Full Version: Many Thanks to Patrick Goodman
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| It's a valid construction of a word. Granted it means the exact opposite of what it was meant to say, but it's still not an incorrect prepending of a prefix. |
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
I suppose since I'm not speaking of data (words are data, but now we're splitting hairs) I should have said "prefixing" rather than "prepending", but that gets into seriously awkward territory ("prefixing a prefix"? Maybe I should have said that it isn't a correct prefixing?).
~J
~J
That is better, thank you Patrick.
As for irregardless, I went ahead and looked it up:
As for irregardless, I went ahead and looked it up:
| QUOTE |
[Probably blend of irrespective, and regardless.] Usage Note: Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so. - dictionary.com |
It is a word, but nonstandard. Not sure why people complain about that, but not 'inflammable', but whatever.
Yeah, don't even get me started on inflammable.
After they dropped the arson charges my parents never let me play with inflammable products again...
After they dropped the arson charges my parents never let me play with inflammable products again...
| QUOTE (nezumi @ Apr 21 2005, 01:44 PM) |
| Not sure why people complain about that, but not 'inflammable', but whatever. |
If I'm not mistaken, the "in-" prefix on inflammable is not the same "in-" prefix on something like inactive. The former is actually a variant of the "en-" prefix and is used as an intensifier.
So inflammable actually means "very flammable".
I think.
Edit: Fixed the bad English I used while giving my little lecture on English. Dur.
Inflammable comes from the same root as inflame (inflammare). It is, as you point out, an intensive prefix.
~J
~J
| QUOTE (American Heritage Dictionary Online) |
| Historically, flammable and inflammable mean the same thing. However, the presence of the prefix in– has misled many people into assuming that inflammable means “not flammable” or “noncombustible.” The prefix –in in inflammable is not, however, the Latin negative prefix –in, which is related to the English –un and appears in such words as indecent and inglorious. Rather, this –in is an intensive prefix derived from the Latin preposition in. This prefix also appears in the word enflame. But many people are not aware of this derivation, and for clarity's sake it is advisable to use only flammable to give warnings. |
(I will say that having Patrick's thread derailed on grammar is a suitable punishment for his being a grammar nazi 
)
Hrm... Rereading my last post, I should probably work on putting emphasis, so it sounds like thanks and not correction. That is better... No?
Patrick - your sig is less confusing. Dumb people such as myself thank you.
)Hrm... Rereading my last post, I should probably work on putting emphasis, so it sounds like thanks and not correction. That is better... No?
Patrick - your sig is less confusing. Dumb people such as myself thank you.
Nezumi: forgot to note this above. It is indeed a nonstandard word, but with the double negation it means "not regardless", or "with regard". There is no usage I can think of that is not either incorrect (replacing regardless or irrespective) or awkward.
~J
~J
Unfortunately, no matter how hard some grammarians try, language doesn't work like maths. Words mean what (L1-)speakers think they mean. That, of course, doesn't mean that we can't gripe about some developments, but no matter how much I rant, clip is going to mean "removable box magazine" pretty soon, if it doesn't already to most English speakers.
| QUOTE (nezumi) |
| (I will say that having Patrick's thread derailed on grammar is a suitable punishment for his being a grammar nazi ) |
I thought it tremendously approprite, myself.
| QUOTE (Patrick Goodman) |
| I thought it tremendously approprite, myself. |
Don't you mean, appropriate?
Just kidding.
First off, I'm gonna hand some Kudos to Patrick, Demonseed, Synner and Bull for being the voices of reason. I've not bothered (till now) to post in SR4 because the majority of what's discussed is vitriolic and alarmist. When browsing, I generally read the starting post, and then scan ahead for posts by Patrick, Demonseed and Synner.
| QUOTE (Patrick Goodman) |
| I wasn't going to bring this tirade out, but you mentioned a very sore subject directly, and I'll answer it the same way. I intend nothing personal to you, Grinder; this is just a gripe I've had for some time (and many of the people who've known me and worked with me for a while know what's coming; you can go get popcorn now, you won't miss anything). Of course, there's the fact that I don't hide behind the anonymity of the internet. My screen name is my real name; my profile really says where I am; my picture is really on my blog. This can be a very ego-bruising kind of place, especially when you're like me and you put a lot of yourself into your work. It's one thing to receive legitimate criticism based on a work, but it's another thing entirely to get the kind of abuse the actual writers have been taking based on something that isn't out there for actual consideration yet. I don't hide behind the internet, but I know a lot of people here that do. Most have legitimate reasons for using a screen name, even if that legitimate reason is "It's fun." A few, though, hide behind it, hold up the First Amendment, and say that they have a right to be offensive and obnoxious, and any request for them to be civil is greeted as censorship. They're cowards, unwilling to actually stand up behind what they've got to say, instead propping it up with their anonymity, since no one can possibly find them and read them the riot act. We've bred civility out of the current crop of humanity, it seems. It's really kind of sad, too, but it's the way things are. What's there to be scared of? You might be surprised, Grinder. I've never received death threats about my writing...but I know a couple of folks who have. I've been insulted more times than I care to count; I can take personal insults, but I don't appreciate my mother being brought into it, as some have done. I've was told that I was the worst thing to ever happen to Shadowrun back when I wrote for Target: Matrix. Nothing major, to be sure, but there's a lot to be said for a kind word now and again. |
Take a perfectly civil, normal guy (I think the guilty are generally male) and put him on the internet. He will immediately become self-righteous, vindictive, and willing to resort to any means necessary to get others to agree with him. This will include insults, attacks and a myriad of logical fallacies. The ironic thing is that these will rarely get the dissenting viewpoint to switch--it'll just bring more crap. Even if you think "it's online and anonymous, so no one's hurt", it is stupid and a waste of everybody's time.
| QUOTE (hahnsoo) | ||
Don't you mean, appropriate? Just kidding. |
Don't sweat it; considering my approach to typographical errors sometimes, catching me in one is, IMO, a perfectly valid pastime.
