Jump to content
Coronavirus topics renamed and some locked. No new topics. ×
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

937 Excellent


About VinnieK

  • Rank
    I'se got the Ize.

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Still Going Wild in the Aisles.
  • Interests
    Living the life of a shameless bourgeois parasite

Recent Profile Visitors

10,467 profile views
  1. Are you talking about Jamys Jeheiney? That was an hour, not half an hour, though I don't think it's running anymore. Claare ny Gael (one hour, FM) is quite good though. . .
  2. Ah! So that's why the police were milling about St Johns for ages today. Apparently, the effigy is of Manannan, though from what I've seen it looks like someone gave the dummy from the Saw films a lick of paint, threw a bit of greenery about it, and stuck weird antler-like eyebrows on its face. I suppose a deity can look however he wants though, and he was something akin to a trickster god⁠—perhaps his latest appearance is some kind of celestial practical joke.
  3. But, as has already been stated, that's not what's happening. If you're a citizen within a member state of the union, you have free movement within that union. If you're not, you don't. The important thing about both those points is that they apply whatever the colour of your skin. That is to say, the average white North American or Australian has less opportunity to freely enter a European Union country than a black Frenchman has to move between those countries. Also, it's worth noting that should someone who isn't white immigrate to a European country and gain citizenship, they then have the right to move and reside within the European Union every bit as much as any other citizen. I think the problem is that you're conflating two very different concepts here: the freedom to move within a political and economic entity and the freedom to enter it. The former is, as previously stated, more or less the same as the freedom to move between U.S., German, or Australian states, and the latter more like gaining entry to any of those countries. Taking this into account, surely the European Union's policy is a lot less 'offensive' by your criteria than is the free movement agreement between Australia and New Zealand (given that they aren't in a political union)? In fact, just for a bit of mischief fun . . . given your views on free movement within Europe, do you then also believe that the Manx should be subject to strict immigration controls when attempting to work, study, or reside in the United Kingdom? After all, though we have a relationship with the United Kingdom we are not actually a part of it and never have been, so why should it be that we can breeze into the UK as and when we please, while someone from Angola or Vietnam would have a lengthy and uncertain application process ahead of them?
  4. That's something of a misrepresentation of both the European Union and its policy of freedom of movement though. There's a world of difference between allowing freedom of movement to all members of a political and economic union, which in this case is or was intended to be something akin to the freedom of movement U.S. citizens have within the United States, and racist or ethno-centric immigration policies individual nations have imposed in the past. Also, the Isle of Man doesn't really have an immigration system: we have no real restrictions on residency or citizenship. We are essentially part of the United Kingdom's immigration system, augmented with a work permit scheme which was intended to protect local labour, rather than to actively select migrants on their 'capability to contribute to the community'
  5. My thought is that singling out one solider for his accomplishments on the battlefield during a lesson on slavery would be a bit odd and come across as a bit jingoistic. It'd be a little like pausing a lesson on World War 2 to start banging on about Robert Henry Cain chinning a bunch of tanks. I don't think we were taught any Manx history either apart from maybe a small bit about the Vikings, though I doubt that extended much beyond "they were here, built some castles and whatnot"
  6. Why are you asking such meaningless questions when you should be overcome with pride regarding True Manx Hero™, William Garrett, who was literally the literal hero of a literal war literally against slavery? Traitor. I think we should commemorate this by issuing a stamp with the pattern of the Stars and Stripes superimposed on the Three Legs, with people of all races gathered around it and perhaps a logo that reads Cur-jee-my-ner! Ta shin yn feallagh mie!
  7. You could say exactly the same thing about every single country outside the point of origin, but that wouldn't be a particularly useful observation. It's better to try and get a handle on how many cases of infection for which travel is directly responsible.
  8. VinnieK


    You might be right about 'plead', but I'd say it's more 'non-standard' than incorrect. 'Plea' can and has been used as a verb in Scotland and the North of England since about the 15th century, though I suspect that it's probably more commonly in use in North America these days.
  9. VinnieK


    Well, if it was simply a consequence of dental work/problems (or if it was something to do with dialect), they were probably looking at you askance during your gesture of retaliation because they were thinking "why is this cretinous child confusing 'refuge' and 'refuse'?"
  10. VinnieK


    Are you sure you weren't just mishearing a 'sh' noise (possibly caused by dentures/missing teeth) as the 'g' sound in refuge?
  11. I like both quizzes, and they're fun, but I suspect neither is particularly useful. The problem is that the questions are worded in such a way that there's likely to be a lot of survey response effect skewing things one way or the other. Generally speaking, questionnaires investigating these kinds of things are better when they're working on a couple of levels deeper than bald statements of opinion on issues or ideology and from which you can determine political standpoints; e.g. by using hypothetical or played out scenarios to probe underlying attitudes. A further benefit of that approach is that you can sneak in a few questions about distressed tortoises to find out if you're dealing with a replicant.
  12. VinnieK


    I think the rule about Greek endings came a fair bit later than the development of prize/price as distinct words though, and only really caught on in a few places in Britain (e.g. in the case of Oxford spelling). Also it doesn't really apply here since the essence of the rule is that -ize is given to words whose etymology ultimately goes back to a Greek word with -ίζειν as a suffix, which isn't the case here: historically, price and prize were just variant spellings of the same word, and one that doesn't fulfil the criteria above. When still just variant spellings, price/prize meant something along the lines of 'esteem, worth, recognition thereof', so the likeliest explanation for the modern situation is that, as different meanings started developing, the pronunciation/spelling of price became associated with one meaning (cost) and that of prize, possibly influenced by praise, with the other (reward). Of course, that's pretty much what you said! I just don't think concerns about Greek suffixes played any particular role in this case.
  13. VinnieK


    He did, but there's a good chance that in this instance his decision did actually reflect the most common form at the time (either deliberately or accidentally). It's not perfect, I know, but Google Ngrams shows words like realize and organize as being more common in the -IZE form than the -ISE one in both British and American spellings (and by some way in the case of the latter). In comparison, the trend in England for -ISE only really seems to have taken off in 1830 or thereabouts, which puts us suspiciously close to the Victorian fetishization of Latin/French forms and grammar. Both are standardizations of course, but the adoption/imposition of -ISE feels (possibly wrongly, mind you) the more artificial of the two.
  14. VinnieK


    Why. . .why are you taking pictures of me? No wonder you looked all flustered and out of breath by the conundrum round, I thought it was just the numbers game that had got you all out of sorts.
  15. VinnieK


    Yeah, but wrong for the right reasons, unlike that transitive/intransitive blunder . I don't mind 'basically' that much, it's basically just being used as a discourse marker in that sense and isn't really (to my ears at least) more offensive than 'well' or 'look', used in the same kind of way. It's true that Webster's dictionary did deliberately rationalize some spellings, but I'm not sure that's the case of -IZE. That form of the suffix was common in British English for pretty good reasons long before Webster's. That said, a lot of the spellings we've inherited, whether in the British Isles or the U.S. are largely because of some more or less process of standardization, be it through more or less arbitrary decisions made in early dictionaries or educational circles (or some combination of the both). Multiple spellings happily coexisting were the norm until people in a position to enforce their will said things like "Spelling debt with a 'b' is totally mega-wicked, bruv".
  • Create New...