User talk:Lysdexia - Revision history

Lysdexia: /* Language use */

2024-07-18T07:27:00Z

‎Language use

Lysdexia: /* Language use */

2024-07-18T07:25:56Z

‎Language use

K2: /* Language use */ warning

2023-07-27T22:02:28Z

‎Language use: warning

Cathartes: delete last two comments; this is too heated for a three-year-old linguistics dispute, and slurs don't belong on the wiki

2023-07-27T21:00:59Z

delete last two comments; this is too heated for a three-year-old linguistics dispute, and slurs don't belong on the wiki

Cssdixieland: Insulting the repugnant 'Dyslexia' AS SHE DESERVES

2023-07-27T20:23:40Z

Insulting the repugnant 'Dyslexia' AS SHE DESERVES

Lysdexia: /* Language use */

2023-07-27T06:03:52Z

‎Language use

Cssdixieland: A few points regarding language style and 'corrections'

2023-07-18T19:00:17Z

A few points regarding language style and 'corrections'

Umbire the Phantom at 22:47, 14 October 2020

2020-10-14T22:47:19Z

Lysdexia: /* Language use */

2020-08-31T01:37:35Z

‎Language use

Lysdexia: /* Language use */

2020-08-31T01:15:27Z

‎Language use

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:27, 18 July 2024
Line 85:		Line 85:
	:No, you, “rougelike” fan. [[User:Lysdexia\|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia\|talk]]) 06:03, 27 July 2023 (UTC)		:No, you, “rougelike” fan. [[User:Lysdexia\|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia\|talk]]) 06:03, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

−	[]User:Cathartes\|Cathartes]], a nonadmin who undid my and Cssdixieland’s [https://nethackwiki.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Lysdexia&oldid=152779 replies], says that slurs don’t belong on the wiki yet doesn’t care that dixieland’s misgendering above is a slur. I didn’t get to address the delusional reply timely but feminism, marriage, and sex are completely nonrelated to the rebuke/redress. [[User:Lysdexia\|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia\|talk]]) 07:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)	+	[[User:Cathartes\|Cathartes]], a nonadmin who undid my and Cssdixieland’s [https://nethackwiki.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Lysdexia&oldid=152779 replies], says that slurs don’t belong on the wiki yet doesn’t care that dixieland’s misgendering above is a slur. I didn’t get to address the delusional reply timely but feminism, marriage, and sex are completely nonrelated to the rebuke/redress. [[User:Lysdexia\|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia\|talk]]) 07:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:25, 18 July 2024
Line 84:		Line 84:
	::Five months to say all this nothing and miss the point so thoroughly. I'm almost impressed. --[[User:Umbire the Phantom\|Umbire the Phantom]] ([[User talk:Umbire the Phantom\|talk]]) 22:47, 14 October 2020 (UTC)		::Five months to say all this nothing and miss the point so thoroughly. I'm almost impressed. --[[User:Umbire the Phantom\|Umbire the Phantom]] ([[User talk:Umbire the Phantom\|talk]]) 22:47, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
	:No, you, “rougelike” fan. [[User:Lysdexia\|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia\|talk]]) 06:03, 27 July 2023 (UTC)		:No, you, “rougelike” fan. [[User:Lysdexia\|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia\|talk]]) 06:03, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
		+
		+	[]User:Cathartes\|Cathartes]], a nonadmin who undid my and Cssdixieland’s [https://nethackwiki.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Lysdexia&oldid=152779 replies], says that slurs don’t belong on the wiki yet doesn’t care that dixieland’s misgendering above is a slur. I didn’t get to address the delusional reply timely but feminism, marriage, and sex are completely nonrelated to the rebuke/redress. [[User:Lysdexia\|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia\|talk]]) 07:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:02, 27 July 2023
Line 22:		Line 22:

	== Language use ==		== Language use ==
		+	All - please keep it civil. This is the only warning that will be given. Thanks. [[User:K2\|K2]] ([[User talk:K2\|talk]]) 22:01, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
		+

