0771: "Period Speech"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
littlelj
Posts: 140
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:40 am UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby littlelj » Mon Jul 26, 2010 2:03 pm UTC

neoliminal wrote:I was just telling someone that if Shakespeare were alive today, he's re-write all his f*cking plays in modern English and film them in f*cking 3-D.

Concur. Titus Andronicus was written because they'd just invented a realistic stage blood. Edit: can't find a cite, dammit.

Me likes this comic, for two main reasons:

    my Linguistics degree
    my obsessive readership of historical novels.

Some authors manage the historical detail. Others ... don't. Suffice it to say that no Regency sweetheart would have had blueberry pancakes with fresh orange juice for breakfast.
Dudes, I'm a woman.

User avatar
Robotguy
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 2:50 pm UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby Robotguy » Mon Jul 26, 2010 2:59 pm UTC

I was really hoping for something about the PATEOTS speech from "Zodiac: The Eco-Thriller".

User avatar
The Scyphozoa
Posts: 2871
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 6:33 pm UTC
Location: Sector 5

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby The Scyphozoa » Mon Jul 26, 2010 3:46 pm UTC

thunderkatz wrote:On the other hand, no lolspeak?

I can imagine someone trying to write more King Arthur literature, and people saying "O hai".
Image
3rdtry wrote:If there ever is another World War, I hope they at least have the decency to call it "World War 2: Episode One"

doogly wrote:murder is a subset of being mean

User avatar
Qaanol
The Cheshirest Catamount
Posts: 3069
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby Qaanol » Mon Jul 26, 2010 3:49 pm UTC

Plasma Man wrote:Good comic today, I especially liked the Stranger In A Strange Land reference. I think that the characters depicted must be heading for battle as we have a sword, spear, knife, gun... and laptop? Maybe the one with the laptop is a hacker and they're all going to storm the Troy company once he's disabled the security with a Trojan horse.

I am reasonably certain the characters depicted are, in fact, all pirates. And yes, they do appear to be headed for battle.
wee free kings

deepforestgreen
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:31 am UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby deepforestgreen » Mon Jul 26, 2010 4:24 pm UTC

That's cool. I can imagine our distant progeny latching onto the 'pirates vs. ninja' craze and assuming they represented political parties. (Although, I've always wondered why anyone would think that a pirate could defeat an assassin who has martial arts training, but I'm just a historian...)

avocadohead
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:36 pm UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby avocadohead » Mon Jul 26, 2010 4:31 pm UTC

Talking of Shakespeare and anachronisms just reminds me of Hector quoting Aristotle in Troilus and Cressida...

etherknight
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 6:05 pm UTC

"On steroids"

Postby etherknight » Mon Jul 26, 2010 4:44 pm UTC

I imagine there will come a time when thereal meaning of the above term will be lost to history. One day, 'steroids' will be just a synonym for 'bigger'
:(

User avatar
bmonk
Posts: 662
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:14 pm UTC
Location: Schitzoed in the OTT between the 2100s and the late 900s. Hoping for singularity.

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby bmonk » Mon Jul 26, 2010 5:02 pm UTC

Is this the proper place to complain about other anachronisms? Such as Medieval Englishman cooking up some nice taters? Or when Alexander "is impetuous in everything, even in Chess"?

Heck, even the Bible has some pretty bad bloopers when it comes to anachronisms, such as in the book of Daniel, or Tobit. (If I remember, according to the book, Tobit would be some 250 years old, and still going...)

One of the hardest things to do when you go back to rewrite history is to get it all straight.
Having become a Wizard on n.p. 2183, the Yellow Piggy retroactively appointed his honorable self a Temporal Wizardly Piggy on n.p.1488, not to be effective until n.p. 2183, thereby avoiding a partial temporal paradox. Since he couldn't afford two philosophical PhDs to rule on the title.

am3930
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:39 pm UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby am3930 » Mon Jul 26, 2010 5:35 pm UTC

So no talk about who would win in that fight?

I'm thinking that as long as the gun is fully loaded that guy will probably win. On the other hand if he only has one or two bullets he'd probably focus on the other people who are actually armed and then the guy with the laptop takes him by surprise.

