palordrolap

Satan sitting exams raises many unaddressed questions.

Who is setting these exams? What is the topic? Who invigilates? How long are these exams? What is the level of qualification?

If I were to guess, the teachers would have had many good reasons to not to too far, whereas the prison guards would have had less incentive to hold back.

Also, a prisoner’s crimes are probably more serious. Probably.

I took the extreme liberty of assuming they were from 1000 years ago and Saxon rather than 2000 years ago and Aramaic, if only so that I might have any chance of producing something even close to what they might have said.

Shepherd is surprisingly fluent. I would have expected something more like “ᚺᚹᚫᛏ? ᛁᚳ ᚾᛖ ᚩᚾᚷᛁᛖᛏᚪᚾ”

“UK seeks bribe to not look into Microsoft’s business practices.”

The follow-up question is basically “Are you a non-American English speaker?”, however you choose to parse that.

So, it’s “neesh” for me.

I too had a decent upbringing, but, after a bit of introspection about why I’m so wary of my own name, it came down to this:

I have two names. One is my given name and the other is “son”.

My parents have always tended to use my given name in negative and neutral contexts and “son” in more positive ones. It’s not intentional on their part, and I expect my father got the same, but I think it’s at the root of it all.

Good upbringing or not, how many of us are still terrified of being addressed by our full name in an irate tone? I’m convinced it’s related.

The only wrinkle that bothers me is when a sonless aunt once called me “son” and it made me very uncomfortable. But, I figure there are other reasons for that.

Identifying this as egg behaviour might be egg behaviour.

A lot of British Pakistanis like to holiday in Pakistan, and I mean, a lot, and like any sufficiently large group of humans, there’s bound to be a handful who bear a grudge.

Which is to say that If I hear that something terrible has happened to him, I won’t be in the least bit surprised.

(Which is NOT to endorse someone doing anything like that. This is merely an observation.)

Well, there is a ring involved and you could probably get aliens to come and do something with it, but it’s not the same thing at all.

So it has a name! If I knew that, I had long forgotten. Thank you!

But if you do decide to do this, and I should stress that this does not constitute a suggestion to do so, make sure to go out in clearly identifiable footwear and clothing and with no head or face coverings so that the camera can get a good look at you before it dies, you filthy, filthy vandal.

Is Cooper (I presume that’s the youngest) old enough to be past the “potato with arms and legs” stage?

For those that don’t know, basically there’s a stage where kids don’t draw bodies at all, because they don’t fully register the interactions with that part of their parent (or something like that), and so a portrait of a parent tends to end up a head with stick limbs.

I don’t specifically remember doing this myself, but I saw younger kids doing that when I was a child and have since learned that it’s a developmental phenomenon.

Anyway, Cooper might be advanced for his age. That is, assuming any of this is even relevant for anthropomorphic cartoon cats.

The answer is racism and doctrines of cultural supremacy. Also a lot of guilt about what happened to the Jews in WWII as a result of racism and doctrines of cultural supremacy.

(This is overly simplistic, of course, but it covers quite a lot of it.)

The speech bubble has “Every time I read a shitty dreadful news”.

There may be some confusion because I took out the adjectives, which don’t change the surrounding grammar at all. They change the semantics somewhat, but this is about grammar, not the meaning. This then reduces to “Every time I read a news”, and then further to the particle “a news”, which, again, does not change the original syntax of that fragment.

My point was that such usage is invalid in the standard varieties of English I’m aware of.

I are of understanding what the author intended, just like you understood the start of this sentence, but it doesn’t mean that it’s standard form. Which, ultimately, is why I asked if there’s a form of English where it is correct.

(Tangentially, I do need to work on softening the way I word my comments. That’s an ongoing struggle.)

Which dialect of English uses “news” as a discrete noun like this? “A news” is ungrammatical to me, so this is either wrong or an innovation I’m not aware of.

What is weird here, either way, is how “new” is generally an adjective, but “news” is a specific plural noun form of it, suggesting that “a new” ought to be grammatical, and indeed perhaps a conjugation for this comic, but that doesn’t sound right to me either.

“A news item” would be the most correct here, I think.

See also: goods.

Something somewhere was definitely doing the conversion for you, but it could have been your editor, the compiler or something in between like a C preprocessor directive getting loaded in by your configuration.

I bet there’s a not insignificant chunk of Win3.11 code still lurking at the heart of Windows even now. Patched and recompiled for 64 bits, but still there.

Though most of it is probably for backwards compatibility by this point. Or so we should hope.

All things considered, I think I preferred “This kills the crab”.

If you’re talking about applications that can be made to act how their namesake predecessors did 30 years ago, sure. The Unix mindset is all about that.

But don’t be fooled into thinking that anything on a modern Unix-like system hasn’t been modified, patched or rewritten from scratch at some point in the last 30 years. More than once. Even /bin/false has a changelog.