Ed Reppert wrote:
Natural language != mathematical language.
Same reason something can be the "most" unique. Or how double (or quadruple or more) negatives can add emphasis instead of cancelling each other out like arithmetic terms. The algorithms that let you generate sentences allow for meanings to be conveyed beyond the strictest limits of geometrical precision.
Now, if you'll excuse me *hefts greatsword* I'm off to savagely split some English infinitives.
Confession: Sometimes I'll say "whom" even when it's wrong, just because I like sounding like an Ent.
Also, have you seen The Oatmeal's take on who/whom?
Cliche British Guy Sipping Tea wrote:
I believe it's spelt Eungluishmuan, guvnor.
Oblivious Plotholes wrote:
And another thing! What's with the use of the word "viable" to mean "works better than anything else in that slot"?! When people demand that something be "viable" all they're asking for is that you can play it without guaranteed failure. "Viable" is literally the lowest bar there is above "entirely non-functional". IT DOESN'T MEAN AWESOME!!! HRNGH!
Where's Tableflip's meditation app, aromatherapy candle, and inspirational cat poster?!
"After countless incarnations spun out by the wheel of fate, after being kings and insects and gods and bodhisattvas, after having sampled every experience a being can experience, after dwelling in the bliss of nirvana for ten billion billion years and suffering in the pyres of hell for that long as well, I have concluded that I got it right the first time: The greatest thing is to crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women."
Master Han Del of the Web wrote:
A 'soul' is not a biological component.
Fun fact: The word "animal" is the adjectival form of the Latin "anima" meaning "soul" (translation of Greek psyche). The Latin translation of Aristotle's "On the Soul" (Περὶ Ψυχῆς) was titled "De Anima" and is not a metaphysical treatise at all. Rather, it is a work of biology, discussing the different kinds of souls that various living things have. It's clear that at least some authors of antiquity believed the soul to be a physical/biological entity (see: Augustine's discussion of whether you've cut a worm's soul up when you cut the worm up into pieces and the individual pieces remain animated).
Wise => wizard is a mistaken folk etymology.
The word wizard correctly derives from OE "weosian", meaning "to dry up, shrivel", related to German "verwesen" (to decay, to rot) and Modern English "wizened." It refers to the fact that wizards dump Strength, can't do a push-up to save their lives, and, no matter what the Age line on the character sheet says, appear as shriveled and spotted as year-old-potatoes.
Clement of Alexandria said 'barbarian' to mean 'pagan' pejoratively, he's not representative of pre christian thought.
Given the paucity of primary sources, can anyone really be said to be representative of the era?
I mean, aside from Agatharchides. That guy was, like, all up in that Hellenism, what what?
That was my point. If you hear it, the click is by definition audible. Therefore, they would have pointed out that any click that is heard doesn't need that adjective, unless I was implying by using an adjective that it was necessary. And since the only other alternative for kinds of clicks, vis a vis hearability, is "inaudible," they would excessively mock me by pretending to hear an inaudible click at every turn.
O.J. Pinckert wrote:
The best way to make players say "Oh F-"... As they are looking around, calmly say "You hear an audible click..."
My players would point out that you can't, by definition, hear an inaudible click. They would then ask if they saw any invisible people or smelled any non-olfactory odors.
At this point, someone would break into "To Dream the Impossible Dream," substituting "To Hear the Inaudible Click!"
And then I would probably be the one saying "oh f---".
Because that. Is how. We roll.
I'd imagine that in the north if you rolled a 1, the situation would be serious, but not hopeless. Whereas in the south, it would be hopeless, but not serious...
I bet! I used to have to worry about that kind of thing for work all the time. And it only gets more wacky when machine translation gets involved. Trying to figure out which grammatical construction would offend the fewest languages when we plugged it into translation software gave me no end of headaches... :)
By the end of every project, the whole team was so punchy from going over the words, that I'm pretty sure none of us was speaking any known language--it had all become just noises and symbols. This may explain why comprehend languages is one of my favorite fantasies...
Fabius Maximus wrote:
I personally am annoyed by Paizo just taking words that mean 'ghost' from different languages and apply them to their critters. We already have a 'Geist' in the German translation, thank you very much.
Huh. I wonder if they could reverse-translate. Like the German version would have 'Geist' for the 'ghost' bestiary entry, but then put 'Ghost' for the 'geist' bestiary entry...
...and I'm sure that would never cause any confusion ever.
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
It's a friggin' plural.
Oh, I see what you did there! Repurposing a word that started with a different lexical value as a colloquially acceptable substitution for a more common, but taboo, profanity word with its own distinct etymology and meaning--to pretend to object to a linguistic change of the same type! Clever... ten thousand spoons clever...
According to the random treasure tables of Ultimate Equipment, diamonds worth 25,000gp for wish spells simply don't exist. ;)
Well, you see, the only way to get a 25,000 gp diamond is to cast a wish spell to ask that prior to the casting of the spell, you were the possessor of a diamond worth 25,000 gp...
...the past subjunctive is really a key part of wish.