Loading AI tools
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an archive of past discussions about User:Cocytus. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Hello, I noticed your comment asking whether ö was properly transcribed as ǫ or ø. From what we have been taught in my Old Norse class, and according to my written sources, it is ǫ. I will try to fix it wherever I encounter it. Best, VincentValentine29 (talk) 03:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC).
The February 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 08:23, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I saw your reversion of the anonymous adding of Finland to the region of Old Norse. The language of Finland was at that time obviously Finnish, but scandinavian/swedish settlements on the coastline have been continuous for a very long time, beginning between 700 and 1300, so Old Norse was in fact spoken in Finland. I didn't do anything about your reversion because this anonymous editor seems to be adding pro-finland-swedish little twists to other articles as well, and I don't feel like encouraging that. Of course most people feel that Finland is part of Scandinavia anyway, so the addition of Finland to the list isn't necessary. So, this is just in case you would like to know. Finnish source: Christian Carpelan, "Esihistorian vuosiluvut, ajoitukset ja kronologia" in "Ennen, Muinoin" ed. Riho Grünthal: SKS, Helsinki--AkselGerner (talk) 00:35, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:04, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Vincent, re "memento mori" – the literal translation does not quite work out. "Remember to die" sounds like something someone has to remember to do, something that they have to want to do in order for them not to fail to do it. For example, take the instruction "remember to buy a pint of milk" – buying a pint of milk is a voluntary thing, the person spoken to can either do it, or not. With dying, this is not the case; dying is not a voluntary thing, but something that is bound to happen to each of us. The Latin construction memento + infinitive (mori is the infinitive of morior) does not mean "remember to ..." here, but "remember that ...". The verb memini, of which memento is an imperative form, takes the accusativum cum infinitivo construction, for example in "suffixum in summa me memini esse cruce" – "I remember that I was affixed to the top of the cross"; it does not mean "*I am remembering that I must get myself hanged on the cross". English has a similar construction in conjunction with the verb "to see", as in "I saw him hang on the cross", but with "to remember", English does not use the a.c.i. construction, but a gerund construction: "I remember him hanging on the cross" (not *I remember him hang on the cross). So the literal translation of "memento mori" is "remember dying"; if the (implicit) accusative object were included, it would be "memento te mori" (remember your dying), but for brevity and elegance, this is dropped from the Latin phrase. At any rate, this is how far my Latin grammar takes me. Cheers, Jayen466 12:11, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I reverted and re-checked on the lfc site they were posting at 518(4) but when it came to updating your figures (13-3-08) - I slinked away. me bad, I did see and scream. forgive me :-) BpEps - t@lk 02:09, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
I put this in that discussion, but I would like your input on it and nobody seems to read or respond to that talk ATM.
I thought of something that might make more people happy than the proposed merge would. Why not cut Old Norse down a bit (it's extremely long, 40kb is long in wikipedia, this is 50% more than that) by making an article "Old Norse Languages" in which Old Icelandic, Old Norwegian, Old Danish, Old Swedish and Old Gnutish can be treated together, separate from the "common norse" but still handled together, so that the developments can be related to each other. That article should then heavily refer to the known documents of these languages, and should draw up the ways that differences and similarities line up, because they do not always follow that East Norse/West Norse split. A large amount of prose can be lifted straight from Old Norse and Old Norwegian can then be merged to the new article. This also allows for the handling of the "middle norwegian" and the other medieval norse languages because the term "Old Norse Languages" can arguably apply also to medieval forms whether they are called "Old" or "Middle" or whatever. Please let me know what you think. I personally feel that this would be a good compromise. I also think my proposed article will be a lot easier to write than the Old Norwegian article has shown itself to be (see that article's talk page for my critique) because the changes can be related to those of the other languages, everything can be put into it's true context.--AkselGerner (talk) 23:19, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
What do you think? --AkselGerner (talk) 23:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
No, I didn't confuse the Teutons with Vikings. So, it was meant to make them look tough, in my case they have succeeded. It's a shame horns were not used in combat, they would have scared many soldiers, don't you think? Thanks for your explaination Mallerd (talk) 05:53, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
The April 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:41, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I notice you reverted my rollback . The version you reverted to has information not reflected in the sourced provided. If you wish to revert again, please provide appropriate sources. Thanks. Rockpocket 00:15, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
My friend since you edit football pages why don't you put a new picture of Arjen Robben? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.188.105.227 (talk) 16:39, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
In reference to this edit, please note that removal of paragraph tags from within a quotation template turns this:
I’ve gotten to know the producers quite well. As far as I can tell, they made sure to budget for lawsuits. Also, I know for a fact that they have one of the best intellectual property attorneys in the business. I expect that the producers made their video close enough to the Harvard video to get tongues awagging (Headline: “Harvard University Seeks Injunction Against Ben Stein and EXPELLED” — you think that might generate interest in the movie?), but different enough so that they are unexposed.
It was a nice touch on the producer’s part to use the same music as the XVIVO video. Presumably they got permission from the artist — or is that another possible oversight to explore? But then again, one of the producers was for years in the music business. So most likely they’re covered here as well.
BOTTOM LINE: Before you think the producers of EXPELLED are idiots, you might think that they are chess players who have seen several moves ahead. For instance, have you ever thought who stood to gain the most from the Machine Video featured at UD a week ago?
...into this...
I’ve gotten to know the producers quite well. As far as I can tell, they made sure to budget for lawsuits. Also, I know for a fact that they have one of the best intellectual property attorneys in the business. I expect that the producers made their video close enough to the Harvard video to get tongues awagging (Headline: “Harvard University Seeks Injunction Against Ben Stein and EXPELLED” — you think that might generate interest in the movie?), but different enough so that they are unexposed.
It was a nice touch on the producer’s part to use the same music as the XVIVO video. Presumably they got permission from the artist — or is that another possible oversight to explore? But then again, one of the producers was for years in the music business. So most likely they’re covered here as well.
BOTTOM LINE: Before you think the producers of EXPELLED are idiots, you might think that they are chess players who have seen several moves ahead. For instance, have you ever thought who stood to gain the most from the Machine Video featured at UD a week ago?
In , you "fixed" two words that were intentionally misspelled. Make sure to preview your automated edits before committing them! Zetawoof(ζ) 07:30, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry.Did not know —Preceding unsigned comment added by I Love Jigsaw (talk • contribs) 15:57, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
The June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:43, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions about User:Cocytus. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.