Loanpost
Loanpost
51 comments
-
-
And then there's Zangendeutsch, where germans replace every single loanword with a calque. It doesn't matter how much sense it makes, all that matters is that it's technically correct.
-
I kinda love that about German though. In Dutch we don't do that and I feel like it's approaching silly levels with the English words we just take over as is, even if there is or could be a much better Dutch alternative. With how much we want to be America and how badly we want to be relevant it just seems very try-hard, while Chad Germany is confident in its language and culture and doesn't need to bend to Angelsaksisch gebrabbel.
-
I also very much love to translate things literally, I mean word by word instead of the meaning. My friends very, very much hate it. It's glorious.
-
Hey Japan? Yeah we already have three discreet words for "savory," "meaty," and "delicious" - you can have your ambiguous catch-all back.
-
Which one is that? Umami?
-
It is.
-
-
Sure but having a singular catchall for the phenomena around that taste is actually better and I would argue more discrete (wait wtf is it discrete or discreet?). Imagine if we had to describe the fundamental tastes like this:
- Salty
- Sweet
- Sour
- Bitter
- Savory, meaty and delicious
-
discrete
That's the correct one for your usage of it.
-
Except that you can have savory that isn't meaty, meaty that isn't savory, and deliciousness is 100% subjective, so I'm afraid your logic for replacing 3 different English adjectives with one Japanese one is fundamentally flawed. If anything, Japanese needs to pick one definition and import some new words to make up the difference.
Or just admit that the languages work differently and that what works for Japanese doesn't work for English, and trying to make it fit just sounds pretentious.
-
Very sneaky, those words are
-
-
Does guillotine count as a loanword when it's actually named after someone? That's like saying pasteurise is a loanword because Louis Pasteur was French, even though the word is clearly just his name
-
Fun fact about the guillotine, it's not named after the person who 'invented' it (there were other iterations outside of France). Or well, it was briefly, it was called the louisette after Antoine Louis, but the guy named Guillotin was just the person who proposed using it as a more humane way to carry out the death penalty instead of the more brutal breaking wheel at the very beginning of the French Revolution.
-
While I'd say no in English, the word is at least a loan word in Spanish
-
-
Orca is a much better name for killer whales
-
Felt like I was having a déjà vu when watching Tom Scott's latest video (https://youtu.be/TFpzps-DCb0) but I dug a bit deep to find where I read it. He spoke about the same thing!
-
He totally saw this meme when it was doing the rounds
-
-
You borrowed the wrong word for killer whale. In Swedish its "lard stabber" and that is a infinitely better name.
-
This hurts my brain.
51 comments
Post about linguistics, but they used i.e. when they meant e.g.
Anyone looking to remember the difference: "id est" (that is) vs "exemplī grātiā" (for the sake of an example). You use the first to clarify meaning, and the second to begin a non-exhaustive list of examples.
What matters is ultimately if you can convey your ideas, so using the wrong term is fine when people can still figure out what you meant. But it's still a good idea to learn the difference, because there will be times when mixing up "i.e." and "e.g." will create ambiguity or misunderstanding.
The best idea is maybe to use "for example" or "that is to say". The former could be abbreviated to "f.ex." like in Norwegian, and the latter could be abbreviated "t.i.t.s."
...Alright, on second thought maybe don't abbreviate that one.
In any case, the Wikipedia Manual of Style recommends avoiding use of "e.g." and "i.e." in regular running text altogether, saying that these abbreviations are better fit for parentheticals, quotations, citations, tables, and lists. This is because there is no word or character limit on Wikipedia, nor is there on Tumblr, and so the language is more clear when abbreviations are avoided. Even when someone is using "i.e." and "e.g." in the prescribed way, that doesn't guarantee that the reader knows the distinction.
I remember "eg" as "example given" and "ie" as "in explanation". Nice mnemonic ways imho
what is the point of the distinction even? 'that is' make sense to introduce an example and vice versa
ie and eg are colloquially synonyms like literally and figuratively
Which are literally not synonyms though.
Is a post about linguistics colloquial?
Ugh, you're one of THOSE..
The colloquial use is only better when it enhances understanding of what you're trying to say. Mixing up eg and ie does the opposite and every time you mean figuratively but say literally, an angel is waterboarded.
In conclusion: stop torturing angels.