zombieslayer
13 years ago

Gee...didn't people read the subtitle? ("Favorite actors/actresses - ...that you think few people on Packershome know about.)

I'll give zombieslayer half a point for naming Monica Bellucci. And 1/2 point to wpr for William Powell and maybe other "oldies" that might be unknown to the historically illiterate youngsters here.

The rest ... fail!

[wallme]

Originally Posted by: Wade 



Read the whole title?
Dang Professors. They expect us to work. 🤐
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
4PackGirl
13 years ago

Argh! I forget that I need to be more precise with you guys.

What I should have said was "who you might have heard of or know the name of, but of whom you don't really know much about the overall quality of their ouevre.

o:)

Originally Posted by: Wade 



huh?? me no understandy you you. [wtf] :-"
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
13 years ago

huh?? me no understandy you you. [wtf] :-"

Originally Posted by: 4PackGirl 



Just me being academically pompous, Julie...it's a fancy word for "all his/her work".

[grin1]


And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Zero2Cool
13 years ago
Charlotte Lewis
Gabrielle Anwar
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
13 years ago

Just me being academically pompous, Julie...it's a fancy word for "all his/her work".

[grin1]

Originally Posted by: Wade 



Just a college professor trying to impress with his lexicon. =d>

It reminds me of the time some friends and I were sitting around talking. I used the term "per capita" in the conversation. One of the guys asked me what it meant. I was a bit surprised. We were all around 30 years old. I have used and heard others use the term for 15 years or so. At first I thought he was kidding me. He is a bit of a joker but also one of the kindest people I know. I certainly wouldn't want to laugh at him and hurt his feelings.

I told him it meant, "per person". He asked one of the best questions I have ever heard. He asked why didn't I use the term per person in the first place. I said perhaps I should have. I was simply using the term I hear all the time. I told him perhaps we as a society should use phrases that will be more commonly understood.


UserPostedImage
zombieslayer
13 years ago

Just a college professor trying to impress with his lexicon. =d>

It reminds me of the time some friends and I were sitting around talking. I used the term "per capita" in the conversation. One of the guys asked me what it meant. I was a bit surprised. We were all around 30 years old. I have used and heard others use the term for 15 years or so. At first I thought he was kidding me. He is a bit of a joker but also one of the kindest people I know. I certainly wouldn't want to laugh at him and hurt his feelings.

I told him it meant, "per person". He asked one of the best questions I have ever heard. He asked why didn't I use the term per person in the first place. I said perhaps I should have. I was simply using the term I hear all the time. I told him perhaps we as a society should use phrases that will be more commonly understood.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



That goes both ways though. I've heard people talk before who were intentionally using big words to impress and if I can't understand what they're saying, I'll tune out.

On the other hand, it's never a bad thing to make it a yearly goal to increase one's vocabulary by X number of words. I've done the "Word Power Made Easy" book before. There are other books like that.

I've had creative writing professors make us write essays where we're not allowed to use the "to be" verb. Those were good exercises.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
13 years ago

Just a college professor trying to impress with his lexicon. =d>

It reminds me of the time some friends and I were sitting around talking. I used the term "per capita" in the conversation. One of the guys asked me what it meant. I was a bit surprised. We were all around 30 years old. I have used and heard others use the term for 15 years or so. At first I thought he was kidding me. He is a bit of a joker but also one of the kindest people I know. I certainly wouldn't want to laugh at him and hurt his feelings.

I told him it meant, "per person". He asked one of the best questions I have ever heard. He asked why didn't I use the term per person in the first place. I said perhaps I should have. I was simply using the term I hear all the time. I told him perhaps we as a society should use phrases that will be more commonly understood.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



Welllll, no.

The problem with this approach is that as you limit your vocabulary, more and more vagueness creeps into your usage. While "per person" and "per capita" probably are interchangeable, there are going to be places where you're going to have to know whether to distinguish between both of them and another term (e.g., "per household"), and you're going to need to know whether per person/per capita or that other term is more appropriate. If you focus people on just using basic vocabulary, they fail to develop the same skills of distinguishing between close-but-not-quite-the-same-subject.

Another synonym for "per capita" is "per head." "Head" is an even simpler word than "person." Should we only learn "per head"? How should we count people? It isn't always obvious.