	Hi,		Hi,

@@ Line 42: / Line 42: @@
 :hard:soft -> touh:easy.  What kind of dismissive comments aren't welcome? (if pinging here works: [[User:bcode]]) [[User:Lysdexia|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia|talk]]) 22:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 :Gentlemen, without wishing to start any kind of debate on the proper use of language, and with all my respect to other Members of the Nethack Wiki, for the most part I HAVE TO AGREE with the points mentioned by Mister Lysdexia. I know that the subject of 'language purism' may seem out of place in a wiki whose main purpose is to explain the mechanics of a complex and highly interesting game such as Nethack, but I need to make my position clear if I have to contribute to the excellent information provided by this wiki. I am not going to repeat all the points that Mister Lysdexia has already made, let alone I am going to delve into detail, but let me state a few examples. The use of the plurals 'they', 'them', 'their', 'theirs' when referring to a noun or pronoun in the singular is GRAMMATICALLY WRONG. In English, either the indefinite 'one' or the masculine 'he', 'him', 'his' have been in use FOR CENTURIES. Likewise, the verbal auxiliaries 'shall', 'should' are not interchangeable with 'will', 'would'. I am not going to explain their different meaning according to person (first, second, third, singular or plural) and to intention (willingness or else obligation, or just statement of facts), but I affirm that they are different. And so with many other examples. I wish to make clear that I respect other contributors and I DO NOT INTEND to correct their work, but I expect to be also respected in the choice of vocabulary in MY OWN WRITING. My text is always, invariably, in classic British English. It is extremely improbable for me to make mistakes in English, though some occasional mistyping of course may happen even to me. What I desire to tell other contributors is that my writing is always carefully reviewed before publication, and it seldom needs 'corrections'. I may tolerate changes up to a certain limit, but if I see too many changes of 'style', I simply stop contributing to the wiki. Pray respect my classsic style and do not try to 'correct' my contributions. If necessary, contributors are always welcome to comment in a respectful manner in my talk page. Together we can help the growth of this excellent wiki, but not by 'correcting' one another as if we were first-time learners of the English language. Because we are not. [[User:Cssdixieland|Cssdixieland]] ([[User talk:Cssdixieland|talk]]) 19:00, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
-::If you “respect” the members you’d already’v readen my whole comments here then not call your talk English, not address randoms with imaginary and deluded labels, not call me a mister—you fag who erases half of the population—learn how IndoEuropean gender works, not circularly define correctness or propriety with usage/custom/habit as that empowers abuses, and know that it is impossibil to respect everyone as interests oppose each other.  Respect must be earned. [[User:Lysdexia|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia|talk]]) 06:03, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/issue I do mean ''issue'', which also means ''problem''.]
 "populism can't support itself for propriety" – correctness in language depends on what is widely accepted as correct and proper. (There's [https://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/ling001/prescription.html a decent writeup about prescriptive vs descriptive ways to approach language], if you're interested.)

@@ Line 44: / Line 44: @@
 ::If you “respect” the members you’d already’v readen my whole comments here then not call your talk English, not address randoms with imaginary and deluded labels, not call me a mister—you fag who erases half of the population—learn how IndoEuropean gender works, not circularly define correctness or propriety with usage/custom/habit as that empowers abuses, and know that it is impossibil to respect everyone as interests oppose each other.  Respect must be earned. [[User:Lysdexia|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia|talk]]) 06:03, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/issue I do mean ''issue'', which also means ''problem''.]
 "populism can't support itself for propriety" – correctness in language depends on what is widely accepted as correct and proper. (There's [https://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/ling001/prescription.html a decent writeup about prescriptive vs descriptive ways to approach language], if you're interested.)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:47, 14 October 2020
Line 78:		Line 78:
	:Einglish, the average of original and i-mutated spelling variants as listed by OED between Ormulum and Chancery sources, not English, borrows from those other languages. Otherwise one ouht hýphenate hybrid words or compound [mis]appropriated words, like English-Latin ''compound'' or English German ''kindergarten''. In any case ''kindergarten'' doesn't literally/radically exclude the American usage, nor does the German usage conclude it. Languages decay when a culture borrows words then inevitably forgets native roots and stems that already meant the loans. There is some English in Einglish but they're usually not mutually intelligibil; that makes them different languages, kronolects. You believe that Einglish is English only wherefore it's written ''English'' but that doesn't make them the same language. Latin properly had Latinos, then Latinus, then Vulgaris. All of the Romans' loanwords need to be hýphenated or compounded too.		:Einglish, the average of original and i-mutated spelling variants as listed by OED between Ormulum and Chancery sources, not English, borrows from those other languages. Otherwise one ouht hýphenate hybrid words or compound [mis]appropriated words, like English-Latin ''compound'' or English German ''kindergarten''. In any case ''kindergarten'' doesn't literally/radically exclude the American usage, nor does the German usage conclude it. Languages decay when a culture borrows words then inevitably forgets native roots and stems that already meant the loans. There is some English in Einglish but they're usually not mutually intelligibil; that makes them different languages, kronolects. You believe that Einglish is English only wherefore it's written ''English'' but that doesn't make them the same language. Latin properly had Latinos, then Latinus, then Vulgaris. All of the Romans' loanwords need to be hýphenated or compounded too.
	:I know I can't make lots of changes I want on this wiki without conflict; I also can't spare the time to edit. Wikipedia likewise doesn't claim to be true: "Verifiability, not truth [sic, instead of ''truthe'']". [[User:Lysdexia\|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia\|talk]]) 01:37, 31 August 2020 (UTC)		:I know I can't make lots of changes I want on this wiki without conflict; I also can't spare the time to edit. Wikipedia likewise doesn't claim to be true: "Verifiability, not truth [sic, instead of ''truthe'']". [[User:Lysdexia\|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia\|talk]]) 01:37, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
		+
		+	::Five months to say all this nothing and miss the point so thoroughly. I'm almost impressed. --[[User:Umbire the Phantom\|Umbire the Phantom]] ([[User talk:Umbire the Phantom\|talk]]) 22:47, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

@@ Line 71: / Line 71: @@
 :What's widely accepted is wrong as most folk are average halfwits who can't discern, will not read history, repeat instead of prove, trust titles instead of reason, and don't care about facts over feelings.  This is why words' usages contradict and meaning breaks down.
 :Not no, neither gender means neither masculine [sic, as mas with mulier is a sex, not a gender as vir and femina, thus virine and feminine] nor feminine, the same as the 0th gender neuter.  Some time after I wrote the March comment I found the quality of ''it'' inaccurate; now I recognize it as indefinite, not definite.  But sometimes I switch ''that'' and ''it''.  Here's the full paradigm:
-::singular definite common: who
+::singular definite common: who<br>singular definite neuter: that<br>singular indefinite common: one<br>singular indefinite neuter: it<br>plural definite common: they<br>plural definite neuter: those<br>plural indefinite common: some<br>plural indefinite neuter: some
 :The third gender is common/epicene/epicœne.  Authors ignorant of this gender mark common words in dictionaries as ''mf'' instead.  All subjects are objects (Newton's law) and some nonbinaries (so-called neutroises, when ''neuter'' already refers to gender and ''sterile'' to sex) are already served by ''that''.  Again I don't care about narrow-minded wide [ab]usage that doesn't determine whether I'm wrong.
 :You mistook ''referent'' (active) for ''referend'' (passive, or even referred, passive).  Sometimes a thing can lead to the thing if there aren't other things like the former thing.  This wiki often talks about figurative persons rather than real.  I'd need to see the writing you had problem with.
@@ Line 84: / Line 77: @@
 :The terms aren't English but Einglish, nonEnglish loanwords.  Cognitive dissonanty, P600 waves, garden-path statements, general confusion, and conflict between formal and informal registers mean the construction is wrong.  A false distinction between amoral and immoral is drawn from the same ignoramus.  The corrupt barbaric constructions make new ones that rely on the accurate meanings of native stems touh to learn and popularize.
 :Einglish, the average of original and i-mutated spelling variants as listed by OED between Ormulum and Chancery sources, not English, borrows from those other languages.  Otherwise one ouht hýphenate hybrid words or compound [mis]appropriated words, like English-Latin ''compound'' or English German ''kindergarten''.  In any case ''kindergarten'' doesn't literally/radically exclude the American usage, nor does the German usage conclude it.  Languages decay when a culture borrows words then inevitably forgets native roots and stems that already meant the loans.  There is some English in Einglish but they're usually not mutually intelligibil; that makes them different languages, kronolects.  You believe that Einglish is English only wherefore it's written ''English'' but that doesn't make them the same language.  Latin properly had Latinos, then Latinus, then Vulgaris.  All of the Romans' loanwords need to be hýphenated or compounded too.
-:I know I can't make lots of changes I want on this wiki without conflict; I also can't spare the time to edit.  Wikipedia likewise doesn't claim to be true: "Verifiability, not truth [sic, instead of ''truthe'']". [[User:Lysdexia|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia|talk]]) 01:15, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
+:I know I can't make lots of changes I want on this wiki without conflict; I also can't spare the time to edit.  Wikipedia likewise doesn't claim to be true: "Verifiability, not truth [sic, instead of ''truthe'']". [[User:Lysdexia|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia|talk]]) 01:37, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:15, 31 August 2020
Line 68:		Line 68:

