randomname01

Yeah okay cool, no need to be condescending when I already told you I found the damn NRC article. I, however, can’t access it and would like to read it in Dutch, or at the very least in a source a bit more trustworthy than Jacobin or not as no-name as nltimes.nl.

Also, like I said, this post frames it as if it’s a quote from Rutte. Your sources say it’s not. This shit is deliberately misleading.

Heb je een link zonder paywall? Ik was dat artikel al tegengekomen maar kon het niet lezen.

I googled the quote in the article (“What can we say to make it seem like Israel is not committing war crimes?”), which it doesn’t even attribute to Rutte, and I just found this article again.

Now don’t get me wrong, I fully believe that Rutte knows that Israel is committing war crimes and that he’s fully on their side regardless, but this article doesn’t prove the legitimacy of this quote at all. What’s more, if what the article states is 100% true, it at least demonstrates that attributing the quote to Rutte himself is misleading, since it is supposed to come from someone in his cabinet.

Source for the quote? I tried searching for it but couldn’t really find anything.

You’re right, the actual chad move is torrenting and seeding.

Heh, we use velo as well. And yeah, we don’t really stigmatise dialects that much either, though depending on how much dialect you use people might find it unprofessional.

It’s kinda funny, I’m Flemish and a lot of French loan words (ambriage, merci, nondedju = nom de dieu to name a few) are mainly used in dialect, and therefore don’t make you sounds sophisticated or worldly at all.

Meh, as a native Dutch speaker auxiliary verbs feel really utilitarian to me, and not particularly fancy - like you said, that’s highly subjective.

As for cases, I didn’t say Latin or German had the most, but just that I think they’re fancy and that Latin has them while French doesn’t.

For one, Latin has more fancy rules than French. I guess the subjunctive is probably something English speakers might consider fancy, but Latin has that too. Latin has more times that are conjugations of the core verb (rather than needing auxiliary verbs), has grammatical cases (like German, but two more if you include vocative) and, idk, also just feels fancier in general.

I’ll admit it’s been years since I actually read any Latin and that I only have a surface level understanding of all languages mentioned except for French, but this post reads like it’s about the stereotypes of the countries rather than being about the languages themselves.

I mean, I guess there’s a point to that, but isn’t there inevitably a social aspect to it? Especially in this post, where the person is saying others don’t have to understand it, meaning it’s clearly outwardly visible and part of who they are.

I’m not saying you should seek approval from anyone (for your gender nor anything else), because that’ll never happen. But denying the importance of some social acceptance for things in the social sphere is kind of weird, and feels like a “haha, unless…?” thing; you want others to understand and accept it, but the moment you don’t their acceptance becomes irrelevant and you never sought any acceptance at all. It feels like an unhealthy way to cope with rejection.

I think the language analogy is actually very apt, because not every has to understand it, but the people you want to speak French with necessarily have to know it. Otherwise it just doesn’t fulfil any purpose.

Also, because gender is a social construct, it requires that enough people understand it to a sufficient degree.