On the other hand, in the future, hacking into SOP might be a common battle strategy. Then everything actually makes sense.
Take me out to the black.
Tell them I ain't comin' back.
Burn the land and boil the sea.
You can't take the-


****, they have.

Faranya
Posts: 259
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 3:10 am UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby Faranya » Mon Jul 26, 2010 7:06 pm UTC

deepforestgreen wrote:That's cool. I can imagine our distant progeny latching onto the 'pirates vs. ninja' craze and assuming they represented political parties. (Although, I've always wondered why anyone would think that a pirate could defeat an assassin who has martial arts training, but I'm just a historian...)

Firearms, in addition to pirates (at least the ones commonly thought of) generally being former members of some navy or another, and thus also have martial arts training (just because it isn't Asian doesn't mean it isn't a martial art)

eudaimonia wrote:Hm. Do all of these (all of them english) sound the same to the modern ear?

~900AD: "HWÆT, WE GAR-DEna in geardagum, þeodcyninga þrym gefrunon"
~1300AD: "whan that april with his shoures sote, the droghte of marche hath perced to the rote"
~1597AD: "But how I caught it, found it, or came by it / What stuff ’tis made of, whereof it is born / I am to learn;"
1833AD: "And see the great Achilles, whom we knew"
1956AD: "i saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness starving hysterical"

Seems to me that we've got several centuries of english to work with as it is, and I think many could tell the difference. (If not name the time period correctly.)


Yeah, 900-1300 sounds close enough. And 1600-2000 sounds close enough as well. I could see someone mistaking them 400 years hence.
Image

User avatar
New User
Posts: 695
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 4:40 am UTC
Location: USA

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby New User » Mon Jul 26, 2010 7:09 pm UTC

I'm pretty sure I saw this joke in the episode of Futurama where the gang went back in time and crashed at Roswell. After Leela reminded Professor Farnsworth that they were in the twentieth century, the two of them tried to blend in with the locals but just mixed up language conventions from the entire century.

Aiwendil42
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 8:52 pm UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby Aiwendil42 » Mon Jul 26, 2010 7:42 pm UTC

Yeah, 900-1300 sounds close enough. And 1600-2000 sounds close enough as well. I could see someone mistaking them 400 years hence.


Really? To me, the Beowulf and the Chaucer sound completely different. The Old English of Beowulf sounds like another language; Chaucer's Middle English sounds like 'normal' (i.e. modern) English with strange spellings/pronunciations, obscure words, and archaic phrasing.

Granted, I've studied both Old and Middle English somewhat, but I remember from the outset noticing that OE seemed so much more 'foreign', as it were, than ME.

lesmith11
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 8:39 pm UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby lesmith11 » Mon Jul 26, 2010 8:10 pm UTC

Plasma Man wrote:
Faranya wrote:Yeah, I have a friend who gets mildly irritated about people trying to use "thou" to sound formal, when it is the familiar term, and "you" is the formal.

He asserts that all his letters to his girlfriend make proper use of thou, and I have no reason to disbelieve him.

I've been able to keep that straight since I read James Clavell's Shogun, where "thou" is consistently used as a sign of intimacy.



I've just been reading it for the second time today and am now seriously consider using the term more often.

SW15243 - I thought the same thing but this is infinitely better

User avatar
eran_rathan
Mostly Wrong
Posts: 1840
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in your ceiling, judging you

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby eran_rathan » Mon Jul 26, 2010 8:25 pm UTC

The Scyphozoa wrote:
thunderkatz wrote:On the other hand, no lolspeak?

I can imagine someone trying to write more King Arthur literature, and people saying "O hai".



Mordred: Dude, wtf why am I not king? gotta go pwn face,lol kthxbai.
"Does this smell like chloroform to you?"
"Google tells me you are not unique. You are, however, wrong."
nɒʜƚɒɿ_nɒɿɘ

User avatar
The Scyphozoa
Posts: 2871
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 6:33 pm UTC
Location: Sector 5

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby The Scyphozoa » Mon Jul 26, 2010 8:29 pm UTC

Faranya wrote:
Pfhorrest wrote:
hotaru wrote:does anyone else think "you" is the most jarring word in this comic?

Yeah, with the way things are going in society, nobody will be that formal by the 21st century. In fact, I predict that within the next 500 years "you" will disappear from the dialect entirely, leaving only "thou", even for addressing the King! Kids these days...

Yeah, I have a friend who gets mildly irritated about people trying to use "thou" to sound formal, when it is was the familiar term, and "you" is was the formal.

They WERE that way, which means nowadays we can use them however the hell we want.