	:Thank you, BCode, for having infinitely more patience in outlining the obvious flaws with this approach than I could be bothered to demonstrate. --[[User:Umbire the Phantom\|Umbire the Phantom]] ([[User talk:Umbire the Phantom\|talk]]) 03:52, 9 March 2020 (UTC)		:Thank you, BCode, for having infinitely more patience in outlining the obvious flaws with this approach than I could be bothered to demonstrate. --[[User:Umbire the Phantom\|Umbire the Phantom]] ([[User talk:Umbire the Phantom\|talk]]) 03:52, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
		+	:No you don't mean ''issue''; you mean ''problem''. Your comment is all about the latter, not simply something to talk about and it's not clear what went out where. Linking to a dictionary without respect to etýma misses my point about the corrupt and contradictory usages/senses/definitions. The words only mean each other narrowly, like a spill or outage, and it makes no sense to say ''issue'' unless its root is respected.
		+	:What's widely accepted is wrong as most folk are average halfwits who can't discern, will not read history, repeat instead of prove, trust titles instead of reason, and don't care about facts over feelings. This is why words' usages contradict and meaning breaks down.
		+	:Not no, neither gender means neither masculine [sic, as mas with mulier is a sex, not a gender as vir and femina, thus virine and feminine] nor feminine, the same as the 0th gender neuter. Some time after I wrote the March comment I found the quality of ''it'' inaccurate; now I recognize it as indefinite, not definite. But sometimes I switch ''that'' and ''it''. Here's the full paradigm:
		+	::singular definite common: who
		+	::singular definite neuter: that
		+	::singular indefinite common: one
		+	::singular indefinite neuter: it
		+	::plural definite common: they
		+	::plural definite neuter: those
		+	::plural indefinite common: some
		+	::plural indefinite neuter: some
		+	:The third gender is common/epicene/epicœne. Authors ignorant of this gender mark common words in dictionaries as ''mf'' instead. All subjects are objects (Newton's law) and some nonbinaries (so-called neutroises, when ''neuter'' already refers to gender and ''sterile'' to sex) are already served by ''that''. Again I don't care about narrow-minded wide [ab]usage that doesn't determine whether I'm wrong.
		+	:You mistook ''referent'' (active) for ''referend'' (passive, or even referred, passive). Sometimes a thing can lead to the thing if there aren't other things like the former thing. This wiki often talks about figurative persons rather than real. I'd need to see the writing you had problem with.
		+	:Folk ignorant of the plural ''ye'' say ''you''. I remember takan a poll of USA regional language where one question had almost a dozen words for the plural of ''you'' the taker used and mine wasn't there. Again, if ''they'' were gender-neutral (neuter), most should be offended when called a ''they'' in the same way as ''it'' or ''that'', instead of gender-communal (common, c, mf).
		+	:The terms aren't English but Einglish, nonEnglish loanwords. Cognitive dissonanty, P600 waves, garden-path statements, general confusion, and conflict between formal and informal registers mean the construction is wrong. A false distinction between amoral and immoral is drawn from the same ignoramus. The corrupt barbaric constructions make new ones that rely on the accurate meanings of native stems touh to learn and popularize.
		+	:Einglish, the average of original and i-mutated spelling variants as listed by OED between Ormulum and Chancery sources, not English, borrows from those other languages. Otherwise one ouht hýphenate hybrid words or compound [mis]appropriated words, like English-Latin ''compound'' or English German ''kindergarten''. In any case ''kindergarten'' doesn't literally/radically exclude the American usage, nor does the German usage conclude it. Languages decay when a culture borrows words then inevitably forgets native roots and stems that already meant the loans. There is some English in Einglish but they're usually not mutually intelligibil; that makes them different languages, kronolects. You believe that Einglish is English only wherefore it's written ''English'' but that doesn't make them the same language. Latin properly had Latinos, then Latinus, then Vulgaris. All of the Romans' loanwords need to be hýphenated or compounded too.
		+	:I know I can't make lots of changes I want on this wiki without conflict; I also can't spare the time to edit. Wikipedia likewise doesn't claim to be true: "Verifiability, not truth [sic, instead of ''truthe'']". [[User:Lysdexia\|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia\|talk]]) 01:15, 31 August 2020 (UTC)