Skip Navigation
Dallas police officer 'executed,' 2 others injured in targeted shootings: Chief
  • Unless you’re suggesting that this man was involved in that situation, there’s room to feel sympathy for both murder victims.

    This cop is either one of the ones committing atrocities, or one of the ones that stand by, hold the "thin blue line", and enable the ones committing atrocities.

    ACAB has no exceptions.

  • Stained Glass
  • Great question! The answer is that, well, you don't, but that's not what I'm intending unstained to mean here.

    As it turns out, "unstained" is structurally ambiguous, because English has two different "un-" prefixes, each of which has different functions and different category selection requirements.

    The first attaches to verbs, and means "reverse the action of", e.g. un-tie, un-do, un-stain, etc. The second attaches to adjectives, and means "not X", e.g. un-happy, un-satisfied, etc.

    So, if we want to form the word "undoable", we can either take the verb "do" and attach "-able" first, giving us an adjective "doable" to which we can then add "un-" to give us "undoable", an adjective meaning "not able to be done" ("Flying by flapping your arms is undoable")
    OR
    We can take "do" and add the other "un-" first, giving us a verb "undo" meaning "to reverse the action of something" to which we can then add the suffix "-able", giving us "undoable", a different adjective meaning "able to be undone" ("Simple knots are easily undoable")

    So, while both of these look and sound like the same word, they actually have different structures that correspond to the differences in their meanings.

    In my OP, you read "unstained" as "unstain-ed", with "un-" attaching to "stain" to give a verb "unstain" meaning "to reverse the staining of", and then added the participle suffix, while my intended structure was to attach "stain" and "-ed" first, giving a participle (adjective) "stained", to which we can then add the other prefix "un-", giving "un-stained" "not stained".

  • Cost of running the Olympics
  • I think blue and red are supposed to be "Profit" and "Loss", not revenues and costs, since I'm pretty sure all Olympics have both revenues and costs. Also, the Y-axis is already labeled deficit and surplus, so why not just use those instead of conflicting, misleading terms?

  • InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)HA
    hakase @sh.itjust.works
    Posts 0
    Comments 68