Jump to content


Photo

Limits on PMs


  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#19 Stephen Chambers

Stephen Chambers

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3902 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West Coast of Clare, Ireland

Posted 27 June 2009 - 12:03 PM

Here Here.... or is it 'Hear Hear?' :D

Depends what you mean, since they're pretty much opposites... :unsure:

(Here, here could be construed as disagreement/a protest, whilst Hear, hear signifies complete agreement/a form of cheering.)

Edited by Stephen Chambers, 27 June 2009 - 05:03 PM.


#20 Patrick King

Patrick King

    Chatty concertinist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 186 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Casino, N.S.W., Australia

Posted 27 June 2009 - 05:22 PM

Here Here.... or is it 'Hear Hear?' :D

Depends what you mean, since they're pretty much opposites... :unsure:

(Here, here could be construed as disagreement/a protest, whilst Hear, hear signifies complete agreement/a form of cheering.)


Alright; thanks.

It's 'Hear Hear'

#21 tallship

tallship

    Heavyweight Boxer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1695 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kent, UK

Posted 27 June 2009 - 05:57 PM

Here Here.... or is it 'Hear Hear?' :D

[pedant] No, actually it's Hear, here (as in hear what is said in this place)[/pedant] :P :rolleyes:

#22 Stephen Chambers

Stephen Chambers

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3902 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West Coast of Clare, Ireland

Posted 27 June 2009 - 07:36 PM

Here Here.... or is it 'Hear Hear?' :D

[pedant] No, actually it's Hear, here (as in hear what is said in this place)[/pedant] :P :rolleyes:

[pedant alert]Point of order, Mr. Speaker! - The phrase "Hear him, hear him!" was used in Parliament since the late 17th century, and had been reduced to "Hear!" or "Hear, hear!" by the late 18th. "Hear" had earlier been used in the King James Bible as a command for others to listen.[/pedant alert] :rolleyes: :P

Edited by Stephen Chambers, 27 June 2009 - 11:03 PM.


#23 Daniel Hersh

Daniel Hersh

    Heavyweight Boxer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1959 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:near Oakland, California

Posted 28 June 2009 - 01:20 AM

[librarian alert] I see that no source was cited for this. It could have been this Wikipedia article which in turn cites this item from Random House. [/librarian alert] ;)

Here Here.... or is it 'Hear Hear?' :D

[pedant] No, actually it's Hear, here (as in hear what is said in this place)[/pedant] :P :rolleyes:

[pedant alert]Point of order, Mr. Speaker! - The phrase "Hear him, hear him!" was used in Parliament since the late 17th century, and had been reduced to "Hear!" or "Hear, hear!" by the late 18th. "Hear" had earlier been used in the King James Bible as a command for others to listen.[/pedant alert] :rolleyes: :P



#24 JimLucas

JimLucas

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9129 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denmark

Posted 28 June 2009 - 02:06 AM

Here Here.... or is it 'Hear Hear?' :D

[pedant] No, actually it's Hear, here (as in hear what is said in this place)[/pedant] :P :rolleyes:

[pedant alert]Point of order, Mr. Speaker! - The phrase "Hear him, hear him!" was used in Parliament since the late 17th century, and had been reduced to "Hear!" or "Hear, hear!" by the late 18th. "Hear" had earlier been used in the King James Bible as a command for others to listen.[/pedant alert] :rolleyes: :P

[librarian alert] I see that no source was cited for this. It could have been this Wikipedia article which in turn cites this item from Random House. [/librarian alert] ;)

Just another Random fact, eh? :unsure:



#25 Patrick King

Patrick King

    Chatty concertinist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 186 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Casino, N.S.W., Australia

Posted 28 June 2009 - 02:29 AM

:huh: I'm an opened-minded person; <_< so don't get anything wrong; that's why I rather hearing the truth about a fact, instead of hearing a normal day in the Australian House of Representatives with the opposition party always opposing things and lying. :angry:

But there's 1 thing I know for certain on this subject: Both ways of writing it are pronounced the same way. :P

Cheers,
Patrick

#26 Chris Timson

Chris Timson

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3353 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bradford on Avon

Posted 29 June 2009 - 05:07 PM

But there's 1 thing I know for certain on this subject: Both ways of writing it are pronounced the same way.

