example
Приключений на свою задницу
:o
it might means something bad, but I have no idea
Printable View
example
Приключений на свою задницу
:o
it might means something bad, but I have no idea
(Seek) adventures for ones ass
means neutral or negative when somebody is ploting something risky or tricky
so it is slang for "ass"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Leof
yes! like butt I suppose
It's a softer, little smoothed word for mentioning the ass
the vulgar form is Ж0ПА
If somebody "ищет приключений на свою задницу" they are being foolhardy. For instance, this can be said about virtually every character Bruce Willis has played, particularly in Die Hard trilogy, or just about any Hollywood-type-tough-guy-superhero :lol:
P.S. Sorry for mangling the English language in my last sentence, I'm not sure how it sounds to a native English speaker - maybe witty, maybe silly :lol:
Oo er. :?Quote:
Originally Posted by Leof
Lingvo says "bum" or "fanny." Those are kind of old-fashioned sounding though...Quote:
Originally Posted by Leof
First, as for the content of what you're saying, is that really the case? Those are silly movies, but the people in the real-world create absurd situations. The characters THEMSELVES are following perfectly logical courses of action -- stopping the bad guys, saving the world, etc. I don't know for sure, but the way I took ищет приключений на свою задницу is more like "looking for trouble you don't need," or "if it ain't broken, don't fix it." Someone who, for example, takes apart their watch, when it works fine, just for the sake of doing so I'd say ищет приключений на свою задницу. Basically, doing something stupid and inadvisable just for the sake of doing so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vadim84
As for you sentence, it was perfectly understandable.
The example with the watch doesn't work here. It's not risky or exciting enough to be considered "приключениями".Quote:
Originally Posted by Бармалей
This phrase often is used when speaking about people who due to their nature or way of living often find themselves in unusual or risky situations. But that doesn't mean don't have some noble goal (like B.Willis :wink:) .
But the first your point was true, Barmaley
as you said it's somebody looking for trouble he doesn't need.
bum should be fits well for задница likewise for П0ПА
TATY, what does your Oo er. mean?
Something Swedish? :D
Старый анекдот по теме:
- Мама, что такое ж..а?
- Вовочка, такого слова нет.
- Как это может быть? Ж..а есть, а слова нету.
This phrase is often said to someone who does something risky or perilous. For example it could be said to someone who intends to walk to his or her place throught dark night streets and jeopardizes his or her money/health/life.
Is it necessary to always write "his or her"? I know that it's kind of PC but it's so boring. :)
Like being married?????Quote:
Originally Posted by Bisquit
Really? You are the native speaker, and this is the first time I've heard the phrase before, but I still disagree, I think. :D I think there's a difference here between:Quote:
Originally Posted by gRomoZeka
a. FINDING themself in a unusual or risky situation
b. PUTTING themself there b/c they're looking for adventure/trouble/etc
To me, the first means it could happen to anybody -- it's like a tragedy befalls on them.
a.I was driving home and my brakes suddenly went out -- so I was in a risky situation until I ran out of gas.
As opposed to:
b.I decided to cut my brake-line, because I saw someone drive without brakes in a movie, and it looked really cool to be in a risky situation like that. Then I ran my car off a draw-bridge while it was up.
Do you understand what I'm arguing?
It means to take unnecessary risks, putting it formal and short.
Man, I wonder whether I'd ever manage to type the word u-n-n-e-c-e-s-s-a-r-y correctly from the first time. It's unbearable. http://ramil.kicks-ass.org/smileys/cry.gif
You could just say 'their'. 'His' can mean mankind, which includes males and females. Usually just saying 'his' is sufficient, unless the person you're speaking of is definatly female. If you're writing a legal document you should probably say 'his or her'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bisquit
Actually, you're wrong. Proper English prohibits using "their" -- it's just a misconception. "Their" is PLURAL. I'm posting a lengthy extract from dictionary.com on the matter below. The gist of it, though, is that some people deliberately make a statement with a plural subject, just so they can use "their" and avoid any political connotations. But the bottom line is you can NEVER use "their" as a singular possessive adjective, however tempting it may be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Layne
EXTRACT:
It is clear that many people now routinely construct their remarks to avoid generic he, usually using one of two strategies: changing to the plural, so they is used (which is often the easiest solution) or using compound and coordinate forms such as he/she or he or she (which can be cumbersome in sustained use). In some cases, the generic pronoun can simply be dropped or changed to an article with no change in meaning. The sentence A writer who draws on personal experience for material should not be surprised if reviewers seize on that fact is complete as it stands and requires no pronoun before the word material. The sentence Every student handed in his assignment is just as clear when written Every student handed in the assignment. ·Not surprisingly, the opinion of the Usage Panel in such matters is mixed. While 37 percent actually prefer the generic his in the sentence A taxpayer who fails to disclose the source of ___ income can be prosecuted under the new law, 46 percent prefer a coordinate form like his or her; 7 percent felt that no pronoun was needed in the sentence; 2 percent preferred an article, usually the; and another 2 percent overturned tradition by advocating the use of generic her, a strategy that brings the politics of language to the reader's notice. Thus a clear majority of the Panel prefers something other than his.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bisquit
Well, as nobody said it before I have to add that it means to go on risk, to mind or do something riskful.
