1417: "Seven"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1417: "Seven"

Postby Klear » Wed Sep 10, 2014 12:32 am UTC

Zinho wrote:I'm going to take a second to rant about the silliness of how figures of speech are categorized. (...) And that's why engineers aren't poets... If any poetry wonks want to enlighten me, feel free.


You think poets care about categorization of figures of speech?

User avatar
PinkShinyRose
Posts: 835
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:54 pm UTC
Location: the Netherlands

Re: 1417: "Seven"

Postby PinkShinyRose » Wed Sep 10, 2014 5:09 pm UTC

Mikeski wrote:
orthogon wrote:
Mikeski wrote:Also, why do we need a two-continent demonym "American" to refer to everyone there? Is there a cultural/ethnic/religious identity that covers everyone from Barrow, Alaska, USA to Ushuaia, Argentina, and everywhere in-between... but also excludes the rest of the world?

You could say the same about all the continents. Is there a cultural/ethnic/religious identity that covers everyone from Colombo to Urumqi to Tokyo to Manila to Jakarta? Or from Lisbon to Edinburgh to Moscow to Ljubljana?

Exactly my point. It's convenient to have a word that means "Citizen of [Country]". It's not as convenient to have one that means "Citizen of [Continent]", but it's still sometimes useful. It's pretty pointless to have one that means "Citizen of [hemisphere]".

So complaining that we can't let "American" mean "Citizen of the USA" because it SHOULD mean "Citizen of the (political) western hemisphere" is a really, really weird complaint.

I don't think anyone would include Europeans, Australians or people from most Pacific islands in the definition of "American". I think demonyms for related groups of cultures are useful (eg. Westerner, East-Asian or Arab).

EDIT or was the "political" part for Western Hemisphere not related to political connections but to the fact that there is no Western Hemisphere? The part about the Pacific Islands still holds up in that case, but I guess the part about Australia and Europe does not.

armandoalvarez
Posts: 126
Joined: Thu May 03, 2012 1:39 am UTC

Re: 1417: "Seven"

Postby armandoalvarez » Wed Sep 10, 2014 5:43 pm UTC

PinkShinyRose wrote:
Mikeski wrote:
orthogon wrote:
Mikeski wrote:Also, why do we need a two-continent demonym "American" to refer to everyone there? Is there a cultural/ethnic/religious identity that covers everyone from Barrow, Alaska, USA to Ushuaia, Argentina, and everywhere in-between... but also excludes the rest of the world?

You could say the same about all the continents. Is there a cultural/ethnic/religious identity that covers everyone from Colombo to Urumqi to Tokyo to Manila to Jakarta? Or from Lisbon to Edinburgh to Moscow to Ljubljana?

Exactly my point. It's convenient to have a word that means "Citizen of [Country]". It's not as convenient to have one that means "Citizen of [Continent]", but it's still sometimes useful. It's pretty pointless to have one that means "Citizen of [hemisphere]".

So complaining that we can't let "American" mean "Citizen of the USA" because it SHOULD mean "Citizen of the (political) western hemisphere" is a really, really weird complaint.

I don't think anyone would include Europeans, Australians or people from most Pacific islands in the definition of "American". I think demonyms for related groups of cultures are useful (eg. Westerner, East-Asian or Arab).

EDIT or was the "political" part for Western Hemisphere not related to political connections but to the fact that there is no Western Hemisphere? The part about the Pacific Islands still holds up in that case, but I guess the part about Australia and Europe does not.

I think Mikeski's point is that there's plenty of everyday uses for "American" in the sense of "from the United States." There are rarely contexts where you need to talk about "American" in the sense of "Pan-American," i.e. North and South America and the adjacent islands, except for flora and fauna ("the American black bear," "American monkeys" [although even there "New World monkeys" is more common], "the American elm"), and the context is usually clear when you do. Using comparisons to other big groups that are rarely used muddies the point a bit, but I think the point is still quite valid.

ps.02
Posts: 378
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2013 8:02 pm UTC

Re: 1417: "Seven"

Postby ps.02 » Wed Sep 10, 2014 10:04 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:Anyway what's wrong with USian? It's short and clear, and doesn't seem to have any negative implications.