Reminds me: in The Lord of the Rings, somewhere in there (not sure where it actually mentions this, in an actual chapter or in an appendix) it says that everyone is surprised when Pippin uses "you" when speaking to Lord Denethor, when (in this book) "thou" represents the formal. But that's a little weird since English is only used to represent the language they're speaking (Westron), and "you" is the translation for whatever the familiar second person is.
Image
3rdtry wrote:If there ever is another World War, I hope they at least have the decency to call it "World War 2: Episode One"

doogly wrote:murder is a subset of being mean

RabbitWho
Posts: 284
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 10:16 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby RabbitWho » Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:13 pm UTC

Hee hee. This joke was done in less awesome style in the episode of Star Trek Voyager where they traveled back to the 1990s and Lieutenant Paris made use of all his knowledge of "20th century slang" .

A good solid xkcd comic.

deepforestgreen
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:31 am UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby deepforestgreen » Mon Jul 26, 2010 10:07 pm UTC

1000 - 1400 is a lot different than 1600 - 2000. Never in history did technology advance as it did in those years. By comparison, people living 1000 years after Jesus lived very similarly to Him, where as we don't live much like Shakespeare. Because language did evolve while so many other things lay dormant, it's easy to see why early modern English and late Old English would get mixed in with each other, even though they are very different.

So, someone wants to debate ninjas vs. pirates? If guns are an option, an assassin would certainly be trained in the use of them - Asian doesn't mean "no guns." Pitting that assassin against a deckhand isn't much of a fight. Sure, if a ninja stood still he'd get shot, but since these guys were known for undercover ops that's not likely. It's more likely that the ninja would hire on as the ship's cook, and then poison all of the pirates with their lunch. If it were hand-to-hand, advanced martial arts from a black belt is superior to that of military hand-to-hand training - despite my respect and admiration for the the latter.

User avatar
Idhan
Posts: 319
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 10:33 pm UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby Idhan » Mon Jul 26, 2010 10:12 pm UTC

myrmaid wrote:I really want to attend a Blogger Reenactment Festival now. I feel like it would be a lot more fun then actually blogging.


Reenactments are usually more fun than what they reenact. Civil War reenactment is vastly, vastly more fun than actually being a soldier in the Civil War.

antwerp42
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 10:41 pm UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby antwerp42 » Mon Jul 26, 2010 10:47 pm UTC

Am I the only person who's initial thought was "this should totally be a T-Shirt"? I certainly hope not.

Also, wasn't "thou" originally merely singular rather than familiar. And regardless of that YOU is definitely correct there due to the fact that it addresses more than one person sitting it decidedly on the V side of the T-V divide. Jarring yes, used correctly regardless of date intended --- absolutely. (Unless it ought to be "Ye" which I think is actually the case.)

Schmendrick
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:14 am UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby Schmendrick » Mon Jul 26, 2010 10:57 pm UTC

Reminds me of Juno.

DCB
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 4:59 am UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby DCB » Mon Jul 26, 2010 11:07 pm UTC

eudaimonia wrote:Hm. Do all of these (all of them english) sound the same to the modern ear?

~900AD: "HWÆT, WE GAR-DEna in geardagum, þeodcyninga þrym gefrunon"
~1300AD: "whan that april with his shoures sote, the droghte of marche hath perced to the rote"
~1597AD: "But how I caught it, found it, or came by it / What stuff ’tis made of, whereof it is born / I am to learn;"
1833AD: "And see the great Achilles, whom we knew"
1956AD: "i saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness starving hysterical"

Seems to me that we've got several centuries of english to work with as it is, and I think many could tell the difference. (If not name the time period correctly.)



how ironic that the last 3 are within 400 years of each other and still easily understood. i mean the shakespearean english is a little odd grammatically from a modern perspective but otherwise it's perfectly fine. honestly between 1597 and 1833 or 1833 and 1956 i wouldn't know it was from a different time period. between 1597 and 1956 I can tell they're quite different, but if you look at that list the growth of the english language is slowing down. 900-1300 is a huge change, and 1300 and 1600 are very different, but 1600 to 1950 is just semantics ( :P but seriously it's not much of a difference).

all's i'm sayin' is that in 2400 it will probably be a linguistic shift similar to between 1600 and 1956. which means language from 1800-2200 will be similar enough to the language of 2000 to be interchangeable. although I suppose that still makes randall wrong, just less so.

jeffk
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:48 pm UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby jeffk » Mon Jul 26, 2010 11:16 pm UTC

Bobsama wrote:The keyboard is mightier than the sword! Except for in a sword fight, in which case an IBM Model M is mightier than a sword!


