This week's book giveaway is in the OO, Patterns, UML and Refactoring forum. We're giving away four copies of Refactoring for Software Design Smells: Managing Technical Debt and have Girish Suryanarayana, Ganesh Samarthyam & Tushar Sharma on-line! See this thread for details.
In the third post or so, there is an emoticon indicating no-no. Where is that emoticon now?? Has it been removed or was it a part of some older forum software. Were there any more emoticons which are not available now. Can you please make them available. It would be fun to use the new (or I can say old) emoticons...
Originally posted by Ulf Dittmer: The icon is still available as you can see. It's just a bit harder to use now.
But in general, the trend is towards fewer emoticons, not more of them. If you look around the forum, these icons are overused as it is; adding more would just seem to make that worse.
Right! I tried every trick that I could to use it. I looked at the source, but there was just an img tag there. I tried to quote the user but it said that there is something wrong with the user account.
You are right that in many cases emoticons are over used but I thought it would be more fun to use some new emoticons [ December 10, 2008: Message edited by: Ankit Garg ]
Sorry mike for editing my post . I really thought that the emoticons would be accessible by using a pattern which I would have to insert manually. But seems like image tags are the only options left now
Originally posted by Ankit Garg: I really thought that the emoticons would be accessible by using a pattern which I would have to insert manually. But seems like image tags are the only options left now
Not to spoil the fun by actually explaining the issue, but the reason there's no shortcut for this emoticon is that it can be misunderstood. The name is "nono", and I think you know that it's supposed to be a person wagging their index finger saying "That's a no-no!", a humorous way of saying that something is a bad idea, and shouldn't be done. But occasionally, someone would misunderstand it: they would think instead that it's a person holding up their middle finger, "flipping the bird" (an obscene gesture in many Western cultures.) This happened often enough that we eventually decided to remove the shortcut.
Originally posted by Ernest Friedman-Hill: ..it's a person holding up their middle finger, "flipping the bird" (an obscene gesture in many Western cultures.)..
Scientific studies have proven that there is no culture where this is not taken as offensive. It's roots can be traced as far back as ancient Egypt, when it was represented as . In my local lingo, it is called "digital communication"
Originally posted by Ankit Garg: English TV shows, Friends and Sienfeld...
I shall be not at all disappointed to see the last of those animated smilies.
Joined: Mar 22, 2005
Originally posted by Campbell Ritchie: English???
They speak English on Seinfeld, don't they? :-) I suppose we could debate the difference between English and British...
Joined: Mar 05, 2008
This has come up several times in the past in MD. Many Indians say "English movies" or "English TV shows" when they mean movies or TV shows in English. This invariably causes confusion because people from the rest of the English-speaking world would use those phrases to mean movies or TV shows from England. But it's nothing new.
Really, it depends what the speaker (or writer) intends. If the speaker cares about whether a film is American as opposed to English, Scottish, Australian, etc, then use those terms. But if the speaker cares more about whether the film uses the English language as opposed to Hindi, German, Urdu, French, Tamil etc, then it's useful to say "English-language film" rather than "English film". At least if you want to be understood by most non-Indians. If you say "English film", most non-Indians will think you mean films from England, or at least predominantly made by English people. (It can get messy in the modern world of internationally-produced media.)
Conversely, it's useful for English-speakers everywhere to remember that there are regional variations in usage. And to consider that if someone makes a statement that seems nonsensical or silly, it's possible that they're just using a slightly different idiom than you're used to. Consider alternate interpretations.
As for the post that led us down this path...
[Ankit]: Oops! I have heard of Star Wars but never saw that. I have only seen two English TV shows, Friends and Sienfeld...
Much of the original Star Wars was filmed in England, as it happens. And the English TV show Friends was actually known as Coupled over there. The creator went on to bigger and better things writing for the new Doctor Who, however. I don't know about any English Sienfeld, nor Seinfeld. Maybe someone more familiar with TV over there can suggest an option...
Originally posted by Mike Simmons: And the English TV show Friends was actually known as Coupled over there. The creator went on to bigger and better things writing for the new Doctor Who, however.
Friends was actually known as Friends over here. Coupling was an entirely different show (although it did involve three male and three female characters who were often to be found sitting on a sofa (except the sofa was in a bar rather than a coffee shop)). The humour was a lot more sexual - can you imagine an episode of Friends that revolves around discussing (in detail) the 'plot' of a video called Lesbian Spank Inferno ? NBC (I think) tried to make an American version of it, but I believe it flopped.
You're right about Stephen Moffat going on to write for Doctor Who - in fact he is soon taking over as executive producer.
Originally posted by Ernest Friedman-Hill: You could refer to American movies and TV shows as... oh, I don't know, "American movies and TV shows."
but Canada, Mexico, Ecuador and a whole bunch of other countries are also in "America", and many of those shows would be in French, Spanish, or a host of other languages.
How about "U.S. movies and TV shows"?
Joined: Mar 22, 2005
How about "U.S. movies and TV shows"?
But then, Mexico's official name also includes "Estados Unidos", so that may not do, either.
Pet peeve of mine, though - to use the name of the continent for the country. A certain lady recently caught a lot of flak for allegedly thinking that "Africa" was a country. :-)
Joined: Mar 05, 2008
I was joking about Coupling - hence the winkie. Sure, they were different, but similar in many ways too. And I remember on one of the Region 1 DVDs, there's an interview with Moffat acknowledges the inspiration. Though I expect he's tired of people asking him about it now. And yes, I'm pretty current with Doctor Who news.
[Fred]: but Canada, Mexico, Ecuador and a whole bunch of other countries are also in "America", and many of those shows would be in French, Spanish, or a host of other languages.
While that's true, I think it's also a lost cause at this point in the English language unless someone finds a good alternative that works in as many contexts (as both noun and adjective). E.g. "US Citizen" or "person from the US" are klunkier than "American", and unlikely to be adopted widely. And most Canadians I know are happier if they're not considered to be part of America at this point. Of course if you're speaking Spanish, there's much more incentive to stick to the original (wider) definition of America - because widespread usage actually agrees with that meaning.
[Fred]: How about "U.S. movies and TV shows"?
[Ulf]: But then, Mexico's official name also includes "Estados Unidos", so that may not do, either.
Out of curiosity, has anyone here ever heard of anyone referring to Mexico as simply "U.S."? I think this objection is pretty far out there. Much like USA could refer to the University of Southern Alabama - so what? I respect the point about American, but come on. [ December 16, 2008: Message edited by: Mike Simmons ]