Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Narrative Space Options for non-spellcasters
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6150846" data-attributes="member: 87792"><p>English is a descriptive and not a prescriptive language. The OED is considered more authoritative than most at getting history right. It also contains more words than just about any other. On the other hand the greater depth the full OED gives to words makes it in many cases less useful rather than more for establishing the normal meanings of terms. On the other hand neither insincere nor disingenuous are obscure words and the M-W is (a) older than the OED, (b) highly respected and authoritative and (c) searchable so we can independently verify each others results.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Indeed. You can act disingenuously. A disingenuous action is one at which the motivation for the action is at odds with the overt form of the action. A lot of flirting is disingenuous - it involves affecting a coyness or an arrogance that is at odds with the underlying person, and is intended to be seen as such. Another form of a disingenuous act is when a politician inserts a rider into a bill not for the purpose of getting the rider passed, but for the purpose of sabotaging the bill. Disingenuous acts are dishonest acts. Highlighting those two words proves nothing other than that you've highlighted two words.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm aware of that meaning. The only time I've seen it used was for translations of the bible in which there was no attempt to read the reader's own meaning into the case. </p><p></p><p>I believe <a href="http://www.units.muohio.edu/englishtech/ENG49502/schoenel/Sincere/sincere.htm" target="_blank">the full OED text to have been copied here</a> - and shorter versions have been copied <a href="http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=482zYI7JCDoC&pg=PA192&dq=sincere+exact+oed+definition+true,+veracious;+correct,+exact&hl=en&sa=X&ei=LJXNUdP0LqWr0QWfl4HgDg&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=true%2C%20veracious%3B%20correct%2C%20exact&f=false" target="_blank">here</a> and <a href="http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_sTIibjd_JUC&pg=PA270&dq=sincere+exact+oed+definition+true,+veracious;+correct,+exact&hl=en&sa=X&ei=LJXNUdP0LqWr0QWfl4HgDg&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=true%2C%20veracious%3B%20correct%2C%20exact&f=false" target="_blank">here</a>. </p><p></p><p>In other words the OED definition you are citing and as has been cited by Google books is:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong></strong></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>1: Not falsified or perverted in any way:</strong></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong></strong>1a: of doctrine etc.: Genuine, pure</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">1b: true, veracious, correct, exact</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">1c: morally uncorrupted, uncontaminated.</p><p></p><p>In order to claim definition 1b <em>you need to claim the definition 1 heading.</em> It's true, veracious, correct, and exact <em>in that it hasn't been falsified or perverted in any way.</em> And insincere using this definition of sincere means that it is untrue or false <em>because it has been falsified or perverted.</em></p><p></p><p>If I am right about the OED's actual text based on your selective quotation then either you are misusing the OED by ignoring the category heading or you are intentionally selectively quoting only the part of the OED that backs up your point.</p><p></p><p>I also notice you look at sincere rather than insincere - does the OED under the entry of "insincere" say that it means the same as not sincere? Or does it say more than that? Because you've jumped straight from disingenuous to sincere without going through <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/insincere" target="_blank">insincere</a> (which the M-W defines as "Not sincere; hypocritical" - and the way it is not sincere is the sort of way that implies hypocricy).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Given that you haven't quoted the OED on the subject of Insincere at all, you haven't shown a thing. You have only quoted sincere. And insincere may be derived from sincere and by a literal meaning be not sincere - but words in English don't mean their literal meanings. And given that you appear to have selectively quoted the OED without including the context (and a text without context is a pretext) I don't think my disagreement is with the OED.</p><p></p><p>The entire OED entry matters - as does the actual entry for the OED on the word insincere - an entry that was conspicuously absent in your reply.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Insincere in the M-W also points to hypocritical. Both are needed if you are to use the M-W effectively. But instead of bringing up the OED's description of Insincere you are instead using a secondary meaning of Sincere. Which is a different word. And the full OED passage you have taken out of context appears (if I am right) to demonstrate that it's truth in the sense of not being falsified or perverted.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>At best it means that you are tragically mistaken out of the way your use of the English language will be taken by people of good faith. And as you are giving offence to [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] whether you mean to or not, and he has called you on this, that on its own should be enough to make you select language that will not give offence. However your response has been to resort to subsidiary meanings in the dictionary to say that what you were saying was not offensive. And when I pointed out what the dictionary said, your response involved some selective quoting, only quoting a little of the root word "disingenuous", entirely missing one of the important words (insincere) out, only partially quoting disingenuous, and seemingly only selectively quoting from one of the meanings of sincere in a way that ignores the overall meaning.