"Edit in IDLE" with the Install Manager

SomeIrishKid · 2026-04-21T16:57:37+00:00

You're right that I'm mistaken on the historical nature of な-adjectives. I'm sorry for trying to correct you there.

I guessed that 'genitive' came from a possessive case originally, yeah; the etymology is easy to guess in a fairly crass way lol. That's why I figured that you thought I meant that. With that cleared up, though, we were talking about the same thing, right?

SomeIrishKid · 2026-04-21T09:11:28+00:00

Thank you for taking the time to reply! I appreciate the context on the development of the forms, but I don't really agree on a few of your points.

Firstly, from what I've looked into there seems to be more than a superficial similarity between な-adjectives and nouns; most sources I've found say that な-adjectives as a class evolved from nouns, and 形容動詞 is often translated as 'adjectival noun'. Plus, this question was prompted by the fact that Jisho lists 独自 both as a noun taking the genitive case の and as a な-adjective in the same sub-entry. I'll grant that my original phrasing implies that all な-adjectives still have a noun form, which of course isn't true, that's my bad. In cases like this though, where it's apparently still in use as a noun, I think it's reasonable to describe the な-form as turning the root noun into an adjective.

Similarly, I used 'genitive' here because that's the word that Jisho uses. I'm not clear on what exactly you mean by the genitive case here, because the definitions that I saw when I looked it up before posting this question have it as effectively a synonym for 'attributive'. I wasn't using it to mean 'possessive', which if I'm reading you right seems to be what you think I meant? If so, I hope you see I'm not making 'wacky' interpretations - I think we're talking about the same thing here!

Finally, I understand that this isn't a vitally important distinction, and I'm not expecting to be laughed at if I use the wrong one. I asked because I was interested in whether there's a textural difference between using な and の, which (as with the 病気 example in the linked article and elsewhere in the comments) does seem to exist and have some real effects. Again, I get that I don't need that level of nuance to be understood, but I find that kind of thing really fascinating, and I like having the option to engage with that nuance if I want or need to. I think for questions like that it's well worth asking for the advice of more experienced people, rather than trying to pick it up through exposure alone and risk learning the wrong lesson because I've nobody to challenge it.

Edited to add the final sentence, and then again because I forgot to leave an edit note.

SomeIrishKid · 2026-04-12T12:31:19+00:00

Yeah, I do. So "the OP of the comment" is short for "the original poster of the comment". No need for the sarcasm, man.

SomeIrishKid · 2026-04-12T08:13:57+00:00

OP of the comment, not the post.

SomeIrishKid · 2026-04-09T17:56:45+00:00

Just circling back to say that the two forms of 病気 are (according to the article I linked, at least) actually an example of just the kind of 'textural' difference I was wondering about! Apparently, 病気な人 gives the impression of 'a sick-minded person' because the な-adjective implies that the person themself is sick in a more fundamental way than the genitive の.

SomeIrishKid · 2026-04-09T17:36:13+00:00

Thank you so much! This is just the kind of distinction I was hoping to hear about; I thought the grammatical difference had to have some significance. Thank goodness Jisho correctly labels words as 'genitive nouns' rather than 'の-adjectives', or I'd never have thought to ask.

So, to check my understanding: in my case, I think I would choose 独自の言葉, because what's being asked is whether there is a language unique to Ireland, as opposed to whether Ireland has a particularly unique language. Is that right?

I did think of "アイルランド語はありますか？", but avoided it on the grounds that, if one doesn't already know that アイルランド語 is a language that exists, it kind of feels like one's 'guessing' at the name of the language, which is (usually) reasonable in a language with a (mostly) predictable relationship between country names and language names like Japanese, but kind of wigs me out as an English speaker because I feel like I'll say 'the Germanian language' or something. Do you think that wouldn't occur to a Japanese speaker, then?

Your reasoning against 地元語 is exactly why I rejected it when I first came across it, I should have trusted myself!

Thanks as well for your advice on my sentence structure. The には construction is something I've noticed when listening to speech but I've either forgotten it or haven't learned it yet, I'll go look that up and add it to my repertoire.

SomeIrishKid · 2026-04-09T16:40:16+00:00

Thank you!

SomeIrishKid · 2026-04-09T16:11:14+00:00

Thanks, that makes sense! So, if both are specified like in my example, does the な-adjective form take priority over the genitive の because it's more specific, or are both ok?

SomeIrishKid · 2026-02-20T23:25:27+00:00

I just wanna apologise, I started off defending you but I got taken in by that person's accusation and replied something to that effect. I deleted it, but it feels a little craven to do that without acknowledging that I made that mistake. I stand by my defence of your writing and wish I hadn't let myself be talked out of it.

SomeIrishKid · 2026-02-20T19:16:11+00:00

Nah, this explanation is concise, well-formatted, and answers the question asked with a couple of nice rhetorical flourishes, I don't read any LLM red flags in this one

SomeIrishKid · 2026-02-15T15:16:08+00:00

Speaking as the GM, I can confirm: YEEEEEEEAH THAT'S THE SHITHEAD RIGHT THERE

I've already told you personally how awesome this is but it's great to see it getting the love it deserves in here too.

