Amanda Unvarnished

In reply to @RollingStone.

@RollingStone Jesus fucking Christ this is monstrous and I hope she sues the fuck out of the state of Texas and wins fucking everything.

In reply to @objectinspace.

@objectinspace @Onj That's the thing that sort of frustrates me. It's not that you can't promote things on here, and be successful about it. Hell, we're doing it with WBH and having decent success with it. You just can't use the same tactics you could on Twitter or Insta, you have to build community, not just broadcast your stuff and sell sell sell all the time.

In reply to @mektastic.

@mektastic @KaraLG84 Welcome back Meka!

In reply to @ppatel.

@ppatel @objectinspace Yeah but if they're looking for basic to intermediate, they really should have picked something else IMHO. And yeah the speech stuff looks really interesting.

In reply to @ppatel.

@ppatel @objectinspace Pet pieve: People who will go to the wall for one particular translation over all the others annoy me, especially because they pick their fave but never do things like read its preface which is where the translators come out and tell you their overall reasons for specific choices and their translation goals and translation type and why they went with that type, dynamic equivalence V. literal equivalence, or a mix where possible.

In reply to @ppatel.

@ppatel @objectinspace Yeah that too.

In reply to @objectinspace.

@objectinspace @ppatel Third, you should have multiple translations not just one or two, and fourth, whatever translations you have need to have an extensive footnote aparatus that explains linguistic concepts/grammar/the cultural stuff that impacts language. So yeah in short this was actually a very bad idea.

In reply to @objectinspace.

@objectinspace @ppatel has as neutral. My usual advice is that if you want a translation decent translation, first there are several caveats: First, you don't want a literal translation. Second, asking for a translation that conveys what the authors actually meant is impossible, you can only have one that conveys how it was understood during specific periods of time. +

In reply to @objectinspace.

@objectinspace @ppatel So that would be difficult. For starters, you're dealing with three source languages, two of which are very much gendered and do not include a neutral gender and which default to masculine most of the time, but have some pretty peculiar exceptions. Also word phrase meaning is heavily dependent on surrounding context, and it's not a one-to-one match between linguistic gender and human gender even when you're not dealing with something English+

In reply to @ppatel.

@ppatel @objectinspace Add to this that it depends on which translations they're using. Assuming it's a public domain one, like the King James or any in that translation family except the New King James, yeah there are going to be some definite problems with regard to all kinds of bias.

In reply to @ppatel.

@ppatel @KaraLG84 I'm not sure where King is taking his reference from, but they're definitely not the same Gilead. Atwood is referencing Gilead as in "balm of Gilead," which is now a figure of speech for a universal cure thanks to the 1611 King James Bible.