1 edit
Originally posted by PalynkaJust because YOU don't understand something, it doesn't mean that that something is incongruent babble.
Jumping the chasm of a poser's incongruent babble is definitely out of my reach.
It just means you don't get it.
"Criticize things you don't know about"
-Steve martin from "Let's get Small"
Originally posted by uzlessNot seeing a parallel between two orthogonal issues is very different from 'not getting it'.
Just because YOU don't understand something, it doesn't mean that that something is incongruent babble.
It just means you don't get it.
"Criticize things you don't know about"
-Steve martin from "Let's get Small"
1 edit
Originally posted by uzlessI'm guessing that's really easy for you... 😀😀
It's like when you are hungry and want to eat out at a restaurant. Rather than go to any old restaurant and order something from THEIR menu, I decide beforehand what I want and then go to a restaurant that serves what I want.
Originally posted by PalynkaOrthogonal?
Not seeing a parallel between two orthogonal issues is very different from 'not getting it'.
"It's not a question of whether someone else cares how you look. It's a question of whether or not YOU want to be a part of something where it matters how you look."
"The question is not whether I treat you rudely, but whether you've ever heard me treat anyone else better"
It's syntatic, structural, parallel logic. They're the same structural argument a sophist would make. Perhaps you haven't caught on to the running theme of rhetoric/the sophists, that i've tossed into some other threads that you've commented in for the past 2 days. Its all related.
Maybe the picture is too large for you to see.
Next time I paint a picture, I'll be sure to paint by numbers instead.
Originally posted by uzlessLOL! It's exactly orthogonal.
Orthogonal?
"It's not a question of whether someone else cares how you look. It's a question of whether or not YOU want to be a part of something where it matters how you look."
"The question is not whether I treat you rudely, but whether you've ever heard me treat anyone else better"
It's syntatic, structural, parallel logic. They're the same str ...[text shortened]... u to see.
Next time I paint a picture, I'll be sure to paint by numbers instead.
One is about how others treat the speaker and the other is how the speaker treats others.
But, by all means, keep banging on about your supposed knowledge of rhetoric. It's entertaining.
Originally posted by Palynka'Tangential' would probably make more sense to an English speaker.
LOL! It's exactly orthogonal.
I've noticed that French people, and this probably goes for speakers of other languages derived from Latin, often use mathematical concepts in conversation -- expressions like 'sur le plan socioéconomique', 'sur l'axe du temps'. This way of thinking is completely alien to the English mentality.
3 edits
Originally posted by Bosse de NageInteresting, I never noticed that.
'Tangential' would probably make more sense to an English speaker.
I've noticed that French people, and this probably goes for speakers of other languages derived from Latin, often use mathematical concepts in conversation -- expressions like 'sur le plan socioéconomique', 'sur l'axe du temps'. This way of thinking is completely alien to the English mentality.
But tangential is also a mathematical concept... or, at least, derived from one. To be even more precise, they all seem to be geometrical concepts. Have you read Steven Pinker's The Stuff of Thought? I bought it last week but haven't started it yet. Supposedly it's related to how we use spatial references to describe abstract thoughts.
Edit: Which would seem to indicate that it's not alien at all to the Anglo-Saxon mentality.
1 edit
Originally posted by PalynkaUh, ok. Let me know next time you find a Londoner enlivening their speech with mathematical concepts.
Edit: Which would seem to indicate that it's not alien at all to the Anglo-Saxon mentality.
Look, for most people, the ready-made phrase 'to go off on a tangent' is about as far as it ever goes. 'Orthogonal to' may appear in specialised discourse, but in everyday speech, no.
Just an example: for "sur le plan des affaires," we'd say "from a business standpoint", excluding the mathematical concept. You could say 'On a business level" but it sounds artificial, like much translation.
How would you translate this sentence?
"Je recherche désormais une agence créative, car c'est dans ce sens que je veux maintenant axer mon travail."
Originally posted by Bosse de NageNot mathematical, but spatial concepts. Anyway, if you're interested Steven Pinker explains it much better than me in this video:
Uh, ok. Let me know next time you find a Londoner enlivening their speech with mathematical concepts.
Look, for most people, the ready-made phrase 'to go off on a tangent' is about as far as it ever goes. 'Orthogonal to' may appear in specialised discourse, but in everyday speech, no.
Just an example: for "sur le plan des affaires," we'd say "f ...[text shortened]... You could say 'On a business level" but it sounds artificial, like much translation.
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/steven_pinker_on_language_and_thought.html
Hopefully the book gets more down into the details than the video.
But I'm not disputing that Romance languages use more geometrical concepts. I'd say that is perhaps due to geometrical terms being derived from normal spatial terms from Latin and Greek, making it more intuitive for a French person to use them. I agree that a literal translation would make it sound more technical than it actually is.
Originally posted by PalynkaDifferent ways of thinking -- Cartesian versus whatever the way it is that English people think.
But I'm not disputing that Romance languages use more geometrical concepts. I'd say that is perhaps due to geometrical terms being derived from normal spatial terms from Latin and Greek, making it more intuitive for a French person to use them. I agree that a literal translation would make it sound more technical than it actually is.
1 edit
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI'm sure that plays a part with French, but you yourself noted the connection between Romance languages and this. I doubt one could say that the way of thinking of Portuguese or Italians, for example, is markedly Cartesian.
Different ways of thinking -- Cartesian versus whatever the way it is that English people think.
1 edit
Originally posted by PalynkaThe only one I know about for sure is French. For the rest, I'm guessing. Does Portuguese have verbs like 'axer' or is the concept rendered differently?
I'm sure that plays a part, but you yourself noted the connection between Romance languages and this. I doubt one could say that the way of thinking of Portuguese or Italians, for example, is markedly Cartesian.
Regarding spatial concepts, there's no doubt they underpin everyday language. Just look at prepositions. Then there are expressions like 'we're talking past each other', 'let's go over this again', etc. But these are not derived from mathematical concepts, which is the small point I'm trying to make.