Page 407 of 2683

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:19 pm UTC
by jovialbard
SPACKlick wrote:<snip>
Preview edit: r is not a vowel, Our is not a true triphthong it's a diphthong. And i don't care how many times Hour, Fire and Loir are quoted at me R IS NOT A VOWEL /linguistichighhorse


R is not a vowel. Correct. However, sometimes the letter r is used to signify a change to a preceding vowel instead of the introduction of an actual r. In the case of hour that change also signifies a shift because you can't "r-ify" (there is a technical term for that, but I forget what it is, it's been a while) an oo. So it ends up coming out as a tripthong ah-oo-er, the er is a single vowel, an r modified eh.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:22 pm UTC
by Someguy945
Dracomax wrote:4. It is revealed that the sand is actually a giant T-1000, and after everyone is gone, it forms into a giant Robert Patrick, and goes off to kill John Connor.


I imagine it would look more like this.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:27 pm UTC
by Dracomax
Someguy945 wrote:
Dracomax wrote:4. It is revealed that the sand is actually a giant T-1000, and after everyone is gone, it forms into a giant Robert Patrick, and goes off to kill John Connor.


I imagine it would look more like this.

That never happened. there was no third Spiderman movie. There was a Hatman and the kingdom of the crystal skull, starring Harrison Ford, but it had no connection whatsoever to any popular or enjoyable series.

Yes, I am perfectly capable of self deception. I also choose to believe that the water isn't just water.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:32 pm UTC
by Purplepants77
buffygirl wrote:Maybe it's Asteroid B-612.

Edits: found name of asteroid. Then fixed typo.


I don't care if this has either been said 1000 times since this was posted or if we've moved on entirely, but in my post-coma ketchup I saw this and couldn't help but blind post my 2 cents...

2 cents: I love this book! I used to have a VHS reading of this when I was a kid1 with the pictures from the book and I loved it. Then I moved recently and stumbled across the actual book in my packing/unpacking process and thought: "Hey, I used to like this as a kid, I'll read the book for the sake of nostalgia!" Then I read it and thought "Wow, my past self didn't get any of the important messages in this book, this is seriously awesome stuff!And to think I just thought it was a cool story." So all my life I lived under the impression that it was a little kids book, not realizing it was actually worth reading!Now I can honestly say that, despite being somewhat simple in both plot and language2 compared to typical "good" books, this is easily one of my favorite. I'm not one to get choked up because of books/movies, but I legitimately came this close to shedding a few tears when I read the chapter with the fox. [/confession]

1Very young kid relatively speaking. Like maybe in the preschool age range +/-
2At least I got that impression in English, I don't know about the original French to be honest.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:33 pm UTC
by thirds
So, where are they getting their bags? Do they have a car nearby? A house?

Is there no internet in this world, no wikipedia?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:38 pm UTC
by SPACKlick
jovialbard wrote:
SPACKlick wrote:<snip>
Preview edit: r is not a vowel, Our is not a true triphthong it's a diphthong. And i don't care how many times Hour, Fire and Loir are quoted at me R IS NOT A VOWEL /linguistichighhorse


R is not a vowel. Correct. However, sometimes the letter r is used to signify a change to a preceding vowel instead of the introduction of an actual r. In the case of hour that change also signifies a shift because you can't "r-ify" (there is a technical term for that, but I forget what it is, it's been a while) an oo. So it ends up coming out as a tripthong ah-oo-er, the er is a single vowel, an r modified eh.


ooh you petulant you. OU can be pronounced as in our without r-ifying, it's simple vowel differentiation not vowel modification by an r. No triphthong, never. By the castles I swear R is not a vowel modifier

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:43 pm UTC
by jovialbard
SPACKlick wrote:ooh you petulant you. OU can be pronounced as in our without r-ifying, it's simple vowel differentiation not vowel modification by an r. No triphthong, never. By the castles I swear R is not a vowel modifier


I suppose you don't believe in silent letters or gh or ph either then :) and are you saying you pronounce "our" ahoo??? without lifting your tongue at the end? What 2 mouth shapes do you form to say our?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:44 pm UTC
by StratPlayer
SPACKlick wrote:<snip>

By the castles I swear R is not a vowel modifier


It is if you're a pirate. "Aaarrrrrrrgh, me matey!"


(God, I've missed this thread!)

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:50 pm UTC
by Valarya
SPACKlick wrote:Image


I have a feeling this interlude of the Bag-Period™ will only precede an even longer Timeperiod of both M&C being gone.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:57 pm UTC
by SBN
Valarya wrote:I have a feeling this interlude of the Bag-Period™ will only precede an even longer Timeperiod of both M&C being gone.

