Burgeoning Battle Gamma tehpineapple Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 This wasn't me, I just came across this. But someone is clearly a fan. http://www.urbandictionary.com/products.php?term=vogel&defid=498698 Temporary tattoo anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchling Cockatrice Slawbug Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Chances are, that urbandictionary definition is not in reference to Jeff. There are a whole ton of Vogels out there, and Jeff does not usually go by "Vogel"... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easygoing Eyebeast Dintiradan Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Besides, it's Urban Dictionary. Look up 'Kelandon' sometime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchling Cockatrice Lilith Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Originally Posted By: Dintiradan Besides, it's Urban Dictionary. Look up 'Kelandon' sometime. that's almost certainly our kelandon and it was almost certainly added by our kelandon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyshakk Koan La paix Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Wow, I remember that one ... but didn't he claim innocence? I wonder how many name-type things are on there. Edit: Don't you love how if you search something that isn't on there, the "yet" is a link? It's like they want random madness no one actually says. Ah, well. Who can blame them? ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchling Cockatrice Alorael at Large Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Yes. It's Urban Dictionary. —Alorael, who thuryled all over urban dictionary yesterday and then did it again right now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easygoing Eyebeast Dantius Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Originally Posted By: Lilith Originally Posted By: Dintiradan Besides, it's Urban Dictionary. Look up 'Kelandon' sometime. that's almost certainly our kelandon and it was almost certainly added by our kelandon Hilarious, and probably true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchling Cockatrice Slawbug Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 I strongly doubt that Kel added that. It's not his style at all... based on the writing style and the date, I'm not sure who to suspect. My best guess would be TM, but I don't think that's a very good guess. ...wait a minute. April 2006. Wasn't that right around the time of the debate about Love in which Kel made that infamous "unzipped his pants and pulled out some new age buzzwords" comment about Synergy? Oh geez, ANYONE might have added the definition after that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easygoing Eyebeast Dantius Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Originally Posted By: CRISIS on INFINITE SLARTIES Oh geez, ANYONE might have added the definition after that! Hm, he's trying to spread the blame. This can only mean one thing: Slarty added the definition himself! A deduction worth of Poirot . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well-Actually War Trall Actaeon Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Which allows us to arbitrarily point fingers. I'll start with Slarty, since he's so eager to point them elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well-Actually War Trall The Ratt Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 I point at Thuryl and Aran! (Quick, someone go make a sexual reference for Slarty before he sees this!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchling Cockatrice Slawbug Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Hah. Well, I suppose I make as much sense as anyone else. Wasn't me though. It could have been Alec or Djur, too. They were both around at that point and Kel and Desp had long since parted ways. And of course, there's always Marlenny, though it doesn't really sound like her writing style... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easygoing Eyebeast VCH Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 It's a complementary definition, so no harm done. I own a paper copy of the Urban Dictionary, and that one unfortunately didn't make the cut. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchling Cockatrice Lilith Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 hahahahahaha it's not alec or djur Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rotghroth Rhapsody waterplant Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Originally Posted By: tehpineapple This wasn't me, I just came across this. But someone is clearly a fan.http://www.urbandictionary.com/products.php?term=vogel&defid=498698 Temporary tattoo anyone? Vogel is the German word for bird, if anyone is interested. Kind of fits the 'God-like' definition as the word 'himmel' covers both heaven and sky - where birds and God (allegedly) reside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchling Cockatrice Slawbug Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 The 'heavens' (or 'heaven' before Ptolemy came into vogue) can refer to the sky in English too, and it typically did until modern times. It may even be related to German 'himmel'... it's pretty typical for a language to use the same word for both concepts, which makes sense, because the sky was a pretty distant and untouchable thing until very recently in human history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easygoing Eyebeast Dantius Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Originally Posted By: CRISIS on INFINITE SLARTIES The 'heavens' (or 'heaven' before Ptolemy came into vogue) can refer to the sky in English too, and it typically did until modern times. It may even be related to German 'himmel'... it's pretty typical for a language to use the same word for both concepts, which makes sense, because the sky was a pretty distant and untouchable thing until very recently in human history. Not really; humans have been studying and analyzing the sky for many thousands of years, probably over 5000 (if not longer). It's pretty hard to image something that you've dissected and analyzed as "distant", especially if you start to get a good understanding of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchling Cockatrice Slawbug Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 I didn't say they imagined the sky to be distant. I said that the sky WAS distant... because it was. Physically. Distant. This is not a difficult point, Dantdring Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easygoing Eyebeast Triumph Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Dantdring??