So you know... - Page 2

me9996 · 01-13-2005, 10:12 PM

You cannot pass!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wayfarer

Come on, me9996, what are you, like 9 years old?

Witch, Wizard, Warlock, Sorcerer, Magician, Enchanter(ess), Whatever. They're all essentially synonyms, with denotations that are slightly different. The ones that do imply gender aren't particularly picky - a Warlock can be a Male Witch, or a Male Wizard, or a Male Sorcerer, or a Male Demon!. A witch can be 'any woman with magical powers', which is certainly a good enough opposite-gender synonym for 'wizard', which is 'one who practices magic'.

Gah. Get over it already.

Okey, that is going far to prove your point.

Wile a sorserer and wizzard can be considered " synonyms " and a warlock and sorserer can be synonyms as well you still can't convence me that he's a wizzard.

You cannot pass!

P.S.
You may have proven the orc and goblin proplem you cannot beat me here!

You cannot pass!

inked · 01-13-2005, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elf Girl

In a fantasy novel, the creator can choose whatever terminology she wants.

Elfgirl,

Couldn't help but notice your sig! are you familiar with this site?
Tom Lehrer Song Lyrics at http://members.aol.com/quentncree/lehrer/

That man was a wizard with words, wasn't he? and at the keyboard of the piano, too!

Proving that a rose by any other name is still a rose and a tune with different words is still the same tune!

No way I can make thid topical, eh?

Wayfarer · 01-13-2005, 10:30 PM

Maybe not, because noone can beat stupidity. If you're going to insist on being wrong, that's your problem. Refusing to admit it doesn't make you any less wrong, and makes you look stupider to boot.

It's just immaturity that causes you to see anything in terms of 'beating' someone else. It's not a matter of winning or losing - it's a matter of one person being correct. When you're wrong, you're wrong, and the only thing to do is admit it.

All those words, and more, simply mean 'someone with magical power'. Since 'magical power' is quite nebulous and doesn't have a technical definition, it's silly to try and make distinctions between them. They're slightly different words for the same thing - 'a female wizard' can be 'a wizard', 'a sorceress', or 'a witch', and a male witch can be 'a witch', 'a warlock', or 'a wizard. It doesn't matter because they all mean the same thing - and if JK Rowling wants to write a book about wizards, and use the term 'witch' to mean 'a female wizard', that's fine, because every single one of those words refers to a person with magical power.

The words have particular denotations, which are close enough to be functionally equivalent. Insisting that everone else use those words in accordance with the particular connotation which you attach to them goes back to that hubris thing. Get over it already.

me9996 · 01-14-2005, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wayfarer

Maybe not, because noone can beat stupidity. If you're going to insist on being wrong, that's your problem. Refusing to admit it doesn't make you any less wrong, and makes you look stupider to boot.

It's just immaturity that causes you to see anything in terms of 'beating' someone else. It's not a matter of winning or losing - it's a matter of one person being correct. When you're wrong, you're wrong, and the only thing to do is admit it.

All those words, and more, simply mean 'someone with magical power'. Since 'magical power' is quite nebulous and doesn't have a technical definition, it's silly to try and make distinctions between them. They're slightly different words for the same thing - 'a female wizard' can be 'a wizard', 'a sorceress', or 'a witch', and a male witch can be 'a witch', 'a warlock', or 'a wizard. It doesn't matter because they all mean the same thing - and if JK Rowling wants to write a book about wizards, and use the term 'witch' to mean 'a female wizard', that's fine, because every single one of those words refers to a person with magical power.

The words have particular denotations, which are close enough to be functionally equivalent. Insisting that everone else use those words in accordance with the particular connotation which you attach to them goes back to that hubris thing. Get over it already.

You like calling me names!

You (still) cannot pass!

Let's nail this down (Hammer noises)
Now how do we get it up?

I've (almost) given up on you people!

If he was useing the word "which" to discribe a female wizzard then this tread shold be proveing that the others are wizzards to!

