The phrase from "Planet of the Apes":
"Was the Homo Sapiens mean to you again?"
Printable View
The phrase from "Planet of the Apes":
"Was the Homo Sapiens mean to you again?"
Home Sapiens are what Humans are called in a scientific form.Quote:
Originally Posted by pranki
That quote is what the gorillas said towards the humans.
"mean to you again" being "mean" is causing harm to another person mentally.
Hope that helps
Thanks! I was confused with this "mean", but now I've figured it out.
Your welcome.Quote:
Originally Posted by pranki
I might have been wrong with "mean"
it can be both mentally and physically depeding on how and when it is used.
well your right but not fully correct, to be mean is to be the opposite of nice, meaning to do harm to someone both mentally, physically or directly, indirectly... basically just to hurt someone in some way, mannor or form.
mean = mistreat
I will add one thing, for grammar.Quote:
Originally Posted by pranki
Homo Sapiens = humans (plural)
Tak, the sentence should be "Were the Homo Sapiens mean to you again."
But, in American "street talk", using "was" instead of "were" is considered normal and strong, tough...because of the bad grammar.
Tak, here, using "Was" instead of "Were" sounds tough, and mean in American collequial English.
American street talk has nothing to with this. It's just that on this particular occasion, this term was used to refer to one person rather than to the humankind, hence the singular verb form.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dobry
Then it should have been "was the homo sapien". No 'S'.Quote:
Originally Posted by translations.nm.ru
"Homo sapiens" is a Latin phrase meaning "sentient man". It's singular. In English, when it refers to humans as a species, it is often used with plural verbs, but it is singular nevertheless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogboy182
SO. You can't say "A homo sapien" ?
Hmm...I've never considered someone who uses "was" where "were" should be tough...Quote:
Originally Posted by Dobry
No, "sapien" is not a word.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogboy182
Well if there's one thing i learned from a month in australia is that it is OK to make up your own words. So its a word to me :D !Quote:
Originally Posted by translations.nm.ru
I used to hear "A homo sapien" in high school quite a bit. It was used generally by teenage girls as an insult to boys as in, "You're such a homo sapien, Johan" or "He's such a homo sapien."Quote:
Dogboy182 wrote:
SO. You can't say "A homo sapien" ?
translations.nm.ru wrote:
No, "sapien" is not a word.
I think they meant primitive or barbaric. You know what teenage girls can be like.
In any case, that's my two cents worth.
Well, I don't know how much literal value we can get from teenage girls and their word usage. I mean, just because a teenage girl says it, it doesn't make it right...Quote:
Originally Posted by Johan
kalinka_vinnie, my apologies. I was a little off topic by providing that little anecdote. It was not intended to be taken as correct or formal usage of English.
Apology accepted, gift-wrapped and ready to be put under christmas trees!
Hmm, I would tend to disagree, being intimately familiar with "street talk" from the cities. And the incorrect use of grammar in order to create a certain feeling or mood.Quote:
Originally Posted by translations.nm.ru
Ohhhh, yea, ya betcha....u was served, u was owned!Quote:
Originally Posted by saibot
:wink:
I'm no expert on Latin, so please excuse my ignorance. I just remember seeing it used in a plural form, to refer to humans in plural, as a species. If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by translations.nm.ru
Can you point to a Latin reference showing it as singular? Not that I'm doubting, just curious, because I remember hearing "sapien" being used as singular by university lecturers, and "sapiens" being used as plural. And unfortunately I'm traveling now, without a handy-dandy authoritative dictionary to check.
In Latin Homo is the nominative singular for human being.
(in Latin "men" and "women" were both "homines", as opposed to other animals; in Latin man as in male human was "vir")
Sing.
Nom: Homo
Gen: Hominis
Dat: Homini
Acc: Hominem
Voc: Homo
Abl: Homine
Plur.
Homines
Hominum
Hominibus
Homines
Homines
Hominibus
Likewise Sapiens is the present participle of Sapio (To Know) used as an adjective and declined as such. (2nd class adjective)
Sapiens
Sapientis
Sapienti
Sapientem
Sapiens
Sapienti
Sapientes
Sapientium
Sapientibus
Sapientes
Sapientes
Sapientibus
There is just no way that a Latin noun ending in -o can be a nominative plural (or any plural case at all, regardless of the declension it belongs to)
See http://www.discipulus.it/art.asp?Art=111
for example. (Sorry, the page is in Italian)
Homo is in the first group of the 3rd declension: "nomi maschili, femminili e neutri imparisillabi, con il tema terminante in una sola consonante", meaning that the noun (be it masculine, feminine or neuter) has a change in the number of syllables going from the nominative to the genitive (homo->hominis) and its root ends in one consonant (the root being <homin> for homo).
Hope it's clear enough :)
:o :o :o
woof-woof!!!
:lol:
Thanks midnight, for clearing that up.
:lol:
You guys are such a bunch of homines sapientis!
According to Webster's and the Oxford Dictionary; "Homo sapiens" only exists only in the plural and cannot be a reference to an individual by him/herself.
ah-HA!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by samba
I thought so!
Tak..."Was the homo sapiens..." is bad grammar!!!
On a side note, just yesterday as I was searching through the highly respected British magazine "Speak Up" (very popular here in Spain, and written specifically for teaching educated, grammatically correct "BBC English")...there was an article in advanced English which referred to "Sapiens" as a plural form.
I rest my case. :lol:
Sapiens is defined a word by itself, but it's meaning is "Homo Sapiens". Same rules apply.
Big deal, if that's the case English borrowed it from Latin incorrectly.Quote:
Originally Posted by samba
Isn't borrowed incorrect Latin basically what the English language is about?Quote:
Originally Posted by midnightsun
I find this rather doubtful, Homo sapiens is a species, and is used in "Encyclopaedia Britannica online" in a singular form.Quote:
Originally Posted by samba
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article...%20sapiens&ct=
Because they're talking about them as one species and not about a few of them physically. You can use Homo Sapiens either in plural or singular depending on what I just wrote in the prior sentence.Quote:
Originally Posted by adoc
I hate to be anal about this, but this is related to my work, so here it is. Noone would write "twenty Homo sapiens were blah-blah" in a scientific article. It'll be rephrased as "twenty human subjects were..." or "twenty adults (Homo sapiens) were...". Colloquailly, anything goes, I have no problem with that. My point was that using Homo sapiens in singular is at least not incorrect in English, not to mention Latin where it, in fact, is singular as explained by midnightsun.
Can somebody start a new thread?
This topic is too old. I am tired of reading about "Homo sapiens". Who cares :dunno:
There has to be someone wanting to clear something up in the English language. That's basicaly where I shine...
3 entries found for Homo sapiens.
Homo sa·pi·ens n.
The modern species of humans, the only extant species of the primate family Hominidae.
[New Latin Hom sapins, species name : Latin hom, man + Latin sapins, wise, rational, present participle of sapere, to be wise.]
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Homo sapiens
n : the only surviving hominid; species to which modern man belongs; bipedal primate having language and ability to make and use complex tools; brain 1400 cc [syn: Homo sapiens]
Source: WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University
Main Entry: Ho·mo sa·pi·ensPronunciation: "hO-(")mO-'sap-E-&nz, -'sA-pE-, -"enz
Function: noun
: MANKIND : HUMANKIND
Source: Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary, © 2002 Merriam-Webster, Inc.