Talk:E-Prime

Arabic

Arabic does have a verb 'to be' in the present tense - yakuun (يَكُون) It is not used in the same way as in English of course. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.47.182.20 (talk) 12:45, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

What about "maybe"?

According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, "maybe" comes (unsurprisingly) from "(it) may be."[1] Should we maybe add "maybe" to the article, or does "maybe" maybe qualify for exception according to an authoritative source? --DigitalBluster (talk) 19:06, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Good thing you mentioned 'an authoritative source'. There is a wikipedia policy WP:RS about this. According to it, you may add anything that makes sense, provided it is discussed in authoritative sources and you provide a foootnote to it. Staszek Lem (talk) 21:25, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Change to Bible example

Attempting to fulfill a recent citation request, I found numerous excerpts from the New American Standard Bible, rendered into E-Prime by Dr. David F. Maas. These do not include Romans 13:1, which was used as an example here. I went ahead and changed the example (I chose a verse from the Sermon on the Mount, just because), which also meant changing the original from the King James. If anyone objects, well, you know what to do. --DigitalBluster (talk) 07:16, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Good job. Now, how about fixing the 'A in W' example? By the way, these examples are a good demonstration how, despite good intentions, e-prime often actually messes with the intention of the phrase rather than fixes it: while the "kingdom" part is OK, the "blessing" part is screwed, if someone wants to dive deeply into theology. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:54, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes

, that what i noticed also "The poor in spirit receive blessings, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to them. " For first, in a way "blessings" it self appears to be word that is "telling how and what it is" but what me want to say is that, one does not receive necessarily blessings because they have kingdom in heaven. Also in a way "poor in spirit" is what we would not want to use in proper clear speak. As there is meanings behind the states that is told to be "boor in spirit". "(the ones said to be)Poor in the Spirit, appear to receive Kingdom of Heaven (that is considered to be a blessing)"

As we do not really know, who are poor in spirit, we not even know what is spirit and what is meant under the spirit on that spot, people just assume that it is probably (Western Version of)intelligence, or the ones that lack mental stability (but why they lack it and when, how?) or more often also interpreted as the poor people who is assumed to have smaller mind and understanding because of the poor state of life that would normally limit to receive knowledge (as assumed).

As in the end, people should have (in my view) be able to express all the sentences in pure truth also besides illustrated sentences. So how can anyone translate the meaning of this if we lack knowing what is behind the words? The real meaning.

Also the sentence "receive blessings" can not we know to be true as is it One blessing or how much of an amount of blessings to get a Kingdom of Heaven?

So in the end perhaps most near truth we can come to this sentence:

"Simple people are lucky to inherit Kingdom of Heaven" or "What a luck Simple people heave to inherit Kingdom of Heaven"

Waffa — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.71.44.92 (talk) 22:05, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

References

No References for "Works Written in E-Prime"

None of these works have references or external links, and the pages for most authors contain no mention at all of E-Prime. Should every work on the list have a [citation needed] added? Brauden (talk) 18:51, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Presumably, the works themselves would claim to be having been (this is hard!) that their writers wrote them in E-prime. If they make no such claim and if no other source exists, we should remove them. —174.141.182.82 (talk) 14:04, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Expressing “the film was good”

The lead states that “the film was good” could not be expressed under E-prime. What about “I considered it a good film”? Or does that contain a contracted “to be”—“I considered it [to be] a good film”? Either way, it may be worth mentioning in the lead. —174.141.182.82 (talk) 13:48, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

No. the real trick that your sentecnce contains "I", i.e., it is a rephrasing with significantly changed structure of the sentence. You will find similar example in the article, e.g, "I see this film as good". Staszek Lem (talk) 23:37, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

"Some people experience the film as good". Randy Kryn 10:45, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

I think it's more that an utterance such as "the film was good" has the form of a universal objective statement about the world, whereas there is no doubt that "I considered it a good film" is an existential subjective statement about a personal taste. Sean O'Halpin 20:28, 7 December 2015 (UTC)