« first day (2161 days earlier)      last day (1676 days later) » 

12:11 AM
@Jasper Cambridge is overrated
Those students don't even bother.
 
user227867
12:24 AM
By the way for those who are interested, the best grammar I know about written in English for German French Italian Spanish are the Routledge Reference Grammars. routledge.com/languages/series/RRG you can see them here, and they are also on the Cambridge reading lists!
 
1:06 AM
O @Helmar, great burninator o' tags, doth thou know the purpose o' Pragmatics?
 
2:28 AM
@Tonepoet DOST THOU
Second person is -st; third is -th!
 
user227867
@tchrist I think Putin did well, lol. Saying Obama founded ISIS is completely ridiculous, lol.
 
user227867
@Tonepoet I forgot to ask you. What do you think of Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary?
 
3:28 AM
Eeh, it doesn't seem to do its job quite well enough. Notice how people are citing Merriam-Webster's against my position here: http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/352516/looking-for-a-term-like-fundamentalism-but-without-a-religious-connotation/352518?noredirect=1#comment817534_352518 Now if it did a good enough job of explaining the metaphor, they wouldn't be doing that but the website clearly has these two sentences on it:

"Orthodox medical treatment, for example, follows the established practices of mainstream medicine. Unorthodox thinking is known in business language as 'think
Other than that I did notice that Merriam-Webster's Collegiate dictionary 10th was the first dictionary to include the pejorative sense of the word "Douchebag" in 1993. Even Random House's 1987 Unabridged and Eric Partridge's Slang dictionaries lacked it in the 80s and the A.H.D. didn't add that until the 5th edition that the American Heritage Dictionary finally capitulated. It's not something I personally seek in a dictionary but if you want a dictionary that'll keep up with the latest slang...
... that seems noteworthy.
@tchrist Also thank you for that information. I'll keep it in mind for the future. With that in mind though, I changed slay to burninate because I knew the odds were I'd get it wrong and I don't think Strong Bad would've gotten it right either. XP
 
user227867
4:00 AM
@Tonepoet Oh I sent you an email just now. I now think that perhaps AHD has the best definitions among all dictionaries.
 
Wikipedia has a decent concise definition for pragmatics: "Pragmatics is a subfield of linguistics and semiotics that studies the ways in which context contributes to meaning."
 
One other nice thing I wanted to say about Merriam-Webster's dictionary is that they offered the tenth edition in a large print format. Large print dictionaries usually get rather bad reviews for not being comparable to actual collegiate dictionaries, but Merriam'Webster's is exactly the same as the regular edition, word for word.
 
Defining pragmatics precisely is difficult. People have different ideas of what exactly it should mean, and where the dividing line between semantics and pragmatics should lie.
The definition for pragmatics in David Crystal's dictionary of linguistics is quite long. I can quote it if anyone is interested.
 
user227867
@Tonepoet Many reviews are written by idiots.
 
user227867
4:06 AM
@Tonepoet Also, I tried to cancel my order of ODE. I hope it has not shipped yet. I think I will not buy Oxford dictionaries anymore this lifetime.
 
@Jasper That's true, but there's generally a bias towards being too positive, over being too negative, if we assume a 3 star rating is neither especially good or bad.
@Jasper Did something upset you about N.O.A.D?
 
user227867
@Tonepoet Well, I think it's all the things that upset me about Oxford that I have mentioned to you ever. And as I browse through NOAD, I also saw some stupid things. Look at the entry for abuse as a verb. The examples given under the sexual subsense there need not be representative of the subsense itself
 
@Jasper Is it the same as the one on O.L.D?
 
user227867
@Tonepoet Yes, the print form and the online form is essentially the same. And the US and the UK one too.
 
user227867
To put those examples under the sexual subsense is extremely misleading, to say the least.
 
user227867
4:12 AM
In fact, where they got the quotations from, the reality might not even be sexual abuse.
 
user227867
So I am pretty much done with Oxford now. Goodbye.
 
I can see how somebody might say the examples in 2.1 in a broader context of sexual abuse, although I do agree that the exemplary sentences are too vague to make anything certain of it. 2.2 confounds me. 2.3 is fair.
 
user227867
@Tonepoet I was specifically referring to the example about the man who abused his two young daughters, and also the abused children
 
@Jasper Right, that's 2.1
 
user227867
@Tonepoet Yes. Therefore, goodbye to Oxford.
 