</p><p></p><p>Anyway, thank you for giving me a distraction from worrying about my little sister's latest heart operation.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 6150846, member: 87792"] English is a descriptive and not a prescriptive language. The OED is considered more authoritative than most at getting history right. It also contains more words than just about any other. On the other hand the greater depth the full OED gives to words makes it in many cases less useful rather than more for establishing the normal meanings of terms. On the other hand neither insincere nor disingenuous are obscure words and the M-W is (a) older than the OED, (b) highly respected and authoritative and (c) searchable so we can independently verify each others results. Indeed. You can act disingenuously. A disingenuous action is one at which the motivation for the action is at odds with the overt form of the action. A lot of flirting is disingenuous - it involves affecting a coyness or an arrogance that is at odds with the underlying person, and is intended to be seen as such. Another form of a disingenuous act is when a politician inserts a rider into a bill not for the purpose of getting the rider passed, but for the purpose of sabotaging the bill. Disingenuous acts are dishonest acts. Highlighting those two words proves nothing other than that you've highlighted two words. I'm aware of that meaning. The only time I've seen it used was for translations of the bible in which there was no attempt to read the reader's own meaning into the case. I believe [URL="http://www.units.muohio.edu/englishtech/ENG49502/schoenel/Sincere/sincere.htm"]the full OED text to have been copied here[/URL] - and shorter versions have been copied [URL="http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=482zYI7JCDoC&pg=PA192&dq=sincere+exact+oed+definition+true,+veracious;+correct,+exact&hl=en&sa=X&ei=LJXNUdP0LqWr0QWfl4HgDg&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=true%2C%20veracious%3B%20correct%2C%20exact&f=false"]here[/URL] and [URL="http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_sTIibjd_JUC&pg=PA270&dq=sincere+exact+oed+definition+true,+veracious;+correct,+exact&hl=en&sa=X&ei=LJXNUdP0LqWr0QWfl4HgDg&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=true%2C%20veracious%3B%20correct%2C%20exact&f=false"]here[/URL]. In other words the OED definition you are citing and as has been cited by Google books is: [INDENT][B] 1: Not falsified or perverted in any way: [/B]1a: of doctrine etc.: Genuine, pure 1b: true, veracious, correct, exact 1c: morally uncorrupted, uncontaminated.[/INDENT] In order to claim definition 1b [I]you need to claim the definition 1 heading.[/I] It's true, veracious, correct, and exact [I]in that it hasn't been falsified or perverted in any way.[/I] And insincere using this definition of sincere means that it is untrue or false [I]because it has been falsified or perverted.[/I] If I am right about the OED's actual text based on your selective quotation then either you are misusing the OED by ignoring the category heading or you are intentionally selectively quoting only the part of the OED that backs up your point. I also notice you look at sincere rather than insincere - does the OED under the entry of "insincere" say that it means the same as not sincere? Or does it say more than that? Because you've jumped straight from disingenuous to sincere without going through [URL="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/insincere"]insincere[/URL] (which the M-W defines as "Not sincere; hypocritical" - and the way it is not sincere is the sort of way that implies hypocricy). Given that you haven't quoted the OED on the subject of Insincere at all, you haven't shown a thing. You have only quoted sincere. And insincere may be derived from sincere and by a literal meaning be not sincere - but words in English don't mean their literal meanings. And given that you appear to have selectively quoted the OED without including the context (and a text without context is a pretext) I don't think my disagreement is with the OED. The entire OED entry matters - as does the actual entry for the OED on the word insincere - an entry that was conspicuously absent in your reply. Insincere in the M-W also points to hypocritical. Both are needed if you are to use the M-W effectively. But instead of bringing up the OED's description of Insincere you are instead using a secondary meaning of Sincere. Which is a different word. And the full OED passage you have taken out of context appears (if I am right) to demonstrate that it's truth in the sense of not being falsified or perverted. At best it means that you are tragically mistaken out of the way your use of the English language will be taken by people of good faith. And as you are giving offence to [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] whether you mean to or not, and he has called you on this, that on its own should be enough to make you select language that will not give offence. However your response has been to resort to subsidiary meanings in the dictionary to say that what you were saying was not offensive. And when I pointed out what the dictionary said, your response involved some selective quoting, only quoting a little of the root word "disingenuous", entirely missing one of the important words (insincere) out, only partially quoting disingenuous, and seemingly only selectively quoting from one of the meanings of sincere in a way that ignores the overall meaning. Anyway, thank you for giving me a distraction from worrying about my little sister's latest heart operation. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Narrative Space Options for non-spellcasters
Top