Vehicles on unimproved roads debate

General out-of-character discussion among players of Cantr II.

Moderators: Players Department, Public Relations Department

User avatar
Agar
Posts: 1687
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 7:43 pm

Postby Agar » Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:12 am

Dear God, can't any thread stay on topic???

From the Wikipedia: (edited for content)

Etymology
The etymology of f#$% has given rise to a great deal of speculation, which should be regarded skeptically. The authoritative Oxford English Dictionary is quite cautious in providing an etymology for this word. In the quotation below, the dictionary's usual abbreviations are spelled out for clarity:

Early modern English f#$%, fuk, answering to a Middle English type *fuken (weak verb) [which is] not found; ulterior etymology unknown. Synonymous German ficken cannot be shown to be related.
The first known occurrence, in code because of its unacceptability, is in a poem composed in a mixture of Latin and English sometime before 1500. The poem, which satirizes the Carmelite friars of Cambridge, England, takes its title, “Flen flyys”, from the first words of its opening line, “Flen, flyys, and freris”; that is, “Fleas, flies, and friars”. The line that contains f#$% reads “Non sunt in coeli, quia gxddbov xxkxzt pg ifmk.” The Latin words “Non sunt in coeli, quia,” mean “They (the friars) are not in heaven, since.” The code “gxddbov xxkxzt pg ifmk” is easily broken by simply substituting the preceding letter in the alphabet, keeping in mind differences in the alphabet and in spelling between then and now: i was then used for both i and j; v was used for both u and v; and vv was used for w. This yields “fvccant (a fake Latin form) vvivys of heli.” The whole thus reads in translation: “They are not in heaven since they f#$% wives of Ely (a town near Cambridge).” From The American Heritage Dictionary, 4th Edition (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=f#$%).

As the OED notes, some have attempted to draw a connection to the German word ficken (to f#$%, in dialects: to rub, to scratch, and historically to strike).

A possible etymology is suggested by the fact that the Common Germanic fuk-, by an application of Grimm's law, would have as its most likely Indo-European ancestor *pug-, which appears in Latin and Greek words meaning "fight" and "fist". In early Common Germanic the word was likely used at first as a slang or euphemistic replacement for an older word for "intercourse", and then became the usual word for "intercourse".

Other possible connections are to Latin futuere (hence the French foutre, the Italian fottere, the vulgar peninsular Spanish follar and joder, and the Portuguese foder). However, there is considerable doubt and no clear lineage for these derivations. These roots, even if cognate, are not the original Indo-European word for to fuck; that root is likely *h3yebh-, ("h3" is the H3 laryngeal) which is attested in Sanskrit (yabhati) and the Slavic languages (Russian yebat`), among others: compare Greek "oiphô" (verb), and Greek "zephyros" (noun, ref. a Greek belief that the west wind caused pregnancy). However, Wayland Young (who agrees that these words are related) argues that they derive from the Indo-European *bhu- or *bhug-, believed to be the root of "to be", "to grow", and "to build". [Young, 1964]

Spanish follar has a different root; according to Spanish etymologists, the Spanish verb "follar" (attested in the 19th century) derives from "fuelle" (bellows) from Latin "folle(m)" < Indo-European "bhel-"; ancient Spanish verb folgar (attested in the 15th century) derived from Latin "follicare", ultimately from follem/follis too.

Some have supposed that f#$% has cognates in other Germanic languages, such as Middle Dutch fokken (to thrust, to copulate), dialectical Norwegian fukka (to copulate), and dialectical Swedish focka (to strike, copulate) and fock (penis). A very similar set of Latin words that have not yet been related to these are those for hearth or fire, "focus/focum" (with a short o), fiery, "focilis", Latin and Italian for hearthly/hearthling, "foc[c]ia/focac[c]ia", and fire, "focca", and the Italian for bonfire, "focere". But these words came from New Latin, centuries after Middle Dutch.

There is perhaps even an original Celtic derivation; futuere being related to battuere (to strike, to copulate); which may be related to Irish bot and Manx bwoid (penis). The argument is that battuere and futuere (like the Irish and Manx words) comes from the Celtic *bactuere (to pierce), from the root buc- (a point). An even earlier root may be the Egyptian petcha (to copulate), which has a highly suggestive hieroglyph. Or perhaps Latin "futuere" came from the root "fu", Common Indo-European "bhu", meaning "be, become" and originally referred to procreation.