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rotghroth Rhapsody waterplant Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 How does one analyse the sky, D? Originally Posted By: CRISIS on INFINITE SLARTIES The 'heavens' (or 'heaven' before Ptolemy came into vogue) can refer to the sky in English too, and it typically did until modern times. It may even be related to German 'himmel'... it's pretty typical for a language to use the same word for both concepts, which makes sense, because the sky was a pretty distant and untouchable thing until very recently in human history. German is filled with these interesting correlations to English. For example a common Australian insult - dickhead - actually makes sense when compared to dickkopf - thickhead or fathead - a parallel German insult. I had called (and been called by) people 'dickhead' for years without even knowing what it meant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easygoing Eyebeast Dantius Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Originally Posted By: CRISIS on INFINITE SLARTIES I said that the sky WAS distant... because it was. Physically. Distant. Firstly, define "sky". I use "atmosphere". Then define "distant". Right now, I define it as "not being able to touch it". I am breathing the atmosphere, and therefore touching it. Hence, it is not distant. QED Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchling Cockatrice Slawbug Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Yeah, guess what. "Atmosphere" is not what "sky" means. Let's look at typical things English speakers might say about the sky. (1) The sky is blue. Is the air I'm breathing blue? No. Rather, the PART of the atmosphere that is considered the sky, looks blue from where we're standing. (2) The sky is cloudy. Is the air I'm breathing cloudy? No. Rather, I can see clouds far above me. (3) It's really foggy here! Here the fog is down where we are. Note that you CAN'T say "The sky is foggy"... because the sky is not where the fog is. (4) Look up at the sky! Can I look up at where I'm breathing? No. The sky is a point of reference that is directionally above us until we reach its limit. (5) The sky's the limit! This expression implies that there is no limit that you can expect to reach... just like for most of human history, nobody ever expected to reach the sky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rotghroth Rhapsody waterplant Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Originally Posted By: Dantius Originally Posted By: CRISIS on INFINITE SLARTIES I said that the sky WAS distant... because it was. Physically. Distant. Firstly, define "sky". I use "atmosphere". Then define "distant". Right now, I define it as "not being able to touch it". I am breathing the atmosphere, and therefore touching it. Hence, it is not distant. QED Brilliant! I admit I was in the 'the sky is up there' group. Nice one! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnificent Ornk Student of Trinity Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 If you count the night sky, how far away is the sky? The night sky would be unbearably bright, if it weren't that the universe is expanding, and of finite age. In a sense, then, the stars that you see at night are unimaginably distant, but the darkness between them is the very beginning of time. So you can cite a distance that I believe is currently estimated as 14 or 15 billion light years, but that's not really the distance to a place. It's the duration back to the Big Bang, which happened everywhere at once, back when the universe had zero volume. In the original Greek text of the New Testament, the word usually translated as 'heaven' (as in 'the kingdom of heaven' or 'our father in heaven') is actually just the word for the sky: ouranos. It means, more or less, 'the big picture', a scale far beyond the human. It does not mean a cloudy alternate dimension full of angels with harps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easygoing Eyebeast Triumph Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 I love it when you scientific-engineering types get snarky and argumentative! It's fun to watch! SoT: do you study Greek? I'm actually rather fond of Koine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchling Cockatrice Slawbug Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 If we allow the thread to vary from ouranos to ouroboros, Kelandon was not just a climax but also a classicist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easygoing Eyebeast Dantius Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Originally Posted By: CRISIS on INFINITE SLARTIES Yeah, guess what. "Atmosphere" is not what "sky" means. Let's look at typical things English speakers might say about the sky. Let's. Originally Posted By: Slarty (1) The sky is blue. Refraction makes the sky blue. This same refraction occurs at ground level, we just don't notice it. Not an argument. Originally Posted By: Slarty (2) The sky is cloudy. (3) It's really foggy here! Here the fog is down where we are. Note that you CAN'T say "The sky is foggy"... because the sky is not where the fog is. Fog and clouds are both atmospheric condensation. They are identical in every respect except for the level at which they form [exceptions are very high up clouds, which are actually ice]. The technical inadequacies of the English language are no excuse for "sky" and "atmosphere" being different things. Originally Posted By: Slarty (4) Look up at the sky! Can I look up at where I'm breathing? No. The sky is a point of reference that is directionally above us until we reach its limit. Quick, crouch down and then look up. That's the air you were just breathing. You just looked up at it. Originally Posted By: Slarty (5) The sky's the limit! This expression implies that there is no limit that you can expect to reach... just like for most of human history, nobody ever expected to reach the sky. Okay, this one is pretty much correct analysis of an incorrect phrase. Might I remind you that trying to define a scientific concept by using aphorism and figures of speech is generally a bad idea? "Typical" phrases spoken by an English speaker are by no means correct, even if they are, in fact, common. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rotghroth Rhapsody waterplant Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 All of what Dantius said. What is 'sky' appears to be relative. The sky is not blue if you perceive it at night. I've been in a cloud forest and breathed cloudy air etc. Q. When does a bird cease to be flying in the sky and begin to fly only in air? A. It doesn't (or when the observer decides so). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well-Actually War Trall Actaeon Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 OR it, like most words, has more than one definition. My dictionary has four, actually. It can certainly mean "atmosphere", a fairly specific and concrete term which jives with our modern understanding of geology and meteorology. We inhabit the sky, under this definition. It can also refer to the more abstract and poetic concept of the unreachable space above us. It needn't refer to that atmosphere, but much less or much more. Under such a definition, you cannot be "in" the sky. It's the limitless space above you, away from the ground. Both are correct interpretations, just as "orange" can refer to both a color and a fruit. The same word covers two related, but distinct, concepts. Edit: I chose not to include the dictionary definitions. All that would do is lead to an argument about the term "heavens", which might pull theology into an already unnecessarily polarized argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnificent Ornk Student of Trinity Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 I audited the first half of an NT Greek course once, a little over 20 years ago. A few factoids stuck in my head, and that's about it. But it was useful. One thing I learned was that the NT is really pretty simply written, so translation poses very few problems. Appeals to common English speech are not normally valid arguments, but since 'sky' is simply a term in common English speech, they're the only argument you can possibly make either way on this question. There is no scientific truth about what the word 'sky' means; definitions are arbitrary human conventions. Exactly how common English usage interprets the word 'sky' is an interesting question, though, precisely because the relationship between 'sky' and 'atmosphere' is far from simple identity. I would not say that one can breath the sky, though I would say that birds in the sky can breath. The sky is indeed blue, by day, and not transparent. If you ascend to huge altitudes, you may exit the atmosphere but you do not exit the sky; the sky remains above you and around you, regardless of altitude, and simply turns black as the atmosphere thins. Astronauts do not consider that Earth's atmosphere below them is sky. In a photograph from space showing the Earth as a small blue ball on a black background, it would be strange to call that thin blue-white halo 'the sky'. On the other hand, although a black dome strewn with stars is the night sky on Earth, it would seem strange for a traveller in deep space to use 'sky' to refer to the same view extended over 360°. But not so strange for a person on the moon to speak of the starfield as sky, though the moon has no atmosphere. Does a tiny asteroid have a sky? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well-Actually War Trall A less presumptuous name. Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Originally Posted By: Actaeon OR it, like most words, has more than one definition. My dictionary has four, actually. Your dictionary has a whopping four definitions? Nice! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnificent Ornk nikki. Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 It makes me sad when people take the fun out of words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchling Cockatrice Slawbug Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 WORDS, WORDS, WORDS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easygoing Eyebeast Dantius Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Originally Posted By: CRISIS on INFINITE SLARTIES <pre><b>WORDS, WORDS, WORDS.</b></pre> Hey, that's My Fair Lady! Words! Words! Words! I'm so sick of words! I get words all day through, first from him, and now you! Is that all you blighters can do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchling Cockatrice Lilith Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Originally Posted By: CRISIS on INFINITE SLARTIES Yeah, guess what. "Atmosphere" is not what "sky" means. Let's look at typical things English speakers might say about the sky. (1) The sky is blue. Is the air I'm breathing blue? No. Rather, the PART of the atmosphere that is considered the sky, looks blue from where we're standing. actually the air you're breathing is in fact blue all that rayleigh scattering stuff you learned about in high school physics contributes to the fact that the sky has a colour at all, but all of that differential-refraction stuff aside, a big part of the reason why it's specifically blue is that oxygen itself has a blue colour Originally Posted By: Dantius The technical inadequacies of the English language are no excuse for "sky" and "atmosphere" being different things. this is precisely the opposite of the truth there's no such thing as a synonym: if two different words exist and are in general use, the concepts they describe