War Room Lounge v65

Should the Lounge rule over the hearts of men?

  • go on...

    Votes: 1 100.0%

  • Hunto rules over the hearts of men and he's not finished yet

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    1
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm glad Luck retired. NFL owners and fans dont give one single fuck about any of the players. And the colts in particular are a terrible organization. Fuck tearing your body up for a few dollars.
 
Has anyone here studied linguistics? I have a question about graphemes.
 
brothir said:
Someone passing by just ironically did the "ruff ruff" part of Who Let The Dogs Out.

I wish I had a shotgun to ominously *kachak*.
Click to expand...
The Well Regulated Militia, ladies and gentlemen. Let's give him a big hand.
 
Rational Poster said:
None of these drug companies will ever pay the true price for the damage they've caused to the country.

They don't have enough cash for it.
Click to expand...
Simply the cost of doing business for them imo. I bet theyve got a way to get a tax write off from these "fines"
 
Awkward exchange of the day.

I see nametag and I think it says "Jedi." I tell her that's such a cool name and is it really hers. She says, "Jodi?" with the expected look on her face. I then explain myself and manage to just barely salvage it.
 
Rational Poster said:
None of these drug companies will ever pay the true price for the damage they've caused to the country.

They don't have enough cash for it.
Click to expand...

This is an even more infuriating phenomenon when it comes to environmental remediation. Companies dump millions of pounds of toxic sludge into the environment, the government spends hundreds of millions of dollars cleaning it up, and then, if you're lucky and you can actually pin it on corporation, they only have a few hundred thousand on hand and dissolve themselves. Usually, just as much in public money is spent on litigating who is at fault as is spent on the actual remediation.
 
Higus said:
y?
Click to expand...
ValuableMelodicAfricanparadiseflycatcher-size_restricted.gif
 
waiguoren said:
Has anyone here studied linguistics? I have a question about graphemes.
Click to expand...

I have no real knowledge of the subject and will almost certainly not be able to help, but I'm curious about the question. Why not just put it out and see if anyone can answer?
 
waiguoren said:
Has anyone here studied linguistics? I have a question about graphemes.
Click to expand...

What kinda graphemes? You got pictograms, ideograms, logograms, phonetic, alphabetic, you name it, we got it at the grapheme emporium.
 
JDragon said:
https://www.bloodyelbow.com/2019/8/...ocked-out-by-donald-cerrone-training-mma-news

Love this guy
Click to expand...
Gaeithje looks and sounds kinda dumb, as if he's already punch drunk, but at the same time he's very honest and grounded and I actually think he has decent fight IQ. To the extent he doesn't fight smart it seems to be by choice. I like his personality and he seems to think about the game on a deeper level than many fighters despite what I said about how he looks and sounds.
 
Kafir-kun said:
Gaeithje looks and sounds kind dumb, as if he's already punch drunk, but at the same time he's very honest and grounded and I actually think he has decent fight IQ. To the extent he doesn't fight smart it seems to be by choice. I like his personality and he seems to think about the game on a deeper level than many fighters despite what I said about how he looks and sounds.
Click to expand...
In essence, the Forrest Gump of fighting?
 
Fawlty said:
Awkward exchange of the day.

I see nametag and I think it says "Jedi." I tell her that's such a cool name and is it really hers. She says, "Jodi?" with the expected look on her face. I then explain myself and manage to just barely salvage it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm sure the girl wasn't creeped out at all and you 'salvaged it'
 
JDragon said:
In essence, the Forrest Gump of fighting?
Click to expand...
He's not an idiot savant. He and his coaches have a realistic understanding of his gifts and limitations as a fighter, so they've worked on developing a style that maximizes his chances to win.
It might seem like an ugly style, but really there are a lot of top fighters who aren't ready to handle the kind of physical and mental pressure he can put on them.
 
Last edited:
Jack V Savage said:
I have no real knowledge of the subject and will almost certainly not be able to help, but I'm curious about the question. Why not just put it out and see if anyone can answer?
Click to expand...

Question 1: does anyone have a satisfactory definition of "grapheme"?

The tightest definition I found via internet searching is on this page, and is due to "David Crystal":

Graphemes are the smallest units in a writing system capable of causing a contrast in meaning. In the English alphabet, the switch from cat to bat introduces a meaning change; therefore, c and b represent different graphemes. It is usual to transcribe graphemes within angle brackets, to show their special status: <c>, <b>. The main graphemes of English are the twenty-six units that make up the alphabet. Other graphemes include the various marks of punctuation: <.>, <;>, etc., and such special symbols as <@>, <&>, and (£). . . .
​
Question 2: What if anything is wrong with the following analysis?


I find Mr. Crystal's definition unsatisfactory. Following the definition, one might consider individual Chinese characters to be graphemes in most or all cases. Indeed, we have here a list of standards for 4700+ common characters published under the title of "List of graphemes..."

For example, the character "帥" (handsome) is capable of causing a contrast in meaning. According to the published list I referenced above, it should be a grapheme.

If we modify that character by adding only one horizontal stroke (一) to the top of the right half of "帥", we get a character "師" (teacher, instructor). Presumably this stroke is a "smaller unit" than a whole character and it is definitely capable of causing a contrast in meaning, so under Mr Crystal's definition it seems that 師 or 帥 is not a "grapheme" at all. Only the extra stroke (一) would seem to meet that definition.

In Chinese, sometimes the smallest such unit is going to be a single stroke. Other times it's going to be a larger structure that still doesn't necessarily constitute a character (generally, 部首). There are also cases in which a full character could meet the definition (e.g., 口). I'm thinking the concept of "grapheme" might just be a sloppy idea resulting from excessive reliance on western languages/thought and/or lack of imagination among the people who invented it. It's also possible that there are superior definitions out there to Mr. Crystal's.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,912
Messages
58,326,672
Members
176,000
Latest member
Markooz86

Share this page

Back
Top