Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'User Submitted News' started by Feels Good Man, May 5, 2011.
You guys always violate the copyright of other sites by quoting news you havent written yourself.
Hence the quote.
And the source.
That's not good enough. It is cleary stated that it's prohibited to publish the text on other sites without a written permission. Quotes and Links to the sources dont matter.
A quotation isn't a publication. Also this is the internet and not a major news network: expect some informality. I'd rather read the wall of text here than on that other site, so I'm glad the OP provided SOMETHING more than a topic that's just a link.
I like when the OP adds in a picture, highlights or even an opinion because it shows some effort.
U sure about that? Does that mean I can take a full review from a site and posting it in quotes on another site would make this legal?
I've quoted this. Therefore, I'm taking credit for this post.
No, because this is not my site and all postings belong to the site owner anyway.
From what I read, they're talking about the Japanese language, not the people.
Even though, thank you for posting this. Very interesting.
I like how you try to cover up the fact that you said something stupid by going along with it and saying more stupid things.
The source text is the copyright of the AP. Only they have the right to use the text unless you have express permission to do so. It's no different than broadcasting a sports game but saying that it's the copyright of the NBA/NFL/NHL/FIFA. If you don't have permission to copy it verbatim then it's a copyright violation. Putting it 'in quotes' is useless.
What would have been appropriate is to put your own commentary about the article, then to link to the article. You can also take snippets of the article, and give proper citation.
You can't simply copy and paste the whole thing.
lol he didnt post about sourcing things or copyright, funny how the tables have turned and the conversation becomes way off topic
How about we talk about the NEWS and not the copyright related crap?
Besides, I don't think the source site gives two shits about it anyway.
Not really surprising. Korean does sound very similar to Japanese (and not in the "all you Asians sound alike" kind of way, though man you damn Euros all look alike to me ). I certainly never mistaken Mandarin/Cantonese/Vietnamese/Phillipino for Japanese when I hear it casually from afar. Korean is really the only one I actually think might be Japanese. I speak fluent Japanese so it's not some 'vauge' thing I'm trying to hear.
On a side note I wish my countrymen had copied the Korean language rather than the dialect. Verb conjugation in Japanese is just a giant pain in the ass.
Heck, English could really benefit from it too. No other language has crap like silent "K", a "C" that you say as 'see' but pronounce as 'kay', I before E except after C and only on Thursdays after Easter. And you wonder why people have a problem learning English.
Interesting read there.
Not because I don't think it's true, but the Koreans have done similar 'research' in the past claiming that things in China and Japan originated from the Korean Peninsula. Japan became a notable civilization long before the Korea did, so it's hard to even say that the "Japanese came from the Koreans". Back in the day, there was no significant nation known as Korea. The central focus was on the Chinese Empire, and Nippon (Japanese Empire). Korea was colonized by smaller kingdoms that were of little to no significance in terms of cultural and political impact. This made Korea like a bridge between China and Japan, as it was easy to navigate across the sea through the Korean Peninsula. Cultural exchanges between the Chinese and Japanese eventually became the traditions of the Koreans as well, and it is shown today with the many traditional holidays in Korea that did originate from the two other countries.
There are many borrowed words in the Korean language that originate in the Chinese and Japanese languages as well, and given the dates in history, it's hard to believe that the Japanese language would actually originate in Korea. Based on cultural regional powers, I think it'd be more believable in vice versa to this research report. The Chinese, being the largest power, has a bigger cultural impact, spread their written language over to the Japanese. The Japanese, being a notable civilization longer than Korea, developed their regional language, and likely through trade and interactions, had their language come back westward to the Asian mainland. Korea, being sandwiched in the middle, developed their dialects from their own ancestor's dialects plus the influence of their powerful neighbours.
Languages influence one another lexically all the time -- English has words from all over the world. English has tons of words from Romance languages, especially Latin and French, but nobody calls English a Romance language. English is categorized as Germanic because of its structure.
It's a language's structure that tells the tale of its origin. Languages are much more reluctant to alter structure than they are to borrow words. Chinese is structurally very very different from both Japanese and Korean, although both languages borrow heavily lexically. Korean and Japanese undoubtedly have too many structural similarities for them to be unrelated.
Oh really? Then I'm obviously imagining the copyright notice of the site the news has been taken from.