Reputation
1,145
Next privilege 2,000 Rep.
Edit questions and answers
Badges
2 11 28
Newest
 Nice Answer
Impact
~108k people reached

Jan
19
comment Correct term for computer language that's close to human in syntax
Oh, my bad. I got side-tracked by on of the comments and though that Cobol was your answer. My bad. Well, it's at least a good attempt, although I hoped for a "real" adjective. What would you say the opposite of that be? I know that both Russians and French constructed languages that were Cobol-like but definitely not English-like...
Jan
19
comment Correct term for computer language that's close to human in syntax
Well, Cobol would be an example of such a language. What would you say here? "Cobol and SQL have XXX syntax, while C# and Java have YYY syntax, whereas LINQ has both XXX and YYY syntaxes."
Jan
19
comment Correct term for computer language that's close to human in syntax
@cobaltduck I'm not entirely sure that's the thing. I can imagine both naturally syntaxed and unnaturally syntaxed languages on the same generational tier... Also, it's not communicative to someone who doesn't have the definition of which generation corresponds to which feature.
Jan
19
comment Correct term for computer language that's close to human in syntax
@HotLicks I wouldn't mind an adjective for that. It's cumbersome to say it's a naturally syntaxed language and it's even more quirky to say it's an unnaturally syntaxed language. Although, I have to admit, the term does indeed correspond to what it looks like...
Jan
19
comment Correct term for computer language that's close to human in syntax
@Josh61 I'd hardly see any of the above as grammatical...
Jan
19
comment Correct term for computer language that's close to human in syntax
@JEL I'm afraid that's not it. Both examples are taken from procedural languages (VB and C#). The same distinction in syntaxes can be made for functional languages (declarative etc.) using SQL and LINQ. In fact, LINQ has both syntaxes available!
Jan
12
comment Idiom for making fun of something people are ashamed of?
@DoubleDouble I lean towards your statement. The second part of my answer is merely remotely related to the intention of the OP. The first part is much more on-spot. Good remark.
Jan
12
comment Idiom for making fun of something people are ashamed of?
@DoubleDouble Good point. I wish to challenge it, though. What if the bear being poked isn't the person themself but rather the shameful property and we're metaphorically poking the sore point of someone's point (the bear being the sore point, not the person)?
Jan
12
comment Should “ya” have an apostrophe? “Doin”? Etc
Oh, I was just being nerdy nit-pick. One can technically speaking construct a genitive form without the apostrophe: "it is my house." and "defender of the Crown", so I was just ass-covering my angles.
Jan
12
comment Should “ya” have an apostrophe? “Doin”? Etc
@IMSoP It makes sense (as in, I can't contradict it without using google). In such case, Dan'll be able to prove me wrong by switching back a few centuries and schootching to a different language, hehe.
Jan
12
comment Is puppy a synonym of dog?
@Mari-LouA And to defend my dignity a bit more I want to point out that I used woman because I wished to add to the variety of gender references. And a generic picture of a human tends to be a man. The intention was good. The delivery clumsy. I appreciate the civil tone of the remark.
Jan
12
comment Should “ya” have an apostrophe? “Doin”? Etc
I thought ya was a contraction of ya'll, which was a contraction of you all. Hence, it should be ya'. But I might be mistaken. Your input is welcome. (Also, as a logician, I need to point out that you're wrong that you only use apostrophe to indicate letter omissions. I dare you to construct a possessive form without it. In a general case! My and of crown doesn't suffice...)
Dec
31
comment What is the origin of “ex”?
@JohnPeyton Oh, I realized it the way you mean. For me, coming from something is being it. Might be influenced by "he comes from money" meaning "he is rich". But I see how you meant. Got it now. Thanks!
Dec
28
comment A synonym for “possible hypothesis” in academic context
I like yours better. It has a bullet list. As for the degree of reliability of each, it's all uncertainties, as you point out. Grading them might be difficult as I realize that the perception of the gravity of each might differ between different recipients. We might have to define a scale, e.g. Viltersten's Reliability Scale, defining the order of each item in relation to the others. Poof - now my name's going down in the history books (or at least in WayBackMachine), haha.
Dec
28
comment Idiomatic expression for being totally off in ones statement/belief
Good suggestion in general. I'll be using that expression as well. In this particular case, I specifically require a term that'll be incomprehensible to the interlocutor unless inferred from the context or know prior to the conversation. (Not because I want to confuse the audience but because I wish to exemplify the linguistic gotchas and wtfs.)
Dec
28
comment What is the origin of “ex”?
@augurar Oh, that makes perfect sense. At least for what the 98's definition considers. However, it still doesn't explain how ex mean former - be that former consul, former wife or whatever. Care to shed some extra light to assist my grey cells in the process, please?
Dec
27
comment Idiomatic expression for being totally off in ones statement/belief
@HotLicks Is that another suggestion for an idiom as requested or is my Vikingish simpleness stopping me from seeing a sophisticated point?
Dec
27
comment Idiomatic expression for being totally off in ones statement/belief
@FumbleFingers Precisely. You suggested that I elaborate the question and I added statement or action, hence an example for each - both being very wrong, way off and - apparently - out in left field.
Dec
27
comment Idiomatic expression for being totally off in ones statement/belief
@FumbleFingers Done.
Dec
27
comment Idiomatic expression for being totally off in ones statement/belief
@FumbleFingers Oh, perhaps I used the expression incorrectly. I didn't really inquired whether you cared for that (since, as you perfectly correctly pointed out, it was evident that you didn't). It was meant as a polite and friendly request for you to reconsider. Apparently it suits you better to use comments, so I'll respect that. However, the way SE works, as far I understand, it's less appropriate that way. As for your question - I found your suggestion perfectly well-suited. In fact, it could be spot-on if you cared to post it as a reply. I'll take it into consideration anyway, of course.