So what would win--an IBM Model M, or a Western Electric Model 500?

steinam
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 11:39 pm UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby steinam » Mon Jul 26, 2010 11:42 pm UTC

Why has no one expressed love for the Heinlein reference? What kind of geek chic crowd is this?!?!

oddtail
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 9:41 am UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby oddtail » Mon Jul 26, 2010 11:48 pm UTC

deepforestgreen wrote:So, someone wants to debate ninjas vs. pirates? If guns are an option, an assassin would certainly be trained in the use of them - Asian doesn't mean "no guns." Pitting that assassin against a deckhand isn't much of a fight. Sure, if a ninja stood still he'd get shot, but since these guys were known for undercover ops that's not likely. It's more likely that the ninja would hire on as the ship's cook, and then poison all of the pirates with their lunch. If it were hand-to-hand, advanced martial arts from a black belt is superior to that of military hand-to-hand training - despite my respect and admiration for the the latter.


Man, I love these kinds of pointless discussions! (no, really. It's fun to discuss such things, I'm not being sarcastic here.)

As a person who's practiced martial arts for several years now (quite intensively, too), I would *love* to agree with your point, but sadly - I do not. I imagine a situation where ninjas were for some reason expected to kill a bunch of pirates, they would do the job easily (as you mentioned, poisoning them would be a possibility, and I raise your "poisoning" with my "sabotage"). But I think you're underestimating the value of common sense. Surely, people who are pirates/corsairs/buccaneers are very careful about who might (figuratively or literally) backstab them. They didn't just arrive at a port saying "hello, we're pirates", because that'd be pretty stupid. Even in the golden age of piracy, not many had enough firepower to pull of an attack on a heavily armed ship. So pirates, despite what popular culture suggests, were smart people capable of advance planning. And I'm sure e.g. Blackbeard had a few attempts at his life. But yeah, I'm sure an experienced team of ninjas would find some way.

As for direct confrontation... here's where I disagree (we're assuming more-or-less realistic pirates and ninjas and not inhabitants of Movieland, right?). Ninjas were taught hand-to-hand combat, but they were also (and primarily) taught about politics, poisons, stealth, diplomacy, acting, sabotage and lovemaking (no, I'm not making that last one up). Simply enough, they were taught to twist the situation in such a way that they would NOT face the enemy directly. They were not an elite military squad, they were spies and saboteurs. Since they had no need to focus on direct fights, they were certainly *competent* at such fights, but they did not *excel* at them - if nothing else, because time for training is a limited resource and they devoted much of their energy elsewhere.

There's also the fact that if a group of pirates fought a group of ninjas, numbers have to be taken into account. Ninjas were (probably) taught all about teamwork, but - again - they were not drilled for open combat. Pirates, on the other hand, fought battles for a living. I guess an average group of pirates would rarely *have* to fight, as they would prey on people who would not give much resistance, but still - sometimes the people attacked fought back. And those pirates that survived essentially *had* to get better at combat, at military tactics (which is important in anything bigger than a small skirmish) and so on. To put it differently, people who fight for a living and stay alive just get very good at not dying. I'm assuming a person whose fights have always been overt would have an edge in overt fighting.

There's also the assumption that you make that martial arts of the East are inherently superior to other fighting methods. This is not the case, or does not have to be. An experienced fighter frequently put in life-or-death situations will soon, if he survives, learn all sorts of nasty tricks the opponent can pull. *All* the senseis/trainers that I trained martial arts with often pointed out that in a fight between a skilled martial artist and a guy who's just been in hundreds of brawls, smart money is on the thug. Why? Because he may or may not lack the formal skills of a good martial artist, but he has the attitude, the experience, the toughness and the mindset that more than make up for it. Similarly, while ninjas were certainly comperent fighters, pirates were just in *more* overt fights. And people who do something more are likely to do it well.

Am I saying that martial arts training is useless? Far from it. But people tend to overestimate skill and underestimate experience, attitude and motivation. In a real fight, especially a fight en masse, there are all kinds of factors other than skill. It all boils down to who makes better *use* of the skills they have. Sure, formal training helps (the aforementioned thug would be even more dangerous if he was a thug with a few years of Karate classes under his - black - belt), but the fact that ninjas followed a strict regime doesn't mean that pirates didn't learn how to fight. Also, martial arts are useful because they offer an artificial way to learn what could otherwise be only learnt by putting your life at risk. People who have had martial arts training are better prepared for a real fight that people who have not had any, true. But you can't do certain things in training - the quickest way to teach people how to fight could achieve good results in a few months and excellent results in a few years, but by the time the training's finished, almost everyone would have been seriously injured, more than a half crippled in at least a minor way, and a handful would be dead. Real combat is the best teacher of fighting, but not for those who happened to die in the process.)

There's also the element of circumstances. In unarmed combat, ninjas would probably sweep the floor with pirates. In armed combat? Not necessarily. Again, pirates were well familiar with the kind of weapons necessary for their job of choice - and ninjas had no need to face the opponent in the open field. Plus, if firearms were involved, I'm assuming an experienced pirate would be a better shot than an experienced ninja. A ninja would, to use modern analogies, probably be a good sniper/marksman. But it's not the same as being cool-headed in the midst of combat and shooting well while people are dying left and right. Again, that's the area of expertise of a bona fide cutthroat, if anything.

All in all, I'm afraid my conclusion is a boring and lame one - whoever fights on his own terms wins (also, I'm afraid it's not a particularly original thought, Sun Tzu beat me by well over a thousand years to it). If a ship of pirates boarded a ship of ninjas (huh.), the pirates would win. Fighting on ground, pirates would - in my opinion - win as well (contrary to what many people seem to think, much raiding and pillaging by pirates involved dry land). There's no "objective" and "real" kind of fight that could be devised, because no ninja would *want* to fight an open battle - and would probably lack experience in such.

Again, it boils down to "everyone does best what he was trained to do". Even in one-on-one, regular, open, equal and fair combat, every conceivable fighting style had a weak point that can be exploited (from personal experience in training - or at least checking out - several martial arts: Karate practitioners are conditioned to toughen up to attacks, so they don't respond well to wristlocks and armbars. People with a little experience in Judo tend to expect force and they can be tricked by treacherously soft moves. People who are into Aikido more often than not can't take a decent punch). It applies even more on a bigger scale. "Who would win?" is a silly question, because everyone taking part in the discussion would imagine a different setup, and setup is everything.

EDIT: funny how long a post I wrote - originally, my main point was to be "no, hand-to-hand training in the military is not automatically inferior to what an experienced martial artist can do, martial arts can be trained in many ways and for a variety of purposes, and attaching black belts and katas to it doesn't automatically make it a better way to fight". Funny how I got distracted by my own thought process.

User avatar
BioTube
Posts: 362
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 2:11 am UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby BioTube » Tue Jul 27, 2010 12:04 am UTC

Aiwendil42 wrote:Really? To me, the Beowulf and the Chaucer sound completely different. The Old English of Beowulf sounds like another language; Chaucer's Middle English sounds like 'normal' (i.e. modern) English with strange spellings/pronunciations, obscure words, and archaic phrasing.

Granted, I've studied both Old and Middle English somewhat, but I remember from the outset noticing that OE seemed so much more 'foreign', as it were, than ME.
For that very reason, Old English was traditionally classified as another language, Anglo-Saxon; however, advancing knowledge eventually revealed that OE's closest relative was Old Frisian and that Old Saxon wasn't all that closely related(and evidence suggests few Saxons were actually involved in the Germanic conquest of England).
Frédéric Bastiat wrote:Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else.

User avatar
phillipsjk
Posts: 1213
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:09 pm UTC
Location: Edmonton AB Canada
Contact:

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby phillipsjk » Tue Jul 27, 2010 12:06 am UTC

neoliminal wrote:I was just telling someone that if Shakespeare were alive today, he's re-write all his f*cking plays in modern English and film them in f*cking 3-D.


The correct term is Stereoscopic. Shakespeare's plays were produced in 3D at the time; just not recorded.

...And nobody cares because the "3D" term has been used by video cards and games for years, while only displaying a 2D image. The reason the "3D" term was used is that the virtual objects in the games are manipulated in 3 dimensions.
Did you get the number on that truck?