[edit]
Fake etymologies
There are many imaginative fake etymologies, including the backronyms "Fornication Under Consent of the King", which was supposedly placed on signs above houses in medieval England during times of population control, and "For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge", supposedly written on the stocks above people who committed adultery or "Forced Unlawful Carnal Knowledge" in various things linked to rape cases. These acronyms were never heard before the 1960s, according to the authoritative lexicographical work, The F-Word. See also fake etymology.
Reality was never my strong point.
User avatar
Agar
Posts: 1687
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 7:43 pm

Postby Agar » Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:15 am

Back to the topic at hand:

If there's a check for boats that won't allow you to build a lake only vessle on the seaside, why can't there be a check to see that the roads have been improved to a functional level? That way, there'd be at least ONE road for the vehicle to travel on. If you try to build a bus and are surounded by deer trails, you could have some handy error flash up and say "The surrounding roads cannot not accomodate this vehicle at present" or something.
Reality was never my strong point.
User avatar
mortaine
Posts: 865
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 4:22 pm
Location: Scotts Valley, CA
Contact:

Postby mortaine » Fri Apr 22, 2005 4:56 am

I hate that error message. It won't let me build a galleon in the forest....
--
mortaine.
User avatar
Nick
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 8:27 pm
Location: Halifax, Canada

Postby Nick » Fri Apr 22, 2005 9:53 am

You wouldn't be upset after investing the time and resources to make a galleon, only to find out that the little stream in the Forest won't cut it?
User avatar
Anthony Roberts
Posts: 2578
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 11:45 pm
Location: Chatham, Ontario, Canada

Postby Anthony Roberts » Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:02 pm

Agar wrote:Back to the topic at hand:

If there's a check for boats that won't allow you to build a lake only vessle on the seaside, why can't there be a check to see that the roads have been improved to a functional level? That way, there'd be at least ONE road for the vehicle to travel on. If you try to build a bus and are surounded by deer trails, you could have some handy error flash up and say "The surrounding roads cannot not accomodate this vehicle at present" or something.


I suggested this.

Must have been in the other thread when it was cut.

Whoops. >.>
-- Anthony Roberts
Schme
Posts: 2067
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 10:21 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Schme » Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:32 pm

You people misunderstand.

You must note that I clearly wrote "mutha", which is not in fact mother.

Also, the "F" was not reffering to the word in question, but rather, Fool.

And so, you see, what I was writting was Muthafool, rather than what you people thought.

And what I mean by that, was of course, fool of muthaly proportions.




Would I lie?
"One death is a tragedy, a million is just statistics."
Joseph Stalin
Schme
Posts: 2067
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 10:21 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Schme » Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:33 pm

Perhaps, on the roads and such, well, I find it rather nonsensical that something like a bus would not be able to travel on a dirt road or some such thing.

Perhaps it could just travel more slowly?
"One death is a tragedy, a million is just statistics."

Joseph Stalin
User avatar
Nick
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 8:27 pm
Location: Halifax, Canada

Postby Nick » Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:41 pm

Yeah, veichles of any type... or land veichles, I should specify, should be able to go down any road... just not very well.
Schme
Posts: 2067
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 10:21 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Schme » Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:46 pm

Yes, exactly.

And perhaps if your going through a piece of swamp road or something, that is unfinished, perhaps a chance to get stuck and have to do a "Getting unstuck project".

But we don't really need that. Just perhaps, go slower. Makes sense.
"One death is a tragedy, a million is just statistics."

Joseph Stalin
User avatar
Nick
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 8:27 pm
Location: Halifax, Canada

Postby Nick » Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:48 pm

Yeah, you're kinda getting ahead of yourself.
It's only too often that people make suggestions that, in princple, may make sense...
But really, they are too unimportant to invest all that effort into.
IMO, we should lock the suggestions forum until babies and roadmap is introduced.... :twisted:
Cookie
Posts: 756
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 11:51 am
Location: NE & NW England

Postby Cookie » Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:48 pm

Well I've never seen a bus go up a mountain without a road.
User avatar
Nick
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 8:27 pm
Location: Halifax, Canada

Postby Nick » Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:49 pm

Cookie Monster wrote:Well I've never seen a bus go up a mountain without a road.


Well I've never seen a car run without gas, or a man carry 15 kilograms of sand in his hands, and swing a sabre at the same time.
User avatar
formerly known as hf
Posts: 4120
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 2:58 pm
Location: UK

Postby formerly known as hf » Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:50 pm

Cookie Monster wrote:Well I've never seen a bus go up a mountain without a road.


You've never been on a bus in India...
*shudders with the memory*
Whoever you vote for.

The government wins.
Cookie
Posts: 756
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 11:51 am
Location: NE & NW England

Postby Cookie » Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:52 pm

Does India have mountains?
User avatar
Nick
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 8:27 pm
Location: Halifax, Canada

Postby Nick » Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:52 pm

Erm... how is that stubborn?

Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest