Wiki Contributions


Good point, although I used Esperanto precisely because it is a language for which the OP's approach is transparently difficult. The Greek word for light (in weight) is avaris...not heavy. So in Greek, one must say "This object is easy to lift because of the lowness of its weight," but in English one can say "This object is light." Seems arbitrary. I appreciate what the OP is trying to do, though.

Most of the time English has an antonym that does not involve a negative prefix or suffix.

  • It is not warm. ~= It is cool.
  • It is not new. ~= It is old.

But this is not the case in other languages. Consider Esperanto:

  • It is not warm. -> Ĝi ne estas varmeta. ~= Ĝi estas malvarmeta.
  • It is not new. -> Ĝi ne estas nova. ~= Ĝi estas malnova.

Because mal- is equivalent to un-, it is forbidden, and you have to resort to periphrasis:

  • Ĝi estas alia ol varmeta. (It is other than warm.)
  • Ĝi estas la malo de varmeta. (It is the opposite of warm.)...oh, wait, this contains mal- too.

People who eat seafood, but not the flesh of other terrestrial animals are pescatarian. Ethical (as opposed to environmental) pescatarians say fish and other marine life aren't complex enough for fear or pain. Perhaps they call themselves vegetarians just to avoid having to explain pescatarianism.

I'm puzzled by your use of the word "intelligence." Intelligence refers to a capacity to understand facts, acquire knowledge and process information. Humans are presently the only members of the set of intelligent self-regulating systems.

Whenever someone uses "they," I get nervous.

This and other communities seek to transcend, or at least mitigate, human imperfections. Just because something is "human" doesn't mean it contributes to human flourishing. Envy, rage, hate, and cruelty are human, after all.

"To believe" in German is glauben, also from Proto-Germanic. Was this meaning also colored by Greek?

I don't know that an opinion that conforms to reality is self-reinforcing. It is reinforced by reality. The presence of a building on a map is reinforced by the continued existence of the building in real life.

When I was in middle school, our instructor was trying to teach us about the Bill of Rights. She handed out a paper copy and I immediately identified that Article the first (sic) and Article the second (sic) were not among the first ten amendments and that the numbers for the others were wrong. I boldly asserted that this wasn't the Bill of Rights and the teacher apologized and cursed the unreliable Internet. But I was wrong. This WAS the Bill of Rights, but the BILL rather than the ten ratified amendments. Everyone came away wrongly informed from that exchange.

Edit: I wrote before that I identified that they were not in the Constitution, but article the second is, as the 27th amendment, and I knew that, but it wasn't among the first ten.

Load More