Arcadia Discussion Zone

Forums dedicated to history's mysteries, Rennes-le-Château and beyond…

Read the Arcadia Forum House Rules

It is currently 22 Oct 2017 2:57 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 21 Apr 2008 3:26 am 
Offline
Queen Bee
User avatar

Joined: 02 Dec 2006 3:44 pm
Posts: 7742
Roger wrote:
Jake got it, Roscoe, but you're beyond help.
Enjoy your life, but never forget your meds.


And still you avoid answering.

Jake? Jake needs a village where he can find a role that suits him.

Just face it. You'd tried pedantry and it didn't work and now you're trying to bluff your way out.

Notice something here. You came breezing in with little or no thought just acting on impulse and got spanked and now it is YOU who are running away, yet again. You keep doing this.

All you have to say is precisely what is wrong with the translation.

You specifically said there was something wrong with the translation of the phrase Cité Sainte

I said it means Holy City

What is wrong with this translation?

_________________
Image
CROMLECK DE RENNES is here.
It's the SUN


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 21 Apr 2008 9:10 pm 
Offline
Grand Master

Joined: 04 Aug 2007 7:08 pm
Posts: 1234
Location: scandinavia
Roscoe,

Its truly sad you lack a sense of humor. Relax, chill out, grab a Bud, kick back and reflect on what you are missing out on.

I wish you zero harm, its not my style. I hold folk like St. Theresa and John of The Cross in highest esteem and I hope they are not too offended with their persona being dragged into such a mundane conundrum.

You raised their presence up on these threads and I succumbed to search for a level of humor you can relate to. I beg forgiveness from St. Theresa and St. John of The Cross, but I don't not have to excuse myself on yer behalf.

The world already is a global village Roscoe, where else can I migrate to and not offend you? the possibility of there being a 'Net connection means ya can't out run my humor, sorry 'bout that... as Frank Sinatra crooned it ... That's Life and there is nuthin' I can do 'bout it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Apr 2008 4:11 am 
Offline
Queen Bee
User avatar

Joined: 02 Dec 2006 3:44 pm
Posts: 7742
Roger wrote:
Jake, "pedant" is an accusation often hurled at their betters by frustrated teensy-weensy intellects. It translates as "how dare you throw your learning at me". Notice how the fool refuses to get the point, and diverts to a completely irrelevant topic? Typical, sad.


Having some trouble answering a most basic question aren't you?

By now everyone other than your pet yesman will see that you've had a serious case of foot-in-mouth syndrome here.

You thought intimidation would save you. It hasn't. Now answer the question.

What is wrong with my translation of the words Cité Sainte

Does it or does it not mean Holy City?

You will now be harrassed on every subject on every thread until you answer. I'm confident, are you?

_________________
Image
CROMLECK DE RENNES is here.
It's the SUN


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Apr 2008 4:57 am 
Offline
Queen Bee
User avatar

Joined: 02 Dec 2006 3:44 pm
Posts: 7742
You specifically said there was something wrong with the translation of the phrase Cité Sainte

I said it means Holy City

What is wrong with this translation?

How many Holy Cities can you name from western culture?

Here's the definition of the word Priory from the several Dictionaries.

pri·o·ry /ˈpraɪəri/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[prahy-uh-ree] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -ries.

a religious house governed by a prior or prioress, often dependent upon an abbey.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1250–1300; ME priorie < ML priōria. See prior2, -y3]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.
American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This pri·or·y Audio Help (prī'ə-rē) Pronunciation Key
n. pl. pri·or·ies

A monastery governed by a prior or a convent governed by a prioress.


The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Online Etymology Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This
priory

c.1290, from Anglo-Fr. priorie (c.1240), from M.L. prioria "monastery governed by a prior," from L. prior (see prior (n.)).

Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2001 Douglas Harper
WordNet - Cite This Source - Share This priory

noun

religious residence in a monastery governed by a prior or a convent governed by a prioress

WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.

That was the definition of the word Priory.

Here is the definition of the word Pedantry

ped·ant·ry /ˈpɛdntri/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ped-n-tree] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -ries.

1. the character, qualities, practices, etc., of a pedant, esp. undue display of learning.
2. slavish attention to rules, details, etc.
3. an instance of being pedantic: the pedantries of modern criticism.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1575–85; It pedanteria. See pedant, -ry]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.
American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This ped·ant·ry Audio Help (pěd'n-trē) Pronunciation Key
n. pl. ped·ant·ries

Pedantic attention to detail or rules.
An instance of pedantic behavior.
The habit of mind or manner characteristic of a pedant.


(Download Now or Buy the Book) The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
WordNet - Cite This Source - Share This pedantry

noun
an ostentatious and inappropriate display of learning

WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.
Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This
Pedantry

Ped"ant*ry\, n. [Cf. F. p['e]danterie.] The act, character, or manners of a pedant; vain ostentation of learning. "This pedantry of quotation." --Cowley.

'T is a practice that savors much of pedantry. --Sir T. Browne. Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
On-line Medical Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This
pedantry

_________________
Image
CROMLECK DE RENNES is here.
It's the SUN


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Apr 2008 6:14 am 
Offline
Queen Bee
User avatar

Joined: 02 Dec 2006 3:44 pm
Posts: 7742
I have now managed at last to worm out a semi lucid statement from Roger hidden amongst a long diatribe of utter waffle. He said:

Quote:
It was because of the attempt to use the translation of "Prieur" to "Prior" as if it allowed for a translation to its homonym "prior".


Tut Tut! He now changes what I said. I wonder why?

here's the original statement and his answer>

Quote:
roscoe wrote:
You will of course note that the Cité Sainte (holy City) is Sion and a Priory is somewhere you go into prior to going into something else. In short a recruiting booth



This is what happens when you attempt linguistics whilst on LSD


This glib response has got him into a hole and he's not going to get out of it until he apologies.

It seems his leap into pathological pedantry was due to the words Prior and Prieur (a word which I never used anyway, I used Prieuré). Assuming a typo here and he really meant Prieuré. Then I always said that this meant Priory, which it does. Which of course doesn't mean the same thing as Prior and I never said it did. A Prieuré is a Priory not a Prior.

My apologies to the casual viewer here but I need to go into this boring detail in order to spank this stupid pedant, whose total contribution to this forum is entirely negative.

The dictionary (any one it doesn't matter) makes a Prior in charge of a Priory and a Priory is a portal to an Abbey (Sorry the dictionary says so). Note the capital letter on the word Prior. I used the word prior which means before earlier.

From Wikipedia:
Quote:
A priory is a house of men or women under religious vows headed by a prior or prioress.

Priories may be houses of mendicant friars or religious sisters (as the Dominicans, Augustinians and Carmelites, for instance), or monasteries of monks or nuns (as the Carthusians).

The Benedictines and their offshoots (Cistercians and Trappists among them), the Premonstratensians, and the military orders distinguish between conventual and simple or obedientiary priories. Conventual priories are those autonomous houses which have no abbots, either because the canonically required number of twelve monks has not yet been reached or for some other reason. At present the Benedictine Order has twenty-seven conventual priories. Simple or obedientiary priories are dependencies of abbeys. Their superior, who is subject to the abbot in everything, is called simple or obedientiary prior. These monasteries are satellites of the mother abbey.




There is an Abbey of Sion (it still exists) .

No doubt the dickhead will come back at me with a new set of rules he's just made up so I'll leave it here whilst I prepare for the next phase.

_________________
Image
CROMLECK DE RENNES is here.
It's the SUN


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 30 Jul 2017 9:05 am 
Offline
Queen Bee
User avatar

Joined: 02 Dec 2006 3:44 pm
Posts: 7742
Roger wrote:
In the unlikely event that anyone is actually interested, here's the full text of my answer to the above-referenced moron's private message:

quote: From: Roger
To: roscoe
Posted: 22 Apr 2008 12:06 pm
Subject: Re: This will now be in your face until you answer.

You are either disingenuous, or truly a semi-functional imbecile.
My critique, as you must know if you can tie your own bootlaces, was not because of the translation of "Holy City". It was because of the attempt to use the translation of "Prieur" to "Prior" as if it allowed for a translation to its homonym "prior". An artless backward somersault of logic, allowing you to make a pun that you imbued with deep meaning, when the only meaning it could possibly have is that the utterer is completely devoid of any logical reasoning capacity.

In other words, you CANNOT translate a word to another language, in which you can make a pun, and try to make that relevant, when that pun cannot exist in the language of origin. To do so, is pure flim-flam, like your dear professor's "decoding" of the word "baphomet" which is simply Occitan for "Mohammed" or "Mahomet", and was in use at the time and featured in a prominent and popular Occitan poem. The word was uttered only ONCE throughout the inquisitorial investigation, and by ONE Occitan knight who was tortured, and this was later dismissed as evidence by the religious authorities as patently absurd information obtained under torture. Similarly, having obtained that "confession" of head-worshiping from that ONE knight, the torturers attempted to obtain the same "head worshiping" confessions from other knights and succeeded in a few cases but without ever that "baphomet" word. As a consequence, the Inquisition conducted further research with regard to head worshiping and idols in ALL the Templar establishments in France. The result is that there had never been any such "head worshiping" or "idols" anywhere. The best they could do was that famous "Caput LVII" silver head from the Paris Temple, and that was found to be a perfectly Catholic reliquary. That was when the whole "head worshiping" and "idol worshiping" count of accusation was dropped, but this item was revived in the XIXth century by Masons and members of "hermetic" societies, in order to advance their peculiar agendas. It has been repeated so often that even very erudite "professors" regularly spend inordinate amounts of time on very clever studies as to the possible significance of something that never was and that serious inquiries would have revealed to be false.

You would do well not to cling so mightily to received notions because many are completely false. If you were willing to re-examine them regularly, and to regularly challenge everything you think you know, you'd be surprised at the different picture that would emerge as a result.

Look, I'm sure you're a very nice guy, but you have a really bad habit of becoming rather a trial when it's pointed out to you that you're wrong about something. Try to verify what you're told, on your own, rather than becoming rabid and foaming at the mouth in defending things that are provably false. Also, avoid synthesis reasoning. One can't make a hodge-podge of completely different and unrelated cultures simply drawing on parallels in their mythology or theology. There has to be a sort of "chain of evidence" narrowly connecting the dots, as it were, in order to make such a point.

Anyway, I bear you no ill-will, but when you employ the tone you do in the forum, expect to be spanked appropriately. unquote.

I think if I've learned one lesson from this unfortunate interaction, it's that engaging morons in debate can lead to no educational purpose and it only makes the moron hop up and down and foam at the mouth. Someone please give Roscoe a tissue.


We have this great long diatribe all because this dickhead has a problem with the words prior, Prior, Priory and Prieuré.

I'm starting to think this display of low level intellect, and an exercise in picking the gnat shit out of pepper is maybe trying to distract people away from what else I said. What I said made him uncomfortable and so the peabrain decided to attack what he thought was one flaw amongst a whole plethora of other interesting facts. The fact that he completely misread what I typed is I have to say typical of the man.

This message above only deals with the problem on this thread with one sentence. The rest is a kind of self verbal masturbation (I bet he did it in front of the mirror) which I have to inform him has been scanned over once looking for key words and then subsequently completely ignored.

But I continue to deal with him because I need this kind of self training because I'm going to get a lot of this kind of utter pedantry and attempts at making a snow job over facts that they don't want to get aired too much. You will notice that his original response started out immediately with ad hominum attacks this is to reassure himself that he's making some kind of argument when clearly if he had any case at all he wouldn't need to attack me personally.

So if anyone is actually reading this please forgive the continuing self training programme I'm conducting here.

_________________
Image
CROMLECK DE RENNES is here.
It's the SUN


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2017 8:12 am 
Offline
Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: 13 Aug 2010 5:37 pm
Posts: 1584
roscoe wrote:
Roger wrote:
In the unlikely event that anyone is actually interested, here's the full text of my answer to the above-referenced moron's private message:

quote: From: Roger
To: roscoe
Posted: 22 Apr 2008 12:06 pm
Subject: Re: This will now be in your face until you answer.

You are either disingenuous, or truly a semi-functional imbecile.
My critique, as you must know if you can tie your own bootlaces, was not because of the translation of "Holy City". It was because of the attempt to use the translation of "Prieur" to "Prior" as if it allowed for a translation to its homonym "prior". An artless backward somersault of logic, allowing you to make a pun that you imbued with deep meaning, when the only meaning it could possibly have is that the utterer is completely devoid of any logical reasoning capacity.

