Newsgroup: it.cultura.linguistica.inglese
Titolo: Dove andremo a finire?

Guardate qua:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=451414&in_page_id=1770&ct=5
Non ho parole.

 Non ho parole.
Never seen a dead animal?
If you eat flesh then either you kill animals yourself or you have them 
killed by someone else.
Kiuhnm

 Non ho parole.
Sei OT.

Sir delu ha scritto:

Non credo proprio, ho postato un articolo in inglese che mi ha colpito,
tutto qui.
Pubblicizzare un gioco fino ad arrivare ad un livello cosi infimo è
una cosa mi ha colpito, e pensavo che potesse interessare al ng.
In fondo per imparare l'inglese si cerca di leggere articoli che possano
essere interessanti e non noiosi, e non credo proprio che sia la prima 
volta che su questo ng
vengano postati link a news in inglese...
In passato ho trovato utili i link di altri, e adesso speravo di 
ricambiare il favore.

Kiuhnm ha scritto:

Have you read the article?
Because if you read it, you'll understand what I was referring to.

 tutto qui.
Sarà, ma non si è capito niente di quel che volevi dire.
Ovviamente non ho aperto il link, non sapendo di che si trattasse. :-)
 
-- 
"And the whole Earth was of one language, and of one speech". 
(Genesis 11,1)

 Ovviamente non ho aperto il link, non sapendo di che si trattasse. :-)
E vabbè, sono stato sintetico perchè avevo poco tempo, bastava un 
piccolo click col ditino però :-)

 Because if you read it, you'll understand what I was referring to.
Why didn't you post the link to the picture of a fat man eating flesh? 
That's even more immoral.
Kiuhnm

Kiuhnm ha scritto:

And what's the point of that?
That news IMO it's very unusual, besides the fact that it's immoral.
Don't you think that showing a goat's slaughter as a commercial is a bit
too much?
  I do, but you're free to have your own opinion about that as I have mine.

 too much?
Too much for who? For us or the goat?
Kiuhnm

Kiuhnm ha scritto:

For a commercial.

 Too much for who? For us or the goat?
Max was offended by a violent and repulsive image being used for 
advertising purposes, as many other around the world, apparently. 
You affect incomprehension. May I ask you why? I find your behavior 
quite peculiar.

 ricambiare il favore.
I agree with you about the "OT" and about the content of the article.
I find it disgusting.
ari
A vegeterian since 1983

 quite peculiar.
Complimenti per l'uso raffinato del verbo affect. Quale verbo useresti in 
Italiano? fingere? spacciare? simulare? 

 You affect incomprehension.
You too.
Kiuhnm

 A vegeterian since 1983
That's the way it should be. You're consistent with yourself and I 
praise you for that.
Kiuhnm

 Italiano? fingere? spacciare? simulare? 
Grazie. Fingere o simulare vanno bene, o se no il meno usato "affettare" 
(sě, proprio come "to slice").

 You too.
Actually you are right. I think I know your motivations: you are trying 
a bit too hard to look cool, or else you are sixteen.

 a bit too hard to look cool, or else you are sixteen.
Look who is making assumptions here...
Kiuhnm

 wrote:

Yes, but you didn't catch the spelling mistake!  It's vegetarian.  You
know that I am relying on this group to help me with  my English,
don't you?

 Yes, but you didn't catch the spelling mistake!
I'm sorry if I'm not good enough for you :-)
Kiuhnm

 That's the way it should be.
They foresee that fish will be extinguished in the next thirty years, cod
and tuna are almost  already gone, whales are still hunted, coral is
sickening, gorillas are dying of Ebola, seals slaughtered by  hundred
thousands, polar bears threatened by  ice melting, frogs endangered and the
list could be extended to hundreds species seriously endangered. As to the
conditions the livestock are bred it's even worse, if possible. What humans
do to stop this inexorable agony doesn't appear sufficient. A new conscience
is needed and quickly.

 He never gave me a straight answer.
And what do you need to understand?
I thought I had been clear enough.
Squash Delivery Boy  seems to have understood perfectly well what I
intended.
The mistake you make is to consider my post as a hypocrite tirade about
animals, while I was simply criticizing Sony's behaviour, which I found
outrageous.

 outrageous.
I was only asking "why".
Kiuhnm

Kiuhnm ha scritto:

Do you consider normal to use a goat's slaughter as an advertising
campaign?
I don't, for me this behaviour is far too much beyond the limits.
A slaughter can be justified(if you aren't vegetarian)  for nutrition
but not for advertising campaigns, that's sickening...

 but not for advertising campaigns, that's sickening...
I think that every animal should be completely *free* until his death. 
But we aren't satisfied with just killing them for food. We have to 
treat them like/as slaves. Were you an animal what would you think of 
the human race? Would you be happy if they kept you prisoner inside a 
fence, forced you to carry them on your back, forced you to take part 
and die in battles you don't even understand, make you jump through 
rings for their entertainment, and so on?
T think I wouldn't like it.
And after all that we professes ourselves outraged at Sony behavior?
*That*'s disgusting.
Kiuhnm



Without wanting to get into a lengthy discussion of animal rights or 
extolling the virtues of vegetarianism (I'm not; I enjoy meat) I have to 
agree with Max that Sony's stunt was in very bad taste (no pun intended!) but 
I think that what they wanted to achieve is notoriety (despite their alleged 
contrition.) It's advertising in the worst form: sensationalism. It garners 
attention, and that's the point of advertising, after all.
Apparently the disadvantage of turning certain viewers off is outweighed (in 
Sony's mind) by the amount of press and other attention they'll get.
However, on to the question of how one would feel if one were an animal. It 
brings to mind one of my favorite poems by my favorite (for now, anyway) 
living poet, Billy Collins. It's written in the voice of the writer's 
now-defunct dog. Here is a link:
http://www.sdreader.com/published/2005-12-22/poetry.html
-- 
Joey DoWop Dee
Remember: It is To Laugh.

 
http://www.sdreader.com/published/2005-12-22/poetry.html
Interesting, but not objective. Dogs have been molded to be as they are 
today. They adore their owners as much as ... let's stop here, we all 
know similar examples in human society. Let's just say that victims 
aren't always conscious of their status or willing to admit it.
Kiuhnm

 aren't always conscious of their status or willing to admit it.
I feel sad: It seems you missed the humor of the poem. It was extremely 
tongue-in-cheek. I wouldn't try to apply philosophy in this case.


 tongue-in-cheek. I wouldn't try to apply philosophy in this case.
I reread it and still think it's pretty serious.
Next time in Italian, please :-)
Kiuhnm

 and be killed the old way.
Absolutely. Nowdays people just don't seem to care anymore about their 
personal bows. Ah, the old good days!
Tschau,
Enrico il Pentolaio.
-- 
Five by five. 

 personal bows. Ah, the old good days!
Seriously, you wouldn't need to hunt on your own or to be able to hunt 
at all.
Kiuhnm

 Tiger mosquitoes (Aedes albopictus) are spreading everywhere.
Well, I wish you'll be delighted with them without complaints, possibly 



Personalmente, lo tradurrei proprio con 'affettare'; chi 'affetta' un certo
comportamento non si limita a fingere o simulare, ma lo fa con una certa
misura di ostentazione, come a insinuare di proposito in chi lo osserva il
sospetto che stia, perlappunto, fingendo.
-- 
Ciao,
Anna