Of cource they're still not fully trained whatever they are

You cannot pass!

***Tessar*** · 01-14-2005, 10:24 PM

Me, I would highly suggest you leave us alone in our ignorance for this one. I think this topic is getting a tad out of hand, and needs to end

.

Elf Girl · 01-15-2005, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by me9996

If he was useing the word "which" to discribe a female wizzard then this tread shold be proveing that the others are wizzards to!

But there's only one Rincewind! And he's a man... I hope.

*watches that sail right over the heads of all who don't read Discworld*

Wayfarer · 01-15-2005, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by me9996

If he was useing the word "which" to discribe a female wizzard then this tread shold be proveing that the others are wizzards to!

I can't even muddle out what you're trying to say, but it's probably not worth listening to anyway.

You should really stop trying to pretend that there is anything in the real world to differentiate between the words. There's not. And that means if an author chooses to define them more narrowly for purposes of use within a fictional world, that's their perogative.

Believe whatever you want. Just don't expect other people to jump to agree with you when you start making a big deal about someone not using a word in accordance with a definition which only exists in your head.

**Nurvingiel** · 01-15-2005, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elf Girl

But there's only one Rincewind! And he's a man... I hope.

*watches that sail right over the heads of all who don't read Discworld*

Even though I've only read one of the books, I think that eeeeeeeeeevery time I see 'wizzard'.

me9996 · 01-17-2005, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wayfarer

I can't even muddle out what you're trying to say, but it's probably not worth listening to anyway.

You should really stop trying to pretend that there is anything in the real world to differentiate between the words. There's not. And that means if an author chooses to define them more narrowly for purposes of use within a fictional world, that's their perogative.

Believe whatever you want. Just don't expect other people to jump to agree with you when you start making a big deal about someone not using a word in accordance with a definition which only exists in your head.

I hope an admin closes this tread!
I can't take to much more of this and nether can Wayfarer (Aperently).
If you prove one thing another thing must be solved.

P.S.
What I ment by "the others" is the girl whatevers he trains with.

Manveru · 01-17-2005, 06:23 PM

2 words: poetic license

2 more words: who cares?

me9996 · 01-18-2005, 02:01 PM

Can I close my own thread?
I'll try!

***azalea*** · 01-18-2005, 03:55 PM

Why? I don't see why it needs to be closed.

It can be an interesting topic, about the different labels that can be given to magical persons.
If you don't wish to talk about it, then don't post in it anymore and it will go down the page into oblivion. Okay?

Lizra · 01-18-2005, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by me9996

You cannot pass!

You cannot spell!

**Nurvingiel** · 01-18-2005, 06:00 PM

Long version:

Me9996, I think you're thinking of Harry Potter in the sense of real life (since it is set in England in the mid-1990s), rather than what it really is - an invented world based on our own, where magic and wizards and witches exist.

If JK Rowling wished, she could write a book about Earth where everything is exactly the same as real earth, except (real life) dogs are called goats. Goats are called kqelrihg0873ls%. See, she can write whatever she wishes.

In this case, she decided that female magic users were called witches, and male magic users were called wizards. (It doesn't matter if they are fully trained or not.)

Not to be mean, but have you read the books? Why do you take issue with the names of magic users?

Now that's an interesting discussion...

Short version:

I'm right.

Minielin · 01-18-2005, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lizra

Quote:

Originally Posted by me9996

You cannot pass!

You cannot spell!

Heh.

It's quite true, though. Contents and names within the fictional worlds of fictional works remain the prerogative of the author. It's really that simple.

Embladyne · 01-18-2005, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Short version:

I'm right.

That's always the best version.

me9996 · 01-18-2005, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lizra

You cannot spell!

You cannot stand it!

P.S.
You're right about the spelling,
I've sayed it meny times.

P.P.S.
You cannot pass!

me9996 · 01-18-2005, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Long version:

Me9996, I think you're thinking of Harry Potter in the sense of real life (since it is set in England in the mid-1990s), rather than what it really is - an invented world based on our own, where magic and wizards and witches exist.