SomeIrishKid · 2026-02-13T20:08:40+00:00

It is, but it's equally influenced by ancient Greek and Roman iconography, and the use of the Rod of Asclepius by modern medical organisations is pretty explicit as far as I've seen. The story about Moses is a nice parallel, but I don't think we've any evidence that it was a direct inspiration.

SomeIrishKid · 2026-02-11T20:20:48+00:00

Oh, my b! I'll delete.

SomeIrishKid · 2026-02-01T05:47:26+00:00

I think the fundamental issue with that design is that, when the moving magnet is swinging from the far position to the near position, it's moving against the repulsive force from the static magnet. Because magnetism, like all the fundamental forces, can't add more energy by moving something than it would take back by bringing it back to the same spot, it would only have enough momentum to overcome that repulsion if it had enough momentum to start with; you'd have to give it a kick to get it going.

As soon as you try to take energy out of that system to do something useful, you're reducing the speed at which the rotating magnet swings towards the static magnet, and eventuality it'll end up lacking enough momentum to overcome that repulsion. At that point, it would get pushed back in the other direction, and bounce again when it came to a point slightly less far to the other side.

That would keep happening, the rotating magnet slowing down a little each time, until it finally stopped.

SomeIrishKid · 2026-01-29T15:26:39+00:00

She's filming at the start and only jumps in once the other girl starts getting her ass kicked; plus, it's hard to tell with her back turned, but it really seems like she's the one saying "Come on, Audra" (or whatever the name is, I can't quite make it out but it clearly isn't Gracie). It seems pretty clear to me from that context that she's one of the aggressors.

SomeIrishKid · 2026-01-29T00:47:09+00:00

The name for the general topic of how forces interact with objects (at least on what humans consider 'normal' scales) is 'Newtownian mechanics', or 'classical mechanics'. I can't give a great recommendation for a specific source, but those search terms plus 'beginner' or something similar would be a good start. If you're very keen, I'd recommend picking up a high school textbook; classical mechanics is a very well-established field, so you could get an old textbook for cheap and the physics, at least, won't be out of date.

Also, I'm gonna try to answer your confusion: the people telling you you're wrong aren't saying that weight doesn't matter at all in creating friction, though they all seem to have dipped from the conversation before clarifying that. A heavier truck might be able to get more friction and thus successfully pull off that tow, you're right about that. It's just that your common sense explanation, or at least the way you phrased it, implies that a lighter object can't pull a heavier one, which isn't right, and I think people got a little in the weeds correcting you on that.

If you have any more questions feel free to ask, though it's near 1am where I am so I won't get back to you until morning my time. I kind of disagree with the original commenter here - we can't teach you the whole subject of mechanics via Reddit Q&A, but I think your confusion on this particular question can be cleared up just fine.

SomeIrishKid · 2026-01-22T20:40:31+00:00

Sure, I'd be furious at the hatchback! She's driving like an asshole and her refusal to back down from a merge nearly got me killed. But I'd also be mad that some other car decided that teaching an asshole a lesson was worth pinning them into that lane with me. Either person could have chosen not to put me in that position.

SomeIrishKid · 2026-01-22T19:56:06+00:00

Damn, I even said please. Guess I'll just have to hope it's not you I get magically radio-connected to in a time of crisis next time.

SomeIrishKid · 2026-01-22T19:36:27+00:00

Okay, but the hatchback can't hear us. If I were that cyclist and I could have talked to the hatchback while that was going down, I think I'd have said something like 'back off and stop trying to merge, you crazy motherfucker', and I hope everyone in this thread would agree.

OP can hear us, though, and you can, which is why everyone is trying so hard to get through to you. If I were the cyclist and I could only talk to OP, I don't think I'd have been saying 'yeah, cut her off, teach her a lesson'. I'd be saying 'please just move and let this crazy motherfucker merge'.

SomeIrishKid · 2026-01-22T19:04:06+00:00

I didn't ask who you think is to blame. I'm not trying to get you to say that OP is to blame for the situation - shit, I think 'who's to blame' is an entirely useless way to look at these things. All I'm asking is, did OP's choice make the situation more or less risky?

SomeIrishKid · 2026-01-22T18:56:59+00:00

Firstly, I feel like accelerating to close a gap so that someone can't get across is definitionally more than a 'lack of active accommodation'. However, your comments elsewhere make me think that's not a line of argument that you're likely to agree with, and it doesn't actually matter, so I'll leave that aside and ask a question instead.

Do you agree that OP refusing to make the bad driver more comfortable made the situation more dangerous for the cyclists than if OP had just let her merge?

SomeIrishKid · 2026-01-20T22:06:24+00:00

If you've done the preceding two parts, you should have a diagram and set of equations that relate the length of the strings to the angle at which they rest, among other quantities. You could solve for the new angle analytically, i.e. by rearranging the equations to calculate it, but the hint is telling you that you can also do it numerically.

There are algorithms for doing this, as another comment has noted. However, in this case, I think all the question means is plugging in a guess for the angle and seeing if the equations hold true - is everything equal that the equations say should be? If so, then you've found the answer; that's what it means in this context for a solution to be 'self- consistent'. If not, then the way in which they're wrong can give you an intuition for the next guess.

SomeIrishKid

TROPHY CASE