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
    Mucky Tundra (2h) : @jalenreagors They’re discussing if Sheduer can go back to college on NFL Network LMFAOOOOO
    beast (4h) : Great point Martha
    beast (4h) : Buddy Ryan used to say if a candy bar goes missing, there are two to blame, Rex and Rob 🤪 jk 😁
    Martha Careful (6h) : Bum Phillips used to say there are two ways to get better. Get better players or get players to play better. We have a new DL coach
    Zero2Cool (6h) : Yes. Look at the losses last year. They can win.
    beast (7h) : Can Packers win with their current DL?
    bboystyle (8h) : waiting for a pass rusher.
    dfosterf (11h) : 5 minutes between picks in the 3rd
    dfosterf (11h) : 3rd. Hate this phone
    dfosterf (11h) : 4rd
    dfosterf (11h) : 5 minutes in the 4
    dfosterf (11h) : 7 minutes between picks in the 2nd round
    Martha Careful (11h) : Sorry to bitch, but the headline writers in that section absolutely mislead, or don't know how to read. It is maddening
    Martha Careful (11h) : No thanks. Not a dependable guy to be in the right place and run the right route. Dumb as a box of rocks.
    Zero2Cool (12h) : Losing 2nd round pick for a one year rental, not ideal. Especially a headcase.
    TheKanataThrilla (12h) : Pickens for Jaire may be interesting. Definitely not sure we want Pickens long term.
    dfosterf (12h) : No.Absolutely not
    Zero2Cool (13h) : NO NO NO NO NO NO!!1 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬
    dhazer (13h) : scenario: Our main prospects are off the board when our pick comes around, do we just throw a 2nd round pick at Pittsburgh for Pickens
    TheKanataThrilla (13h) : Hopefully she had some comfort that her son will be live his dream when she passed away. Sad news.
    Mucky Tundra (14h) : Damn that sucks
    Zero2Cool (14h) : News about Derrick Harmon mom, saddening.
    Zero2Cool (15h) : Mark Murphy: "I predict we will trade up once and down twice."
    beast (17h) : Rip the Packers and getting the fans yelling and booing him
    beast (17h) : Super competitive Bears fan and WWE "superstar" wrestler, Seth Rollins is supposed to announce a Bears pick and absolutely rip Packers
    packerfanoutwest (25-Apr) : Golden
    beast (25-Apr) : I want DT Derrick Harmon, Oregon
    Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : And I can't be looking at my phone
    Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : Hey I'm at work lol
    Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : btw, new site chat won't delete auto like
    Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : because everyone left like wimps
    TheKanataThrilla (24-Apr) : I am wondering if there is some type of autoclear when there isn't activity after a certain amount of time.
    Mucky Tundra (24-Apr) : What happened in the chat? Me and Zero posted a few things earlier and they're all gone
    dfosterf (24-Apr) : 10-15 min bs plus flyover
    dfosterf (24-Apr) : Yes
    Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : 7pm is when this kicks off????
    buckeyepackfan (24-Apr) : I told him. IT'S VONTE MACK , no matter what!
    buckeyepackfan (24-Apr) : He asked me who I thought The Browns were taking.
    buckeyepackfan (24-Apr) : 2. Would of had to wear Browns gear all week. NOPE I'll watch from my living room.
    buckeyepackfan (24-Apr) : He wanted to know if I would go. 2 things, would have had to fly from Detroit to Green Bay. Nope
    buckeyepackfan (24-Apr) : All expense paid trip to the draft. He will be in the Browns section. I told him to say hi to J-10VE for me 😃😃i
    buckeyepackfan (24-Apr) : For a call from my nephew, he won an sllexp
    TheKanataThrilla (24-Apr) : Hope to see everyone in the Chat tonight!!! Go Pack Go!!!
    TheKanataThrilla (24-Apr) : Jeanty would be a great pick-up for the Bears. I see Warren mocked to them as well who I think would be a great selection.
    Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : GameDay Chat is open. Posting bits an tids in there.
    Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : Excellent Source: The Bears have a deal in place to move up to 5 if Jeanty is there.
    Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : Probably not until 10pm will be making pick
    dfosterf (24-Apr) : But it is still not tonight. Lol
    wpr (24-Apr) : Today is finally here.
    dfosterf (24-Apr) : I should have put it in quotes
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2024 Packers Schedule
    Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
    Eagles
    Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
    COLTS
    Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
    Titans
    Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
    Rams
    Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
    CARDINALS
    Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
    TEXANS
    Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Jaguars
    Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Bears
    Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
    49ERS
    Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
    DOLPHINS
    Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
    Seahawks
    Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
    SAINTS
    Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
    Vikings
    Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
    BEARS
    Recent Topics
    17m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    24-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

    24-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    24-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    24-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / wpr

    22-Apr / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    22-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

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