What's the slang term for those that are not in the overlapping areas, i.e. only intelligent ("smart" I guess), only socially inept, or only obsessed?

Compound words even if they're shorter than the English equivalent may "break" the layout if width is restricted and automatic hyphenation is impossible or unreliable (such as on web); which is another reason to reserve extra space in fixed layouts for translations.

Point is you have to reserve enough space for a doubling in length when translating a text, and also have to make it look good if the translated text becomes half the length.

But you also have some shorter Norwegian ones like: "requirement"="krav".

I'd think that for the brain, repeating and intense scrutiny of a word triggers the same responses (probably causes the same stream of repeated stimuli of the same word/phrase, to the language center). Most of our senses work this way, repeated or constant stimuli causes the signal to decrease, if you stare at a fixed point long enough your field of vision starts to fade to gray, and if you sit in a room with a constant noise, it eventually disappears from your conciousness. This is probably true for higher level concepts too.

Why do English use Latin abbreviations anyway? In norwegian we use "dvs." as short for "det vil si" ("that is"), and "f.eks." as short for "for eksempel" ("for example"), and we would never pronounce it as an abbrevation (unless you're trying to sound geeky).

Inglish sirisli ni:d speling riform. Yu kud låwn såm letrs fråm ðe Aislændik ænd Nårwijn/Deinish ælfebet får ðe wawls ænd ðe kånsenents tu meik it mår fonetik, wi wudnt maind ;)

Except that in your example the only way to know which pronunciation of "read" you mean, is context in which case the phonetic spelling "red" would be just as understandable... If I wrote "I red it in a book" you would never think "red" was the color in this context. (You don't think that when I say it anyway)

Using "cold" rather than "low" is probably safer, because some people think of "minus degrees" and "plus degrees" as something different, (a "cold scale" and a "hot scale") and could be confused when told that "5 minus-degrees" is more than "6 minus-degrees"... But if you know the recipient understand physics, use "low temperature".

"cold temperature" sounds weird, but "at colder temperatures" serves a purpose, since many temperature scales have an odd zero point, it makes it easier to understand. Using a moderating term such as "at a slightly cold temperature" also works because its specifies a low but not a precise temperature...

I think "how come" implies it could be a coincidence while "why" implies an intention.

Agree, though "to patch" could also refer to the creation of a patch...

The painful temperature illusion works both ways too; If you touch hot metal while outside in the winter (or inside large freezer), you'd probably think that it was biting cold, but I would not recommend trying that... ;)

English has so many exceptions to its many rules, that they're almost useless. Further complications arise from differences in the several dialects making most rules specific for one dialect. English never had or has a language council to tidy up the mess.

According to google: "collidable" About 46,300 results; "collideable" Did you mean: collidable? About 6,230 results. But this may just reflect the American English prevalence among programmers... :)