English thread. Why not?

If it's not ZDoom, it goes here.
User avatar
Ravick
Posts: 1987
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 10:59 pm
Location: Tubarão, Brasil

Re: English thread. Why not?

Post by Ravick »

Thanks! :D
User avatar
Enjay
 
 
Posts: 26441
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 4:58 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: English thread. Why not?

Post by Enjay »

Fun fact (from memory) Buffy the Vampire Slayer is meant to be the first TV show to have a character use the word "google" as a verb. The character Willow asks something like "have you googled it".
User avatar
Ravick
Posts: 1987
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 10:59 pm
Location: Tubarão, Brasil

Re: English thread. Why not?

Post by Ravick »

So, it got me curious. There is this "cultist base but it is wee woo" meme I guess everyone already knows about:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3saIjFDY3X4[/youtube]

Well, Mick Gordon commented "is same" in the video. WTF does it mean?! Does he means that the music and Patrick's singing sounds the same? Also, if so, is it a usual/normal way to say that? I mean, people would say it in that way in a regular conversation?

Thanks in advanced! :)
Enjay wrote:Fun fact (from memory) Buffy the Vampire Slayer is meant to be the first TV show to have a character use the word "google" as a verb. The character Willow asks something like "have you googled it".
Oh, I didn't remember that. I guess they screwed it in the dubbed version I've watched, =/
User avatar
Ravick
Posts: 1987
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 10:59 pm
Location: Tubarão, Brasil

Re: English thread. Why not?

Post by Ravick »

Hi there.

Just a quickly question: may I use 'noclipper' to refer to a person who uses the NOCLIP cheat? I mean, is it a thing or would it be confusing to understand if I use it?
User avatar
wildweasel
Moderator Team Lead
Posts: 21590
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 7:33 pm
Preferred Pronouns: He/Him
Operating System Version (Optional): Win10 22H2, Win11 22H2, macOS 11.7
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support

Re: English thread. Why not?

Post by wildweasel »

Ravick wrote:Hi there.

Just a quickly question: may I use 'noclipper' to refer to a person who uses the NOCLIP cheat? I mean, is it a thing or would it be confusing to understand if I use it?
This is going to depend highly on your audience. People from these forums are almost guaranteed to understand it, but outside of enthusiasts, it may not be understood outside of the niche of people who have played FPS games and known the cheat codes for them.
User avatar
Rachael
Admin
Posts: 13211
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 1:31 pm
Preferred Pronouns: She/Her

Re: English thread. Why not?

Post by Rachael »

Ravick wrote:Just a quickly question: may I use 'noclipper' to refer to a person who uses the NOCLIP cheat? I mean, is it a thing or would it be confusing to understand if I use it?
Let me preface this by saying that "noclipper" is not officially a word in the English language - so tread carefully using it.

That being said, however, like Weasel said it depends on your audience. But here's my (somewhat controversial) opinion: Strictly following the standards of any language is impossible and counter-productive. Standards are created around the way it is used, and if standards are worshipped like God then that language cannot evolve or adapt to the changes that happen in our world. So use the word. As long as your target audience knows what you said, language has served its purpose; standards be damned.

Sure standards are good for helping your target audience understand your meaning, but there is no standard that exists for every possible scenario you could possibly use language - it's like the rules on a forum - they're never ever perfect, and sometimes new rules have to be created around the way its users behave. Use your best judgment. Follow standards, but sometimes you just have to make your own rules (at least as far as language is concerned).

(Braces for the incoming hate mail from English teachers)
User avatar
Ravick
Posts: 1987
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 10:59 pm
Location: Tubarão, Brasil

Re: English thread. Why not?

Post by Ravick »

This is very close to my personal vision of languages: they seem to me just like ecosystems, with words being species inhabiting them; and they are able to evolve along time, just like ecosystems (and not just their species) do.

BTW, thank you both for helping. :)
User avatar
Rachael
Admin
Posts: 13211
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 1:31 pm
Preferred Pronouns: She/Her

Re: English thread. Why not?

Post by Rachael »

You're welcome.

I would say with how easy I am able to understand you, generally, you have enough command of the English language that if you need to, you can form your own words if you ever need to and as long as those words are based on something that is already understood you should be safe using them. It's always preferable to use a standardized word if one exists but, as you well know one not always does. And if you don't have time to look it up, don't worry about it. It's always far more important that your audience understands you than it is for you to follow a standard.
Gez
 
 
Posts: 17731
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:22 pm

Re: English thread. Why not?

