Zompist Bboard Again

Posted: **Sat Oct 26, 2019 12:05 pm**

From the New York Times:

Lebanon Battles to Be Born at Last

More: show

Posted: **Mon Nov 04, 2019 3:01 pm**

Full Trump Impeachment Inquiry Transcripts Released for First Time (NPR)

The intended meaning is that the two transcripts released today were released in full rather than being only excerpted, as was the practice previously. But I initially read it as saying that all transcripts related to the impeachment inquiry had been released and thought "That can't be right."

Posted: **Sat Nov 16, 2019 4:10 am**

I just found the most amazing sentence in Terry Pratchett’s book The Last Continent:

Terry Pratchett wrote: You should’ve seen the temporal disturbances we will have been used to be going to get in my day.

Try as I might, I just cannot figure out this sentence. Can anyone help?

(I know this isn’t a headline, but I don’t know of any other place to post this. If someone suggests a thread where this would be more on-topic, I would be happy to post it there instead.)

Posted: **Sat Nov 16, 2019 6:51 am**

Big Machine Records Denies Taylor Swift’s Claims of Blocking Music Use (Variety)

Posted: **Sat Nov 16, 2019 7:36 am**

bradrn wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 4:10 am I just found the most amazing sentence in Terry Pratchett’s book The Last Continent:

Terry Pratchett wrote: You should’ve seen the temporal disturbances we will have been used to be going to get in my day.
Try as I might, I just cannot figure out this sentence. Can anyone help?

(I know this isn’t a headline, but I don’t know of any other place to post this. If someone suggests a thread where this would be more on-topic, I would be happy to post it there instead.)

It's a joke about the different tenses people need to use when they're involved with any kind of time travel. In the future - but, because of "temporal disturbances", in the speaker's subjective past - there will be really bad temporal disturbances - much worse than what the person being addressed is used to. The speaker will then have to get used to those temporal disturbances, and to the idea that they're coming. But because of these temporal disturbances, it's all in the speaker's subjective past - that's why the speaker already remembers it. Of course, with it all being a time travel tense usage joke, you probably shouldn't take it too seriously.

Posted: **Sat Nov 16, 2019 5:14 pm**

Raphael wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 7:36 am
bradrn wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 4:10 am I just found the most amazing sentence in Terry Pratchett’s book The Last Continent:

Terry Pratchett wrote: You should’ve seen the temporal disturbances we will have been used to be going to get in my day.
Try as I might, I just cannot figure out this sentence. Can anyone help?

(I know this isn’t a headline, but I don’t know of any other place to post this. If someone suggests a thread where this would be more on-topic, I would be happy to post it there instead.)
It's a joke about the different tenses people need to use when they're involved with any kind of time travel. In the future - but, because of "temporal disturbances", in the speaker's subjective past - there will be really bad temporal disturbances - much worse than what the person being addressed is used to. The speaker will then have to get used to those temporal disturbances, and to the idea that they're coming. But because of these temporal disturbances, it's all in the speaker's subjective past - that's why the speaker already remembers it. Of course, with it all being a time travel tense usage joke, you probably shouldn't take it too seriously.

I’m fully aware that this is a joke. I just wanted a step-by-step breakdown of the verb phrase here.

Posted: **Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:53 pm**

bradrn wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 5:14 pm
Terry Pratchett wrote:You should’ve seen the temporal disturbances we will have been used to be going to get in my day.
I’m fully aware that this is a joke. I just wanted a step-by-step breakdown of the verb phrase here.

The core sentence is something like

You should've seen the temporal disturbances we got in my day.

Add a prospective: "we were going to get"

Add a habitual: "we used to be going to get"

Add a perfect: "we have been used to..."

Add a future: "we will have been used to..."

You can't actually add all these things at once in English, syntactically or semantically. I don't think there's an actual intended meaning beyond the core sentence; it just sounds like something someone familiar with time disturbances would say.

Posted: **Wed Nov 20, 2019 4:03 pm**

Moffat breaks silence on axe

Posted: **Mon Nov 25, 2019 12:16 pm**

This is not a confusing headline. It's an "Are You Fucking Serious?" headline.

Fact Check: Don't believe this hoax about a New York restaurant serving human flesh.

That really needed fact-checked?

Posted: **Mon Nov 25, 2019 3:07 pm**

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 25, 2019 12:16 pm This is not a confusing headline. It's an "Are You Fucking Serious?" headline.

Fact Check: Don't believe this hoax about a New York restaurant serving human flesh.

That really needed fact-checked?

Well, if you keep in mind how many people believe all the Q stuff these days... and the hard-right part of US media really seem to have convinced parts of their audience that New York City is a cesspool of all things horrible.

Posted: **Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:24 am**

John Mayer’s Feedback On Taylor Swift’s Hit Song Lover Has Many Agreeing With Him (Celebrity Insider)

For some reason, the headline-writer decided not to put the title of the song in quotes, rendering an otherwise straightforward sentence ambiguous.

Posted: **Sat Dec 28, 2019 6:00 am**

Andersonville Neighbors’ Push To Ban New Condo Development Denied By Alderman (Blockclub Chicago)

Posted: **Sat Dec 28, 2019 8:10 am**

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 28, 2019 6:00 amAndersonville Neighbors’ Push To Ban New Condo Development Denied By Alderman (Blockclub Chicago)

So much syntactic meaning packed into a single unpronounced apostrophe.

Posted: **Sat Dec 28, 2019 10:52 am**

Ser wrote: ↑Sat Dec 28, 2019 8:10 am
Linguoboy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 28, 2019 6:00 amAndersonville Neighbors’ Push To Ban New Condo Development Denied By Alderman (Blockclub Chicago)
So much syntactic meaning packed into a single unpronounced apostrophe.

I was also struggling to understand why they were trying to ban something which had already been denied.

Posted: **Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:43 am**

Received an email at work today with this subject line: What does a sound digital transformation strategy look like?

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:16 am**

"Sex Offender Laws Are Broken. These Women Are Working To Fix Them."

Took me a while before I realised it meant that "the laws aren't working properly so they should be changed", rather than "people break the laws so the laws should be modified." I was really confused for a minute.

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:40 pm**

Darren wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:16 am "Sex Offender Laws Are Broken. These Women Are Working To Fix Them."

Took me a while before I realised it meant that "the laws aren't working properly so they should be changed", rather than "people break the laws so the laws should be modified." I was really confused for a minute.

Really? Both interpretations make sense to me (in principle).

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:04 pm**

Vijay wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:40 pm
Darren wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:16 am "Sex Offender Laws Are Broken. These Women Are Working To Fix Them."

Took me a while before I realised it meant that "the laws aren't working properly so they should be changed", rather than "people break the laws so the laws should be modified." I was really confused for a minute.
Really? Both interpretations make sense to me (in principle).

I would still be confused if they wanted to change laws just because people broke them. Maybe "them" could be referring to the people breaking the laws, which sounds a bit wierd but would make more sense. Either way, it was ambiguous and only one interpretation was relevant to the article. That's why I was confused, cause I thought of the wrong interpretation.

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:37 pm**

Darren wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:04 pmI would still be confused if they wanted to change laws just because people broke them.

What if people broke them so much the laws couldn't be enforced?

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:44 pm**

Vijay wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:37 pm
Darren wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:04 pmI would still be confused if they wanted to change laws just because people broke them.
What if people broke them so much the laws couldn't be enforced?

Possibly, although if they wanted to say that I'd have expected something more definite than "Sex Offender Laws Are Broken," which says nothing about how many times they're broken. If it had said "Too many Sex Offender Laws Are Broken," then that interpretation would make more sense.

Zompist Bboard Again

Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines

Re: Confusing headlines