Even if overcoming linguistic inertia were, as it were, free, it's got the same problem (to a lesser degree) as the LibreOffice software project. To a native English speaker, there's no way to pronounce, and thus talk about, "LibreOffice" that doesn't sound either elitist, absurd, or both. Whoever came up with that name must have assumed the goal was maximal awkwardness. (My coping strategy, btw, is to proceed as though the project were based around a Reoffice Library.)

Djehutynakht wrote:To put it into context, one doesn't formally call people from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland "UKian". The UK can be used to refer to the country, but isn't a demonym for the people.

Well that's because we already have a good demonym for the people. Why would we need two?

I dunno, seems to me the Bretons in Brittany have about as much cause to be annoyed that they aren't considered "British" as anyone in the Americas that they aren't considered "American". Which is to say, they're probably not actually annoyed, but they could be if they wanted. Without actually looking it up, I suspect the average Breton has a lot more Britannic/Celtic descent than does the average Englishman. So the Anglo-Saxons can be British but the Bretons can't, and so far as I know, nobody makes a big deal of that.

Mikeski
Posts: 1112
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1417: "Seven"

Postby Mikeski » Wed Sep 10, 2014 10:09 pm UTC

And yes, the "political" part was to exclude the slivers of asia/europe/africa that are in the "geometric" western hemisphere. Gaia isn't OCD enough to give us 180 degrees of longitude of our very own...

Plutarch
Posts: 103
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:29 am UTC
Location: London, UK

Re: 1417: "Seven"

Postby Plutarch » Wed Sep 10, 2014 11:50 pm UTC

None of these posts about continents mention Risk. I'm sure that's where my knowledge of continents came from, and I've stuck with it ever since, ignoring all evidence and opinions to the contrary. Europe, Asia, Africa, North America, South America, and Australia, so that's six continents, and then you assume there are two icy bits at the top and bottom, giving eight.

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 3484
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC
Location: Cleveland, Ohio

Re: 1417: "Seven"

Postby Eebster the Great » Thu Sep 11, 2014 2:52 am UTC

I knew about Irkutsk exclusively through Risk for the first 18 years of my life before meeting people from the area.

User avatar
PinkShinyRose
Posts: 835
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:54 pm UTC
Location: the Netherlands

Re: 1417: "Seven"

Postby PinkShinyRose » Thu Sep 11, 2014 2:30 pm UTC

ps.02 wrote:
Diadem wrote:Anyway what's wrong with USian? It's short and clear, and doesn't seem to have any negative implications.

Even if overcoming linguistic inertia were, as it were, free, it's got the same problem (to a lesser degree) as the LibreOffice software project. To a native English speaker, there's no way to pronounce, and thus talk about, "LibreOffice" that doesn't sound either elitist, absurd, or both. Whoever came up with that name must have assumed the goal was maximal awkwardness. (My coping strategy, btw, is to proceed as though the project were based around a Reoffice Library.)

I always assumed the name was French, not English.

gnatbean
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 8:46 pm UTC

Re: 1417: "Seven"

Postby gnatbean » Tue Sep 30, 2014 8:48 pm UTC

I am pretty sure guacamole refers to the one of seven layers in a Taco Bell Seven Layer Burrito. It really couldn't be anything else.

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 3484
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC
Location: Cleveland, Ohio

Re: 1417: "Seven"

Postby Eebster the Great » Wed Oct 01, 2014 4:43 am UTC

gnatbean wrote:I am pretty sure guacamole refers to the one of seven layers in a Taco Bell Seven Layer Burrito. It really couldn't be anything else.

Seven layer dip always includes guacamole. It has nothing specifically to do with Taco Bell.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10331
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: 1417: "Seven"

Postby addams » Mon Oct 06, 2014 3:08 am UTC

bachaddict wrote:
Pfhorrest wrote: the layers of dip,

I read that in OTTish at first and was rather puzzled :P

There's also the seven deadly sins.
Image

Funny that sloths are neither lively nor deadly!

The old jokes from the beginning are still funny.
Sloths are neither lively nor deadly.

I have looked at a slothful person....and....
Well...It is IS a deadly sin.

I have great self control.
He did not Die that day.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Feedfetcher, Majestic-12 [Bot], toddgeorge and 107 guests