Europe
News and information from Europe 🇪🇺
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
Rules (2024-08-30)
- This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
- No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
- Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
- No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
- Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
- Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
- No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
- Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
Posts that link to the following sources will be removed
- on any topic: Al Mayadeen, brusselssignal:eu, citjourno:com, europesays:com, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Fox, GB News, geo-trends:eu, news-pravda:com, OAN, RT, sociable:co, any AI slop sites (when in doubt please look for a credible imprint/about page), change:org (for privacy reasons), archive:is,ph,today (their JS DDoS websites)
- on Middle-East topics: Al Jazeera
- on Hungary: Euronews
Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com
(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)
Ban lengths, etc.
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the primary mod account @EuroMod@feddit.org
view the rest of the comments
No, you lack a second person singular, but that's just because thou refuses to employ it, not because it doesn't exist.
Personally I'd prefer using the already existing 2nd person singular instead of starting to use "y'all" for a second person plural, but my opinion doesn't really matter here, so you know, fuck me and you do you.
Buddy what on Earth are you talking about? You is the second person singular, its also 2nd person plural hence my comment. You all, or y'all, on the other hand is strictly 2nd person plural.
You is used as a second person singular in modern Southern-American English (ie Bumfuckcousinfuckernowhereville), but "thou" is the existing and non-used second person singular.
Why would you even ask about this when it's so fucking easy to Google it?
Note that it doesn't say "completely unused or archaic". No. It's largely archaic, and mostly replaced by the second person plural "you". MOSTLY.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thou
You seem to not know English well so I'll just note that "mostly" means a different thing than "completely." And "remains in use" means it's still used.
He didn't write "the second person singular is used for the second person plural", but the other way.
Thou are just dead wrong, which is very easy to check, but thou will never admit to it.
What on Earth are you babbling about? I didn't mention the word thou in my comment. You said that English lacked a second person singular.
You is the second person singular. Not just in southern America but everywhere. You used it multiple times already. The fact thay thou is also second person singular is irrelevant. You typed all of that for no reason whatsoever.
Like I said, you'll never accept being wrong.
You don't understand the basics of linguistics and currently you're arguing against an established fact. Your opinion doesn't matter fuck all.
Just because you don't use a second person singular (ie the colloquial language lacks one, especially in Southern Usa) doesn't mean you don't have one.
No matter how much you cry and whine, you're still wrong.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thou
I know "y'all" have a hard time with literacy and English in general, but even you should be able to understand what "remains in use" means.
Yet thou said "everywhere", almost as if thou is having trouble accepting thy mistakes...? ;>
Yeah I'm not understanding your argument either. Are you arguing that "you" is not a second person singular in Modern English? It sounds like you are but then you also are using it currently so I'm confused.
It's not. And this really isn't complex.
If you shit in a bucket, that doesn't make the bucket a toilet seat. If you use a stone to hammer in a nail, it doesn't become a hammer. It's still a rock, and eveyone would refer to it as a rock.
Hell, you could use a nail-gun as a hammer. And thus kt would be "a tool to help nails go in", but it wouldn't be a hammer, per se.
"You" is not a second person singular despite being used as one.
This really isn't complex, you guys.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thou
"Plural forms." "Used as."
What's so hard to understand about this I don't get it.
Okay so your argument is basically that language never changes and never evolves? Because it wasn't a second person singular 300 years ago it can't be one today? All right. That seems silly but you do you.
By what perverted fucking reading do you get that from?
I'm not the one who makes up the definitions of academic linguistics.
Really? That's the best you can come up with? A shitty strawman?
Just because you USE Y as X doesn't mean Y becomes X. Is that so hard to comprehend? English STILL, TO THIS DAY, has a second person singular which is in use.
If we were having this conversation 500 years in the futures where the second person plural is something like (ewww) "y'all" exclusively and there wasn't anyone using "thou" and the language had changed to treating "you" as the second person singular, THEN we could maybe consider your strawman.
But we aren't, it hasn't, and "thou" is still used. Wait a second... Feels line we've been over that fact....
OH YEAH
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thou
Do you have a hard time understanding those two sentences? Do you know what "largely" means when attached to a word like "archaic"? Do you know what "remains in use" means?
Hey if the proper grammar is to say "he is going" but "you are going", would you mind explaining why you'd use the plural form of the verb with the second person singular? Hmm?
You will just never be able to admit being wrong about this. It's a shame, because it will limit your potential very badly.
For the life of me I can't understand you why you keep linking the same Wikipedia page to a word nobody is talking about. You're continually making the argument that the word you is not a second person singular while still using the word you as a second person singular. Thou art utterly absurd. I'm going to block you now.
Because if you read it and weren't an uneducated moron it would show give the history of the second person plural in English, you dipshit.
What is so hard to understand about this sentence:
What is so hard to understand about this sentence?
Oh wait right, you're an uneducated (and definitely monolinguistic) dipshit, I can see how you wouldn't have the slightest idea of what that's about.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%E2%80%93V_distinction
Just because you can use a large screwdriver to hammer in a nail does not make it a fucking hammer.
So because you're ignorant of the basics of linguistics, perhaps you should keep your ignorant mouth shut?
Do you say "you is" or "you are"?
You is joking, surely.
If you actually spoke other languages or listened in any linguistics class you've ever had, you might be able to understand. But you aren't.
Colloquially English lacks a second person singular? "You" is not colloquially used? That's your assertion? Even though you use it in multiple times in your comment and you're clearly understanding my use of it? Just want to clear that up cuz it seems insane.
Like I said, you'll never admit to being wrong. You're literally incapable.
Here, let me just make this even simpler for you with an example, as I know you Americans have difficulties with anything intellectual
Okay, so, imagine having a fancy new nail gun. Except you don't know it's a nail gun. And you just use it to bang in nails. Just because you use it as a hammer doesn't make it one. If your boss came along and said "we need to nail things to this wall", you'd correctly get the right tool. However, if your boss said "get me a hammer" and you got the nail gun you stupidly use to hammer in nails, your boss is gonna laugh at you.
You is used as a second person singular. If you spoke any other languages or even raid the starting paragraph of the short Wiki article I linked twice already, you'd know why it is exactly so that it is a second person plural used as a singular, and not the other way around.
But no, because you're illiterate and cognitively lazy, but can't admit it to yourself, you just simply will never admit to being wrong. We could have a professor of linguistics here telling you this, and you'd still continue your tantrum.
I know you won't understand this, but in my native and agglunative language, we use second person plurals to show respect. That's how it was in English as well, but since English isn't agglunative, it doesn't really affect the grammar around it much, so it was easy to just default to the second person plural, because that was safer than accidentally offending someone. This is literally stated in the article you refuse to open (because it proves you wrong.)
Notice how it says "plural forms USED AS"? No? Can't even address the article or the history or anything actually objective? Just "wyaaa wyaaa wyaaa I'm not wrong bcus bcus bcus ur stoopid"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thou#History
I've seen this tantrum literally a million times.
You sound utterly insane.
And you sound like the dipshits who couldn't be arsed to read in basic education and is now annoyed they're childish insults don't actually constitute arguments.
Must be a bitch being dumb, huh?