:roll:
I think it was originally "искать приключений на свою голову".
Жара ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lampada
ЖАБА!
as in Star Wars?Quote:
Originally Posted by Leof
YES! He looks very жаба-like actually!
Perhaps the word was жена?
I can't guess right - I even can't imagine what did Lampada talk about.
:o
:lol:
Are you people serious or you're just having fun? I wouldn't spoil anything for you. Both guesses about the word are wrong. :)
:P :lol:
Это они умничают. Ха-ха. Притворяются, что не заметили моё "по теме". :twisted: И не надо их поддерживать.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
жира нету у женыQuote:
Originally Posted by Leof
:lol:
Barmaley, your perception of the discussed Russian phrase ("looking for trouble you don't need") is almost correct but it needs just a little correction. It really should be:Quote:
Originally Posted by Бармалей
"looking for trouble you don't need (in the eyes of the speaker)" :wink:
So when I speak about Hollywood's Willises and such I consider saving the world as an illogical thing and don't think they are following perfectly logical courses of action :wink: What the heck, let the world go to hell! :twisted:
I think Leof was wrong when he said "means neutral or negative". As I see it, the phrase almost always shows the negative evaluation by the speaker.
Other than that you are right. It's definitely PUTTING themself there b/c they're looking for adventure/trouble/etc (but in the speaker's opinion :!: because the subject of the action may think he is looking for something else, not adventure/trouble) and not FINDING themself in a unusual or risky situation
But read this:Quote:
Originally Posted by Бармалей
Question: I often find that I need a singular pronoun to refer to an individual whose sex is unknown. In past years, I would have used "he" and never have given it a second thought. Today, that obviously will not do. . . .
Answer: Problems can arise when an indefinite pronoun (or a noun) is replaced with a singular personal pronoun, such as he or she. When they refer to homogeneous groups, singular personal pronouns are fine: None of the brothers thought himself better than the others.
But do not use singular personal pronouns to describe members of groups that are or could be heterogeneous: "Every secretary should help her boss keep his calendar up to date" will get you into hot water! Job descriptions, policies, regulations--any writing intended for both men and women must use inclusive language. Three simple techniques will help you revise:
1. Avoid third-person pronouns where possible.
2. Use plural pronouns (they, their) and plural verbs for most constructions;
3. experiment with "we" or "you."
4. Match indefinite pronouns with the plural pronouns "they" and "their." This choice has historical legitimacy, is acceptable for all informal writing and — if used consistently — for formal writing as well (though some will raise their eyebrows). You can also use the pronoun pairs "he or she," and "his or her," though I find them awkward.
Take a look at the usage discussion in the American Heritage Dictionary, 3rd Edition, under "he."
It's from http://www.protrainco.com/
well I can assure you it is possitive in the eyes of hot blonde zluts
Ж0ПА
0ПА!!!!!!!!!
is it related to the song of diskoteka avaria?
Слово = zhопааааааа. Как глагол "zhопаааавать," прилагательное "zhопаааавный," и Наречие "zhопаааавно." :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lampada
Uhm, every bit of text you posted actually SUPPORTS me. :D It's just saying that where you can, make the OVERALL sentence plural to avoid using he/she in the first place. It's NOT saying you can use their in combination with SINGULAR subject. It suggests that you do this:Quote:
Originally Posted by Vadim84
"All people have a right to their safety." (Plural subject matched with plural possessive pronoun -- you can safely mean both men and women while being grammatically incorrect).
and NOT this:
"A human has a right to his safety." (Grammatically fine, may be politically incorrect though)
"A human has a right to their safety." (Totally wrong. If you use this, your English teacher will flog you.)
Первый пункт: Согласен.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vadim84
Второй пункт: Согласен.
Третей пункт: Согласен. :D
[quote=Бармалей]Uhm, every bit of text you posted actually SUPPORTS me. :D It's just saying that where you can, make the OVERALL sentence plural to avoid using he/she in the first place. It's NOT saying you can use their in combination with SINGULAR subject. It suggests that you do this:Quote:
Originally Posted by Vadim84
"All people have a right to their safety." (Plural subject matched with plural possessive pronoun -- you can safely mean both men and women while being grammatically incorrect).
and NOT this:
"A human has a right to his safety." (Grammatically fine, may be politically incorrect though)
"A human has a right to their safety." (Totally wrong. If you use this, your English teacher will flog you.)[/quote:ummiz1g6]
Hm, but how will you explain this quote from my English dictionary. It's an explanation of one of the meanings of the word "someone":
If you say that a person is someone or somebody in a particular kind of work or in a particular place, you mean that they are considered to be important in that kind of work or in that place.
A SINGULAR subject (the word "person") + they, huh?
It's a contradiction.Quote:
I think Leof was wrong when he said "means neutral or negative". As I see it, the phrase almost always shows the negative evaluation by the speaker.
Using your words almost always IS NOT THE SAME with never.
So if it's almost always negative, in other cases it can be..what? POSITIVE?
So was I wrong at that? I obviously was not.
ТретийQuote:
Originally Posted by Бармалей
Glad to see you are being so "agreeable" finally :lol:
Okay, you caught me :lol: I should've formulated my phrase better. You weren't wrong, I just elaborated on the subject.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leof