GoldenGryffin
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:49 pm UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby GoldenGryffin » Tue Jul 27, 2010 12:25 am UTC

neoliminal wrote:I was just telling someone that if Shakespeare were alive today, he's re-write all his f*cking plays in modern English and film them in f*cking 3-D.


You're probably right. Shakespeare at the time was writing the equivalent of soap operas (which isn't to say he didn't do it well. He did it exceptionally well and became one of the most widely-known playwrights of his day) but he was definitely writing for the masses when others were attempting to gain recognition among their university-educated peers (so... mostly lawyers and the like) by showing off how much latin they knew.

GoldenGryffin
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:49 pm UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby GoldenGryffin » Tue Jul 27, 2010 12:29 am UTC

bmonk wrote:Is this the proper place to complain about other anachronisms? Such as Medieval Englishman cooking up some nice taters? Or when Alexander "is impetuous in everything, even in Chess"?

Heck, even the Bible has some pretty bad bloopers when it comes to anachronisms, such as in the book of Daniel, or Tobit. (If I remember, according to the book, Tobit would be some 250 years old, and still going...)

One of the hardest things to do when you go back to rewrite history is to get it all straight.


I think that had to do with their concept of a 'year' being shorter than ours is. Read that somewhere so I can't be very specific. Abraham and Noah have similarly unlikely ages. I think it got to the point where no one was quite sure how old anyone was early on in the Bible because the numbers were meaningless.

Faranya
Posts: 259
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 3:10 am UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby Faranya » Tue Jul 27, 2010 12:36 am UTC

Aiwendil42 wrote:
Yeah, 900-1300 sounds close enough. And 1600-2000 sounds close enough as well. I could see someone mistaking them 400 years hence.


Really? To me, the Beowulf and the Chaucer sound completely different. The Old English of Beowulf sounds like another language; Chaucer's Middle English sounds like 'normal' (i.e. modern) English with strange spellings/pronunciations, obscure words, and archaic phrasing.

Granted, I've studied both Old and Middle English somewhat, but I remember from the outset noticing that OE seemed so much more 'foreign', as it were, than ME.

Maybe I'm not reading the Beowulf properly (to be honest, I have no idea what those letters are supposed to sound like and I am guessing), but they seem like they could be existing concurrently...
Image

GoldenGryffin
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:49 pm UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby GoldenGryffin » Tue Jul 27, 2010 12:51 am UTC

oddtail wrote:
deepforestgreen wrote:So, someone wants to debate ninjas vs. pirates? If guns are an option, an assassin would certainly be trained in the use of them - Asian doesn't mean "no guns." Pitting that assassin against a deckhand isn't much of a fight. Sure, if a ninja stood still he'd get shot, but since these guys were known for undercover ops that's not likely. It's more likely that the ninja would hire on as the ship's cook, and then poison all of the pirates with their lunch. If it were hand-to-hand, advanced martial arts from a black belt is superior to that of military hand-to-hand training - despite my respect and admiration for the the latter.


Man, I love these kinds of pointless discussions! (no, really. It's fun to discuss such things, I'm not being sarcastic here.)

As a person who's practiced martial arts for several years now (quite intensively, too), I would *love* to agree with your point, but sadly - I do not. I imagine a situation where ninjas were for some reason expected to kill a bunch of pirates, they would do the job easily (as you mentioned, poisoning them would be a possibility, and I raise your "poisoning" with my "sabotage"). But I think you're underestimating the value of common sense. Surely, people who are pirates/corsairs/buccaneers are very careful about who might (figuratively or literally) backstab them. They didn't just arrive at a port saying "hello, we're pirates", because that'd be pretty stupid. Even in the golden age of piracy, not many had enough firepower to pull of an attack on a heavily armed ship. So pirates, despite what popular culture suggests, were smart people capable of advance planning. And I'm sure e.g. Blackbeard had a few attempts at his life. But yeah, I'm sure an experienced team of ninjas would find some way.

As for direct confrontation... here's where I disagree (we're assuming more-or-less realistic pirates and ninjas and not inhabitants of Movieland, right?). Ninjas were taught hand-to-hand combat, but they were also (and primarily) taught about politics, poisons, stealth, diplomacy, acting, sabotage and lovemaking (no, I'm not making that last one up). Simply enough, they were taught to twist the situation in such a way that they would NOT face the enemy directly. They were not an elite military squad, they were spies and saboteurs. Since they had no need to focus on direct fights, they were certainly *competent* at such fights, but they did not *excel* at them - if nothing else, because time for training is a limited resource and they devoted much of their energy elsewhere.