I'm not saying people should emulate French literary critics in using $10 words, much less the academic practice of creating neologism after neologism ("new word") by adding a gratuitous -ist or -istic subject. Those are instances of pedantic vocabulary to blur and make meaning less precise. But emulation of William F. Buckley or our own Rourke is actually good for us. Yes, we'll usually use a $10 word where an agreed-upon $1 word will do. But we'll also make ourselves into more precise thinkers.

Because that ability to remove ambiguity in service of precision is a skill that becomes ever-more-important in a global economy. Everyone in the world may speak English, but everyone also speaks "broken" English. We're never going to be able to insist on precise commonality, so we had better have skills at making the uncommon (to us) more precise.

For example, I'm currently trying to teach myself some "fuzzy set theory." One of the books I am using (purchased from a seller in Poland) is written by a Japanese author and published by a German publisher. It's a good book, but it is missing a lot of definite and indefinite articles. This is not surprising to me -- my experience with students and colleagues is that a many Asians struggle with getting these little "the" and "a" and "an" correct. And, over the years, I've found ways of dealing with that vagueness when I listen to such a person speak or read what they have written, ways that allow me to subconsciously add the correct article without much thought. I know the difference between "an equation" and "the equation" -- not only do I share the common language of English articles, I have lots and lots of practice with choosing which one to use for which thinking situation.

But when I lack more nuanced vocabulary (as I do when it comes to fuzzy match), then all of a sudden "a" and "the" become giant road barriers to understanding. Not only do I not know which one to insert into the sentence, I don't know whether one is missing. I don't even know when to look for one.

Here's another example. I'm studying fuzzy sets because I want to find a recursive model that will allow for multiple "education" decision-makers making decisions under uncertainty based both on what others have done in the past and are expected to do in the future. As it sits right now, my (non-fuzzy) model has four decisions, each with a different wealth constraint. So I find this fuzzy model that seems to be exactly what I'm looking for ... but when I try reading it more carefully I come on the following sentence, "The system explicitly assigns each decision unit a unique objective, a set of decision variables, and a set of common constraints which will affect all decision units." Okay, the "decision unit" is a bit annoying (I read it to be equivalent to "decisionmaker(s)"), but that isn't the real problem for me. The real problem is that word "common" combined with "affect all". Does it mean "affect everyone in some way" or does it mean "affect everyone in the same way"? Now the sentence does have a citation (by what looks to be a South Asian author), but we don't get that journal here and I don't want to spend $22 (the online price) for one article that I may or may not be able to read, and which may or may not have some different "second language" mixed in. On the other hand, it will, I think, end up being a make or break it interpretation. If "common" means "some", the model will work for me; if "same", it probably won't.

I am sure that anyone who practices this particular kind of dynamic programming regularly knows exactly how "common ...will affect all" should be read. But none of those people are here either. Just me and my ignorance that has vague notions of dynamic programming lingering thirteen years past my PhD and some just acquired notions of how the math of fuzziness works.

It isn't just that I lack the vocabulary. Virtually every word used by this Japanese author is a "common word" for me, a word that I use every day. It's that I lack the precise meaning that this community of scholars assigns to those common terms.

And the same is true of members of any group -- scholarly or otherwise -- that seeks to talk with each other. One needs common ground to have a conversation -- but one needs a lot of common ground; and the more complex the conversation, the bigger "a lot" becomes.




And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
13 years ago
Prof,

Nice novelette.

I do understand where you are coming from but since "Per capita" and "Per Person" are roughly the same (at least for the average guy on the street.) I gave him some slack. Understandably "Per Household" is an entirely different definition which I had no plan on using since it was the wrong term.

I was trying to let my friend off easy by agreeing with him. Just as you are not taking the Asian (Students?) to task for using the wrong word, I agreed with him for the sake of harmony and his self esteem. I think we were sitting around a baseball field after a game just relaxing a bit. No need to drag him thru the mud.

Ironically I have often wished Americans had more of a desire to use our own version of the "Queen's English" like the Brits do. Of course I have noticed a decline in their need to speak "proper English" the same as we see it here. With text and twitter and FB all running a muck the desire for the proper use of words is declining by the hour.


UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
13 years ago

Prof,

Nice novelette.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



(bow)

After all, if I could be concise, I'd be in marketing. Or writing Britney Spears lyrics. Or something.


And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    Zero2Cool (9h) : Both LB Quay Walker and Rookie DB Micah Robinson have passed their physicals
    Zero2Cool (9h) : Happy to see site feels more snappy snappy
    Zero2Cool (9h) : No sir. I did not.
    dfosterf (10h) : You didn't get free childcare when you were at work?
    wpr (10h) : These guys make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. Pay for their own childcare.
    dfosterf (11h) : 2nd issue. Number 1 issue was no gameday childcare. 1 of 3 teams not providing it
    Zero2Cool (12h) : Suppose if locker room is main issue, we sitting pretty
    wpr (12h) : I thought so Mucky. In those useless player polls GB always rates high overall. Locker is a part of it.
    Mucky Tundra (12h) : Wasn't the locker room just updated like 6 or 7 years ago?
    Zero2Cool (13h) : I have forum updated on different site. We'll see how this one goes before going to that
    Zero2Cool (13h) : Elgton Jenkins has a back injury, is expect to end contract dispute
    wpr (16h) : It's funny the PA complained about the locker room. It wasn't that long ago it was top shelf. Things change in a hurry.
    wpr (16h) : The site is much more better.
    Zero2Cool (16h) : NFLPA report said Packers lockerroom needed upgrade. Whining bout where you change?
    Zero2Cool (16h) : I saw that and thought it was kind of lame.
    dfosterf (16h) : Packers new locker room is pretty awesome. Great for morale, imo
    Zero2Cool (17h) : Shuffled things on the web server. Hope it makes it faster.
    Zero2Cool (17h) : Other times, it's turtle ass
    Zero2Cool (17h) : Sometimes it's snappy, like now.
    beast (18h) : I feel like it's loading at the top of the next minute, or something like that.
    beast (18h) : Also the thanks/heart takes FOREVER to load, and posting in the shout box takes three times FOREVER!
    beast (18h) : Thanks for saying something, I thought it was slow, but assumed it was on my end
    beast (18h) : Thanks for saying something, I thought it was slow, but assumed it was on my end
    Zero2Cool (18h) : Yeah, I noticed that too. Is it slow for PackerPeople.com too?
    wpr (18h) : I don't know what you IT guys call it but the page loading is very slow for me today.
    Zero2Cool (19h) : SSL might be settled now.
    Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Still working through SSL cert issues
    wpr (23-Jul) : Glad to be back
    Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : I think PH original finally working.
    dfosterf (22-Jul) : Can tell you are having a fun day Kev
    Zero2Cool (22-Jul) : Yep, I had to manually move them. It'll fix itself after more posts.
    Mucky Tundra (22-Jul) : Same deal with the songs/videos thread, says you replied last but when I go there it's what I posted earlier is last
    Zero2Cool (22-Jul) : I had to manually move three posts.
    Mucky Tundra (22-Jul) : But when I go it, Martha's is the last reply
    Mucky Tundra (22-Jul) : Still a little screwy; it shows on the main forum that you were the last person to reply to the Jenkins trade thread
    Zero2Cool (22-Jul) : Host issues, been crazy day
    Mucky Tundra (22-Jul) : Connect 4?
    Zero2Cool (22-Jul) : Connecting to new database
    Zero2Cool (22-Jul) : What the hell
    beast (22-Jul) : Packershome going to the Whiteout unis again
    Zero2Cool (21-Jul) : Oh wait, they got Cam Ward. 1st overall right? haha oops
    Zero2Cool (21-Jul) : They could send Packers a 1st for a QB they are familiar with
    Zero2Cool (21-Jul) : Titans QB Will Levis to have season-ending shoulder surgery
    Zero2Cool (19-Jul) : Their season did kind of start there, so 🤷
    dfosterf (19-Jul) : Eagles put an engraved Brazil flag on their super bowl rings
    Zero2Cool (18-Jul) : Benton unsigned no more
    Zero2Cool (17-Jul) : That's good analysis, yes you are getting old. It'd a blessing!
    dfosterf (14-Jul) : *analysis* gettin' old
    dfosterf (14-Jul) : One of the best analyisis I"ve ever watched at this time of an offseason
    dfosterf (14-Jul) : Andy Herman interviewed Warren Sharp on his Pack a day podcast
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2025 Packers Schedule
    Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
    COMMANDERS
    Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
    Browns
    Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
    Cowboys
    Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
    BENGALS
    Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
    Cardinals
    Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
    Steelers
    Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
    PANTHERS
    Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
    EAGLES
    Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
    Giants
    Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
    BEARS
    Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
    Broncos
    Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
    Bears
    Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
    RAVENS
    Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
    Vikings
    Recent Topics
    1h / Around The NFL / beast

    2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    4h / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

    7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    22-Jul / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

    22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    18-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    15-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.