SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
No bio...
User ID: 84
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
3hr ago
-
Bomb Iran
-
???
-
Profit
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
7hr ago
If the answer is that we have to make massive changes to the entire structure of higher education in the US
But you don't! Don't touch high schools. Don't touch colleges.
Only change med school to admit based on entrance exam that tests qualifications for studying medicine (ie. a bunch of medicine textbooks) and having graduated high school. Nothing more. Afterall, med school admission is already an entirely separate track (due to requiring a college degree or significant studies).
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
19hr ago
If your answer is "because the schools outright don't want to", then you should go and actually say it. Otherwise you're just stuck in a "We have to do it like this because this is how we do it"-loop that leads to absolutely nowhere.
I still don't see any reason that would prevent those med schools from just doing it if they wanted to. Which student is going to say "No, I'll just go and do a pointless and expensive intermediate degree instead and only then apply to what I actually want to study." Having entrance exams certainly doesn't seem to be any problem for various art schools that award university degrees, so there doesn't appear to be any fundamental limit to that.
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
19hr ago
Talking to you on this topic is remarkable because you seem totally convinced that everything in medicine is exempt from fundamental economic laws like supply and demand, it's impossible to change anything that touches doctors without making things worse
This is really just an example of the more general very common phenomenon where Americans (and yes, it's specifically Americans who do this) will treat their current system as an unchangeable law of nature when presented with "why don't you do X like this large group of countries?" instead of actually engaging with the question.
It's a strangely pervasive attitude that I've noticed it time and again ever since I first got internet access 30 years ago (first when it came to internet access and then mobile plans).
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
19hr ago
What does that have to do with committing at 16?
Finish high school at 18-19, study medicine for 5-6 years, become a doctor like in Europe. This discussion is afterall about eliminating the pointless separate undergrad degree that artificially lenghtens that time in US.
Over here the entry to study medicine is based on the nation wide matriculation exam and an entrance exam. The only time off is a couple of months in the spring of last year of high school to study for those exams (where the matriculation study is more or less considered part of the high school itself). In the good old days (ie. until around a decade ago), this would apply to most university level subjects. The only time "off" for studying for the entrance exams is around a month and half, certainly not an entire year (unless you are a middling student with delusions of higher performance or just too lazy to study that year in which case you probably won't get in after a gap year either).
Up until the winter of final year the only preparation you have to ensure is to take enough math courses (because math applies for anything remotely STEM-like) and whatever other subjects that give points for entrance (or are relevant in the exam). Thus the only extras you'd need to go from "pure engineering route" (ie. max math, physics & chemistry) to medicine would be a handful of extra biology courses, a fairly trivial undertaking for anyone actually capable of thriving in med school and something you'd probably do out of interest anyway if you were such person.
I don't see any reason why med school in the US couldn't use a similar combination of SAT scores and a dedicated entrance exam if they wanted to. Move the exam date slightly later, have the high school graduation in May and there's really nothing that would prevent a similar entrance exam based system.
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
20hr ago
When even the guy responsible for organizing SS genocidal tactics and supressing the Warsaw uprising thinks the guy is too far gone, that's really saying something:
"Guderian was supported by SS-Obergruppenführer Erich von dem Bach-Zelewski, the overall commander of the forces pacifying Warsaw (and Dirlewanger's own former superior officer in Belarus)"
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
20hr ago
Why would someone need to commit to being a doctor at the age of 16 instead of at the end of / after high school?
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
1d ago
Hence the (largely rhetorical) question. Imagine that Futurama meme on top.
Not sure if satire or serious...
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
2d ago
the intention to hang nu-metal's corpse.
Do please hurry up with that shit.
Yours, an ex-metalhead (the actual traditional metal, not this nu-shit)
No reasonable person (sorry mods, but let me finish) could really have a strong stance against valid and secure forms of identification as a requirement for voting.
Just see "leftist" Europe. Requiring an ID to vote is ubiquituous and it's a complete non-issue. Of course there is no separate voter ID as such but simply a requirement to present some valid ID (passport, national ID, drivers license or any other form accepted by the jurisdiction). Eg. the Finnish law merely states that the voter must identify themselves but does not specify any particular method for that. You can even get a temporary ID card for free from the local police station if you have no currently valid ID (ie. your passport / ID has expired and you have no drivers license).
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
3d ago
The crew are old now. Nobody wants to see middle aged actors hobbling around pretending to be space pirates.
Eh. There's definitely a show to be made with that concept. Not sure if the Serenity crew are the right ones for it tho.
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
3d ago
Look, I fantasized about sleeping with my (female) teachers from 8th grade onwards, it was a sex-segregated institute, and I had sadly little contact with female peers. I was too chubby and acne ridden for a teacher seducing me to be a remotely realistic prospect. But if they had been blind and demented, I don't think I'd have accused them of sexual assault. I'd be hell-yeahing with the boys.
