Is a nympho considered decadent ?
Heck no!
It's strange that some people seem proud of writing/speaking broken English. Shouldn't we all try to better ourselves?
Sure language changes but some expressions are simply wrong and illogical. For example: "There's far less humans than ants." This sort of error is common. It should be: "There are far fewer humans than ants." Less is for indeterminate quantities not countable units and the plural form should be used for two or more items. I understand why some people use shorthand, introduce new words etc. but the logical nature of language still has to be preserved. Similarly, in chess, one might make an objectively bad move to generate more complexity and winning chances or some other reason. This is understandable. However, if one moves the king through check, it destroys the foundation of the game. Extending language must be done within its rational limits and even then it's not always a good idea.
Anyway, I don't share Ozie's complaint since we are only dealing with sentence fragments.
BTW: I didn't even speak English for half my life. I spent a good part of my childhood in Europe.
Just curious we can count humans but how do you count ants???
Didn't read this whole thing (yeah, that's short for "I did not read this entire set of postings"), so somebody else may have already said this, but in my experience almost nobody understands what the word "only" means. As in, "I only played one game" or "I only had two eggs" -- certainly very common structures. Phrased in this manner, the only excludes everything other than "played" or "had" -- I had the two eggs, but nothing more. Did not eat them, cook them, look at them, purchase them, digest them, ... Clearly, the intention is to exclude numbers beyond two, so it should read "I had only two eggs".
GeoffreyBernardo wrote: I only had two eggs might also mean I, but nobody else, had two eggs.
horas non numero nisi serenas: 'I number none but shining hours' ( an inscription on a sundial).
A decent translation.
Going back to latin: horas= hour, non numero= is not a number, nisi= without or if not or less, serenas=serene.
My translation is: Do not count the hours but enjoy the moment.
Other latin similar expressions: numero horas sed serenas ; nullas numero nisi serenas horas, horas non noto nisi lucidas ; ultima latet"
Can also be translated by: I remember only the the happy hours or good times.
The context of the phrase and the time it is mentionned dictates the accurate translation.
If said now or if said in the past time there are 2 meanings both actually very close.
Topics I have posted in
Subject: I
Verb: have posted
Object: topics
Adverbial phrase: in ... (In? In what?)
The parsing above clearly demonstrates the grammatical inaccuracy of the sentence under review. The sentence is incomplete.
Not quite sure about your assertion as we are talking about forums, that is clear to me.
In what ? In the forum is the answer.
I don't think that's quite accurate Paul, the intent of the sentence is that it is "in" the Topics, not the forums. "Topics I have posted in the forums" would seem to imply only topics that you started, not participated in. "Topics in which I have posted" is probably the ideal formulation, although "Topics I have posts in" is also sufficient to get the point across.
I think that the wording of :"topics that I have posted in" has a larger extension than "topics I have started", it actually includes both in my opinion.
Perhaps a better alternative would be "topics I have replied to" as being more accurate or specific.
Actually BP, it was tongue in cheek. The word appears where people use words. Try googling the newsgroups for the word. There will be found a ton of usage, including discussions similar to ours here.
Decadent food is food for the self-indulgent. Anyone have a problem with this usage?
Yes, I have a problem with that particular usage. How can food be decadent? How can it decline?
I understand that language is not static, yet the root has to mean something, doesn't it? McDonalds would have us believe that decadent means rich, sugary, and fattening. It does not. Decadence is a falling apart--so I guess it would work with some kind of crumbly cake;)
Decadent? All words have more than one meaning, the proper one which is
used mostly, the figurative one which is used as a comparison to, the imaginative one which extends the meaning and more.
A good example is the word horse.
1. Common sense: a quadruped.
2. Figurative: a wooden frame with legs supporting something.
3. Imaginative: a rope to attach to a yard to support the sailors while they furl the sails.
Etc.
Decadent follows the same pattern.
By transposition, it means hedonic satisfaction, a sensual food pleasure or epicurian enjoyment of good food.
So decadent does mean more than corrupted or decaying or spoiled.
So do I, it was the inference that the "in" referred to "in the forums" that I thought restricted it. Also, by my interpretation "Topics I've replied to" seems to exclude those you've started.
Many people enjoy playing chess in the library where it is quiet, and reference books are available if grammar questions etc arise..... me smart, me post on chess.com......just thinking outloud here...........
Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.