4:15 AM
I see.
 
user227867
I care about the word 'abuse' a lot because I know a lot about the different kinds of abuse. =P
 
user227867
In fact from now onwards before I buy a dictionary, I will make sure I look at the entry for abuse. =P
 
Okay Jasper, how does Noah Webster's definitions of abuse compare in your personal opinion?
 
user227867
@Tonepoet I think it is pretty good but so far I have not come across any dictionary that mentions the physical, psychological and sexual types of abuse with these three adjectives. Of course, a dictionary is not an encyclopedia. But the term psychological abuse is pretty common today that I feel it should be included explicitly
 
4:28 AM
Hmm, just a moment.
They might've added further senses in the supplement I should dig up too.
Nah, not really They do have abuze as a simplified spelling interestingly enough.
 
 
2 hours later…
7:07 AM
@tchrist Yes, made I quick SEDE query and put it in Excel to get the values from the posthistory editing table
@Tonepoet I most certainly do not :D
 
user227867
7:22 AM
@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 I did not know Canada is the second biggest country until today. =)
 
user227867
@Tonepoet Thanks. No need to waste your time for me. =)
 
7:57 AM
@tchrist It's not a list of the number of times they got deleted. Just a flat list of what did exist at least once.
 
 
1 hour later…
9:07 AM
καλήμερα
 
user227867
9:29 AM
Did the course say what level you will reach at its end @matt?
 
9:40 AM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in answer, bad keyword with email in answer, email in answer: Is the Word Homeopathy Used Inappropriately? by Brown Gabriela on english.stackexchange.com
 
10:03 AM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in answer, bad keyword with email in answer, email in answer: Is the Word Homeopathy Used Inappropriately? by Brown Gabriela on english.stackexchange.com
 
 
2 hours later…
12:04 PM
@Jasper no
 
There should be a pill for a language.
I mean, I'd understand if it took a few minutes to take effect.
And wear off after a few hours, but that's how meds work.
unless it were like an antibiotic. killing off ones lack of knowledge of a language permanently.
 
12:41 PM
@Jasper Congratulations! Most of it is prairies or tundra though
 
Hey, @Mr.Shiny.
 
We were going through the genders of some countries last night in Greek class. The articles for masculine feminine and neuter are ο, η and το. Canada is masculine.
 
O Canada! Ha!
Hi @Matt.
 
hi @KitZ.Fox :D
 
12:45 PM
Shit. I just accidentally executed the whole script.
 
And managed to cancel it only after it had dropped most of the tables.
 
@KitZ.Fox d'oh, that happened to me too the other day
 
Well, I guess it's time to run the whole script.
And make sure it works!
 
I had a constant, c_dry_run, set to true. But then I did if (c_dry_run = 'true') then commit; else rollback; end;
 
12:47 PM
Last time I checked it, it took 5 minutes, so hopefully it's not too much longer now.
@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Oh...whoops.
 
luckily it was just the test db
 
phew.
I'm covertly setting up a test/dev environment for the project that I'm still contracted on because they want to pay me to do support but not to build it out so they don't have to pay me for support.
I decided that it is stupid, so I will build a second site with the support stuff coded in. That will make my job easier and then when they get around to deciding to pay me for the work, I will sell it to them.
Easy-peasy mac n cheesy.
 
user227867
It's writing day.
 
user227867
I just had some cheese fries.
 
Oh right. Writing day.
grumble, mutter
 
user227867
12:52 PM
The last ten days, I found three errors in Oxford's dictionaries and I told them about it.
 
user227867
I have also decided not to buy any more of their dictionaries.
 
Well, there. If I hadn't done that by accident, I wouldn't have known that I failed to write a drop table statement for that one table.
woo.
 
user227867
Serendipity.
 
user227867
I recently learned the word longanimity.
 
user227867
I think my mum will watch Korean dramas from 7 to 9 every day for the rest of her life, lol.
 
user227867
12:58 PM
I have been hearing so much Korean and so little Japanese that now I have difficulty distinguishing the two.
 
user227867
Maybe if I stare at my left hand and not at my right hand, after a while I will have difficulty distinguishing them.
 
user227867
Sometimes when I move my eyeballs left and right, it seems that I hear wind in my ears. I think maybe I have a tumour somewhere.
 
user227867
I am going to take a nap. Poof!
 
@KitZ.Fox yay! so it was a successful test then.
 
Yes.
And it took 8:21.
so now I know that too.
 
1:36 PM
I am really digging Samantha Bee.
 
