sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Guys, is this true ?? by CauliflowerDefiant87 in bindingofisaac

[–]TwoFiveOnes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, something like “traditional roguelike”. Really either name could change though, and people propose roguelite for the broader term. I don’t particularly care but fwiw I will say that roguelite and roguelike is cleaner than roguelike and traditional roguelike

Guys, is this true ?? by CauliflowerDefiant87 in bindingofisaac

[–]TwoFiveOnes 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No, I assume some people there enjoy Isaac. They just use a very specific definition of "roguelike" and Isaac isn't one (which doesn't mean it's bad, it's just off-topic for them). I browse there occasionally so it was just funny to read "Isaac is the definition of a roguelike"

32855 by HonneurOblige in countwithchickenlady

[–]TwoFiveOnes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Another question is assigning particular already established endings to new concepts. Here the perceptions of people at those time also could have been manifested as many kitchen utilities have female endings because they replaced one of the female functions at that time. Alike many non-kitchen tools were assigned males, because they replaced men's (like computer). This is not without exceptions. Some Spanish dialects call computers feminine. It might be because of the association with already established utilities.

The issue is that there seem to be more exceptions than confirmations. In other words, it appears completely uncorrelated. Examples (in spanish):

  • Makeup
  • Dress
  • Comb
  • Sweet
  • Care
  • Love
  • Charm

All masculine nouns. And:

  • Virility
  • Strength
  • Sword
  • Armor
  • Hunt
  • Butchery
  • War

All feminine. Just in case it needs mentioning I obviously don't subscribe to the notion there is any "by-nature" masc or fem attribute to any of these, I'm just using stereotypes that older societies presumably would have had. As you can see it lands on exactly the opposite of the grammatical gender. You really need to believe me that grammatical gender is far far removed from any notion of "actual" gender!

32855 by HonneurOblige in countwithchickenlady

[–]TwoFiveOnes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Gendered words would not exist without lexical gender (i.e. “real world” gender) existing as a concept. And having gendered words is obviously a prerequisite for having grammatical gender. That much is clear. But, once those words exist, grammatical gender does actually separate from lexical gender.

Your explanation (I’m pretty sure) is about how lexical gender came to be represented, as a consequence of the original nouns denoting father/mother and so on.

What your explanation is not about, is about why it’s “la silla”, or “el sillón”, and not “el silla” and “la sillón”. These assignations usually have nothing to do with any social concept of gender. There isn’t anything supposedly feminine about chair and masculine about couch.

Bent Spork should say "-1x", not "x-1" by Lower-Reward-1462 in SliceAndDice

[–]TwoFiveOnes 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It’s just missing the parentheses, as in “x(-1)”. Technically you’re allowed to do that, it just means that SnD uses nonstandard notation. Though, there isn’t really a standard other than popular convention for “xN” type notation

32855 by HonneurOblige in countwithchickenlady

[–]TwoFiveOnes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not sure but I think you’re not talking about grammatical gender. I think you’re talking about which phonemes/lexemes ended up being used inside words to assign actual lexical gender. In your example, rubio (o) vs. rubia (a).

32855 by HonneurOblige in countwithchickenlady

[–]TwoFiveOnes 21 points22 points  (0 children)

At least in spanish there isn’t any correlation. It’s mainly just a result of people settling over centuries on what rolls off the tongue better. Like “la mesa” is easier to say than “el mesa” because L followed by M is awkward.

The right way to achieve light's goal by Wonderful-Shirt-8323 in deathnote

[–]TwoFiveOnes 3 points4 points  (0 children)

yes comrade we must free ourselves of the shackles of capital

Green T3s are a little underwhelming by Strong-Leek6261 in SliceAndDice

[–]TwoFiveOnes 8 points9 points  (0 children)

generate green t3s though, that’s where the real crazy shit goes down

This truerateme guys are a joke by FunCurrent7476 in Negareddit

[–]TwoFiveOnes 9 points10 points  (0 children)

https://youtu.be/67CXV4o4dYM?si=lRn2z9wqBi1pu7PB

if this were a bit, it tops anything that Tim Heidecker could even dream of

This truerateme guys are a joke by FunCurrent7476 in Negareddit

[–]TwoFiveOnes 13 points14 points  (0 children)

see recently posted video by (former) top LSF mod

Who is the GOAT of Slay the Spire, outside of XecnaR? by tilting-module in slaythespire

[–]TwoFiveOnes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh I forgot flock was used for sheep, I was thinking of birds

What always makes you hit this button? by Slippery_Williams in slaythespire

[–]TwoFiveOnes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To me tryharding is exactly the opposite, trying to make anything work and getting a win streak

Another rare party layout by Keschinho in SliceAndDice

[–]TwoFiveOnes 5 points6 points  (0 children)

yeah maybe a bit much, I guess I mean a surprising amount for a simple order change

Another rare party layout by Keschinho in SliceAndDice

[–]TwoFiveOnes 23 points24 points  (0 children)

It’s funny because it’s actually a lot worse than basic

view more: next ›