Heer, heer ...

#27 Stephen Chambers

Stephen Chambers

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3902 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West Coast of Clare, Ireland

Posted 30 June 2009 - 12:35 PM

But there's 1 thing I know for certain on this subject: Both ways of writing it are pronounced the same way.

Heer, heer ...

I'd say pronounced, but not spoken in the same way. ;)

"Here, here" would be said in a tone that suggests disagreement, argument even, whilst "Hear, hear" would be spoken in agreement, or as a cheer.

Not sure about "Heer, heer" though... :unsure:

#28 Leo

Leo

    Heavyweight Boxer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1766 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Western Pennsylvania United States

Posted 30 June 2009 - 03:24 PM

But there's 1 thing I know for certain on this subject: Both ways of writing it are pronounced the same way.

Heer, heer ...

I'd say pronounced, but not spoken in the same way. ;)

"Here, here" would be said in a tone that suggests disagreement, argument even, whilst "Hear, hear" would be spoken in agreement, or as a cheer.

Not sure about "Heer, heer" though... :unsure:

and the addition of one consonant to, there there,alters the meaning yet again.

This year I fear we need beer here dear jeered the seer as he would leer in the ear of his peer with a tear near the rear of the pier. Clear?

Cheer
Leo :rolleyes:

#29 Patrick King

Patrick King

    Chatty concertinist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 186 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Casino, N.S.W., Australia

Posted 30 June 2009 - 05:02 PM

But there's 1 thing I know for certain on this subject: Both ways of writing it are pronounced the same way.

Heer, heer ...

I'd say pronounced, but not spoken in the same way. ;)

"Here, here" would be said in a tone that suggests disagreement, argument even, whilst "Hear, hear" would be spoken in agreement, or as a cheer.

Not sure about "Heer, heer" though... :unsure:

and the addition of one consonant to, there there,alters the meaning yet again.

This year I fear we need beer here dear jeered the seer as he would leer in the ear of his peer with a tear near the rear of the pier. Clear?

Cheer
Leo :rolleyes:


Just about. :)
I thought SCHone did moan about the tone of the bone.

Groan,
Roan :P

#30 Patrick King

Patrick King

    Chatty concertinist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 186 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Casino, N.S.W., Australia

Posted 30 June 2009 - 05:03 PM

But there's 1 thing I know for certain on this subject: Both ways of writing it are pronounced the same way.

Heer, heer ...

I'd say pronounced, but not spoken in the same way. ;)

"Here, here" would be said in a tone that suggests disagreement, argument even, whilst "Hear, hear" would be spoken in agreement, or as a cheer.

Not sure about "Heer, heer" though... :unsure:

and the addition of one consonant to, there there,alters the meaning yet again.

This year I fear we need beer here dear jeered the seer as he would leer in the ear of his peer with a tear near the rear of the pier. Clear?

Cheer
Leo :rolleyes:


Just about. :)
I thought SCHone did moan about the tone of the bone.

Groan,
Roan :P

#31 drbones

drbones

    Chatty concertinist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 345 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 July 2009 - 12:18 PM

Should we start on the word "redundant" now?

Is it me or has this thread taken a wild tangent? :unsure:

You know me, I have to put in my 2 cents.
Apologies.. :(

If you listen here you’ll hear they’re here.
If you listen there, you’ll hear they’re there.
Where does a tailor wear his wares?
To me it’s neither here nor there.
as long as he wears clean underwear. :o
So why not ask someone who cares? :P

#32 JimLucas

JimLucas

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9129 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denmark

Posted 02 July 2009 - 05:38 AM

Should we start on the word "redundant" now?

