[projectaon] Re: Drakkar v. Drakkarim
- From: McSwain LeRoy <simonaamanarfan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2008 22:29:06 -0400
fellow kai lords,
hello all; thought i'd weigh in on this one. i think i may have started it,
years ago. for the record, i agree with simon and jonathan about the usage.
also, we have standardised a number of other issues even in cases where both
forms used in the books were acceptable (such as with hyphens). i'm curious
how grandmaster dever himself feels about it but, per the giak language rules,
i'm guessing that he intended 'drakkar' to be singular and 'drakkarim' to be
plural but accidentally overused the word 'drakkarim' because it is a more
interesting word. i often see and hear persons misuse the word 'cherubim' in
place of the singular 'cherub' for assumably the same reason.
according to dictionary.reference.com, the adjective 'scots' derives from a
truncation of 'scottis' an alternate form of 'scottish'. the fact that it
looks like the plural form of the noun is apparently a coincidence.
thank you jonathan, simon, and david for sharing your interesting views on this
subject.
for sommerlund and the kai
leroy
> From: feline1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [projectaon] Re: Drakkar v. Drakkarim
> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2008 13:24:35 +0100
>
> No I disagree (unless I'm missing something) -
>
> "Scots" and "Scottish" and both valid, interchangeable, adjectival forms,
> when referring to generic collective/plural things from Scotland.
>
> e.g. "Scots Law" or "Scottish Law",
> "They are Scottish" or "they are Scots",
>
> so in the sorts or sentences Jon gives examples of below,
> it would be perfectly valid to write either
> "Scots assault-troopers" or "Scottish assault-troopers"
> "Scots warriors" or "Scottish warriors"
> "a Scots patrol" or "a Scottish patrol"
>
> the only special case I am aware of is whisky,
> where the form "Scotch" is used! :)
>
> I don't see a problem with Drakkar and Drakkarim being used
> interchangeable as they appear to have been.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Simon Osborne"
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2008 10:22 AM
> Subject: [projectaon] Re: Drakkar v. Drakkarim
>
>
>> Hi all
>>
>> David Davis wrote:
>>> I've never felt this needed to be "standardized" - a direct analogy is
>>> provided by the adjective "Scots" and "Scottish",
>>> which are completely interchangeable, both correct, either can be used
>>> to give whichever flavour the writer or speaker wishes.
>>
>> Not really; a vaguely closer analogy would be Scot (singular) and
>> Scottish.
>>
>> If you then compare: He is a Drakkarim / They are Drakkar--He is a
>> Scottish / They are Scot.
>>
>> It don't work right. ;-)
>>
>> We are fortunate enough to have an overview of the entire series, so these
>> discrepancies are more obvious to us. Editing the books on an individual
>> basis back in the 90s, when computers has nowhere near the RAM or raw
>> power home PCs have these days, precluded running searches on multiple XML
>> files to discover such problems!
>>
>> Jonathan Blake originally wrote:
>>>> The effects of a decision on Drakkar v. Drakkarim could be large:
>>>> "Drakkarim" is used at least 600 times in the books and "Drakkar" is
>>>> used at least 175 times. So lets get this right the first time. :) Let
>>>> me state the problem.
>>>>
>>>> The problem is that these rules aren't followed consistently. We see
>>>> things like "a Drakkarim warrior" or "Drakkarim assault-troopers". If
>>>> the rules (that I personally prefer) were followed, these would be "a
>>>> Drakkar warrior" and "Drakkar assault-troopers".
>>>>
>>>> Which should be the adjective form equivalent to "French" or
>>>> "English": Drakkar or Drakkarim? Standardizing this either way would
>>>> require a lot of changes. I wonder if we should tackle this now or
>>>> after all the books are all available to the public.
>>
>> Another benefit of having all the books in XML format is that this sort of
>> global decision can be made and implemented. Really, we might as well try
>> to pull this in along with the rest of the editing. Once we get up to
>> speed on it, it should be like the arrow/Arrow bow/Bow on to/onto issues
>> that seem to drag for a time but get cleared up quite quickly once things
>> get moving.
>>
>> Looking through the first 8 books, my untrained eyes can only see these
>> four potential misuses of the terms:
>>
>> Book 2:
>> (er) 326, 326 (Caption): black-clad shape of a Drakkarim warrior ->
>> black-clad shape of a Drakkar warrior
>>
>> Book 5:
>> (er) 304: Drakkarim reinforcements -> Drakkar reinforcements [??]
>>
>> Book 8:
>> (er) 1: an army of Drakkarim warriors -> an army of Drakkar warriors
>>
>> Assuming I've understood and these are all correct (i.e. correct = a
>> Dakkar patrol _or_ a patrol of Drakkarim), we might as well alter these
>> before we re-release Book 8 (and 1-7).
>>
>> --
>> Simon Osborne
>> Project Aon
>>
>> ~~~~~~
>> Manage your subscription at http://www.freelists.org/list/projectaon
>>
>>
>
>
> ~~~~~~
> Manage your subscription at http://www.freelists.org/list/projectaon
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
ボーナスが出たら、同僚が次々転職！転職活動ってやったほうがいいの？プロに相談してみよう。
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/msnjpqjc0080000002gbl/direct/01/
~~~~~~
Manage your subscription at http://www.freelists.org/list/projectaon
Other related posts: