Pretty much. English borrowed it from Latin because it's posh. And Latin borrowed it from Greek because it's posh. But at the end of the day it's in the same spirit as "the ABC", or Latin "abecedarius".
Android File Transfer for Linux. Here's the release note from the OP.
[advertisement] [email protected] welcomes this sort of question [advertisement]
That said, look at Latin:
- dexter - right side, but also: favourable, fitting, proper (cf Spanish diestro)
- sinister - left side, but also: adverse, hostile, bad (cf Spanish siniestro)
The "privileges" that you see in derecho and right are an extension of what Latin already associated with dexter - things that are proper to do or to get. For example if I got a right to freedom, that means that it's fitting for me to get freedom, you know?
Based on that odds are that Spanish simply inherited the association, and kept it as such even after borrowing izquierdo from Basque and shifting directus→derecho from "straight" to "right". While English borrowed it, either from Latin or some Gallo-Romance language.
And overall you'll see a fair bit of that in the Western European languages, regardless of phylogenetic association, since languages clustered near each other (i.e. a Sprachbund) will often borrow concepts and associations from either each other or from a common source.
Also, note that right "as side" and "as privilege" are not homonyms. Those aren't different words from different sources, it's the same word with two different meanings, this is called polysemy. The same applies to derecho.
Here's an example. Let's say that you don't know how open source works, and I told you the following:
Why are you in Lemmy? It's open source so any hacker can screw with it, and infect your computer with viruses. You'll never know, right?
That's FUD: fear, uncertainty, and doubt. It's a disingenuous tactic to convince you to not do something, based on the following:
- You fear a certain outcome. In this case, a computer virus.
- That fear is vaguely associated with something that is uncertain for you. In this case, how a hacker could use Lemmy to inject viruses into your computer.
- The odds of that outcome happening are doubtful; it may happen, it may not, otherwise you could call me out for not happening. In this case, even if you don't get a virus from using Lemmy, I can still say "well, some people get it, some don't, but let's play it safe and avoid Lemmy."
This shitty strategy is fairly used in the tech industry because most people are clueless about tech, but they know that it has a big impact on their lives. However you'll also see this in politics, religious debate (Pascal's Wager is FUD), and others.
5. We don't talk about Reddit here. Except when we do.
6. [De]federation is srs bizniz.
7. Seize the means of ~~production~~ computation.
8. People from that instance over there are bad.
Fun fact: strawberry was admitted to the psychiatric yard once pepper and cucumber joined the berry club.
[Shameless comm advertisement: make sure to check [email protected], this sort of question fits nicely there!]
There are two main points: agreement and derivation.
Agreement: grammatical gender gives you an easy way to keep track of which word refers to which. Consider for example the following sentence:
- The clock fell over the glass table, and it broke.
What does "it" refer to? It's ambiguous, it could be either "the clock" or "the glass table" (both things are breakable). In Portuguese however the sentence is completely unambiguous due to the gender system, as the translations show:
- O relógio caiu sobre a mesa de vidro, e ele quebrou. // "ele" he/it = the clock
- O relógio caiu sobre a mesa de vidro, e ela quebrou. // "ela" she/it = the table
It's only one word of difference; however "ele" he/it must refer to "relógio" clock due to the gender agreement. Same deal with "ela" she/it and "mesa" table.
Latin also shows something similar, due to the syntactically free word order. Like this:
- puer bellam puellam amat. (boy.M.NOM pretty.F.ACC girl.F.ACC loves) = the boy loves the beautiful girl
- puer bellus puellam amat. (boy.M.NOM pretty.M.NOM girl.F.ACC loves) = the handsome boy loves the girl
Note how the adjective between "puer" boy and "puella" girl could theoretically refer to any of those nouns; Latin is not picky with adjective placement, as long as it's near the noun it's fine. However, because "puer" is a masculine word and "puella" is feminine, we know that the adjective refers to one if masculine, another if feminine. (Note: the case marks reinforce this, but they aren't fully reliable.)
The second aspect that I mentioned is derivation: gender gives you a quick way to create more words, without needing new roots for that. Italian examples:
- "bambino" boy vs. "bambina" girl
- "gatto" cat, tomcat vs. "gatta" female cat
- "banana" banana (fruit) vs. "banano" banana plant
- "mela" apple (fruit) vs. "melo" apple tree
Focus on the last two lines - note how the gender system is reused to things that (from human PoV) have no sex or social gender, like trees and their fruits. This kind of extension of the derivation system is fairly common across gendered languages.
Addressing some comments here: English does not have a grammatical gender system. It has a few words that refer to social gender and sex, but both concepts (grammatical gender and social gender) are completely distinct.
That's specially evident when triggering agreement in a gendered language, as English doesn't do anything similar. Portuguese examples, again:
- [Sentence] O Ivan é uma pessoa muito alta.
- [Gloss, showing word gender] The.M Ivan.M is a.F person.F very tall.F
- [Translation] Ivan is a very tall person.
Check the adjective, "alta" tall. Even if "Ivan" refers to a man, you need to use the feminine adjective here, because it needs to agree with "pessoa" person - a feminine word. This kind of stuff happens all the time in gendered languages, but you don't see it e.g. in English.
Lemmy removes EXIF data from pictures, since it includes potentially private information such as phone model, where IRL the pic is from, date, time, etc. But as a side effect, it also removes a tidbit of info that says "rotate this pic when showing it".
The way that I usually solve this* is by editing the picture in Kolourpaint. Either cropping it or resizing it.
*by coincidence to post cat pictures. Yours is making such a silly face :3 love it!
It's from English, not Sanskrit. More specifically, an archaic English feature, where you'd use "be" instead of "have" for the present tense, if the main verb denotes a change of state (such as "become"). Note how "I have become Death" sounds perfectly fine for modern readers.
Odds are that Oppenheimer was quoting either an archaic translation Bhagavad Gita, or one using archaic language (this is typical for religious texts).
Also give this a check. English used to follow similar rules for be/have as German does for sein/haben.
[Shameless community promotion: check [email protected] ! This sort of question would fit like a glove there.]
Here's my idea:
It's a middle ground between completely hiding the duplicates, and letting them as is. Once you click that plus button, it shows the duplicates as full posts, otherwise it leaves them as just one-liners.
From Reddit's PoV I don't think that there is a mass emigration; it's just that the most engaged sectors of the community left, so the 99% left don't give a damn about it. Over time I predict that it'll be a slow drain, not a mass exodus.
However from Lemmy/Kbin's PoV there is a mass immigration. And the users are disproportionally active; for example a comm with 3k subscribers getting 1k upvotes in a post, stuff like this.
That's surprisingly accurate, as people here are highlighting (it makes geometrical sense when dealing with complex numbers).
My nephew once asked me this question. The way that I explained it was like this:
It's a different analogy but it makes intuitive sense, even for kids. And it works nice as mnemonic too.