are different in some way also you're being deliberately contrarian now also also i've now read the word "sky" so many times that it no longer seems like a real word Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchling Cockatrice Slawbug Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Um, actually, it's Hamlet. And I believe My Fair Lady takes the line from Pygmalion, which was making a reference to Hamlet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well-Actually War Trall Actaeon Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Originally Posted By: Master1 Originally Posted By: Actaeon OR it, like most words, has more than one definition. My dictionary has four, actually. Your dictionary has a whopping four definitions? Nice! Four for "sky", as I imagine you were aware. I was honestly surprised there weren't more. It's an unabridged Websters of over 2500 pages. I guess I should keep looking for an Oxford edition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnificent Ornk nikki. Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Originally Posted By: CRISIS on INFINITE SLARTIES <pre><b>WORDS, WORDS, WORDS.</b></pre> You make me saddest of all, Slarty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchling Cockatrice Slawbug Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 For if the sun breed maggots in a dead dog, being a god kissing carrion,--Have you a daughter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easygoing Eyebeast Dantius Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Originally Posted By: CRISIS on INFINITE SLARTIES For if the sun breed maggots in a dead dog, being a god kissing carrion,--Have you a daughter? Wait, did you just call Nikki a maggot? I'm confused... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchling Cockatrice Alorael at Large Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Words can be synonyms without being identical. That is an accepted definition of synonym. —Alorael, who expects that definition to be soundly and immediately rejected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easygoing Eyebeast Dintiradan Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Y'know, I haven't read all that much Shakespeare; also, I've only read Hamlet once and only watched one adaptation of it. But I'm having trouble thinking of a scene that I enjoyed more than that one where Hamlet and Polonius meet in the library. Both reading it and watching Mel Gibson and Ian Holm play it -- I don't know why I like it that much, I just do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easygoing Eyebeast Dantius Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Originally Posted By: Dintiradan Y'know, I haven't read all that much Shakespeare; also, I've only read Hamlet once and only watched one adaptation of it. But I'm having trouble thinking of a scene that I enjoyed more than that one where Hamlet and Polonius meet in the library. Both reading it and watching Mel Gibson and Ian Holm play it -- I don't know why I like it that much, I just do. My favorite Shakespeare play is Richard III. It's also the most recent one I saw, watched it about a year ago at the CST. I don't know why I like it so much, it's basically a piece of hack-job propaganda with little to no grounding in reality. But still, Richard's soliloquy at the beginning gets me every time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easygoing Eyebeast Dintiradan Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Never actually read the play, but reminds me of this one Al Pacino documentary we watched in high school, Looking for Richard. We didn't watch the whole thing (the Wikipedia article mentions interview segments that I don't remember seeing), but what we did watch were these segments that would alternate between the cast members discussing how to interpret a line and Pacino trying all the different deliveries. It's amazing how many meaningful ways you can deliver "Now is the winter of our discontent." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well-Actually War Trall Actaeon Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Richard III and Hamlet were blantant rip offs of "The Lion King". The Bard tried to hide it with flowery language, but I could see what he was up to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easygoing Eyebeast The Mystic Posted July 24, 2010 Share Posted July 24, 2010 Originally Posted By: Dantius Originally Posted By: CRISIS on INFINITE SLARTIES <pre><b>WORDS, WORDS, WORDS.</b></pre> Hey, that's My Fair Lady! Words! Words! Words! I'm so sick of words! I get words all day through, first from him, and now you! Is that all you blighters can do? Careful, or I might start singing showtunes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easygoing Eyebeast Dintiradan Posted July 24, 2010 Share Posted July 24, 2010 Originally Posted By: Actaeon Richard III and Hamlet were blantant rip offs of "The Lion King". Oh hey, right. I guess this means I've seen three adaptations of Hamlet -- Mel Gibson's version, The Lion King, and Strange Brew. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchling Cockatrice Slawbug Posted July 24, 2010 Share Posted July 24, 2010 "Borrowing plot" and "adaptation" are not the same thing. Shakespeare borrowed practically all of his plots, anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchling Cockatrice Randomizer Posted July 24, 2010 Share Posted July 24, 2010 Originally Posted By: CRISIS on INFINITE SLARTIES "Borrowing plot" and "adaptation" are not the same thing. Shakespeare borrowed practically all of his plots, anyway. Back then they still called it research. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easygoing Eyebeast Dintiradan Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 In other news, I just came back from watching Much Ado About Nothing (the last possible showing, actually). Now I'm wondering if it's possible to give the Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead treatment to Dogberry. EDIT: woo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.