I'm really hoping we get to go with them.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:58 pm UTC
by SPACKlick
jovialbard wrote:
SPACKlick wrote:ooh you petulant you. OU can be pronounced as in our without r-ifying, it's simple vowel differentiation not vowel modification by an r. No triphthong, never. By the castles I swear R is not a vowel modifier


I suppose you don't believe in silent letters or gh or ph either then :) and are you saying you pronounce "our" ahoo??? without lifting your tongue at the end? What 2 mouth shapes do you form to say our?


None, I form one mouth shape, the diphthong aʊ followed by the consonant r

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:01 pm UTC
by thirds
They are also missing the possibility that the land they are on is simply sinking.

Where do they expect to go? Explore the perimiter of the Sea? In their 2-ish-D world?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:03 pm UTC
by Jonas79
No one has posted yetONG

Image

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:03 pm UTC
by Whizbang
What magic tricks does she have in that bag? It hardly seems like a bag to take on a long scientific adventure.

I'm predicting a Marry Poppins-esque bottomless bag. I am guessing this is where all the construction material has come from.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:04 pm UTC
by Angelastic
SPACKlick wrote:
jovialbard wrote:
SPACKlick wrote:<snip>
Preview edit: r is not a vowel, Our is not a true triphthong it's a diphthong. And i don't care how many times Hour, Fire and Loir are quoted at me R IS NOT A VOWEL /linguistichighhorse


R is not a vowel. Correct. However, sometimes the letter r is used to signify a change to a preceding vowel instead of the introduction of an actual r. In the case of hour that change also signifies a shift because you can't "r-ify" (there is a technical term for that, but I forget what it is, it's been a while) an oo. So it ends up coming out as a tripthong ah-oo-er, the er is a single vowel, an r modified eh.


ooh you petulant you. OU can be pronounced as in our without r-ifying, it's simple vowel differentiation not vowel modification by an r. No triphthong, never. By the castles I swear R is not a vowel modifier
Do you actually speak RP, or are you just saying it's not a triphthong because it isn't one in your accent? The fact that the letter 'r' is not a vowel is irrelevant; it's not even pronounced as a consonant, since RP is non-rhotic. At least let that poor dejected r get credit for modifying the vowel.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:10 pm UTC
by jovialbard
SPACKlick wrote:
jovialbard wrote:I suppose you don't believe in silent letters or gh or ph either then :) and are you saying you pronounce "our" ahoo??? without lifting your tongue at the end? What 2 mouth shapes do you form to say our?


None, I form one mouth shape, the diphthong aʊ followed by the consonant r


That would still be three mouth shapes (with smooth transitions between) but your point is understood, that you treat the trailing r as a consonant and not a vowel. Let me try to pronounce that word... wow that sounds awful. If you are really saying R as a consonant then you are building up pressure behind your tongue as you raise it to almost completely block the flow at the roof of your mouth. If what you are describing is what you are doing then you sound a lot like a pirate right now "ouR". If you don't sound like a pirate then the flow of air is not pressurized as it meets your tongue, which is the definition of a vowel, and you have not spoken a single consonant. (Phonetics was one of my favorite courses when I was a theater major, so this is fun, but wait is this turning into a flame war!)

New discovery: The vowel chart on wikipedia is fun to play with!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:15 pm UTC
by Dracomax
jovialbard wrote:
SPACKlick wrote:
jovialbard wrote:I suppose you don't believe in silent letters or gh or ph either then :) and are you saying you pronounce "our" ahoo??? without lifting your tongue at the end? What 2 mouth shapes do you form to say our?


None, I form one mouth shape, the diphthong aʊ followed by the consonant r


That would still be three mouth shapes (with smooth transitions between) but your point is understood, that you treat the trailing r as a consonant and not a vowel. Let me try to pronounce that word... wow that sounds awful. If you are really saying R as a consonant then you are building up pressure behind your tongue as you raise it to almost completely block the flow at the roof of your mouth. If what you are describing is what you are doing then you sound a lot like a pirate right now "ouR". If you don't sound like a pirate then the flow of air is not pressurized as it meets your tongue, which is the definition of a vowel, and you have not spoken a single consonant. (Phonetics was one of my favorite courses when I was a theater major, so this is fun, but wait is this turning into a flame war!)

NO FLAME WARS! We've gone 16259 posts without starting a flame war, and I'll be damned if we start now!

