND firm on it, STAND down dissenters, and when unrefuted, the point STANDs, ...

Tonepoet

20:53

@Ghalib However when you say inverted commas, I suppose you mean single quotes like this '. Those and double quotes bind the words together as a ver betim search term, so that what appears between them must occur as written.

Mitch

also even with that very shortened list, the whole point was exoticism. People will accept that Mohawk or Warlpiri has some weird exotic stuff going on, but not English, when weird stuff is happening in English all the time.

wait... that was not the point of that article.

no it was that people freak out that a word may mean more than one thing in another language (say Mohawk), but totally accept such ambiguity in their own (English in this example) because we know what's going on.

user288256

@Tonepoet I meant double quotation marks, these " ". Single quotation marks don't bring anything specific.

Mitch

> I know we are not supposed to "go there." But then, let's take STAND.
You STAND on a corner, you STAND rather than sit, you STAND up. One can STAND pat -- even in an argument. That is, one can STAND up for a thesis, the point can STAND to reason, one can STAND firm on it, STAND down dissenters, and when unrefuted, the point STANDs, although the debate may also end in a STAND-off. We extend that meaning to say that something cannot STAND, and when we are not inclined to let something STAND we cannot STAND it. One person STANDs in for another; a symbol can STAND for a concept. Something not…

user288256

@Tonepoet Hah what? No, you are not foolish, quite intelligent and nice if you ask me.

user288256

I make dumb mistakes too all the time.

Mitch

21:03

> On the other hand, I find it quite easy to imagine that if the word for STAND -- say, HALUC'KIP -- were used in the same ways in an indigenous language, then some writer somewhere might be telling classrooms that this word signals some complex, dynamic relationship between bodily position, conviction, toleration, nutrition, performativity, and trees.

SmokeDetector

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Repeating characters in answer: Looking for a word to describe a person who lies/invents stories to elicit sympathy to manipulate others and further their own advancement by Maks on english.SE

Mitch

@Cerberus All I'm looking at is etymonline and OED and it seems not totally decided as you say.

Tonepoet

@Ghalib Perhaps, but I feel I should say that contrary to popular belief, intellect and foolishness are not mutually exclusive. Intellect is a propensity to learn. For one thing, intellect is a propensity to learn and does not actually indicate that any actual wisdom was learned. More importantly though, even a wise person can do foolish things if they neglect to use their wisdom.

Now my own my own problem is that I opine that I have learned relatively little, and neglect to use what little wisdom I have accrued frequently. I am trying to fix the former problem with books, but the latter problem is far more dangerous if it is not fully recognized, and so I must really pay attention to my own faults.

user288256

21:29

@Tonepoet A person can't learn wisdom from books though. And writing a wrong thing at the wrong time isn't a lack of "wisdom" I guess, it probably comes under the heading of "experience".

user288256

And why "dangerous"? I would say "grave" but not dangerous. I mean I would use that word if I was working with something like nuclear materials or at a place where I could become a big liability.

Tonepoet

@Ghalib I disagree with the first sentiment: There are some things that can not be learned through books, but there is so much wisdom to be found in them and recorded information, such as that found in books, serves as the foundation of most, if not all developed civilizations. Writing the wrong thing at the wrong time is not necessarily a lack of wisdom, but if it is not the result of a lack of wisdom, then it arises as the result of neglect to use that wisdom.

user288256

@Tonepoet Well, I disagree. Writing the wrong thing at the wrong time can be overcome by "experience". Does a person really need "wisdom" to smash their keys on the keyboard until an appropriately intelligent and smart looking sentence materializes on the screen? I don't need wisdom to type, I just need a keyboard and some tea and an active brain (i.e. not feeling sleepy etc.)

user288256

Just a friendly debate by the way.

Tonepoet

sdaflkjdfj'lkfgoihfgpokdsfjfbpojsbbdijrg9rt90ithoijrgiufv iojhrgi[jrgoij' srfgoihj bpokrgioh rg0935yb0u43ioj grklfg0934lb]

user288256

21:43

haha. What is that?

Tonepoet

Smashing keys on the keyboard to see if an appropriately intelligent response would occur. ;-)

user288256

haha

user288256

You are funny.

user288256

I didn't mean it literally.

user288256

Well, I guess they use that expression because when you type fast it looks like you are smashing keys.

user288256

21:46

Depends on the type of keyboard too.

Tonepoet

I know that, but a literal interpretation does serve a point in this case. Absolutely no wisdom was used in the selection of keys pressed, so in a manner of speaking, at least some is required. I can't say how much though.

