Oh great, another self loathing English speaker!
Matt_W
6539
Don’t get me wrong, I think its flexibility is an asset, but it must be awful to learn.
Sabotai
6542
You are correct, -e is a pluralization of the adjective in Dutch.
And in Dutch adjectives can be conjugated and have different meanings, like: “een grote man” (a large man) or “een groot man” (an important man). Both singular.
At least it isn’t gendered, like German
schurem
6544
I’d love to engage in further linguistics banter, but I don’t really feel like this is the right place for it.
This shit isn’t quite over.
That’s awesome.
You are too stupid to see the truth!
Tell that to the FBI, loser.
Nesrie
6548
You know how Donald Trump stood up there and told all these idiots how special they were, well, these conspiracy circles go around telling everyone how genius smart they are. It’s part of that lure. These people honestly believe they are the smartest people on the planet because they see conspiracies.
Typical Antifa ruthlessness.
It reminds me of that expression (I think it’s an expression) - just because everyone thinks you’re wrong doesn’t make you Galileo. I think conspiracy theories appeal to people who think the mainstream view must always be the ‘sheeple’ view and to be idiosyncratic = to be in the know, smarter than the flock etc.
antlers
6551
I don’t know if this has been linked yet-- it is an Op-Ed published in the post Jan. 5. that sheds light on what security officials were really thinking before the planned protest, before they knew they had to cover their butts. Key quotes are these:
I remember thinking at the time that those rules of engagement-- several hundred Capitol Police without riot shields or lethal weapons-- would be totally inadequate if Trump got the crowd worked up like he seemingly intended. I would love to know who the “anonymous official” quoted in the column actually is. Ignatius is a neo-con with solid ties to Republican defense figures. It looks like the rules of engagement were dictated by Trump appointees at Defense.
Well, it got ugly, all right.
Nesrie
6553
My personal experience with this group, which of course is not big data, is these are individuals who are used to not feeling very smart. Like there are many things in the world they do not understand but instead of actually trying to learn more, like the stumbling, the mistakes and maybe getting to some sense of clarity… they get mad and offended. And then this conspiracy crap comes along and now they can be made, offended AND be told they’re the smartest people on the planet… not a sheeple.
Agree. The lure of “secret knowledge” within religion and mysticism has always been strong.
But the only sense if which these people are “special” is in their ability to commit to idiocies that are easily debunked in this age. They’ll believe anything that comes from within the circle.
If you’re talking about English, it’s also almost entirely uninflected in terms of case, with the exception of its personal pronouns (I/me, he/him, she/her, they/them) and some rapidly disappearing forms like “whom,” and is thus much more dependent on syntax to signal the functions of nouns in sentences.
@Matt_W By my count English only has two (synthetic/non-auxiliary verb-dependent) verb tenses: the present and past: I eat/I ate. Everything else is done with auxiliary verbs: will eat, have eaten, had eaten, am eating, was eating, will have eaten, etc., and that’s just the indicative mood). German is actually similar in this respect, and I suspect that’s a general trait of Germanic languages, both North- and West-, but I don’t know for sure.
No, I was talking about Dutch.
Papageno
6557
Ah, neat. I assumed that it had grammatical genders for nouns as well.
Anyway, sorry for the linguistic digression, all. Re the rioters, I gather that some have been indicted on conspiracy charges, right?
