Misplaced Pages

User talk:ZuluPapa5: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 09:18, 1 January 2016 editZuluPapa5 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers6,447 edits happy new year← Previous edit Revision as of 07:29, 4 January 2016 edit undoCnilep (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users34,103 edits Active voice: new sectionNext edit →
Line 13: Line 13:


{{cob}} {{cob}}

== Active voice ==

Hello, ZuluPapa5. You recently edited ], changing several periphrastic genitives (possessives with the word ''of'') to forms marked with apostrophe+s. I'm not sure if that's Misplaced Pages style or just a preference; in either case it's fine. But one change was incorrect. You changed "syntactic role of subject" to "subject's syntactic role". In that phrase, though, ''of'' didn't mark a possessive but the name of a syntactic role.

I changed it to "the ''subject'' syntactic role", which I hope communicates the correct idea. (To be agonizingly specific: the idea is that there is a role in syntax called ], which in active sentences corresponds to the semantic role called ], and in passive sentences to ].)

Happy editing, ] (]) 07:29, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 07:29, 4 January 2016

Please sign (~~~~) before you save. Beware SineBot!

Status: Unknown

Quotes

“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual.

— Galileo Galilei

Within a Bayesian psychometric analysis, I am 110% certain that humankind is solely responsible for climate change; because, if not by material activity, then by conscious opinion manifesting as science.

— ZP5

Forgive me, Nihilism by its lonely sad self aggrandizement, causes illness to exist in me. For real, it exists that way. Happily, there is a cure.

— ZP5

"Human beings are selfish, small minded, violence-prone savages; civilization is a blight on the earth; the rising tide of chaos that surrounds us on all sides ensures that everything's going to fall apart any day now. Right? ..... Wrong, says Rob Brezsny. In fact evil is boring. Cynicism is stupid. Despair is lazy. The truth is that the universe is inherently our friend. Life is a sublime game created for our amusement and illumination, and it always gives us exactly what we need, exactly when we need it."

" ... in modern mechanized warfare there is no warrior, no chance to be a warrior (with dignity), just little human boys in different uniforms ... so what Bly went on to say is that most men in this country cannot grieve, cannot experience grief! Good Grief Charlie Brown! ... Now the crux of the matter as Bly sees it and as my father saw it and Spiritual God-Father Mr A. Green, the full blooded Cherokee tattoo artist who lived in the apt next door for my first 13 yrs ... The heart of the matter has to do with the "warrior" in themselves. This "warrior" is not the one who goes to war. No this "warrior" is the one who goes through life with a quiet goal and sees it through "Come hell or high water" to use an apt a phrase."

— Father to ZP5, 8/23/1990

"Within the body of a True Believer or a Skeptic you will find a heart that may unite them. "

— Zulu Papa 5 ☆ (talk))

My editing occasionally suffers from transpositions transportation and typos. Please let me know if I may help you.

— ZuluPapa5

If you are trying to help someone who has an “paranoid” mentality, they interpret your action as an attempt to oppress them or infiltrate their territory. But if you decide not to help them, they interpret that as a selfish act: you are seeking comfort for yourself. If you present both alternatives to them, then they think you are playing games with them. The “paranoid” mentality is quite intelligent: it sees all the hidden corners. You think that you are communicating with a “paranoid” face to face, but in actual fact he is looking at you from behind your back. This intense paranoia is combined with an extreme efficiency and accuracy which inspires a defensive form of pride. The “paranoid” mentality is associated with wind, speeding about, trying to achieve everything on the spot, avoiding all possibilities of being attacked.

— From “The Myth of Freedom” - Trungpa

Active voice

Hello, ZuluPapa5. You recently edited Active voice, changing several periphrastic genitives (possessives with the word of) to forms marked with apostrophe+s. I'm not sure if that's Misplaced Pages style or just a preference; in either case it's fine. But one change was incorrect. You changed "syntactic role of subject" to "subject's syntactic role". In that phrase, though, of didn't mark a possessive but the name of a syntactic role.

I changed it to "the subject syntactic role", which I hope communicates the correct idea. (To be agonizingly specific: the idea is that there is a role in syntax called subject, which in active sentences corresponds to the semantic role called agent, and in passive sentences to patient.)

Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 07:29, 4 January 2016 (UTC)