Another consideration - it would not be a good idea to poison the entire crew while a ship is out at sea because a ship can't be steered by just one person. So I would say what would probably happen is the ninja would, for example, poison the captain and possibly a couple of his most trusted men then manipulate the resulting power struggle to his own advantage, which is where all that diplomacy, sabotage and other skills would come in useful. Don't think the lovemaking thing wouldn't be much use given women were rarely allowed on board pirate ships (as women. I assume we're talking Western pirates here, not Eastern ones).

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5371
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby Pfhorrest » Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:13 am UTC

deepforestgreen wrote:That's cool. I can imagine our distant progeny latching onto the 'pirates vs. ninja' craze and assuming they represented political parties. (Although, I've always wondered why anyone would think that a pirate could defeat an assassin who has martial arts training, but I'm just a historian...)

And they will think that (so we believed) Jesus was a superhero sent by his father, the god Jor-Elohim, from planet Heavon to save mankind, who every year on his birthday delivers presents to all the good little boys and girls in a single night, a feat which he manages by flying backwards around the world really fast to stop time, and then forward really fast again to start it back up again. Or at least, he did, until an evil demon made of green Heavonite named Grinch nailed him to a cross. (He was later replaced by a cyborg, a clone, an alien, and other impostures; but some day the real Jesus will return as a zombie and burn all the kids on the naughty list with his hellfire-vision, ushering in the zombie apocalypse and bringing eternal unlife to all mankind).
Last edited by Pfhorrest on Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:32 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

oddtail
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 9:41 am UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby oddtail » Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:28 am UTC

GoldenGryffin wrote:Don't think the lovemaking thing wouldn't be much use given women were rarely allowed on board pirate ships (as women. I assume we're talking Western pirates here, not Eastern ones).


I'm sure there's an "ass pirate" joke in here somewhere, but let's maintain some pretense of good taste.

User avatar
hotaru
Posts: 1045
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 6:54 pm UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby hotaru » Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:40 am UTC

GoldenGryffin wrote:Shakespeare at the time was writing the equivalent of soap operas

it's nice to finally see someone else say what i've been saying for years...

Code: Select all

factorial product enumFromTo 1
isPrime n 
factorial (1) `mod== 1

hackerb9
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 2:42 am UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby hackerb9 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 3:10 am UTC

novax6 wrote:Reminds me of this.


Exactly what I thought! Perry Bible Fellowship did it first, did it better, and did it in glorious color, but I'm a word nerd and I'd still rather have a T-shirt of this comic. Or one that simply says,

Ye Olde Blogger Reenactment Faire

smartcookie:)
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 6:50 pm UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby smartcookie:) » Tue Jul 27, 2010 3:16 am UTC

SW15243 wrote:Not gonna lie, saw the "Period Speech" title and expected a prepubescent girl at a podium.
Not sure if I'm disappointed or not.
Makes me sound like a pedophile...

I was actually thinking along the same lines. :lol:


Pfhorrest wrote:
deepforestgreen wrote:That's cool. I can imagine our distant progeny latching onto the 'pirates vs. ninja' craze and assuming they represented political parties. (Although, I've always wondered why anyone would think that a pirate could defeat an assassin who has martial arts training, but I'm just a historian...)

And they will think that (so we believed) Jesus was a superhero sent by his father, the god Jor-Elohim, from planet Heavon to save mankind, who every year on his birthday delivers presents to all the good little boys and girls in a single night, a feat which he manages by flying backwards around the world really fast to stop time, and then forward really fast again to start it back up again. Or at least, he did, until an evil demon made of green Heavonite named Grinch nailed him to a cross. (He was later replaced by a cyborg, a clone, an alien, and other impostures; but some day the real Jesus will return as a zombie and burn all the kids on the naughty list with his hellfire-vision, ushering in the zombie apocalypse and bringing eternal unlife to all mankind).

This simply MUST be made into a film.

anthonyjerome
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 3:19 am UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby anthonyjerome » Tue Jul 27, 2010 3:24 am UTC

Is part of the joke that the language is used incorrectly, not just incongruently? 10-4 is standard American police code for "acknowledged," as in, "I heard and understood you," not "yes" as in "I agree with the statement you just said." When I worked in the NYPD the correct way to say "yes" was "affirmative." "Ten-Four" would have been a good reply if the leader had given them a command or made an agreeable assertion ("all units report to the station house"), not asked a question.

