|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:27 am
Jon-OH attatching hard-and fast rules to anything as fluid as language is a useless exercise, as language's form will match function, practical application dictates the rules of language, not the other way around. Provided speaker is understood by listener, this is the only important rule of communication, not the placement of a period or if the plural of series is 'series' or 'seriesi' or even 'frankenhiemer'. I like it, gozaru.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:45 pm
Rules of language will come and go, true, but the human vocal system will by default avoid certain combonations of phonemes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 27, 2006 3:18 pm
Phil Srobeighn Rules of language will come and go, true, but the human vocal system will by default avoid certain combonations of phonemes. exactly, it's just a given, so what point is there in making a rule that people already aren't inclined to break?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 1:11 am
Jon-OH Phil Srobeighn Rules of language will come and go, true, but the human vocal system will by default avoid certain combonations of phonemes. exactly, it's just a given, so what point is there in making a rule that people already aren't inclined to break? If you don't think that people will try if there aren't rules to stop them you must have been living under a rock all those hundreds of years you've been alive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 3:24 pm
November 12, 2006
VictoriaErin Thaddeus And wolfsbane is severely poisonous to them... even more so, I believe, than to humans. ninja That sounds like you're saying if a human and a werewolf were both poisoned by wolfsbane, the werewolf would die more than the human.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:26 am
Why has Arch's quote board become more of an English lesson?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:29 am
Phil Srobeighn Why has Arch's quote board become more of an English lesson? One, it's funny and two, it's a type of humor Archie must really perfer... ya'know, him being our local grammar nazi and all. 3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:35 am
Haru Mania Phil Srobeighn Why has Arch's quote board become more of an English lesson? One, it's funny and two, it's a type of humor Archie must really perfer... ya'know, him being our local grammar nazi and all. 3nodding *writes all this in the notebook entitled: "Ways to finally make QOTW again"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thaddeus rolled 2 6-sided dice:
1, 3
Total: 4 (2-12)
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:00 am
I continue to submit that [wolfsbane] is more poisonous to werewolves [than it is to humans]. They need to be extra-dead, lest they rise again, as vampires. ... I read it in a book. ninja
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:31 am
Shokushu Jon-OH Phil Srobeighn Rules of language will come and go, true, but the human vocal system will by default avoid certain combonations of phonemes. exactly, it's just a given, so what point is there in making a rule that people already aren't inclined to break? If you don't think that people will try if there aren't rules to stop them you must have been living under a rock all those hundreds of years you've been alive. Rules don't stop people from breaking these rules, you'll notice the high level of crime, and those are rules that actually have consequences. I still contend that grammer rules, much like say, rules of edicit or politeness only count when everybody knows what's going on and why. Grammer only matters to those who like to nit-pick, it's as innane as where you put silverware around a dinner-plate, or not putting your elbows on the table. Theses rules only matter to those who enforce them, they're just ways of stratifying society... I don't really care about these things, i just like pointing them out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 3:38 pm
I don't think the Quote this week has anything to do with grammatical rules. I just found it a funny example of the old "one gets you just as dead as the other" discussion. But Thad has given a very good example of why wolfsbane might kill werewolves deader. I for one would be just fine with that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2006 11:39 am
Wait, are we saying now that wolfsbane kills werewolves more than other forms of werewolf slaying?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2006 1:25 pm
I don't think anyone suggested that...
but if it outrages you, yes, absolutely
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2006 1:28 pm
Yet, if not, why did Thad suggest that they might become "extra-dead?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2006 1:55 pm
illiteration?
colorful word choise inorder to make the things he says more interesting, and there-for more entertaining?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