Man, that's just weird...
that you had hot enough teachers for that. We sure didn't until perhaps senior high school but by then I was far too distracted by the girl sitting in front of me who wore deliciously tight jeans. She's also the reason why I still remember the lyrics to this song (they were written in the backside of the seat she sat in in that class).
Or maybe you truly are a MILF enjoyer. Not that I judge, considering how many of my peers are nowadays MILFs.
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
3d ago
You might be okay with the idea of a 13 yo girl having a boyfriend, and maybe having sex with said boyfriend.
I make no judgement either way but this does remind me of two situations from middle school:
On the one sex ed class we had when I was 14 or so, one guy in our class made a fairly plausible claim of having had sex and that it was with an older girl when he was 12 years old at some summer camp. The reaction was mostly "nah, you're trying to fool us" with a bit of "12? You sure started young". At no point was any sort of abuse considered. Another guy had a steady girlfriend of the same age and the only reaction was "lucky you!" (she was quite pretty).
When I was in 9th grade (ie. 15 years old) I remember a girl in another class having a steady boyfriend who was in 7th grade in the same school. Our reaction was "He's quite young. I wonder what she sees in him?" I do recall them kissing publicly but we didn't exactly ask if they had sex.
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
3d ago
If a book has complex and difficult sentence structure in the original, it should be preserved in translation
Are you actually proficient in two languages that belong in two different language families?
Because if you are, then you should know that preserving the original sentence structure is flat out impossible in many cases because languages have different grammars. What is correct structure in language A can be very much not correct in language B.
sentences which flow, which pull you along in a clear semantic progress from concept to concept.
This is exactly why I wish such english -> english translations would exist! To me the old text does not flow. It's overly complicated in ways which contribute absolutely nothing to it and could be streamlined with minimal alterations (see example 3 here) that would subtract absolutely nothing from the original. And of course the original keep existing for anyone who wants to read them.
Reading these sentences is a skill, one which modern readers have to develop, but that's fine, it's part of being a good reader. You may be taking too much of a jump at once
Seriously, what is it with these condescending personal attacks? Do you truly believe that anyone who disagrees with you can only do so because they are somehow inferior?
Unless your intent is to demonstrate that literature buffs are narrowminded gatekeeping idiots who can only consider their own position and never anyone else's, in which case you're doing an excellent job at that. It sure takes some guts to complain that non-native speakers don't have perfect enough grasp of the language when only a small fraction of the natives speak any other language with remotely the same fluency.
With respect to archaic terms, that's understandably frustrating to non-native speakers, but also part of the game.
No, it is not. Some of it can be but others are simply a case of changed meaning where a new word can be substituted in that place to restore the original meaning.
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
3d ago
I don't see why I have to care about you or your convenience
You don't. All I ask is that you not actively try to prevent me. Yet you keep claiming that I must read it the original way.
read it in translation
I would if a high quality translation existed. It does not exist. See example #2 that I linked.
I don't really see how the third is a massive improvement over the first.
Yes, for a native it may not be. For a non-native like me it's a significant improvement in readability.
which will help you read other works in the same period without needing translation
Again, I do not care about this. I'm not doing this for some school course or bragging rights. All I want is to read the book so it's enjoyable to me.
Why are you trying to force me to do something I do not want and that has absolutely no effect on you? Why are you so much against people simply enjoying literature if they do not do it exactly as you prefer? You don't have to read it. All I ask is that people like me be allowed to read a version we prefer without ridiculous gatekeeping and personal attacks.
Seriously, all this does is further the impression that literature buffs are gatekeeping assholes who care more about some weird concept of purity than that people actually enjoy literature.
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
3d ago
How is it a strawman to say that the existence of foreign language translations is considered fine by people? I've certainly never seen a literature enthusiast who'd want to restrict others from reading translated works when they can't read the original language.
As for streamlining, the very act of translating English text to Finnish inherently changes the sentence structure because English and Finnish are in different language families and have completely different grammar. It's impossible to translate many forms of archaic English to Finnish without streamlining the sentence structure because proper Finnish doesn't have the same forms of very long tacked on sentences (there are some long sentences but they are different form and thus wouldn't be any more authentic than the streamlined ones).
Obviously poor quality translations are considered bad but that's the very reason why I wish someone would make slightly streamlined versions of English language classics. As it is, my options are 1) try to read the originals and give up because the text is too laborous and annoying to read (without a very good cause, ie. the language used was the norm for the era instead of being a dedicated stylistic choice as you'd find in some books that intentionally evoke the feel of archaic language), 2) read at best a middling quality translation (because they are old and done without access to proper understanding of the source material) or 3) hope a newer high quality translation exists (eg. Pride and Prejudice has been translated by Kersti Juva who's renowned for her outstanding Tolkien translations). Given the lack of option 3, how is it better to either prevent me from reading the book in the first place or to force me to read a subpar translation (that gets say 70% there) instead of allowing me (and everyone else without requiring N different translations) to read a slightly modernized version that's 95% accurate to the original? (and will result in outright better comprehension and appreciation of the text because it uses the words in their modern meaning instead of 200 year old outdated meaning that will cause misunderstandings)
And if you think the existence of people who think that is a strawman, take a look at this and this comment in thus subthread which are essentially saying just that.
