Слово дня: vagabond.
Слово дня: plea bargain.
"97% of trails end in plea bargains instead of justice, and minimum sentences ensure these people spend ridiculous amounts of time in prisons that punish them rather than rehabilitate them into productive citizens. A judge will hold a defendant indefinitely in prison without a conviction for refusing to disclose their disk encryption password in accordance with their 5th amendment rights — though if many political players had their way, encryption would be illegal anyway."
Слово дня: rehearsal.
Времена глагола -> ebzzry.io
Слово дня: surmise.
If life is a big game, it can be surmised that everything some kind of entertainment.
Слово дня: unfathomable.
"Glow is an ongoing comic series by Ray Chou and Vincenzo Ferriero with art by Anny Maulina and Dia Jia.
Glow takes place in a world where magic catalyzed both industrial revolution and nuclear holocaust. Half a millennia ago, an ancient and powerful empire known as Nymera developed a means to channel and store magical energy into a sticky blue substance known as anima, storing them into massive Towers across the world."
Слово дня: voracious.
слово дня: robotripping
Dextromethorphan has powerful dissociative properties when administered in doses well above those considered therapeutic for cough suppression. Recreational use of DXM is sometimes referred to in slang form as "robo-tripping," whose prefix derives from the Robitussin brand name
Слово дня: peachy-keen.
Слово дня: nitty-gritty.
Попался новый глагол – to tsun.
Haruhi Suzumiya: [...] and violently tsuns him out of the room. tvtropes.org
Слово дня: insincerity.
Слово дня: smidgeon.
Слово дня: Perspicuity.
Слово дня: nonchalantly.
слово дня, прилагательное: logorrheic.
Страдания англоязычных от ASCII
Even in English we lived through all the days of ASCII without the ability to spell co-operate properly (with a diaeresis over the second 'o', instead of the hyphen). Or naive (diaeresis over the 'i'), for that matter.
husband = house dweller pbs.twimg.com
слово дня на сегодня: zilch
Подумалось, что катакана — это биндинги для японского языка к английскому.
Briefly, "the realization that each random passerby is living a life as vivid and complex as your own." [Originally from the Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows](www.dictionaryofobscuresorrows.com/post/23536922667/sonder), which has a lot more beautiful neologism definitions like this you might enjoy.
Is Sonder an actual word?
Not quite, John Koenig, the creator The Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows states explicitly that all definitions are made up.
сегодня я впервые заметил употребление этого слова в дикой природе
Слово дня на сегодня: hamartia
(the character flaw or error of a tragic hero that leads to his downfall)
бля, написал в чатике Me с большой буквы. Пусть знают наших :)
когда мы сказали, что не отличаем на слух «caught» от «coat» и им подобные, наш преподаватель (британец) ответил, что не видит разницы в звучании слов «мужчина» и «машина». — for ten minutes straight I was wondering why my colleague suggests me to get inside of a man...
Всегда читал слово jewelry как jeweRLy, а оказывается правильно оно jeweLRy.
Полный отстой, какое-то бракованое слово
Как по-английски будет "тебе надо, ты и делай"?
Hallowe'en (a contraction of All Hallows' Evening)
what does the fridge say
spelling is correct... nah, dont think so
на urbandictionary уже есть это слово img-9gag-fun.9cache.com
У Неандертальцев был крупнее мозг, сильнее тело, но они были первобытными коммунистами. Кроманьонцы были слабее их, но они были первобытными капиталистами. Как всегда, рыночек порешал. Вымершие неандертальцы — вот до какой исторической черты коммунисты хотят деградировать людей: fee.org
"In the blockbuster 2015 book Sapiens, Yuval Noah Harari pointed out that our species has conducted intergroup trade for tens of thousands of years, but that other species of hominids never did:
“Archaeologists excavating 30,000 year old Sapiens sites in the European heartland occasionally find there seashells from the Mediterranean and Atlantic coasts. In all likelihood, these shells got to the continental interior through long-distance trade between different Sapiens bands. Neanderthal sites lack any evidence of such trade. Each group manufactured its own tools from local materials…”
He argues that this is what gave homo sapiens a decisive competitive advantage over our distant cousins, who in some cases actually had bigger brains than us.
However, Harari is not the first to make this argument. In his 2010 book The Rational Optimist: How Prosperity Evolves, Matt Ridley made and elaborated on the same point and the same argument. Ridley also noted the archaeological evidence of far-flung trade networks among homo sapiens.