User avatar
hotaru
Posts: 1045
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 6:54 pm UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby hotaru » Tue Jul 27, 2010 3:46 am UTC

anthonyjerome wrote:Is part of the joke that the language is used incorrectly, not just incongruently? 10-4 is standard American police code for "acknowledged," as in, "I heard and understood you," not "yes" as in "I agree with the statement you just said." When I worked in the NYPD the correct way to say "yes" was "affirmative." "Ten-Four" would have been a good reply if the leader had given them a command or made an agreeable assertion ("all units report to the station house"), not asked a question.

look at what the question is.

Code: Select all

factorial product enumFromTo 1
isPrime n 
factorial (1) `mod== 1

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5371
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby Pfhorrest » Tue Jul 27, 2010 3:57 am UTC

smartcookie:) wrote:
Pfhorrest wrote:
deepforestgreen wrote:That's cool. I can imagine our distant progeny latching onto the 'pirates vs. ninja' craze and assuming they represented political parties. (Although, I've always wondered why anyone would think that a pirate could defeat an assassin who has martial arts training, but I'm just a historian...)

And they will think that (so we believed) Jesus was a superhero sent by his father, the god Jor-Elohim, from planet Heavon to save mankind, who every year on his birthday delivers presents to all the good little boys and girls in a single night, a feat which he manages by flying backwards around the world really fast to stop time, and then forward really fast again to start it back up again. Or at least, he did, until an evil demon made of green Heavonite named Grinch nailed him to a cross. (He was later replaced by a cyborg, a clone, an alien, and other impostures; but some day the real Jesus will return as a zombie and burn all the kids on the naughty list with his hellfire-vision, ushering in the zombie apocalypse and bringing eternal unlife to all mankind).

This simply MUST be made into a film.

I just finished writing a basic short-story version of a trilogy based on the above: The Superjesus Trilogy.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

Apteryx
Posts: 174
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:41 am UTC

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby Apteryx » Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:27 am UTC

The contention in the comic is simply wrong though. Sure, "old timey" is what the PRESENT ignorant consider Dickens, but really, who cares what the stupid people think?. Most of them don't read now, yet more books are published every year than were published in a decade in the 1800s.

From now, until there are no humans left alive, the intelligent people of all societies will be able to read Pride and Prejudice and value the proper use of English. Or learn 16th century English usage to properly value Shakespeare's worth. Or for that matter, Kant, Li Po and Casares in THEIR old style tongues. WE don't speak like Shakespeare or Austin did, but WE learnt the value in understanding them, didn't we?. And no trends or slangs nor fads will ever change that for humanity.

200 years from now, the ignorant might not get it, but some people always will.

Dumb kids might not know the difference now between the Norman Conquest and the Normandy invasion, but people here who read that sentence DO, and even for the ignorant ten seconds on Google supplies answers, and that will never change.

Edit to add

Re Pirates. Most of the English Pirates had been in the 16th and 17th century British Navy. About 6 hours a week Open Cutlass Drill from Quarter Masters, week in week out, on top of probably as much again Gun Drill. You got to be Master by surviving one of the hardest existences history contained for a decade, then you trained blokes to fight with swords for another decade. Many of the sea battles of the British Navy against pirates and other navies record boarding actions where 40 ( two long boat crews )boarders killed and wounded the entire enemy crew without more than wounds for the British sailors.

Wimpy ninjas better stick in the shadows I think. :P
Last edited by Apteryx on Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:47 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Abuse of words has been the great instrument of sophistry and chicanery, of party, faction, and division of society.
John Adams

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5371
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: "Period Speech" discussion (#771)

Postby Pfhorrest » Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:36 am UTC

Apteryx wrote:The contention in the comic is simply wrong though.

Methinks, therefore, you misapprehend the contention of the comic. It's not contesting whether educated, scholarly types will be able to differentiate between (to them) past dialects; as you point out, modern folk of that ilk are able to do so with presently past varieties of English just fine. The comic is merely contending that, as the modern laity are unable to differentiate between drastically different forms of language antique to us presently, so too will our descendants, the uneducated commoners amongst them at least, be unable to differentiate the (to us) bewilderingly dissimilar and distinct dialects of the modern Anglophone world and its recent history.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Rossegacebes and 68 guests