Editing Talk:1898: October 2017
Please sign your posts with ~~~~ |
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
:: The -oid suffix means 'having the form of'. By definition, a fact has the form of a fact, so must be factoid. However, non-facts could also be factoids if they have the form of a fact (for example, if they are commonly repeated as if true). When [http://www.startrek.com/database_article/odo Odo] complains (as he often does) that he will never understand humanoids, he doesn't mean to exclude humans - they too are humanoid. Of course, it's slightly odd that he uses this term at all - having 'grown up' on Bajor, you might expect him to be more inclined to consider them 'Bajoranoid'. One might argue that he is in fact saying 'Bajoranoid', and the universal translator is translating it as 'humanoid', but that would seem to suggest that it is playing fast and loose with the translation, since the accurate translation into English would be, er, 'Bajoranoid'. I may have spent too much time thinking about this. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.32|162.158.155.32]] 12:49, 6 October 2017 (UTC) | :: The -oid suffix means 'having the form of'. By definition, a fact has the form of a fact, so must be factoid. However, non-facts could also be factoids if they have the form of a fact (for example, if they are commonly repeated as if true). When [http://www.startrek.com/database_article/odo Odo] complains (as he often does) that he will never understand humanoids, he doesn't mean to exclude humans - they too are humanoid. Of course, it's slightly odd that he uses this term at all - having 'grown up' on Bajor, you might expect him to be more inclined to consider them 'Bajoranoid'. One might argue that he is in fact saying 'Bajoranoid', and the universal translator is translating it as 'humanoid', but that would seem to suggest that it is playing fast and loose with the translation, since the accurate translation into English would be, er, 'Bajoranoid'. I may have spent too much time thinking about this. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.32|162.158.155.32]] 12:49, 6 October 2017 (UTC) | ||
:::I'll say a tomatoid would almost certainly be a vegetable with some striking similarities to a tomato, but whose grandparents include perhaps a potato, some brussel's sprouts. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.88.86|162.158.88.86]] 10:47, 8 October 2017 (UTC) | :::I'll say a tomatoid would almost certainly be a vegetable with some striking similarities to a tomato, but whose grandparents include perhaps a potato, some brussel's sprouts. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.88.86|162.158.88.86]] 10:47, 8 October 2017 (UTC) | ||
− | ::: Hmmm, your link seems to stop at the underscore, and doesn't show your link text. Way to go wiki! LOL! Until seeing the link in full while typing this, I had assumed you were talking about Data and I was confused about your talking about Bajor. :) | + | ::: Hmmm, your link seems to stop at the underscore, and doesn't show your link text. Way to go wiki! LOL! Until seeing the link in full while typing this, I had assumed you were talking about Data and I was confused about your talking about Bajor. :) True, "humanoid" and "planetoid" (the only words of this form I can think of right now) can include humans and planets respectively, but the way I've heard it they shouldn't, that -oid means "like but isn't". At the very least I've read this in reference to "factoid", that the form of the word SHOULD mean "Seems like a fact but isn't one". Also it seems like the tendency is to include "humans" within the term "humanoid" mostly when the word is used by someone who isn't human, like Odo. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:55, 13 October 2017 (UTC) |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
The explanation is referring to 11 months ago for the election. However, the wording of the title text, "the start of the election", seems different. 11 months ago was one day long, seems weird to describe the election as "starting" then as the election ended that same day. I think Randall is referring to the start of campaigning. As an outsider I don't know specifically, but the time I'm thinking of would have been January, February, March 2016, something like that. Actually I feel like I've heard something about "primaries" and "April". [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 03:59, 6 October 2017 (UTC) | The explanation is referring to 11 months ago for the election. However, the wording of the title text, "the start of the election", seems different. 11 months ago was one day long, seems weird to describe the election as "starting" then as the election ended that same day. I think Randall is referring to the start of campaigning. As an outsider I don't know specifically, but the time I'm thinking of would have been January, February, March 2016, something like that. Actually I feel like I've heard something about "primaries" and "April". [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 03:59, 6 October 2017 (UTC) | ||
:I agree that it could refer longer back, but it is interesting that he made a similar titles comic when the election was complete... So maybe it is that day he refers to? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:25, 6 October 2017 (UTC) | :I agree that it could refer longer back, but it is interesting that he made a similar titles comic when the election was complete... So maybe it is that day he refers to? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:25, 6 October 2017 (UTC) | ||
− | :: That makes a lot of sense, pairing "November 2016" with "October 2017", '''BUT''' saying "start" doesn't make any sense unless it's a period of time, many days, even months. The election didn't start on that day, the entire thing began and ended that day. Unless he's including the campaign. THAT took months. THAT indeed had a "start | + | :: That makes a lot of sense, pairing "November 2016" with "October 2017", '''BUT''' saying "start" doesn't make any sense unless it's a period of time, many days, even months. The election didn't start on that day, the entire thing began and ended that day. Unless he's including the campaign. THAT took months. THAT indeed had a "start" [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:41, 13 October 2017 (UTC) |
'''A comment on the explanation''' | '''A comment on the explanation''' |