Especially when there's a spell-checker available, and I pass it by in arrogance and haste.
| QUOTE (Neal Stephenson. Cryptonomicon) |
Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker's game because they almost always turn out to be -- or to be indistinguishable from -- self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possessing infinite amounts of free time. |
| QUOTE (Patrick Goodman) |
| I've was told that I was the worst thing to ever happen to Shadowrun back when I wrote for Target: Matrix. Nothing major, to be sure, but there's a lot to be said for a kind word now and again. |
You know, I just bought that book a few days ago, and so far it's one of my favorite source books...
I'd also like to extend a big thanks to Patrick and all the other designers/playtesters who wade into this toxic sea of speculation and try to set us straight. You are doing an overtime job on this and we really do appreciate it. I know you can understand how we gamers can get a little possessive about "our Shadowrun". Hope I can get to GenCon Indy and get a copy firsthand.
| QUOTE |
| Tinman Posted on Apr 21 2005, 11:20 PM QUOTE (Patrick Goodman) I've was told that I was the worst thing to ever happen to Shadowrun back when I wrote for Target: Matrix. Nothing major, to be sure, but there's a lot to be said for a kind word now and again. |
Nah it wasn't Patrick.
It was Mike Mulhville(sp?).
| QUOTE (Grimtooth @ Apr 25 2005, 01:03 PM) | ||
Nah it wasn't Patrick. It was Mike Mulhville(sp?). |
Mulvihill. And I'll thank you not to repeat that in my presence again. Mike's a friend of mine, and while you're entitled to your opinion, I don't feel the need to sit idly back and watch you insult him.
Apologies
Its a personal opinion.
Based on the responses i got from him way back when sr3 came out.
He wasn't the kindest person when he replied to FAQs.
Its a personal opinion.
Based on the responses i got from him way back when sr3 came out.
He wasn't the kindest person when he replied to FAQs.
| QUOTE (Austere Emancipator) |
| Unfortunately, no matter how hard some grammarians try, language doesn't work like maths. Words mean what (L1-)speakers think they mean. That, of course, doesn't mean that we can't gripe about some developments, but no matter how much I rant, clip is going to mean "removable box magazine" pretty soon, if it doesn't already to most English speakers. |
Actually, the solution to that is to scream "MAGAZINE" whenever someone says "clip".
It gets hard to do that in the context of Shadowrun, though, when it says "clips" on the equipment list.
Easy: scream it every time someone opens to that page.
~J
~J
Lots of people like and don't like different author's and developer's contributions to the game. There is absolutely no reason to take it personally or consider someone's opinion of your or a friend's work as a personal affront.
My 2
{edit}
Unless, of course, it was intended that way. I don't think it was in this case.
Heck, I just read Harlequin and I could rip it apart in many ways, but I don't disparage the authors personally.
My 2
{edit}
Unless, of course, it was intended that way. I don't think it was in this case.
Heck, I just read Harlequin and I could rip it apart in many ways, but I don't disparage the authors personally.
| QUOTE (Jrayjoker) |
| Lots of people like and don't like different author's and developer's contributions to the game. There is absolutely no reason to take it personally or consider someone's opinion of your or a friend's work as a personal affront. My 2 |
How can you say someone is the worst thing to happen to something and not mean it as an affront, personal or otherwise? That, to me, is the silliest notion I've heard in quite some time.
Well, I hope you got a good giggle at least. 
I look at it like it was a figure of speech, hyperbole.
I look at it like it was a figure of speech, hyperbole.
Disagreed. It could be a flat statement of opinion. For example, I think that John Sculley could reasonably be said to have been one of the worst things to have happened to Apple, but I don't consider that a personal insult against him; some people simply are not suited for the tasks which they undertake.
I suppose the division has to be made between insinuating incompetence and/or malice and merely implying that one's actions or direction resulted in disaster.
~J
I suppose the division has to be made between insinuating incompetence and/or malice and merely implying that one's actions or direction resulted in disaster.
~J
Point taken. These forums are an avenue for misunderstanding intentions, and until said intentions are stated explicitly we will never know if a personal insult was the purpose.
Back on topic:
I also appreciate the efforts of those bound by NDAs to spread as much information as legally possible in order to help the unwashed masses (a. k. a. - us) maintain their sanity.
Back on topic:
I also appreciate the efforts of those bound by NDAs to spread as much information as legally possible in order to help the unwashed masses (a. k. a. - us) maintain their sanity.
| QUOTE (Grimtooth) |
| Apologies Its a personal opinion. |
No sweat; things like this are a hot button for me, that's all.
You know that i will get out here and gripe and complain and just be downright pissy.
But i was talking to a member of my group and he mentioned that this kind thing was probly going on when 3rd edition came out. I just didn't look at the forums at that time. I just accepted what was happening.
I will reluctantly relent. SR4 is coming and that's that.
Change is good. Anything that advances the greater story will make it grow.
Hopefully it will make me grow.
But i was talking to a member of my group and he mentioned that this kind thing was probly going on when 3rd edition came out. I just didn't look at the forums at that time. I just accepted what was happening.
I will reluctantly relent. SR4 is coming and that's that.
Change is good. Anything that advances the greater story will make it grow.
Hopefully it will make me grow.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.