Ridley helpfully distinguishes between true trade and the other kinds of reciprocity that occur throughout the animal kingdom:
“I am not talking about swapping favours — any old primate can do that. There is plenty of ‘reciprocity’ in monkeys and apes: you scratch my back and I scratch yours. (…) Such reciprocity is an important human social glue, a source of cooperation and a habit inherited from the animal past that undoubtedly prepared human beings for exchange. But it is not the same thing as exchange. Reciprocity means giving each other the same thing (usually) at different times. Exchange — call it barter or trade if you like — means giving each other different things (usually) at the same time: simultaneously swapping two different objects. In Adam Smith’s words, ‘Give me that which I want, and you shall have this which you want.’”
Inventing inter-band trade was quite an achievement, Ridley remarks, especially given:
“…the homicidal relationships between tribes. Famously, no other species of ape can encounter strangers without trying to kill them, and the instinct still lurks in the human breast. But by 82,000 years ago, human beings had overcome this problem sufficiently to be able to pass Nassarius shells hand to hand 125 miles inland.”
Ridley compares the trade networks of our ancestors to the isolationism of Neanderthal bands:
“This is in striking contrast to the Neanderthals, whose stone tools were virtually always made from raw material available within an hour’s walk of where the tool was used. To me this is a vital clue to why the Neanderthals were still making hand axes, while their African-origin competitors were making ever more types of tool. Without trade, innovation just does not happen. Exchange is to technology as sex is to evolution. It stimulates novelty. The remarkable thing about the moderns of west Asia is not so much the diversity of artefacts as the continual innovation. There is more invention between 80,000 and 20,000 years ago than there had been in the previous million. By today’s standards, it was very slow, but by the standards of Homo erectus it was lightning-fast. And the next ten millennia would see still more innovations: fish hooks, all sorts of implements, domesticated wolves, wheat, figs, sheep, money.”
Neanderthals were individually stronger than us and had bigger brains. They were clever enough to make tools and weapons, to speak, to think conceptually, to create art, and to develop culture. But, they were incapable of trade relations outside the familial band, and that doomed them to many millennia of economic and technological stagnation."
"African poverty was not caused by colonialism, capitalism or free trade. As I have noted before, many of Europe’s former dependencies became rich precisely because they maintained many of the colonial institutions and partook in global trade. African poverty preceded the continent’s contact with Europe and persists today. That is an outcome of unfortunate policy choices, most of which were freely chosen by Africa’s leaders after independence.
Like Europe, Africa started out desperately poor. The late Professor Angus Maddison of Groningen University has estimated that, at the start of the Common Era, average per capita income in Africa was $470 per year (in 1990 dollars). The global average was roughly equal to that of Africa. Western Europe and North Africa, which were parts of the Roman Empire, were slightly better off ($600). In contrast, North America lagged behind Africa ($400). All in all, the world was both fairly equal and very poor.
The origins of global inequality, which saw Western Europe and, later, North America, power ahead of the rest of the world, can be traced to the rise of the Northern Italian city states in the 14th century and the Renaissance in the 15th century. By 1500, a typical European was about twice as rich as a typical African. But the real gap in living standards opened only after the Industrial Revolution that started in England in the late 18th century and spread to Europe and North America in the 19th century.
In 1870, when Europeans controlled no more than 10 per cent of the African continent (mostly North and South Africa), Western European incomes were already four times higher than those in Africa. Europe, in other words, did not need Africa in order to become prosperous. Europe colonised Africa because Europe was prosperous and, consequently, more powerful. Appreciation of the chronology of events does not justify or defend colonialism. But it does help explain it.
Africa’s fortunes under colonial rule varied. Much progress was made in terms of health and education. Maddison estimates that in 1870, there were 91 million Africans. By 1960, the year of independence, the African population grew more than threefold – to 285 million. The OECD estimates that over the same time period the share of the African population attending school rose from less than 5 per cent to over 20 per cent. On the down side, Europeans treated Africans with contempt, and subjected them to discrimination and, sometimes, violence.
That violence intensified during Africa’s struggle for independence, as the colonial powers tried to beat back African nationalists. As a result, African leaders took over countries where repression of political dissent was already firmly established. Instead of repealing censorship and detention laws, however, African leaders kept and expanded them.
It was precisely because colonial rule was so psychologically demeaning to Africans in general and nationalist leaders in particular that post-independence African governments were so determined to expunge many of the colonial institutions. Since rule of law, accountable government, property rights and free trade were European imports, they had to go. Instead, many African leaders chose to emulate the political arrangements and economic policies of a rising power that represented the exact opposite of Western free market and liberal democracy – the Soviet Union.
Africa’s love affair with socialism persisted until the 1990s, when, at long last, Africa started to reintegrate into the global economy. Trade relations with the rest of the world were somewhat liberalised and African nations started to deregulate their economies, thus climbing up the rankings in the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business report. That said, even today, Africa remains the least economically free and most protectionist continent in the world. That – and not free trade – is the problem."
в любом языке свои засады, кмк
The phrase “shipping” derives its origin from “relationshipper.” так вот откуда дровишки