Annoying Questions I'd Like Answered...

Cynic · Post by **Cynic** » Thu Jan 31, 2013 5:00 pm

Meikle: I can try to translate sanskrit. It's been like 22 years since I actually used it on a regular basis. On a similar note, you don't really speak sanskrit because there isn't really enough people to keep a dialogue with. I think there's like one village in southern India where sanskrit is still spoken but even that's supposed to be heavily modified by the local languages around the village.

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Thu Jan 31, 2013 5:07 pm

There's also some right-wing nationalists who have a radio news show in Sanskrit.

Cynic · Post by **Cynic** » Thu Jan 31, 2013 5:49 pm

I know AIR (Indian BBC) still does short segments every day in sanskrit. I hope they aren't the right-wing nationalists.

If they aren't, I have to wonder how many people these idiots are actually reaching. I mean the 2001 census suggests that there are 14k people who reported sanskrit as a native tongue. While this isn't really indicative of use in India because most people can at least speak two to three languages. Due to the emerging nature of the country, I'd probably say 4 languages including english.

So how many in these 14k people are really right wing nationalists? I'd assume like 500 and probably lower. This is all based on the assumption that this is a nationally aired show rather than some small syndication in bum-fuck Mattur village*.

Yeah, I'm all for Sanskrit revival but it's a really difficult proposition because the spoken sanskrit is so different from place to place. We have 4 primary states that have villages/towns that speak sanskrit. Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Orrisa. SO in order, that's southern India, Middle India, Northwestern India, and Eastern India. Only the middle two are neighboring states. Now considering how different the languages are in those 4 states and how they belong to two language families and four distinctive language branches that are far removed from each other. It is mostly a ceremonial language used in Hindu, Jain, and Indo-buddhist rites. And even this is fragmented from denomination to denomination of the religions.

*After living in Mattur for like 4 days, I am the ultimate authority on why this is obviously a bum-fuck village....wait.

Meikle641 · Post by **Meikle641** » Thu Jan 31, 2013 11:55 pm

Well, figured I'd check. Had a culture in my last campaign setting who spoke it, but well... computer translations are what they are. The dictionary I did find was a bit confusing to me.

For instance , what are the differences between nirodha, virodha, upasad, etc? All I can tell is that they're masculine terms that apparently mean the same thing?

Other than that, I guess I can PM you questions in future, perhaps with a tiny bit of pay for the trouble.

Cynic · Post by **Cynic** » Fri Feb 01, 2013 2:55 am

contextually those are different.

Nirodha is one of many things. It is technically one of the four essential truths of buddhism. In that context - it's the removal of suffering or causes of suffering. A peaceful siege of sorts. Although you'd have to ask Jigoku about the Buddhist view on that.

another one of Nirodha's definition is prevention. Again going along with the whole Buddhist thing. But in the way of siege, I'd probably see this as nonviolent struggle of sorts.

Virodha has to do with standing up to what you feel is wrong (I think). The link you have shows it as objection or protest. So I suppose this could be right. But again it's been ages.

Upasad is one of the few words that actually is a pretty steady word for siege or assault. The roots of it are literally Upa (nearby) and sad (to sit). The main use of it is usually for worship and reverence but here it is also used as to back what you revere. I know it's a weird way of looking at it.

Speaking of roots, I can go a little deeper.

Rodha can have one of few meanings. Growth (like a bud springing up) or suppression/obstruction. Yeah...

VI - can either be used as to cut away or as an intensifier of the word it is prefixed onto. So there might be two meanings to Virodha that both talk about siege. To cut away obstruction/growth or make them have a power level of over 9000.

ni - down, at the bottom of, back. I know there has to be some more but I can't really think of them. So nirodha, in the siege context, is...I don't know. I know what the word itself means but putting together the root words is kinda baffling in context.

Consequently if you take Upa, ni, and sad, You get Upanishad which is literally the starting religious texts of hinduism. Mostly these days it's about ethical teachings and rituals rather than actual use. Lack of sanskrit knowledge means that those on high *coughpriestscough* can tell the masses what they mean. It's really hard to track down a non biased upanishad. But you can totally do that with the vedas (latter hindu texts). But this is a whole different story.

I'd be up to help you in the future and I'll always welcome pay. But I'll be honest. My sentence structure and grammar are pretty shitty. I can recognize sanskrit text and maybe translate it. But translating english sentences into sanskrit is probably something I might be able to do.

I hope this helped.

Meikle641 · Post by **Meikle641** » Fri Feb 01, 2013 3:04 am

Huh. Well, that was definitely interesting. Thanks for the help, Cynic. I appreciate it.

fectin · Post by **fectin** » Sat Feb 02, 2013 6:42 pm

So, how do you learn a new language?
Obviously, 'pay for it', 'be a super-genius', and 'be a philatelist' are all good options, but assuming I'm not up for any of those, what are some good ways?

Cynic · Post by **Cynic** » Sat Feb 02, 2013 8:51 pm

fectin wrote:So, how do you learn a new language?
Obviously, 'pay for it', 'be a super-genius', and 'be a philatelist' are all good options, but assuming I'm not up for any of those, what are some good ways?

Find people who speak the language and convince them to talk to you in it for a while?

Also, I think you have philatelist confused with something. A philatelist is someone who collects stamps.

Count Arioch the 28th · Sat Feb 02, 2013 9:36 pm

Being exposed to the language helps. I learned more swedish spending a week in gothenburg than the previous six months teaching myself from books.

name_here · Post by **name_here** » Sat Feb 02, 2013 9:50 pm

My Linguist cousin says that it's a hell of a lot easier to learn linguistics and then a language than to try using language textbooks, because the language textbooks attempt to explain linguistic concepts without actually explaining linguistics.

That's probably not terribly helpful, though. You could try a free online language course from one of the many universities that do those these days.

fectin · Post by **fectin** » Sun Feb 03, 2013 2:59 pm

I had philatelist confused with philologist.

tussock · Post by **tussock** » Mon Feb 04, 2013 5:27 am

Direct exposure of all kinds basically works, but ideally you seek food, shelter, and other desires while only hearing the language in question. Like kids do.

Realistically though, you know English, so just speak that at people, they'll handle it.

Maybe you could just spend your weekends immersed in that language. TV, internet, books, radio, real people. Not being able to use what you know at all forces your brain to try and learn the alternative. Start with kids books, and kids songs, and kids tv, like kids do. Repetitive sing-songy crap about eating your vegetables and going to bed when you're told is way easier to learn than treatises on human rights.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Mon Feb 04, 2013 5:30 am

fectin wrote:I had philatelist confused with philologist.

And it made me think of fellatist.

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Mon Feb 04, 2013 3:08 pm

So, obviously, people don't like being manipulated. Now, from what I can see, I think this stems from people not liking to be read and predicted. When you look at manipulation, the manipulator sizes the person up, figures out how to trick them into doing something, and (if successful), it plays out to their predictions. I think this hits more on the whole reading and predicting thing, because people seem to hate it if someone figures them out and tells them that, even if they aren't manipulating them. That seems to be the biggest thing that bothers them; that someone understood them that intimately and/or could procedurally determine how they'd likely act.

That being said, I have two question:
1) Is this apt (or am I totally off base)?
2) If so, is there a fancy, official name for this bias?

tussock · Post by **tussock** » Wed Feb 06, 2013 11:31 am

People don't like the concept that they're not in control of their own actions, that they are not rational independent actors. Addicts prefer to believe they repeatedly choose their addiction, advertising and marketing is what works on stupid people rather than me and my family, etc, etc.

Like, we're not rational self-controlled actors, at all. But the illusion that we are is the basic premise for a lot of moral and legal systems, and it seems very difficult to create any legal framework if you can't fix blame on the final actor.

In part because telling people they're not responsible for their actions is an unmitigated disaster. People who aren't held to swift account for their actions act like real fucking monsters. Worse. It's genuinely hard to believe how absolutely abhorrent nearly every single one of us is if we're officially told we're not responsible for our actions. It takes about three days and we're all Joseph Mengele. Studies have been done, same result every time. Soldiers in war do monstrous things because they're just like us.

People hate being manipulated because it puts the lie to our necessary deceit of blaming the criminals for the crimes. You can't make me do something, because what if someone made me do something bad? Wouldn't I be a bad person then? Isn't that trick you've got there really dangerous?! What if you used it for evil? How could we place the blame on you?

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Wed Feb 06, 2013 6:00 pm

People don't like being manipulated because being tricked, fooled, and taken advantage of makes them feel stupid. Since most people don't believe themselves to be stupid and easily duped, manipulation spawns cognitive dissonance - which can trigger a wide array of reactions to resolve the conflict.

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Wed Feb 06, 2013 6:52 pm

Are you guys saying that being manipulated is separate from being read, understood, and predicted? What I was getting at is it seems like that might be more of the base issue. I don't think people like it when someone else can figure them out that well. I was wondering if there was a fancy name for that, or if there were any studies on it.

That, or I'm totally off base and this isn't actually related to being manipulated.

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Wed Feb 06, 2013 7:23 pm

Being predicted isn't something people universally like or dislike; it's a marker of intimacy. We get upset when our family or lovers don't predict our reactions. We also get upset when strangers do, because it violates our sense of privacy and personal space.

fectin · Post by **fectin** » Wed Feb 06, 2013 7:41 pm

Same reason people don't like Socratic dialogues: people don't feel like you're engaging honestly with them (because you aren't).

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Wed Feb 06, 2013 8:03 pm

RobbyPants wrote:That, or I'm totally off base and this isn't actually related to being manipulated.

This. I think Orion's explanation of predictability is better...

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Wed Feb 06, 2013 8:31 pm

Fair enough. Thanks.

Count Arioch the 28th · Wed Feb 06, 2013 9:38 pm

I know why getting manipulated pisses me off.

Generally, I react to things by getting really pissed off at them for a short time period, then analyzing what I did wrong, what I could have done better, and what to look for next time.

However, when anyone hears about me getting ripped off, they start spouting off advice that a retarded monkey could have come up with (retarded by monkey standards, not human standards, because that does make a difference).

You will never realize how stupid everyone around you thinks you are until you mess up and they hear about it and start giving you advice. If I was in charge, giving unsolicited advice would be punishable by drop-kick to the ovaries (because if you give unsolicited advice, you're obviously a bitch.)

Ted the Flayer · Post by **Ted the Flayer** » Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:37 pm

I am taking a technology course at the local college. The test for the first unit involves going to some manufacturer's website, and talk about the product.

Am I right to feel weird about that? I'm basically being forced to go through an ad and talk about a product in a class that's neither marketing nor manufacturing nor web design. I'm kind of bothered by it, and am considering reporting it to the head of the department. Or am I looking at it all wrong?

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:46 pm

What's the purpose behind the first unit?

Ted the Flayer · Post by **Ted the Flayer** » Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:49 pm

Operation and maintenance of water distribution systems. I mean, it's a product that circulates water in storage tanks, but I don't see why any of these questions needs to be about this one particular product.