Printable View
Depends on what type of character you are attracted to I guess, sometimes you just want to have a good conversation about this and that (that is how I nicknamed #14's). I feel that it's really important to be intellectually challenged in a relationship.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV
# 38 seem flexible in their opinions though, and # 27 seem to have a wide spread of beliefs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
... We have a babe thread for a reason gents.
#38 is a bit cold though. But I agree on #27 I have always liked the more artistically forward. They do a supurb job at making you think about the challenges of modern lifeQuote:
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV
Oh, but this is about politics...Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Indeed. The most pressing matter at hand is wether or not they agree this rag I hold here smells like chloroform, if we don't ask who will?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV
I have another "matter" at hand...Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Sol Campbell is, in that link Beskar posted... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18192375Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaxfetish
BTW, I do actually have some understanding for Feme. Womens rights has NOT come a long way in Ukraine, and I guess that in a country like that they need to take to extremes to get their voice heard.
And let's face it, boobs sell. From a PR perspective it is a stroke of genius.
Problem is that I think they will be seen, but not heard. Men might get... distracted... to say the least.
Oh jokes asides, I fully support these girls. Feminists here are mostly man-haters who want freeriding, these babes are actually discriminated against in a most horrible way. They should just come here imho, same for arab women. Here they can have a life without worrying, nobody will bother them in any way. But power to them if they want to change their part of the world instead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV
My skier heart cries when "freeriding" is used as a negative term ;)
Oh, so you are against MALE arab immigration now? I always thought Ali G's idea on immigration is brilliant... Accept only HOT girls.
Of course not. But strange and unfamiliar does not invalidate its use. For example, "begging the question" does not mean strictly the same as "prompting the question" yet the two are used interchangeably in normal conversation, if begging the question were used "correctly" you would probably find it an odd turn of phrase. Similarly, "tautology" is a term in formal logic which means a statement that is always true, such as "right or wrong". But in rhetoric "completely and utterly" is a tautology despite in terms of formal logic it really is not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
This is already the best thread ever.
Also, better tell me I'm right. You don't want me to turn into one of those radicalised terrorists.
Exactly the other way around, right or wrong is no tautoligy. White snow is an tautoligy, green grass is one, right or wrong however is notQuote:
Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios
"White snow" is a pleonasm. A tautology is an actual sentence that repeats itself, or at least that's what they teach in language classes. TA is talking about formal logic though and I wouldn't know about that.
Hmm, something tells me you missed the bit about formal logic. Obligatory lazy wiki link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tautology_(logic)
Back to the topic of rhetoric: you're still wrong. White snow is what your teacher called "pleonasm". That's basically a tautology from rhetoric except by implication (the adjective/adverb could be left out as it is otherwise implied). That's in the name, pleonasm might be loosely translated as "lot of words". Round circles, red blood, etc.
You are right, but you still suck as right and wrong is still not an tautoligyQuote:
Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios
Edit Heer en meester, screw it you got me
I WIN
I HAVE THE BEST GRAMMAR
No it sucks skippyballs through a straw, that bad. This was just about pleonasm controversy. TA said something right for a change we all do at some pointQuote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
Strike, you're losing it. Not a single spelling or grammar mistake in a whole post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
Also: cut us some slack. I've been testing software for an MP3 server project, and I didn't pick the test tracks. Don't underestimate what "American Idiot" set to repeat ad nauseam can do to a person.
You didn't just test it you obviously merged and transcended
Back to Semantics!
@ Hax & Kralizek
Here's what I can turn up after a little digging into to vs. till, and their appropriateness before kingdom come.
According to the OED, till was originally the Old Norse equivalent of native English to, so they start out with the same meaning, just in different languages. Till is borrowed into English, at least in the north, very early on, and is already in use by the 800s. While it seems likely that they each started out with a spatial meaning, indicating the end location of some movement, they have also both expanded to have many other functions. Probably due to their inherent semantic similarity, the additional functions they've gained are almost identical; however, in many cases, one or the other (usually to) has won out and is now the only one of the two used for a given function.
Major functions:
- to mark a spatial goal: I went to the store; I went till the store (till no longer has this function except in Scotland and the north of England)
- to mark a dative: Listen to me; Listen till me (till no longer has this function except in Scotland and the north of England)
- to mark a purpose: I hired you to do this job; I hired you till do this job (till no longer has this function except in Scotland)
- to mark the infinitive generally: Get him to give me a lift; Get him till give me a lift (till no longer has this function except in Scotland)
- to mark a time goal: From morning till evening; From morning to evening (both still current)
So for the most part, to has been the dominant alternative, except in Scotland and the neighboring parts of England, where till has more traction. The exception is in the time sense, where till (and its compounded form until) remains in common use in English generally. In fact, it can be used in this sense in places to cannot.
I'll wait for you till morning
?I'll wait for you to morning
She'll be there till she graduates
*She'll be there to she graduates
Nonetheless, to can still be used in plenty of cases with this temporal meaning: business hours run from ten to six; parliament is postponed to the 10th of February; some maintain that to this day she is a living child, you should see it from beginning to end, etc. So, without considering the context, both till and to are potentially acceptable words to mark an endpoint in time.
-------------------------------------------------------------
As for the specific context of controversy, Hax's original statement was this: "Tis truly not long to kingdom come." To here is being used in the temporal sense, with kingdom come serving as the endpoint in time. A quick comparison of the phrases to kingdom come and till kingdom come on COCA yields the following:
till kingdom come--6 occurrences
to kingdom come--47 occurrences
On the surface, this makes it look like to kingdom come is the preferred choice, but there's a complicating factor.
All instances of till kingdom come use kingdom come as a goal in time, but this is not the case for to kingdom come. The majority of these cases (25) are instances of the idiom "blow X to kingdom come," and many of those remaining (13) are variants of this metaphor, just using other verbs in place of blow (blast, bomb, nuke, knock, kick, whack, sue). While 'kingdom come' presumably refers to the arrival of God's kingdom on the earth (a future event and not a location), and thus a temporal rather than spatial destination, my impression is that it has lost this temporal sense in this idiom. Blowing someone to kingdom come isn't generally used in my experience to mean, say, repeatedly exploding them until the world comes to its end, but rather blowing them up so completely that they go out of existence, but with the explosion happening all at once. Kingdom come then represents an end state rather than an ending time, and till would not be appropriate in most of the English-speaking world. While some of the other verbs would be more appropriate for a repeated action, the end-state meaning nonetheless seems more prominent to me for all of these ones.
For some of the remaining instances, a spatial meaning seems most likely (chase to kingdom come, drive to kingdom come, glide to kingdom come), though temporal or end-state interpretations are at least plausible. For another, talking about George Bush and Korea, kingdom come seems to represent a level of intensity rather than a spatial or temporal destination: "by ratcheting up threats to kingdom come."
For the others, a temporal meaning seems more reasonable, though the end-state meaning may be intended instead. The first may be about the ridiculous time spent doing the cooking or the end state of the vegetables, the next two contrast kingdom come to now in what is clearly a time relationship, and for the last two, kingdom come is apparently serving as a euphemism for orgasm, which could be thought of either as a time or as an end-state.
- That night I cook minestrone and joke about how Italians cook vegetables to kingdom come.
- Our collective butts will all be persona non grata here from now to kingdom come!
- Another reason she never loved me, although she'd deny it from now to Kingdom Come, is that I was born with one leg a bit shorter than the other and I walk with a slight limp.
- Talking about it made me want to climb on top of him and ride him to kingdom come.
- Your guy thrusts faster and harder as you get closer to kingdom come.
Hax's use of to kingdom come is a temporal one, and COCA seems to show an approximately even split between the use of till and to in this function, though to is more strongly associated with kingdom come generally. My intuition agrees with this, and I'd have to say both till kingdom come and to kingdom come sound perfectly natural in the context Hax used.
Ajax
:smash:
I, on the other hand, would say that Hax has made a classic non-native mistake and the question is uncomplicated.
"till Kingodm come" means "until the end of time" (his meaning) "to kingdom come" means "going/sending to the the next life"
Ergo, "till Kingdom come" is idiomatically correct
Eeven though "unto Kingdom come" makes sense gramatically we just don't use it, it has become an anachronism.
You can take that for whatever you think it's worth.
Well. You've sucessfully made football a more enticing topic than I ever thought possible by creating one even stupider.
I hate you all.
On the other side of the world, something miraculous happens...
What is it with this Euro Cup that makes people just.... GET IT!?
I never thought I'd be so for either weather reports nor un-opposed feminism...
So "I went up to (not including?) the store". I've heard this usage throughout the East Coast.Quote:
I went till the store
I'm gonna knock you (in)to next week for that!Quote:
Blowing someone to kingdom come isn't generally used in my experience to mean, say, repeatedly exploding them until the world comes to its end,
Absolutely not. While I won't deny that my English is not perfect, I'm fully aware of the semantic differences between till Kingdom come and to Kingdom come. In fact, I paused for a bit while writing my post, but in the end, I opted for the archaic version.Quote:
I, on the other hand, would say that Hax has made a classic non-native mistake and the question is uncomplicated.