The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this

Hello There, Guest! Welcome to The CardBoard!

Feel free to Register and discuss on various topics with likeminded people. Already have an account? Please Login!

Thread Rating:

2 Vote(s) - 1 Average
1
2
3
4
5

The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this

BostonCard
24th year senior

Posts: 30,090
Threads: 2,136
Joined: Dec 2013

#32

12-20-2022, 10:01 PM

(This post was last modified: 12-20-2022, 10:06 PM by BostonCard.)

(12-20-2022, 09:45 PM)CTcard Wrote: By the way, does anyone know details as to why the phrase "Phillipine Islands" denotes colonialism while "Phillipines" does not?
I would assume it's some issue of historical usage.

I'm guessing that it's because "Philippine Islands" suggests a possessive: the islands belonging to Phillip II.

BC

By the way "seminal" is also an interesting etymology, because while it does come from the Latin "semen", the word meant "seed" in Latin.

Thus, "seminal" and "semen" (along with "seminar", "seminary") all come from the same Latin root, meaning seed, but there is no implication that any of the terms other than "semen" are gendered.

BC

#32

BostonCard

12-20-2022, 10:01 PM

(This post was last modified: 12-20-2022, 10:06 PM by BostonCard.)

(12-20-2022, 09:45 PM)CTcard Wrote: By the way, does anyone know details as to why the phrase "Phillipine Islands" denotes colonialism while "Phillipines" does not?
I would assume it's some issue of historical usage.

I'm guessing that it's because "Philippine Islands" suggests a possessive: the islands belonging to Phillip II.

BC

By the way "seminal" is also an interesting etymology, because while it does come from the Latin "semen", the word meant "seed" in Latin.

Thus, "seminal" and "semen" (along with "seminar", "seminary") all come from the same Latin root, meaning seed, but there is no implication that any of the terms other than "semen" are gendered.

BC

Find

Reply

« Next Oldest | Next Newest »

Messages In This Thread

The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by gailtate - 12-20-2022, 09:01 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by winflop - 12-20-2022, 09:14 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Mick - 12-20-2022, 12:23 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by winflop - 12-20-2022, 06:53 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Mick - 12-20-2022, 09:55 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by martyup - 12-20-2022, 10:29 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Bampa - 12-20-2022, 10:43 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by SamuelMcF - 12-20-2022, 10:47 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by martyup - 12-20-2022, 11:08 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Bampa - 12-20-2022, 11:11 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by JohnR34231 - 12-20-2022, 10:59 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Beeg_Dawg - 12-20-2022, 11:04 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 12-20-2022, 11:24 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by McKenwood - 12-20-2022, 11:34 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by murky - 12-20-2022, 05:05 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 12-20-2022, 09:16 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by M T - 12-20-2022, 12:08 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 12-20-2022, 01:25 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by lex24 - 01-07-2023, 09:59 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Snorlax94 - 12-20-2022, 01:56 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by cardcrimson - 12-20-2022, 02:15 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by dabigv13 - 12-20-2022, 02:25 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by cardcrimson - 12-20-2022, 02:33 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by dabigv13 - 12-20-2022, 03:18 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by CompSci87 - 12-20-2022, 03:33 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 12-20-2022, 03:45 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by qwerty49 - 12-20-2022, 02:35 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by CTcard - 12-20-2022, 09:45 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 12-20-2022, 10:01 PM

MVCard - by MVCard - 12-20-2022, 02:36 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by dabigv13 - 12-20-2022, 03:43 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Phogge - 12-20-2022, 05:05 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Leftcoast - 12-20-2022, 07:09 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by 82lsju - 12-21-2022, 08:19 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by winflop - 12-21-2022, 08:53 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Mick - 12-21-2022, 10:46 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by CTcard - 12-21-2022, 10:07 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Phogge - 12-21-2022, 01:19 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 12-21-2022, 05:29 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by terry - 12-21-2022, 06:27 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by cardcrimson - 12-21-2022, 07:27 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Madera86 - 12-21-2022, 10:11 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Leftcoast - 12-21-2022, 10:42 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by M T - 12-21-2022, 08:51 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 12-22-2022, 08:56 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Mick - 12-22-2022, 07:09 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by dabigv13 - 12-22-2022, 07:31 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by 2006alum - 12-22-2022, 07:38 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by 82lsju - 12-22-2022, 09:45 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by 81alum - 12-23-2022, 11:13 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by murky - 12-23-2022, 02:07 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Phogge - 12-23-2022, 03:06 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Canalejas - 12-23-2022, 03:40 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by TreesAndBirds - 01-07-2023, 10:07 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by winflop - 01-13-2023, 08:30 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by lex24 - 01-07-2023, 10:42 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Goose - 01-07-2023, 11:34 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 01-12-2023, 06:24 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by M T - 01-13-2023, 02:17 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by 2006alum - 01-17-2023, 05:31 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by lex24 - 01-17-2023, 08:10 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Mick - 01-27-2023, 06:23 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Phogge - 01-12-2023, 06:32 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by martyup - 01-13-2023, 09:34 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 01-13-2023, 02:45 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by cardcrimson - 01-13-2023, 02:51 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by lex24 - 01-13-2023, 08:35 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by martyup - 01-13-2023, 10:00 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 01-16-2023, 04:07 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by jacket3ree - 01-16-2023, 06:22 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 01-26-2023, 10:08 PM

View a Printable Version