A strange word, that.

How can something be "re-dundant" if it's never been "dundant"? :unsure:

#33 drbones

drbones

    Chatty concertinist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 345 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 July 2009 - 09:22 AM

Should we start on the word "redundant" now?

A strange word, that.

How can something be "re-dundant" if it's never been "dundant"? :unsure:

Valid point. I tried looking up "Dundant" and it seems the word doesn't exist. So, how is it a prefix like "re" can be placed with a non-existant word and give it meaning? :unsure:
I also split off the suffix "ant" which left "dund" which is also not a word. The suffix "ant" changes a verb to an adjective. Still nonsense. :blink:

I finally came up with this:

“Red” is a color, “und” is German for “and”, and “ant” is a small colonizing insect.
So, “red", "and", "ant” equates to “red ant” which, when in a colony, are abundant and therefore redundant. :rolleyes:

#34 david_boveri

david_boveri

    Heavyweight Boxer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1059 posts
  • Location:chicago, illinois, usa

Posted 11 July 2009 - 02:54 AM

who else never noticed there was a limit on pm's? i never send a lot of them. usually i include my email to use that. i am fine with any measures needed to keep a limit on spammers. sorry that the original poster got an inaccurate message and spent 3 days writing three messages! personally, i would have tried again, cuz i dont like being told what to do... :rolleyes:

Should we start on the word "redundant" now?

A strange word, that.

How can something be "re-dundant" if it's never been "dundant"? :unsure:

Valid point. I tried looking up "Dundant" and it seems the word doesn't exist. So, how is it a prefix like "re" can be placed with a non-existant word and give it meaning? :unsure:
I also split off the suffix "ant" which left "dund" which is also not a word. The suffix "ant" changes a verb to an adjective. Still nonsense. :blink:

I finally came up with this:

“Red” is a color, “und” is German for “and”, and “ant” is a small colonizing insect.
So, “red", "and", "ant” equates to “red ant” which, when in a colony, are abundant and therefore redundant. :rolleyes:


well, if you look at latin instead of german, und- means wave. red- is in fact the same as re-... i believe it is different to counteract the fact that the word starts with a vowel. think of redact and redargue--dact is not a word, nor is dargue, but act and argue are words.

so, you could translate redundant as "re-waving," or "re-flowing." to redound (which is a word) is to return (to flow back), so to be redundant is to flow back characterized as flowing back to the same subject. or, if we are to take some artistic license, as there is no word "ound" from redound, we could say say it is to re-wound, and to be redundant is to wound again! :P but in all serious, if you want to have that sort of connotation, you could coin a neo-latinate word and say that c-net forum members like to be "revulnant." i just searched revulnant, and it seems i have coined a word which does not exist in google, and thus i include has never been uttered. all 4 "links" are actually google misreading typeface for the latin words repugnant and repugnantes.

#35 JimLucas

JimLucas

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9129 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denmark

Posted 11 July 2009 - 06:13 AM

so, you could translate redundant as "re-waving," or "re-flowing." to redound (which is a word) is to return (to flow back), so to be redundant is to flow back characterized as flowing back to the same subject. or, if we are to take some artistic license, as there is no word "ound" from redound, we could say say it is to re-wound, and to be redundant is to wound again! :P but in all serious, if you want to have that sort of connotation, you could coin a neo-latinate word and say that c-net forum members like to be "revulnant." i just searched revulnant, and it seems i have coined a word which does not exist in google, and thus i include has never been uttered. all 4 "links" are actually google misreading typeface for the latin words repugnant and repugnantes.

That argument contains some pretty fancy footwork.

Ped-antic, I'd call it. B)



#36 david_boveri

david_boveri

    Heavyweight Boxer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1059 posts
  • Location:chicago, illinois, usa

Posted 12 July 2009 - 01:46 AM

That argument contains some pretty fancy footwork.

Ped-antic, I'd call it. B)


haha, what can i say, i have two left brains.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users