Trebuchets are okay, though.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:17 pm UTC
by jovialbard
Dracomax wrote:NO FLAME WARS! We've gone 16259 posts without starting a flame war, and I'll be damned if we start now!

Trebuchets are okay, though.


Awwww, but Daaaaad.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:18 pm UTC
by Jonas79
Dracomax wrote:
jovialbard wrote:
SPACKlick wrote:
jovialbard wrote:I suppose you don't believe in silent letters or gh or ph either then :) and are you saying you pronounce "our" ahoo??? without lifting your tongue at the end? What 2 mouth shapes do you form to say our?


None, I form one mouth shape, the diphthong aʊ followed by the consonant r


That would still be three mouth shapes (with smooth transitions between) but your point is understood, that you treat the trailing r as a consonant and not a vowel. Let me try to pronounce that word... wow that sounds awful. If you are really saying R as a consonant then you are building up pressure behind your tongue as you raise it to almost completely block the flow at the roof of your mouth. If what you are describing is what you are doing then you sound a lot like a pirate right now "ouR". If you don't sound like a pirate then the flow of air is not pressurized as it meets your tongue, which is the definition of a vowel, and you have not spoken a single consonant. (Phonetics was one of my favorite courses when I was a theater major, so this is fun, but wait is this turning into a flame war!)

NO FLAME WARS! We've gone 16259 posts without starting a flame war, and I'll be damned if we start now!

Trebuchets are okay, though.


A trebuchet war would be cool :D Flamewars are lame.

Also, on topic. Why is Megan pausing? Did she expect Cueball to still be around?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:21 pm UTC
by jovialbard
Jonas79 wrote:<snip>Also, on topic. Why is Megan pausing? Did she expect Cueball to still be around?


She's plotting her next move

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:30 pm UTC
by patzer
Congratulations, the recent posts have received recognition in the List of off topic discussions. (only 9 off-topic discussions have been recognized in over 400 pages!)

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:36 pm UTC
by edo
Flado wrote:Mine also had their personal nicknames; what I mean is a generic female nickname you use when you don't know the real one (and in some other situations which vary by country, language, and intent). Maybe something like "kid", or "kiddo", but genderful. Is there such a thing in English?.


yeah, English doesn't quite work like that, you can rarely call someone directly by an adjective ( I have seen it for deminutives, "fatty" or "cutie" would be equivalent to "Gordinho" and "Lindinho" in Portuguese. but there is no "littlie" in English. the other way is to call the person (or thing) by the (indefinite?) pronoun "one" use an adjective on that (little one, smart one (of course smarty exists), etc)

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:42 pm UTC
by Bytes
I still maintain that that is rope, a bag would be coloured in.

Join me non-believers, for I am... the Pope of the Rope!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:45 pm UTC
by StratPlayer
edo wrote:
Flado wrote:Mine also had their personal nicknames; what I mean is a generic female nickname you use when you don't know the real one (and in some other situations which vary by country, language, and intent). Maybe something like "kid", or "kiddo", but genderful. Is there such a thing in English?.


yeah, English doesn't quite work like that, you can rarely call someone directly by an adjective ( I have seen it for deminutives, "fatty" or "cutie" would be equivalent to "Gordinho" and "Lindinho" in Portuguese. but there is no "littlie" in English. the other way is to call the person (or thing) by the (indefinite?) pronoun "one" use an adjective on that (little one, smart one (of course smarty exists), etc)


True, but there is "L'il", a semi-common prefix, especially for rappers (a LOT of LITTLES), but it is more of a Noun than a generic pronoun.

But if you're mad at someone who just broke your window or left a flaming bag of dog-pooh on your porch, but then you might use it as, "C'mere, you l'il shit!!!" so perhaps it would qualify as a generic pronoun in that case?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:48 pm UTC
by Jonas79
Bytes wrote:I still maintain that that is rope, a bag would be coloured in.

Join me non-believers, for I am... the Pope of the Rope!


I think it's a bag, since, well, she was going to get bags.

Spoiler:
Image

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:48 pm UTC
by ggh
edo wrote:
Flado wrote:Mine also had their personal nicknames; what I mean is a generic female nickname you use when you don't know the real one (and in some other situations which vary by country, language, and intent). Maybe something like "kid", or "kiddo", but genderful. Is there such a thing in English?.


yeah, English doesn't quite work like that, you can rarely call someone directly by an adjective ( I have seen it for deminutives, "fatty" or "cutie" would be equivalent to "Gordinho" and "Lindinho" in Portuguese. but there is no "littlie" in English. the other way is to call the person (or thing) by the (indefinite?) pronoun "one" use an adjective on that (little one, smart one (of course smarty exists), etc)


I always called my daughter "Little Girl" before she was born (and that among an assortment of other endearments afterwards) but I was delighted to hear my native New Zealander friend calling her son "Little-ie" (Littlie? Little-y?). So maybe it's just American English that lacks that.