Then again, there's an old bit of wisdom to the contrary though:

it was the best of times it was the blurst of times

►

user288256

@Tonepoet Erm, by the way you are right I was wrong. I mean "wisdom" = "the quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment". So we were both basically saying the same thing. I feel dumb now. :P

Tonepoet

@Ghalib That "and" should be an "or".

user288256

@Tonepoet Well, I pasted that from here.

user288256

I guess both "or" and "and" would be correct.

Tonepoet

22:01

Syntactically perhaps, but it's a huge semantic difference. One of the conjunctions is exclusive, and the other is inclusive. "And" at least implies that it is all three qualities at once, if it does not outright require that interpretation. Using "or" indicates that each criterion can be excluded from the others, and thus is sufficient in and of itself to constitute wisdom.

user288256

@Tonepoet I often lose in a debate/discussion with a native speaker of English, like with you today with you. I guess the reason is 'the language'.

user288256

Looking back at what I wrote above, my writing kind of sounds nonsense, just because, I was calling "wisdom" "experience" and didn't even notice they both mean the same thing (almost).

Tonepoet

It's a difficult distinction to make I suppose. The word streetwise comes to mind.

user288256

What do you mean?

user288256

I mean what are you implying?

user288256

22:14

> possessing the skills and attitudes necessary to survive in a difficult or dangerous situation or environment

Tonepoet

Streetwise is a the word "wise" to suggest that what can be learned on the harsh streets of a tough town can only be learned through direct experience. It's often juxtaposed against book smarts, which is the sort of information you learn through indirect reports, and most especially school textbooks.

They're slang terms so I wouldn't take them as indicative of optimal examples of either the word wise or smart though.

user288256

Okay. Yeah I can see what it means. But what does that term have anything to do with winning a debate or an argument? Or did I misunderstand you?

user288256

I was familiar with this term "street smart".

user288256

Maybe you mean I can only learn with direct experiences like that?

user288256

I hope I am not inundating you with questions. Didn't mean to.

Mitch

22:48

I read a book once

Alan Munn

Hi can somebody explain this comment to me? I really don't have a clue how it relates to downvotes.

Cerberus

23:30

@AlanMunn I think Ashworth is saying that the answer gets down-votes because the question is too much like ELL to be on topic.

But he is unclear.

He's known for his negative comments, by the way, so don't take any of it personally.

Alan Munn

@Cerberus Yes I've run into him before. But downvoting an answer because the question is off topic seems perverse.

Cerberus

Some people feel that off-topic questions shouldn't be rewarded by answering them.

Alan Munn

@Cerberus And given that the OP is asking why something is bad, not which one is the correct one, it's far from clear to me that the question is in fact off topic.

Cerberus

I think the question is fine.

But I doubt whether you'll find any other SE site where about half of all new questions are closed...

Alan Munn

@Cerberus Yeah, you guys are weird. :)

Cerberus

23:34

Hey, don't count me in!

Alan Munn

@Cerberus No, I don't. But there definitely is a different vibe here than my usual haunt (tex.se).

Cerberus

Yeah.

Is that site smaller than this one?

I find that SE sites get less friendly to newcomers as they get bigger, and as they get older.

Alan Munn

@Cerberus In terms of number of users? Or numbers of questions? Or visits? I don't know what counts as big.

@Cerberus We have 137k questions, you have 86k, so by that count, we're bigger.

Cerberus

@AlanMunn Number of users?

@AlanMunn Hmm that doesn't sound so small.

And when were you founded?

Alan Munn

We also get slightly more questions per day than you.

We're 7 yrs old. And have 108k users to your 163k

But we also go out of our way to be friendly to people. And we vote a lot. :)

Cerberus

23:49

Good.

I don't know why our site is so hostile.

That is, I don't know why so many high-reps are.

Alan Munn

@Cerberus I don't know why either. And every time I come back to the site and answer a few questions it reminds me why I shouldn't. Especially since I'm a linguist so I do actually know what I'm talking about most of the time.

Cerberus

I noticed.

My advice would be to ignore all negativity and take from the site what you like.

Alan Munn

@Cerberus Yes, of course. But I guess with a site in which I'm unlikely to ever ask a question and will only occasionally learn something new from, the enjoyment should come from answering questions. But if that's no fun, then why bother. On the TeX site I also only rarely ask questions, but answering is rewarding, and there is lots to learn from reading others' questions and answers.

Anyway, thanks for listening. :)

Las Vegas Raiders

Thanks for coming back :-)

Alan Munn

@LasVegasRaiders A little summertime procrastination.

Transcript for

English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…