 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / May 2009The Dark Force
Hi all, In the following webpage: http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~eclark/maple_or_mathematica.html I encountered such a sentence: In brief, Maple represents The Force, and Mathematica is often referred to as The Dark Force. I just cann't understand the meaning of the _Dark_ in the prhase _The Dark Force_. Any hints will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.  Signature.: Hongyi Zhao [ hongyi.zhao AT gmail.com ] Free as in Freedom :. > Hi all, > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I just cann't understand the meaning of the _Dark_ in the prhase _The > Dark Force_. Any hints will be greatly appreciated. Evil. This is a cliché of fantasy fiction going back at least to the Dark Lord in /The Lord of the Rings/. I think the comment specifically refers to the /Star Wars/ movies, in which some good characters use a power called the Force and bad characters use the Dark Side of the Force. The writer presumably dislikes Mathematica and is humorously exaggerating his or her dislike by linking Mathematica with Cosmic Evil. -- Jerry Friedman > > Hi all, > > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > exaggerating his or her dislike by linking Mathematica with Cosmic > Evil. You often see the same usage with respect to Windows, refered to as the evil empire, or the dark side. Jan >Jerry Friedman wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >You often see the same usage with respect to Windows, >refered to as the evil empire, or the dark side. When it comes to speaking their dislikes about technical matters, people sometimes are at their best. One of my favorites is "C is to C++ as lung is to lung cancer." > >You often see the same usage with respect to Windows, > >refered to as the evil empire, or the dark side. > > When it comes to speaking their dislikes about technical matters, > people sometimes are at their best. One of my favorites is "C is to C++ > as lung is to lung cancer." The one I remember goes more like "If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. If your hammer is C++, everything starts looking like your thumb." Jim Deutch (JimboCat) -- "A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver." -- Boon > Hi all, > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Thanks in advance. Watch the Movie Star Wars. The Force" ie: the good the Dark side of the force,ie:the evil. >> Hi all, >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > The Force" ie: the good > the Dark side of the force,ie:the evil. This concept of Light equals Good, and Dark equals Evil is very old.[1] From the OED: dark, a. II. fig. 4. Characterized by absence of moral or spiritual light; evil, wicked; also, in a stronger sense, characterized by a turpitude or wickedness of sombre or unrelieved nature; foul, iniquitous, atrocious. a1000 Satan 105 (Gr.) Feond seondon re{edh}e, dimme, and deorce. "deorce" is an old spelling of "dark". [1] That means that I don't actually know how old. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >This concept of Light equals Good, and Dark equals Evil is very old.[1] > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >[1] That means that I don't actually know how old. I wouldn't be surprised if it goes all the way back to 23 October 4004 BC. SignatureJames >>This concept of Light equals Good, and Dark equals Evil is very old.[1] >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >I wouldn't be surprised if it goes all the way back to >23 October 4004 BC. That is the date of the Virtual Origin of All Things. The whole kit and caboodle (aka whole shooting match) was created much more recently. It was created with a built-in history (aka back story) so that it appears to have been created on 23 October 4004 BC. Another hyposthesis is that it was actually created on 23 October 4004 BC with a built-in history of evolution from a Big Bang n billion yesr ago. (Vary the creation date to personal taste.) SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) > >>This concept of Light equals Good, and Dark equals Evil is very old.[1] > >> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > more recently. It was created with a built-in history (aka back story) > so that it appears to have been created on 23 October 4004 BC. Indeed, she created the world last thursday, every last thursday even, Jan >>This concept of Light equals Good, and Dark equals Evil is very old.[1] >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > I wouldn't be surprised if it goes all the way back to > 23 October 4004 BC. Actually, I only see it used figuratively once in the Torah, in Genesis 15:12 As the sun was about to set, a deep sleep fell upon Abram, and a great dark dread descended upon him. The KJV gives this as "a horror of great darkness". All the other uses in the KJV appear to be literal, including things like Exodus 20:21: "Moses drew near unto the thick darkness where God was". (The Hebrew uses a different word, meaning "dark cloud" than in the Genesis passage.) In many later books, darkness is seen as scary and light is better, but at the same time, God is portrayed as dwelling in darkness and dark clouds. (So much so that I start to wonder whether priests at the time it was written weren't perhaps generating smoky clouds to give worshipers a substitute for icons.) It's when you start getting into Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Isaiah and the like that you start seeing a real identification of darkness with evil. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |To find the end of Middle English, 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |you discover the exact date and Palo Alto, CA 94304 |time the Great Vowel Shift took |place (the morning of May 5, 1450, kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |at some time between neenuh fiftehn (650)857-7572 |and nahyn twenty-fahyv). | Kevin Wald http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >>>This concept of Light equals Good, and Dark equals Evil is very old.[1] >>> [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] >Isaiah and the like that you start seeing a real identification of >darkness with evil. But on that fateful October day, when that God person suddenly decided to do something, he created light and saw that it was good. This implies that the darkness that had been was upon the face of the deep until then was less than good. On a more serious note, here's an extended clerihew: How odd of God To Ussher in Six thousand years With such a din By starting with Such smart designs Then screwing up With Spencer Hines SignatureJames > But on that fateful October day, when that God person suddenly > decided to do something, he created light and saw that it was > good. This implies that the darkness that had been was upon the > face of the deep until then was less than good. There's a bit of a difference between "not as good as it could be" and "evil". Indeed, even in those first six days things that were improved on had been "good". On the second day he created the sky and called it "good", but on the fourth day he created the stars and the sun and the moon and called *that* "good". Was the starless sky not really good on the second day? Was it evil? Had God just gotten bored with it by the fourth day and it wasn't good anymore? Similarly, on the third day, he separated the waters and created the dry land and the seas and called it "good". But on the fifth day it apparently could be better, and he created insects, fish, and birds, and called *this* "good". On the sixth day, he created animals, and now *that* was "good". (Then he created people and didn't say anything.) SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |A burro is an a.s. A burrow is a 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |hole in the ground. As a Palo Alto, CA 94304 |journalist, you are expected to |know the difference. kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com | UPI Stylebook (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >> But on that fateful October day, when that God person suddenly >> decided to do something, he created light and saw that it was [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >now *that* was "good". (Then he created people and didn't say >anything.) That last observation is interesting, and it harmonises nicely with the tenor of my little poem. SignatureJames >On a more serious note, here's an extended clerihew: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Then screwing up >With Spencer Hines When God has a bad day He will frequently say Booze is a sin So never agin! On one morning of vomit He displaced a comet Which zapped dinosaurs Leaving Earth to an implaus Ible mammal called Man Who, when he can Likes to slaughter More than he oughter. Unfortunately, God (The lazy old sod) Didn't invent a scheme (Thus fulfilling our dream And relieving our souls) Of eliminating trolls Before they are born So they're already gawn Before we can read 'em And know we don't need 'em. SignatureRobin (BrE) Herts, England >>On a more serious note, here's an extended clerihew: >> [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >Before we can read 'em >And know we don't need 'em. Two questions: 1. Is that the longest clerihew on record? 2. Does everyone here pronounce "troll" to rhyme with "soul"? I rhyme it with "doll". Dictionaries allow both pronunciations. The sound sample at Wiktionary seems to have been uttered by some drunk who was vomiting at the same time: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/troll#Pronunciation SignatureJames >2. Does everyone here pronounce "troll" to rhyme with "soul"? You betcha. >I rhyme it with "doll". One more reason for me to stick with "A Letter to Sis" and not try poetry. Y'all wouldn't understand me. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida >>2. Does everyone here pronounce "troll" to rhyme with "soul"? > >You betcha. I'm astonished at the speed with which you collected everyone's replies. Was there not a single dissenting voice? >>I rhyme it with "doll". > >One more reason for me to stick with "A Letter to Sis" and not try >poetry. Y'all wouldn't understand me. Remember, I am new to this group of yours, having been asleep inside this planet of Magrathea for five million years, and know little of these Letters to Sis of which you speak. SignatureJames >>> 2. Does everyone here pronounce "troll" to rhyme with "soul"? >> You betcha. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > inside this planet of Magrathea for five million years, and know > little of these Letters to Sis of which you speak. Me, I like Tony's filigree decorations. I'm old fashioned enough to think that they give a lovely baroque feel to an epistle. SignatureDavid >>>2. Does everyone here pronounce "troll" to rhyme with "soul"? >> >>You betcha. > >I'm astonished at the speed with which you collected everyone's >replies. Was there not a single dissenting voice? On Fridays that fall on an odd-numbered day, The Committee appoints one Regular to speak for all Regulars. >>>I rhyme it with "doll". >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Remember, I am new to this group of yours, having been asleep >inside this planet of Magrathea for five million years Nudge that guy next to you - Peter Daniels - and tell him to wake up and find out what is now "usual" to the rest of us. >, and know >little of these Letters to Sis of which you speak. The first thing you need to know about them is that I have no sister. From there on, it's all downhill. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida >2. Does everyone here pronounce "troll" to rhyme with "soul"? I >rhyme it with "doll". I certainly say /troul/, not /trOl/, although I recognize both pronunciations. I'd probably guess that /trOl/ users were more likely to be British, but I wouldn't be surprised to be wrong on that. I suppose we could describe mine as "TINT" ("troll is not trawl") and yours as "TIT" (erm, maybe that's not so good an idea). Or does your "trawl" have a different vowel? -GAWollman SignatureGarrett A. Wollman | The real tragedy of human existence is not that we are wollman@csail.mit.edu| nasty by nature, but that a cruel structural asymmetry Opinions not those | grants to rare events of meanness such power to shape of MIT or CSAIL. | our history. - S.J. Gould, Ten Thousand Acts of Kindness >>2. Does everyone here pronounce "troll" to rhyme with "soul"? I >>rhyme it with "doll". [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > yours as "TIT" (erm, maybe that's not so good an idea). Or does your > "trawl" have a different vowel? My "troll"[*] is neither "trawl" nor the start of "trolley" (to rhyme with "doll"). Troll is with "soul" and "pole", "trawl" is with "haul" and "wall". [1] - in the "I'm a Troll, Fol-de-roll" sense[2] and the Internet sense. In "trolling about aimlessly" I'd rhyme it with "doll". It has never existing as a fishing term for me. [2] - in which "roll" clearly sounds differently than when used to describe what Swiss do when you push them down a mountain. SignatureOnline waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk development version: http://canalplan.eu >My "troll"[*] is neither "trawl" nor the start of "trolley" (to rhyme >with "doll"). Troll is with "soul" and "pole", "trawl" is with "haul" [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >sense. In "trolling about aimlessly" I'd rhyme it with "doll". It has >never existing as a fishing term for me. I'm glad I decided to read the thread before answering. For me, "troll" has always taken the "soul" pronunciation because of the Three Billy Goats Gruff. I don't think I've ever used the word as a neutral verb as in your second sentence. SignatureLinz Wet Yorks via Cambridge, York, London and Watford My accent may vary >>2. Does everyone here pronounce "troll" to rhyme with "soul"? I >>rhyme it with "doll". [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >yours as "TIT" (erm, maybe that's not so good an idea). Or does your >"trawl" have a different vowel? In my dialect, "doll" rhymes with "trawl", with /O:/, but I am aware that this is not Received Pronunciation (although I must have received it from somewhere). Before voiceless consonants I don't drawl the short vowel so much, so I do make the standard distinction between "tot" and "taught". SignatureJames (BrE with a distinctly septentrional flavour) >>> 2. Does everyone here pronounce "troll" to rhyme with "soul"? I >>> rhyme it with "doll". [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > much, so I do make the standard distinction between "tot" and > "taught". Oh, the CIC/CINC differentiation. (Cot/caught, but in other dress. Note that the "cote" part is not considered.) > On Fri, 08 May 2009 09:53:17 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum > [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > Then screwing up > With Spencer Hines That's not a clerihew. It needs to be aabb, with irregular rhythm, and the first line must be the subject's name, no more and no less. Jehovah Created a nova, But thought he'd let a Rational person think it was a veta. -- Jerry Friedman >> On Fri, 08 May 2009 09:53:17 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum >> [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] >But thought he'd let a >Rational person think it was a veta. I stand corrected. Is there a name for the type of couplet that inspired my little whatever-it-was? I am referring to William Norman Ewer's: How odd of God To choose the Jews or someone else's: On Fry-days I always Eat Pisces in slices. SignatureJames On May 8, 11:26 pm, jerry_fried...@yahoo.com wrote: > > On Fri, 08 May 2009 09:53:17 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum > [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] > But thought he'd let a > Rational person think it was a veta. W. O. Bentley Explained, gently, That while of clerihews no-one could be fonder, They were not related. So he moved to Lagonda. -- franzi >On May 8, 11:26 pm, jerry_fried...@yahoo.com wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] >That while of clerihews no-one could be fonder, >They were not related. So he moved to Lagonda. Jamie Hogg Was fervently agog To learn about the clerihew From two who knew. SignatureJames |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.