Edit: PS: Congrats Jovialbard and Jonas79!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:51 pm UTC
by Dracomax
ggh wrote:
edo wrote:
Flado wrote:Mine also had their personal nicknames; what I mean is a generic female nickname you use when you don't know the real one (and in some other situations which vary by country, language, and intent). Maybe something like "kid", or "kiddo", but genderful. Is there such a thing in English?.


yeah, English doesn't quite work like that, you can rarely call someone directly by an adjective ( I have seen it for deminutives, "fatty" or "cutie" would be equivalent to "Gordinho" and "Lindinho" in Portuguese. but there is no "littlie" in English. the other way is to call the person (or thing) by the (indefinite?) pronoun "one" use an adjective on that (little one, smart one (of course smarty exists), etc)


I always called my daughter "Little Girl" before she was born (and that among an assortment of other endearments afterwards) but I was delighted to hear my native New Zealander friend calling her son "Little-ie" (Littlie? Little-y?). So maybe it's just American English that lacks that.

My sister called her child "Pip" before birsth. Not sure if it was based on Great expectations, or the dot on a die, though.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:53 pm UTC
by thirds
Jonas79 wrote:
Bytes wrote:I still maintain that that is rope, a bag would be coloured in.

Join me non-believers, for I am... the Pope of the Rope!


I think it's a bag, since, well, she was going to get bags.


My questions remain: where are they getting the bags? A nearby vehicle or house? Is there no internet available to them (maps? wikipedia? - or required suspension of disbelief?)
And where are they going, can they trek around the perimeter of a 2-D-ish Sea?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:54 pm UTC
by SWO Crash
Bytes wrote:I still maintain that that is rope, a bag would be coloured in.

Join me non-believers, for I am... the Pope of the Rope!

So long as you're not Pope on a Rope.
Spoiler:
soap_on_a_rope.jpg
soap_on_a_rope.jpg (97.12 KiB) Viewed 18867 times


ggh wrote:
edo wrote:
Flado wrote:Mine also had their personal nicknames; what I mean is a generic female nickname you use when you don't know the real one (and in some other situations which vary by country, language, and intent). Maybe something like "kid", or "kiddo", but genderful. Is there such a thing in English?.


yeah, English doesn't quite work like that, you can rarely call someone directly by an adjective ( I have seen it for deminutives, "fatty" or "cutie" would be equivalent to "Gordinho" and "Lindinho" in Portuguese. but there is no "littlie" in English. the other way is to call the person (or thing) by the (indefinite?) pronoun "one" use an adjective on that (little one, smart one (of course smarty exists), etc)


I always called my daughter "Little Girl" before she was born (and that among an assortment of other endearments afterwards) but I was delighted to hear my native New Zealander friend calling her son "Little-ie" (Littlie? Little-y?). So maybe it's just American English that lacks that.


We called our daughter "Bug" or "Bean" before she was born, and now my wife calls her "Love Bug" and I call her "Sweet Pea." Which, naturally, leads to the melding of names to create "Sweet Bug".

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:56 pm UTC
by Jonas79
ggh wrote:
edo wrote:
Flado wrote:Mine also had their personal nicknames; what I mean is a generic female nickname you use when you don't know the real one (and in some other situations which vary by country, language, and intent). Maybe something like "kid", or "kiddo", but genderful. Is there such a thing in English?.


yeah, English doesn't quite work like that, you can rarely call someone directly by an adjective ( I have seen it for deminutives, "fatty" or "cutie" would be equivalent to "Gordinho" and "Lindinho" in Portuguese. but there is no "littlie" in English. the other way is to call the person (or thing) by the (indefinite?) pronoun "one" use an adjective on that (little one, smart one (of course smarty exists), etc)


I always called my daughter "Little Girl" before she was born (and that among an assortment of other endearments afterwards) but I was delighted to hear my native New Zealander friend calling her son "Little-ie" (Littlie? Little-y?). So maybe it's just American English that lacks that.


I have no idea how New Zealand English works. In the other two languages of the three languages I speak, you can use translations of "La Petite™" and it would mean a small girl (English is my third language).

But, does New Zealand English have tripthongs? hides

Edit: Bad grammar.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:00 pm UTC
by Jonas79
cowaBONGa

Image

Edit: Is she getting something out of the bag?

Edit2: And what does she have in the bag that she doesn't have in the box?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:04 pm UTC
by jjjdavidson
Dracomax wrote:
Spoiler:
ggh wrote:
edo wrote:
Flado wrote:Mine also had their personal nicknames; what I mean is a generic female nickname you use when you don't know the real one (and in some other situations which vary by country, language, and intent). Maybe something like "kid", or "kiddo", but genderful. Is there such a thing in English?.


yeah, English doesn't quite work like that, you can rarely call someone directly by an adjective ( I have seen it for deminutives, "fatty" or "cutie" would be equivalent to "Gordinho" and "Lindinho" in Portuguese. but there is no "littlie" in English. the other way is to call the person (or thing) by the (indefinite?) pronoun "one" use an adjective on that (little one, smart one (of course smarty exists), etc)


I always called my daughter "Little Girl" before she was born (and that among an assortment of other endearments afterwards) but I was delighted to hear my native New Zealander friend calling her son "Little-ie" (Littlie? Little-y?). So maybe it's just American English that lacks that.

My sister called her child "Pip" before birsth. Not sure if it was based on Great expectations, or the dot on a die, though.

Could also refer to a seed, especially orange or lemon seeds (e.g. Sherlock Holmes, "The Five Orange Pips").

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:06 pm UTC
by morgothcr
I'm sorry... can I ask what is this "OTC" people is talking ago?
Long ago, I tried to keep up with this thread, and was able to do so for the first 60 pages... but damned is I'm going to read the last 347 pages to find it...
Thanks a lot!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:06 pm UTC
by Angelastic
thirds wrote:
Jonas79 wrote:
Bytes wrote:I still maintain that that is rope, a bag would be coloured in.

Join me non-believers, for I am... the Pope of the Rope!


I think it's a bag, since, well, she was going to get bags.


My questions remain: where are they getting the bags? A nearby vehicle or house?
The nearby IKEA, where it is rumoured they got the plan(c)ks for the plat(c)form.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:09 pm UTC
by Jonas79
morgothcr wrote:I'm sorry... can I ask what is this "OTC" people is talking ago?
Long ago, I tried to keep up with this thread, and was able to do so for the first 60 pages... but damned is I'm going to read the last 347 pages to find it...
Thanks a lot!


One True Comic

A BlitzGirl, you are not... :wink:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:17 pm UTC
by patzer
morgothcr wrote:I'm sorry... can I ask what is this "OTC" people is talking ago?
Long ago, I tried to keep up with this thread, and was able to do so for the first 60 pages... but damned is I'm going to read the last 347 pages to find it...
Thanks a lot!

http://xkcd-time.wikia.com/wiki/One_True_Comic

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:19 pm UTC
by Jonas79
Maybe the bag contains some kind of instruments? But they already know the sea is rising...

Edit: Am I a Page-Pope now?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:20 pm UTC
by SBN
thirds wrote:So, where are they getting their bags? Do they have a car nearby? A house?

Is there no internet in this world, no wikipedia?

IKEA sells bags.

jovialbard wrote:
Dracomax wrote:NO FLAME WARS! We've gone 16259 posts without starting a flame war, and I'll be damned if we start now!

Trebuchets are okay, though.


Awwww, but Daaaaad.

That was close, I thought he was going to turn the thread around and go home.
Jonas79 wrote:Also, on topic. Why is Megan pausing? Did she expect Cueball to still be around?

I thought she was saying goodbye to the castle.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:21 pm UTC
by thirds
SBN wrote:
thirds wrote:So, where are they getting their bags? Do they have a car nearby? A house?

Is there no internet in this world, no wikipedia?

IKEA sells bags.


What good are empty bags?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:22 pm UTC
by ggh
SWO Crash wrote:We called our daughter "Bug" or "Bean" before she was born, and now my wife calls her "Love Bug" and I call her "Sweet Pea." Which, naturally, leads to the melding of names to create "Sweet Bug".


Ha - funny. One of the other endearments I alluded to, but didn't want to mention, was "Little Bug."

Jonas79 wrote:But, does New Zealand English have tripthongs? hides


Yeah, I'm terrified of that whole discussion. Pinker's "The Language Instinct" is my main breastfeeding reading material, and after I read that most people pronounce NPR beginning with M (and that that's natural and fine), I realized that I have no idea what sounds are actually coming out of my mouth. Worse, I wondered if thinking about the sounds of speech could evenually jeopardize my ability to understand it. Wonderful book btw.

I hope BlitzGirl is doing okay. I wonder if these pages might go a bit nuts in the next dozen newpics.