• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Time Cube Redux: Space Moors, Freemasons, black means white, there was no slavery

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's included yes but like I've mentioned several times you have the principle of denotation and connotation which shouldn't be ignored. Slang is something everyone uses like when we say something like those girls are bad, we don't mean bad in a negative way but positive but that's why slang is slang.
Is your point that the word 'nation' now carries a different meaning? It seems like you're trying to argue that the modern definition of nation is slang which is just weird and wrong. Slang is just informal speech so do you mean colloquialism or perhaps even idiom?
 
You keep deflecting. "Nation" isn't slang. Get back to the point: what are you trying to say?

My slang example was just an analogy. We all have read the 19 century definition of American which was for identifying copper color skinned people but over time American was adopted for anyone born in the land. So just like my example, American has changed in definition but that does not neglect the original meaning for America.
 
The origin of a word is important in understanding its current meaning; the current meaning being what you want to understand. Once the current meaning is understood the origin is secondary.

Therefore, what the origin word meant is not important currently except for understand what the word currently means.

This is your opinion but the reality of a word is present regardless of how many people decide to use it wrong, truth always stays true.
 
My slang example was just an analogy. We all have read the 19 century definition of American which was for identifying copper color skinned people but over time American was adopted for anyone born in the land. So just like my example, American has changed in definition but that does not neglect the original meaning for America.

The original meaning is now irrelevant though, unless you're a linguist.
 
Well, this certainly doesn't help me understand any better. I get the feeling there was some funny stuff happening earlier in this thread and I missed it all.

Like Cyan said, this thread is like the Konami conference, you have to watch the train wreck in its entirety. But if you want me to sum it up:


- OP created the thread with the nonsensical stance that nobody is really American because we are a nation of immigrants. He attempts to back this up by giving to the theory that the founding fathers were Communist or stating that the congressional records support his points when they don't.

The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments are now operating within a de facto status in name only under Emergency War Powers. With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved, the receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government for the United States. This new form of government is known as a Democracy, being an established Socialist/Communist order under a new governor for America. This act was instituted and established by transferring and/or placing the Office of the Secretary of Treasury to that of the Governor of the International Monetary Fund. Public Law 94-564, page 8, Section H.R. 13955 reads in part: "The U.S. Secretary of Treasury receives no compensation for representing the United States?’
http://www.afn.org/~govern/bankruptcy.html

Come again?

____________

Dude, you quoted congressional record 103rd, get the fuck out of here. What I posted was congressional record H1303.

This is congressional record H1303.

(From 1998. Let's see if I can pull up a PDF from 1993!)



- People frequently challenge the OPs claim only for him to provide ludicrous responses which often displayed the OPs complete lack of geographical and political knowledge
So if I'm born in France, I'm a European citizen as well as a French citizen lmao.

While we're at it, lets make a East America and a West America that are separate continents as well. America encompasses it all be it north or south and even the Islands.



- The real shocker of the thread was when someone who was African American challenged the OPs stance, since African-Americans didn't immigrate here and had their culture systematically torn from them. The OP pretty much replied that slavery didn't exist.

Oh, you believe your people were brought to America, ok but that's another discussion I can do.



- The OP has also constantly engaged in the discussion that language and meanings of words never evolve over time as displayed by the post right above this one.
 

Makonero

Member
My slang example was just an analogy. We all have read the 19 century definition of American which was for identifying copper color skinned people but over time American was adopted for anyone born in the land. So just like my example, American has changed in definition but that does not neglect the original meaning for America.
Okay first off, your usage of slang was not analogous to what you are trying to say.

Secondly, uh, no? After the war for independence, the colonies began thinking of themselves as citizens of the United States. But the "original" definition of American is bunk since Native Americans considered themselves members of their own tribes and nations, none of which was "American."
 
It's included yes but like I've mentioned several times you have the principle of denotation and connotation which shouldn't be ignored. Slang is something everyone uses like when we say something like those girls are bad, we don't mean bad in a negative way but positive but that's why slang is slang.

Slang isn't any less legitimate from a linguistic standpoint. The first definition isn't the only valid definition.
 

mavs

Member
My slang example was just an analogy. We all have read the 19 century definition of American which was for identifying copper color skinned people but over time American was adopted for anyone born in the land. So just like my example, American has changed in definition but that does not neglect the original meaning for America.

That would be more like the 16th-17th century definition. By the 19th century the Washington-come-lately Americans were calling those people "Indians".
 
This is your opinion but the reality of a word is present regardless of how many people decide to use it wrong, truth always stays true.

Actually . . . no. Language evolves. If everyone starts using a word in a "wrong" manner, the meaning of the word actually changes.


You seem to have a problem with shades of gray. Nothing is static. Words, races, nations, nationalities . . . . all change over time.
 

PBY

Banned
Words aren't. If we open a dictionary you won't see people's opinion of a particular word.

but... how is that definition formed? is it just divinely inscribed into the dictionary with all encompassing truth that doesn't reflect changes in norms?
 
My slang example was just an analogy. We all have read the 19 century definition of American which was for identifying copper color skinned people but over time American was adopted for anyone born in the land. So just like my example, American has changed in definition but that does not neglect the original meaning for America.

So when George Washington said this in his first inaugural address in 1789, he was referring to Native Americans, which weren't recognized as citizens of the United States of America in the original unamended Constitution, and not the citizens of the United States of America?

The preservation of the sacred fire of liberty, and the destiny of the republican model of government, are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally staked, on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people.

Huh, that's weird.
 
You're asking for the impossible. Words don't have objective meanings. But they do have generally accepted meanings. If you're going to use a word as though it's meaning is something other than its generally accepted meaning at the time of use, you're not going to communicate with anyone.

Here's an example of that sort of thing.

I know. :)

But the OP is talking about true meanings. A generally accepted definition is not the same thing. If he wants to build an argument like this based on word meanings, he needs to be able to prove it. But he can't.

I just wanted to see him try......
 

AntoneM

Member
This is your opinion but the reality of a word is present regardless of how many people decide to use it wrong, truth always stays true.

Hmm, could you please explain the truth of all the words you just used so that I can understand what you really said?
 

Makonero

Member
So when George Washington said this in his first inaugural address in 1789, he was referring to Native Americans, which weren't recognized as citizens of the United States of America in the original unamended Constitution, and not the citizens of the United States of America?

Huh, that's weird.

Connotation and denotation, man. Connotation and denotation.
 
Do you ever wonder why all of your posts end up with you arguing the definition of words with the entire forum? How can anyone here actually comment on anything you say when no one else speaks your language? Is there even a place you've found that shares your very narrow and specific language, a place where you can seriously engage in debates? Because I would very much like to visit this funny place.
 

collige

Banned
What is a dog though?

image.php
 

Makonero

Member
Do you ever wonder why all of your posts end up with you arguing the definition of words with the entire forum? How can anyone here actually comment on anything you say when no one else speaks your language? Is there even a place you've found that shares your very narrow and specific language, a place where you can seriously engage in debates? Because I would very much like to visit this funny place.
But it isnt a continent lmao
 

Metaphoreus

This is semantics, and nothing more
I know. :)

But the OP is talking about true meanings. A generally accepted definition is not the same thing. If he wants to build an argument like this based on word meanings, he needs to be able to prove it. But he can't.

I just wanted to see him try......

Oh, sorry, I thought your post was sort of a general request.
 

AntoneM

Member
Do you ever wonder why all of your posts end up with you arguing the definition of words with the entire forum? How can anyone here actually comment on anything you say when no one else speaks your language? Is there even a place you've found that shares your very narrow and specific language, a place where you can seriously engage in debates? Because I would very much like to visit this funny place.
You can't because it only accepts passports from nations and, at minimum, the United States isn't one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom