OP
Your Ispo is all defacto
And crapus excretus
(yeah, I know it doesnt make any sense but I liked the sound of it…my latin teacher is spinning in the grave I am sure)
This entire thread demonstrates the principle of stercus accidit.
O sibili si ergo! Fortibus es in aro. O nobili demis trux. Watis inem? Causand dux.
Ego sum validus insquequo terminus, quoniam ego eat meus spinach.
Yeah, those online translators aren’t quite there yet, are they?
Lorem ipsum dolar sit, altum viditur!
Take that, bitches.
I got nuthin. Semper ubi sub ubi?
Carpe scrotum.
Reduction ad absurdum, as a phrase, seems to be regularly misused on this board and elsewhere, so I can understand where the OP is coming from. I’ve seen posters use it when they really meant to point out a slippery slope fallacy. Simply labelling a claim, in order to rebuff it, as a reductio ad absurdum is nonsensical. Reductio ad absurdum is not a fallacy — it’s a basic principle of proof in logic; suppose a proposition, derive false, conclude the negation of the assumed proposition.
Fortis ad finitum sum quia spinaciam meam edam, if the “because” clause takes the subjunctive…
Awesome.
I remember Tycho at Penny Arcade rebutting someone else’s post- where said “someone” used the term ceteris paribus- by saying “ceteris paribus- which is Latin for ‘look how fucking smart I am’”…
ETA: ah, here it is:
And yet, the entire comic strip and accompanying blog boils down to “look how fucking smart I am”. Somehow the guy who knows something you don’t know is the one being the bloviating prick.
It’s got a Popeye in the machine.
Of course Latin doesn’t make your argument stronger. Tout le monde knows the way to make a weak argument stronger is to throw in some French.
If it doesn’t make it stronger, it at least makes it more arousing.
If it isn’t a noun, then what is it?
I seemed to have had a priori knowledge about how this thread was going to go.
About thirty years ago, there was a company called Thinking Cap that made and sold movie-related caps and other apparel. Their motto, which I guess was supposed to mean “I think, therefore I wear a cap,” was “Cogito, ergo capellam vestio.”
That translates as: “I think, therefore I <clothe/decorate/adorn> a she-goat.”
It is to be used as a noun. If someone ‘spells that shit out and uses it as a noun’ it is not as annoying as someone using ‘MO’ as a verb phrase. I saw that on in a debate recently and stared at for awhile before deciding (perhaps incorrectly?) that M.O. can only be used as a noun. It was rather awkward, so I’m only assuming the person used it without knowing what it stood for. If I’m wrong, then definitely tell me.
How do you use ‘modus operandi’ in singular v. plural form?
Everyone makes mistakes - I screw up my words every day (thank you, TBI!) but I feel as though people throw in Latin phrases just to sound authoritative on the subject. If it’s used incorrectly, that’s just an additional annoyance.
I don’t knock on word errors, misspellings (well, not that often) or things like “irregardless” or “lay/lie” but I do get annoyed at stuff like this (which is someone arguing about things that are either factually incorrect or he just contradicted himself):
I still can’t spell bureaucracy (or any “bureau” word), nauseam, nausea, nauseated, and nauseous without spellcheck. I say things like ‘sawdust’ when I mean to to say ‘dandruff’. I’m OK if people correct me. I need it.
I just don’t aspire to sound like a ‘bloviating prick(ette)’.
Are you sure you’re on the right board? 