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
4d ago
Frankly, I don't care about the "history of English language". Neither do I care about "[your] heritage". I am afterall not English (or anglo- anything).
I simply want to read a few classic books in versions that don't require constantly jumping back and forth for no good reason or require using translations that can't capture the meaning of the original, being simultaneously both inaccurate and sounding archaic in precisely the wrong way (ie. many Finnish translations from 1940s and 50s). I don't see how making a new entirely optional version aimed at modern and foreign readers would somehow erase the existence of the original, particularly given that it's out of copyright and can't thus be removed from the market (like happens with movies). This isn't about "proving my literateness". I just want to read the book so that it's actually enjoyable instead of a chore.
Contrast the first paragraph of the original:
"Emma Woodhouse, handsome, clever, and rich, with a comfortable home and happy disposition, seemed to unite some of the best blessings of existence; and had lived nearly twenty-one years in the world with very little to distress or vex her."
with the only available Finnish translation (translated back to English and differences to the original bolded):
"Emma Woodhouse was beautiful, intelligent and rich; She had a comfortable home and happy disposition; She seemed to unite some of the best blessings of existence. She had lived nearly twenty-one years in the world with nothing to meaningfully distress or anger her."
and with something close to what I'd prefer:
"Emma Woodhouse was beautiful, clever and rich, with a comfortable home and happy disposition, and seemed to unite some of the best blessings of existence; She had lived nearly twenty-one years in the world with very little to distress or vex her."
Do you really think that people should have to read the second instead of the third when the first is not an option?
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
4d ago
Literally, it’s not that different.
Oh, really?
Do you often use words like "bride-people" or "valetudinarian", describe someone as of "easy fortune" or say "consequence" when you mean "social position"? Those are examples from just the first few pages of the book.
I guess I'm not really literate then. Of course, I assume this means that you in turn can read eg. Dostoevsky in the original Russian editions without problems, right? Afterall, by your measure anything else would be "bowdlerization".
And just to be clear, I'm not talking about some "simple English" version but simply updating those words and terms that have changed their meanings in the last 200 years (and there are enough that the first chapter alone has 34 foonotes!) and making minor changes to some of the overly complex sentence structure so you don't have to keep a dozen different things in mind just to be able to parse a single sentence.
But more to the point I simply cannot understand this view where nobody, not even non-native speakers, should be allowed to have an easier to read version available for them that stays authentic to the original's spirit and it would be better that all those people simply not read at all such books.
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
4d ago
I’m continuing my tradition of using The Motte as a wildly inappropriate forum for suggestions about media.
I recently watched Clueless (1995) and 10 Things I Hate About You (1999) which are modernized teenage high school romantic comedy adaptations of Jane Austen’s Emma and Shakespeare’s Taming Of The Shrew. And I loved them. They are the perfect combination of lighthearted fun, warm and fuzzy positive vibes (particularly Clueless), (faux) nostalgia back to my teenage years, good performances (even iconic in the case of Alicia Silverstone’s Cher in Clueless) combined with great execution and obviously excellent source material.
What other similar light hearted teen rom com adjacent yet actually really good adaptations or even original movies from the late 80s to 2000s should I check out?
I just started Jane Austen’s Emma. I’ve been meaning to read more ”proper” books for a while and I recently watched and loved Clueless (1995) which turns out to be a very well regarded modernized adaptation of Emma to a 90s high school setting. Thus getting an annotated ebook seemed a natural choice (for the high, high, price of $4.50). Wish me luck, lol.
Some googling for translations has also revealed an interesting example of elitism in literary circles. People recoil at the very idea that someone would translate older English language Classics to modern late 1900s / 2000s English and tell you to just suck it up with the overly complicated sentence structure and completely changed meaning of words. However translating to a foreign language - which throws the sentence structure to wind and streamlines it significantly - is somehow perfectly fine. Goddamn elitists…
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
5d ago
No, it very much isn't.
"Kill people required to achieve this strategic goal" is a valid war goal. Same with "Kill these specific people". Even "Kill or drive away everyone in this area" might be. But just "Kill lots of people" isn't because it doesn't achieve anything useful.
To
UnderpantsBomber Gnomes obviously.For real, the Iran "plan" seems to be about as well planned as the Underpants Gnomes' plan in that episode.
More options
Context Copy link