In other words, you CANNOT translate a word to another language, in which you can make a pun, and try to make that relevant, when that pun cannot exist in the language of origin. To do so, is pure flim-flam, like your dear professor's "decoding" of the word "baphomet" which is simply Occitan for "Mohammed" or "Mahomet", and was in use at the time and featured in a prominent and popular Occitan poem. The word was uttered only ONCE throughout the inquisitorial investigation, and by ONE Occitan knight who was tortured, and this was later dismissed as evidence by the religious authorities as patently absurd information obtained under torture. Similarly, having obtained that "confession" of head-worshiping from that ONE knight, the torturers attempted to obtain the same "head worshiping" confessions from other knights and succeeded in a few cases but without ever that "baphomet" word. As a consequence, the Inquisition conducted further research with regard to head worshiping and idols in ALL the Templar establishments in France. The result is that there had never been any such "head worshiping" or "idols" anywhere. The best they could do was that famous "Caput LVII" silver head from the Paris Temple, and that was found to be a perfectly Catholic reliquary. That was when the whole "head worshiping" and "idol worshiping" count of accusation was dropped, but this item was revived in the XIXth century by Masons and members of "hermetic" societies, in order to advance their peculiar agendas. It has been repeated so often that even very erudite "professors" regularly spend inordinate amounts of time on very clever studies as to the possible significance of something that never was and that serious inquiries would have revealed to be false.

You would do well not to cling so mightily to received notions because many are completely false. If you were willing to re-examine them regularly, and to regularly challenge everything you think you know, you'd be surprised at the different picture that would emerge as a result.

Look, I'm sure you're a very nice guy, but you have a really bad habit of becoming rather a trial when it's pointed out to you that you're wrong about something. Try to verify what you're told, on your own, rather than becoming rabid and foaming at the mouth in defending things that are provably false. Also, avoid synthesis reasoning. One can't make a hodge-podge of completely different and unrelated cultures simply drawing on parallels in their mythology or theology. There has to be a sort of "chain of evidence" narrowly connecting the dots, as it were, in order to make such a point.

Anyway, I bear you no ill-will, but when you employ the tone you do in the forum, expect to be spanked appropriately. unquote.

I think if I've learned one lesson from this unfortunate interaction, it's that engaging morons in debate can lead to no educational purpose and it only makes the moron hop up and down and foam at the mouth. Someone please give Roscoe a tissue.


We have this great long diatribe all because this dickhead has a problem with the words prior, Prior, Priory and Prieuré.

I'm starting to think this display of low level intellect, and an exercise in picking the gnat shit out of pepper is maybe trying to distract people away from what else I said. What I said made him uncomfortable and so the peabrain decided to attack what he thought was one flaw amongst a whole plethora of other interesting facts. The fact that he completely misread what I typed is I have to say typical of the man.

This message above only deals with the problem on this thread with one sentence. The rest is a kind of self verbal masturbation (I bet he did it in front of the mirror) which I have to inform him has been scanned over once looking for key words and then subsequently completely ignored.

But I continue to deal with him because I need this kind of self training because I'm going to get a lot of this kind of utter pedantry and attempts at making a snow job over facts that they don't want to get aired too much. You will notice that his original response started out immediately with ad hominum attacks this is to reassure himself that he's making some kind of argument when clearly if he had any case at all he wouldn't need to attack me personally.

So if anyone is actually reading this please forgive the continuing self training programme I'm conducting here.


Is the forum timestamping out of whack as well?
Surely this must be a joke. This can't be a post from yesterday referring to something back in 2008 can it?
IF it is a serious post, then all I can say Roscoe is that you should get someone else in to train you, as your self training doesn't appear to be working.....or is that self training bit just a feeble excuse to launch one of your attacks?

PS I thought you'd left never to return? No? Obviously not.

_________________
"One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams."

Salvador Dali


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: St Teresa de Avila
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2017 10:09 am 
Offline
Queen Bee
User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2007 1:57 pm
Posts: 11273
Location: France
Serves as a good reminder of how eloquent and patient some of our ex members could be towards the "above-referenced moron".


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot]


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group