If JK Rowling wished, she could write a book about Earth where everything is exactly the same as real earth, except (real life) dogs are called goats. Goats are called kqelrihg0873ls%. See, she can write whatever she wishes.

In this case, she decided that female magic users were called witches, and male magic users were called wizards. (It doesn't matter if they are fully trained or not.)

Not to be mean, but have you read the books? Why do you take issue with the names of magic users?

Now that's an interesting discussion...

Short version:

I'm right.

Fine, but the athor is wrong!

P.S.
There is a kqelrihg0873ls% behind you

me9996 · 01-18-2005, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by azalea

Why? I don't see why it needs to be closed.

It can be an interesting topic, about the different labels that can be given to magical persons.
If you don't wish to talk about it, then don't post in it anymore and it will go down the page into oblivion. Okay?

Okay, evryone stop posting!
(Alot of the time if I'm the sliteist bit abraisive I stop posters)

Embladyne · 01-18-2005, 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by me9996

Okay, evryone stop posting!
(Alot of the time if I'm the sliteist bit abraisive I stop posters)

Hey, if people are interested, they can post. That's the whole purpose of this forum. If you're tired of reading the posts, or the subject, you can stop. Just cause you started the thread does not mean you have to take responsibility for it's continuation or ending. That's what the mods are for...and we <3 them

!
Personally, I think it's a good idea to realize that different authors use differents words for the same ideas because they want to play upon certain connotations that words have. And that's what makes their work interesting and distinctive. If everyone used the same language, what would be the point of having different authors? All stories would sound like they were written by the same person, though they would be of differing levels of skill.

01-13-2005, 10:30 PM	#23
Wayfarer The Insufferable Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 3,333	Maybe not, because noone can beat stupidity. If you're going to insist on being wrong, that's your problem. Refusing to admit it doesn't make you any less wrong, and makes you look stupider to boot. It's just immaturity that causes you to see anything in terms of 'beating' someone else. It's not a matter of winning or losing - it's a matter of one person being correct. When you're wrong, you're wrong, and the only thing to do is admit it. All those words, and more, simply mean 'someone with magical power'. Since 'magical power' is quite nebulous and doesn't have a technical definition, it's silly to try and make distinctions between them. They're slightly different words for the same thing - 'a female wizard' can be 'a wizard', 'a sorceress', or 'a witch', and a male witch can be 'a witch', 'a warlock', or 'a wizard. It doesn't matter because they all mean the same thing - and if JK Rowling wants to write a book about wizards, and use the term 'witch' to mean 'a female wizard', that's fine, because every single one of those words refers to a person with magical power. The words have particular denotations, which are close enough to be functionally equivalent. Insisting that everone else use those words in accordance with the particular connotation which you attach to them goes back to that hubris thing. Get over it already. __________________ Disgraced he may be, yet is not dethroned, and keeps the rags of lordship once he owned Last edited by Wayfarer : 01-13-2005 at 10:34 PM.

01-17-2005, 06:23 PM	#30
Manveru Elven Warrior Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 256	2 words: poetic license 2 more words: who cares? __________________ Earendel arose where the shadow flows At Ocean's silent brim; Through the mouth of night as a ray of light Where the shores are sheer and dim He launched his bark like a silver spark From the last and lonely sand; Then on sunlit breath of day's fiery death He sailed from Westerland

01-14-2005, 10:24 PM	#25
*Tessar* Master and Wielder of the Cardboard Harp of Gondor Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: IM IN UR POSTZ, EDITIN' UR WURDZ Posts: 6,433	Me, I would highly suggest you leave us alone in our ignorance for this one. I think this topic is getting a tad out of hand, and needs to end .

01-18-2005, 03:55 PM	#32
*azalea* Long lost mooter Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Florida Posts: 3,342	Why? I don't see why it needs to be closed. It can be an interesting topic, about the different labels that can be given to magical persons. If you don't wish to talk about it, then don't post in it anymore and it will go down the page into oblivion. Okay?