2:02 PM
@Jasper chili cheese fries... mmm
with bacon
@Jasper I don't think Oxford is the worst there.
@KitZ.Fox She doesn't hold back
also, blazers
 
24
A: "Its" as a Possessive Pronoun

John LawlerThat shell is not mine. Nor is it yours. It belongs to that snail over there. That shell is its, not mine or yours. As you can see, this construction doesn't occur often, because possession is not often attributed to neuter nouns, let alone pronouns.

@tchrist: ^
 
Thanks.
 
np
 
2:34 PM
@deadrat See both the linked duplicate and also our blog entry. We long ago decided that the site couldn't sustain the infinite stream of beginning questions constantly asking how the various and many English time constructions and aspects correspond to one another; if you disagree with that policy please bring up the matter on our Meta. — tchrist ♦ 1 min ago
Does anybody have an argument for reopening that question?
 
@Robusto or, or, or you could move to a fucken proper country where you can fucken watch it on fucken YouTube. Just like I did.
You realize your fucken country is high maintenance, right?
And just you wait till it puts a mullet on.
It will need four extra hours in the bathroom every morning.
 
Thank you, @KitZ.Fox.
 
@tchrist no. there's no good argument. I don't get why @deadrat seems so ... upset?
I don't think he wants it to be reopened. Or else I've misunderstood
 
He doesn't like that we close questions.
Although if he really wanted it reopened, he could certainly have voted that it be such.
 
My first impressionable answer to the question was 'go read an english grammar book'
maybe he doesn't like migrating to ELL. It seems like that was part of his argument even though there was no such indication in the closing.
 
2:46 PM
The tag is bizarre, too.
> I will have been going to be having eaten.
 
@tchrist I don't think it's quite that. I think he doesn't like that we close questions so often.
 
Well, sure.
Our closure rate is about 60%, and ever-rising.
 
What's our rate of reopening questions?
 
That varies by close reason, but it's not high.
 
@tchrist No. It's i) off topic—too basic; ii) no research, not even a teeny tiny bit and iii) a dupe.
 
3:01 PM
@tchrist the (non-mod) review queue is down to 3!!
 
@Tonepoet It's in the data in that chart, maybe.
 
The design of reopening makes it very difficult to do
It shouldn't have parity with closing, but it's still in the direction of unfair (for unclear, POB, or OT/no research)
 
I think it should have parity with closing ideally speaking. When it doesn't, that suggests people either don't understand the rules or that we're placing undue burdens on people who do. Lack of parity doesn't exactly tell us which of those problems it is though.
 
I don't understand why you think there "should" be parity.
 
It's an optimistic stance; a very impractically optimistic stance but the one we should nevertheless strive to achieve: Ideally everybody would understand what sorts of questions should be asked on this website to the degree where every question is fundamentally good enough to be asked here. Any questions that are closed, would then be fixable with an edit. Once an edit is made to put a question into compliance with the website's rules, it should be reopened.
 
3:17 PM
Parity implies a zero-sum game in which the net number of questions closed is zero.
 
Yes tchrist. In the situation I described, there would ultimately be zero closed questions, because closable questions either wouldn't be asked, or they'd be fixed immediately and people would understand they've been fixed.
In reality what happens is that people don't fix their questions, so they stay closed forever.
 
@Tonepoet Sure, that would be wonderful but is utopic. I am reasonably sure that the vast majority of questions on all SE sites are from drive-by users.
 
Question goes to the review queue, gets reopened because the principle claim is true. If the question is re-closed, it should probably be for the primarily opinion based reason (meaning it should've never been asked)
 
We can't expect new users to be aware of a site's scope in sufficient detail to never post off topic questions. Hell, even the regulars are not too clear on their site's scope since all sites have grey areas.
What's worse, I'm a mod on two different sites and on both there are borderline questions that I'd have trouble deciding whether they're on topic.
And I've been obsessed active on several SE sites for a few years now.
If even experienced users can get confused about scope, we can't expect new users not to.
No, we just close the bad ones when they come and try to reopen as much as possible.
 
3:37 PM
Sure, we can't realistically expect that, but shouldn't and can't are two different things. There are obligations on everybody's part to make the experience as close to ideal as possible, which is why we discuss matters of policy: To minimize the bad and maximize the good to the fullest extent possible. Right now, I think we have an obligation to make the existence of our rules more evident to our newest users. I think there's a fair consensus that they're too hidden.
I've seen several requests for a link on every page. In those questions, it's pointed out that we have the help link on every page but nothing makes it particularly evident that this link, or the so called "help center" are anything other than optional reading material for users experiencing difficulty with the interface.
 
Well, if you can find an efficient and non invasive way of doing that, I'm all for it. I can't think of one though.
 
I'm not entirely sure. At the very least the S.E. corporation could adhere to U.I. and English norms by capitalizing Review and Help. I'd prefer the help center to be renamed "guidelines" (or rules even, although I think that language is perhaps considered too strong for S.E. management) and maybe have a direct link to it next to the review queue and help menu, since we have blank space up there.
This is something that would have to be requested at the main website meta though....
 
4:31 PM
Heh, I much prefer them in lower case, actually.
 
Prefer what?
 
@Rubisco Tonepoet suggested "capitalizing Review and Help". I prefer them lower case. They're not sentences or proper nouns, after all.
 
Well, what is that going to help with?
 
Dunno.
 
5:15 PM
> And the fallen lord Pharzuph fought against the shining city on the hill all that day and all that night; and he took the city, and slew all people he found therein, and beat down their city, and sowed it with salt.
—Annals of the 2016 Presidential Election
Gives a whole new meaning to "you are the salt of the earth".
 
@Cerberus Oops sorry, I was quoting from the Book of Judges rather than from the Book of Revelation per your reference. Silly me!
 
@Cerberus Best to watch good poll aggregations. Individual polls can be misleading.
 
I know.
Just to give Tchrist hope.
Although the aggregators also show a solid lead.
 
We’ve now moved into salting-the-earth territory.
 
@terdon That's debatable, particularly the proper noun bit. Those are the names of the specific menus, rather than the common signification of those words. As far as U.E. goes I've never seen menus elsewhere in lowercase either and it'd make them more noticeable.
 
@Cerberus O Pandora, always the desperado!
 
@Tonepoet The problem is not that people don't notice it. It's that people notice it and don't give a damn.
 
> Now this is not the beginning. It is not even the end of the beginning. But it is, perhaps, the beginning of the end.
 
@Rubisco Those aren't mutually exclusive problems.
 
5:24 PM
From Apocalypse Wow!
 
@Tonepoet But we do know that merely making it more noticeable -- And it's debatable whether capital letters will do that -- won't get any favorable results.
 
@MetaEd Toxic radioactive fallout from finally exercising the nuking option will salt the fields that we know even onto the fourth generation of those that fear Mad Dworkin's handiwork in the Major Arcana.
@Rubisco ᴄᴀᴘɪᴛᴀʟ ɪᴅᴇᴀ
 
@Rubisco I don't see any reason to predict whether making it more noticable would have results or not. It's conceded that the specific suggestion of capitalization might have questionable results, but it's also so non-intrusive and easy to implement that it's worth a shot.
 
@tchrist I will thesisisificationize in some years
 
@Rubisco The bizarre thing here is that he is hardly the first whom this notion has occurred to!
Not, mind you, that what has been provided counts as an answer.
 
5:32 PM
@tchrist When urban dictionary and a website called unwords are the only citations, even omitting wiktionary, it's pretty unlikely that it's standard usage.
 
Far be it from me to assert otherwise!
 
I should go add 'thesisisificationize' to Metropolitan Dictionary.
 
No sissifying in this chat.
 
You know what's annoying?
 
Perennially.
 
5:33 PM
Personally, I feel indifferent to the suggestion.
 
When you want to listen to the pronunciation of an IPA character but you're listening to music.
 
@Lawrence For what?
 
Mhm
I can never unhear music.
 
@Cerberus But regard the letterform and give full reign to your synaesthesia!
 
It affects, it pierces my brain much faster than anything spoken
 
5:34 PM
Alas, it doesn't work that way.
I get colours at best.
Hmm it seems I have been approximating Cixi well enough.
 
It sounds like you guys are deaf to all but the song!
 
@tchrist Dworkin is cool. Great guy to party with.
 
6:08 PM
 
No smoking.
 
In this chat
 
6:25 PM
 
@Rubisco I am unhearing so much music right now it's undeafening
 
6:43 PM
@mitch I saw your comment but I don't want to engage in extended discussion in the comments. Please join me in this chatroom.
 
6:53 PM
@mitch uhm..
I guess you just joined for a second and then left.
 
Ok you guys, I have to fly. I leave you with a challenge: figure out how to tell this guy, and people like him, that what they keep asking counts as off-topic proofreading.
0
Q: Writing advice (word usage)

Yeganeh AhmadiIs the usage of brings forth correct in the following sentence? Moghaddam brings forth the question: What policies should we adopt to manage diversity in the context of fractured globalization?

I need a canned comment. We get these

every

single

day.
 
@tchrist That's impossible: With the way we define proofreading in the close reason, it's not because he identified the portion he has trouble parsing. It's not even closed for proofreading.
 
All "Is this correct?" questions are off-topic proofreading by definition.
 
"Proofreading questions are off-topic unless a specific source of concern in the text is clearly identified." Change that then, because unless it is, people will be forever confused.
 
On our site, questions such as this one are considered off-topic proofreading because they ask simple yes–no style “Is this correct?” (or multiple-guess “Which of these is or are correct?” questions) which present no research or theories, and which are unlikely to help future visitors to this site, which is for for linguists, etymologists, and (serious) English language enthusiasts. You can edit your question to flesh it out more to show your work and theories and make it more interesting, or ask it on English Language Learners under their rules. — tchrist ♦ 12 secs ago
"Is this right?" will never be good enough.
Because there are infinitely many GIMME DA CODEZ! demands of that nature.
 
7:03 PM
"Which present no research or theories" that's not proofreading, that's gen. ref. You said proofreading.
 
You aren't helping.
 
There's no helping the situation in my personal opinion, although I'd be happy to be proven wrong. I think all we can do with the current system is ask him to explain the reason he suspects that specific portion of the sentence is wrong, preferably with grammatical terms.
 
 
1 hour later…
8:17 PM
@tchrist Regarding your original request here's what I suggest. Just two words should be appended to our definition of proofreading in the close reason and in the help center "and explained". It's not much but maybe it'll get the point across that simply emphasizing several words isn't enough? I would imagine an explanation requires some additional writing, more along the lines of what you seek in a question like this.
 
user227867
8:42 PM
I just woke up and had some coffee.
 
@Tonepoet I see what you mean. I'll try to look at this tomorrow. Stuck in cross-country travel today.
 
user227867
@Lawrence You need to learn to use the arrows to reply. That is why @Kit did not know what you were thanking her for. If you don't know how to use the arrows, ask again next time you come here and some chat expert like me will help you.
 
@Tonepoet Because I wrote in writing advice because it's right there in the title :D
 
user227867
@tonepoet Do you know that dictionary.cambridge.org has some bilingual foreign language dictionaries, only online though, not in book form? I hope that means they are considering making books in the near future. I look forward to CUP competing with OUP soon.
 
The impossibility stems from the fact that those questions are asked by people who have not read the tour page, the on-topic pace and will read any finely worded comment only after the fact.
 
user227867
8:49 PM
@Tonepoet I pronounce amazon.ca and amazon.co.uk as amazon dot ka and amazon dot ko dot ook, lol
 
@tchrist I want to rewrite the whole thing to be honest. We'll talk about this more when you have more time.
 
user227867
Interesting that amazon.co.uk calls it basket and amazon.com calls it cart, lol
 
@tchrist First solution, make a big red warning pop up if either writing advice or correct? is in the title. Make it a real eye-assaulting red NO with a flashy border and an alarm sound that straightens your back in shock. After half a second switch to a soothing orange font which politely states the rules for grammaticality and word choice questions.
 
@Helmar That's true Helmar, but everything on this website could be classified as "writing advice" by a broad enough definition of the words. The definition provided in the Help Center suggests that a "writing advice" question is a question that would be apt on Writer's S.E. Anyway, I have no time for discussion now as I just received a broken package and need to engage in the refund process. Wish me luck.
 
@Jasper So the Brits have to carry their stuff to the check-out themselves?
@Tonepoet Go get your money back ;)
 
user227867
8:55 PM
@Tonepoet Do you have a favourite British dictionary? I know your favourite American one is AHD.
 
user227867
@Matt I was reading up on Britain, Great Britain, United Kingdom, England, Northern Ireland, Ireland, Republic of Ireland. Pretty confusing, lol
 
user227867
@Helmar I noticed you are putting in a lot of effort into this site.
 
9:15 PM
@Jasper Just giving back a bit :)
 
I sent a message. Now all I need to do is wait. This is probably going to cost me a little out of pocket due to the return policy. v_v
@Jasper Unfortunately no, I do not.
 
@Helmar I doubt that writing advice merits a titular ban via scarlet letter, but I am now ready to go to bat for grammatically and correct. Our general close rate is now 50% higher than when last I looked at this. I bet those are at 80% now.
Maybe even look at the auto-quality metrics on questions.
Signing off for ascent into the skies.
 
9:44 PM
@Helmar Blink! We need blink!
 
user227867
10:26 PM
...
 
11:19 PM
<BLINK>*blinky blinky pa laid doo*</BLINK>
 

« first day (2161 days earlier)      last day (1676 days later) »