tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3387495443226852794.post4375108245760737805..comments2024-03-29T05:52:53.051+11:00Comments on The Adventurers Guild: Missed Classic: Trinity - When Soviet Time-Traveling Robot Armadillos AttackThe Tricksterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01419316208187255801noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3387495443226852794.post-3802582781070671732021-11-11T17:08:21.470+11:002021-11-11T17:08:21.470+11:00Thannks for sharing thisThannks for sharing thisRoy Andrewshttps://www.royandrews.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3387495443226852794.post-54247022839214559832020-04-23T18:15:48.246+10:002020-04-23T18:15:48.246+10:00I look forward to y'all finishing the entire I...I look forward to y'all finishing the entire Infocom canon. There is yet more good stuff coming... Plundered Hearts wasn't properly appreciated at the time (poor marketing) but it's groundbreaking.Nathanaelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3387495443226852794.post-88404801595353704322020-03-20T16:23:09.379+11:002020-03-20T16:23:09.379+11:00Probably just Indo-European thing, or thing in som...Probably just Indo-European thing, or thing in some of its subgroups. In Finnish (one of Fenno-Ugrian languages), we can say as easily "pieni ruskea pallo" (small brown ball) as "ruskea pieni pallo" (brown small ball).<br /><br />Finnish has the less restrictive rule that subjective attributes (like "ihana" - 'lovely') tend to come earlier than objective attributes (like those describing colour or size): so "ihana pieni pallo" (lovely small ball) is somewhat more usual than "pieni ihana pallo" - although the latter is definitely not impossible.<br /><br />The length of the adjective is also important, so that longer ones tend to come closer to the noun: "pieni kevyehkö pallo" (small, somewhat lightweight ball) is more usual than "kevyehkö pieni pallo".Ilmari Jauhiainenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01655841880034965950noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3387495443226852794.post-43368860517538466832020-03-20T15:49:49.815+11:002020-03-20T15:49:49.815+11:00The same kinda rule applies in my home language to...The same kinda rule applies in my home language too, and as far as I know in the Dutch language as well, which makes it likely I'm several others too. Could it be a European thing, of more universal than we think? ShaddamIVthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02024540172370536692noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3387495443226852794.post-25456304404512824632020-03-19T14:41:51.971+11:002020-03-19T14:41:51.971+11:00Gotta wonder if they did, maybe people who learn E...Gotta wonder if they did, maybe people who learn English as adults would have an easier time not sounding "weird"Rosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09703211229982182936noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3387495443226852794.post-71676461880165994642020-03-19T02:29:38.941+11:002020-03-19T02:29:38.941+11:00@ShaddamIVth - To be clear, no one "studies&q...@ShaddamIVth - To be clear, no one "studies" this and outside of linguistics circles no one even knows this is a rule. It's just something that almost all native English speakers do naturally. We can articulate that something sounds off, but there are no grammar teachers that rap your knuckles when you get it "wrong". Joe Pranevichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12997014242774219758noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3387495443226852794.post-12678981251347451822020-03-18T12:08:11.431+11:002020-03-18T12:08:11.431+11:00That wasn't as clear as it should've been....That wasn't as clear as it should've been. I think "time-travelling" comes before "robotic" because time-traveling is something the armadillos <em>do</em>, rather than something they <em>are</em>Rosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09703211229982182936noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3387495443226852794.post-26805071861763815492020-03-18T12:07:01.590+11:002020-03-18T12:07:01.590+11:00Generally speaking, "qualifier" is the o...Generally speaking, "qualifier" is the one you have a lot of leeway with. In particular, most words that work for "qualifier" can also work for "quality or opinion". One of my go-to examples is the difference between a red hard candy (ie., a jawbreaker) and a hard red candy (ie., twizzler that's sat out too long). <br /><br />My inclination is that "robotic" binds tighter to "armadillo" than "time-travelling". "Robotic" goes immediately before "armadillo" because you're more likely to ask "Wait, which robotic armadillos are we talking about? Oh, right, the time-travelling ones." than "Okay, there's regular time traveling armadillos and robotic time traveling armadillos. Which one did you mean?"Rosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09703211229982182936noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3387495443226852794.post-37392942812472510392020-03-17T22:01:02.486+11:002020-03-17T22:01:02.486+11:00how would a “real-time” ending sequence work? Woul...<i>how would a “real-time” ending sequence work? Would touch typists and faster computers automatically have an edge?</i><br /><br />You will see this (or at least a reasonable fac-simile) when you tackle Infocom's "Border Zone" some time down the line...<br /><br />And kudos on the Good Place reference! ;)Vetinarihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04734964199926068473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3387495443226852794.post-75002300531967493512020-03-17T17:19:32.940+11:002020-03-17T17:19:32.940+11:00English not being my first language we never studi...English not being my first language we never studied it in so much depth, but from my perspective the first and foremost description would be how we relate to the object. Here it is Soviet, simply because the first thing we need to know is that he is the "enemy". If the dog was angry at us he would be the "Angry big red dog" as our priority is our security. He could be brown, mottled or grey, the fact is he is angry and I must be careful. If for example I describe a car, I could place place of origin further, e.g. "the beautiful white Italian sports-car" prioritizes the colour, simply because with cars we relate to the colour more than we do to the country of origin.<br /><br />When we get to "Soviet time-travelling robotic Armadillos" there is simply no way in which we can prioritize the relation of robotic or time-travelling. So we simply switch to "Wow-factor". Which is more amazing, a robotic armadillo or a time-travelling one? For me, a robotic armadillo is impressive but do-able, but time-travelling trumps it easily. Despite this we are more concerned that it is Soviet, since that is the primary "threat".ShaddamIVthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02024540172370536692noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3387495443226852794.post-57178352471507036882020-03-17T13:31:16.688+11:002020-03-17T13:31:16.688+11:00Let's talk about English! Since it seems that ...Let's talk about English! Since it seems that no one wants to discuss the armadillos. :) <br /><br />In English, there is a rule that all native speakers know but which is difficult or impossible for non-native speakers to do as intuitively and that is adjective order. It goes like this:<br /><br />Quantity or number.<br />Quality or opinion.<br />Size.<br />Age.<br />Shape.<br />Color.<br />Proper adjective (often nationality, other place of origin, or material)<br />Purpose or qualifier.<br /><br />So, in English it is okay to say "the big red dog" but never "the red big dog". <br /><br />But that order seemed wrong this time and I am interested in other opinions. "Soviet Time-Traveling Robot Armadillos" reads correctly for me, but is it correct? It's clear at least that we have Soviet (place of origin) Time-Traveling (purpose) Armadillos. But is Robot in the correct spot? Did I make a compound noun instead of an adjective phrase? Should it be Soviet Robotic Time-Traveling Armadillos instead? That reads all wrong, but seems to be in the right order. <br /><br />My brain boggles. <br />Joe Pranevichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12997014242774219758noreply@blogger.com