Post by Gez »

I'll point out that all the classic authors -- and not just in English, but in every language -- have invented words when convenient. And it continues to this day. When the Simpsons' writers invented "cromulent" (as a synonym of "valid" or "acceptable"), it was quickly adopted...
User avatar
Ravick
Posts: 1987
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 10:59 pm
Location: Tubarão, Brasil

Re: English thread. Why not?

Post by Ravick »

Rachael wrote:you can form your own words if you ever need to and as long as those words are based on something that is already understood you
I remember when I was learning English, and I got amazed how common it was to see(listen...) people doing it. A friend that already as fluent in English told me that, if I want to say something I didn't kow a word for, I could put together two words that describes what I want and use as a functional new word. Therefor,e he said, there was not much sense in me asking if such expression 'exists' in English, as long as the expression make sense to the audience.
Gez wrote:I'll point out that all the classic authors -- and not just in English, but in every language -- have invented words when convenient.
Trivia: In Portuguese, a Brazilian classic author created the word ensimesmado, meaning "self-absorbed", but constructed more or less just like 'in-himself-ish'. And it got into the oficial dictionaries. :lol:
User avatar
Ravick
Posts: 1987
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 10:59 pm
Location: Tubarão, Brasil

Re: English thread. Why not?

Post by Ravick »

Hi there.

I've just watched a few videos in English about cats and noticed that cats are refereed as female. I mean, with pronouns as "she" or "her", instead of 'it'.
Does "cat" has a gender in English, just like in romantic languages? Or is it just some funny way of cat lovers talk about them? o.õ

(Oh, and, trivia: in Portuguese, gato is a male word.)
User avatar
wildweasel
Moderator Team Lead
Posts: 21590
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 7:33 pm
Preferred Pronouns: He/Him
Operating System Version (Optional): Win10 22H2, Win11 22H2, macOS 11.7
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support

Re: English thread. Why not?

Post by wildweasel »

Ravick wrote:Hi there.

I've just watched a few videos in English about cats and noticed that cats are refereed as female. I mean, with pronouns as "she" or "her", instead of 'it'.
Does "cat" has a gender in English, just like in romantic languages? Or is it just some funny way of cat lovers talk about them? o.õ

(Oh, and, trivia: in Portuguese, gato is a male word.)
Cats, believe it or not, have genders. :shrug:
User avatar
Rachael
Admin
Posts: 13211
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 1:31 pm
Preferred Pronouns: She/Her

Re: English thread. Why not?

Post by Rachael »

All animals are referred to with gendered pronouns in English, if/when the gender is known. That is even done for arthropods, such as spiders, bees, ants, etc, in cases where the gender is known. (Though, male arthropods are relatively extremely rare, depending on the species)

If the gender is not known, it is traditional that the male gender is assumed (though often wrongly) for said animal - it is becoming increasingly common these days for unknown genders to be referred to as "they/them" as is done with humans.
User avatar
Ravick
Posts: 1987
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 10:59 pm
Location: Tubarão, Brasil

Re: English thread. Why not?

Post by Ravick »

Rachael wrote:All animals are referred to with gendered pronouns in English, if/when the gender is known.
You mean the gender of the individual? Lets say, if the subject is one certain cat that is know to be female. The videos I've watched were talking about cats in general, not any particular individual and using female pronouns. That is what made me confuse about it.


__
I'm aware this question of mine may sound absurd in a non-romantic language just like English. I hope it is not being now. In my mother language, most nouns have genders. For example, one will always use female pronouns to talk about animals such as whales, lhamas or zebras, even when referring to a male individual. As for cats, "gato", the literal translation of "cat", is a male word, and one will always use male pronouns with it. If someone needs to refer specifically to a female cat or only to female cats, he'll use the female variations "gata" or "gatas".

wildweasel wrote: Cats, believe it or not, have genders. :shrug:
:p
:)
Gez
 
 
Posts: 17731
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:22 pm

Re: English thread. Why not?

Post by Gez »

If a cat has three fur colors (calico or tortoiseshell), then you can be reasonably sure it's a female cat.

Return to “Off-Topic”