The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Discuss anything about the Transformers cartoons and comics! You can discuss anything from G1 to Cybertron as well as the comics from Marvel, Dreamwave, IDW and more!

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby sto_vo_kor_2000 » Sun Nov 30, 2008 2:17 am

Motto: "Today is a good day to die......but the day is not yet over!"
Saber Prime wrote:
But you CAN'T use a verb to describe a person. A verb is an ACTION not a DESCRIPTION.

You're confusing verb with adjative. An adjative is a word used to describe a noun.

Verbs can NOT be used as adjatives.


Here we go again.

Please read it this time......

VERB:

In syntax, a verb is a word (part of speech) that usually denotes an action (bring, read), an occurrence (decompose, glitter), or a state of being (exist, stand). Depending on the language, a verb may vary in form according to many factors, possibly including its tense, aspect, mood and voice. It may also agree with the person, gender, and/or number of some of its arguments (subject, object, etc.). action verbs involve people doing things.

Valency (linguistics)
The number of arguments that a verb takes is called its valency or valence. Verbs can be classified according to their valency.


Intransitive (valency = 1): the verb only has a subject. For example: "he runs", "it falls".
Transitive (valency = 2): the verb has a subject and a direct object. For example: "she eats fish", "we hunt deer".
Linking (valency = 3): State of being; does not require an action. The subject complements are related to subject rather than the verb. It simply reports a condition or asks a questions about a condition.

The section in budge lettering is how it applies.

Saber Prime wrote:You've lost me completly. I don't by any means understand what you just said has anything to do with what I said.

If if what you said did have any conection with what I said I'm still lost on the line "vampires would be made from a single bite without any need to "turn" them." I've read that like 8 different times and it makes absolutly no sence.

Vampires would be made from a single bite. The problem here is I never said ANYTHING about how many times a vampire would have to bite someone to turn them so I don't get why you even said that.

Without any need to "turn" them. Adds to the confusion by contridicting the first part of the statement that made no sence to begine with. To "turn" a human and make a vampire are the same thing so you basically said "vampires can make other vampires without makeing other vampires."

So yeah, could you rephraise this whole section here because I really have no clue what the heck you're trying to say and have no idea how to respond other than to exsplain why it makes absolutly no sence.


You originally said to my statement about the differences in Mobious and other Marvel vampires:

Saber Prime wrote:Not everyone who gets bit by a real vampire will become one. Vampires can either turn humans or outright kill them at will.


And what I'm trying to say is that at the time of his creation Vampiresim in the Marvel Universe was more like a sickness.When exposed you contracted the illness.

So unlike other Vampire myths, where there is a set of circumstances in the turning of a human, or the killing threw feeding instead of changing, every one bitten and feed on would turn into a Vampire.

But like I said that has been changed in modern times.

Saber Prime wrote:I think you're mixing media there with the witch talk. Witches familiars are an entirely different thing from Vampires. Vampire familiars were just mortals, cattle really. Witch familiars are useually but not allways, animals or former witches in the form of animals, mostly cats.

Vampire familiars serve as workers, someone who can easily walk around in daylight and do the jobs the vampires themselfs can't. Witch familiars depending on the fiction can be either talking or non talking animals that are either teachers, protectors, or the true source of their magic.


I'm not mixing the media I'm just giving you all the information I have on those that were called "familuars" in the Marvl comics back then.

Like I said some Vampires had a few but it was never portrayed as it is in the Blade movies....at least not back in the day.

Saber Prime wrote:Did you even read the definition you just put up? Yes a Verb not only requires an action, IT IS AN ACTION. The definiton you put up only says that about 10 times. It allso gave about 10 examples of verbs that were ALL ACTIONS.

I read the definition you put up just now and guess what, it's the same definition I was tought in school and that is that a verb is an action.

How are you getting that it's a describing word? That would be an adjative. I use to get nouns and adjatives mixed up in school, alot of people get thoughs two mixed up but this is the first I seen anyone confuse a verb for an adjative.


Again read this section on how a "Verb" is used.

Linking (valency = 3): State of being; does not require an action. The subject complements are related to subject rather than the verb. It simply reports a condition or asks a questions about a condition.

Saber Prime wrote:Not to dissrespect you, but they teach this stuff in elimentry school and again in high school. It's verry basic stuff and you are in fact getting it wrong. The defintion you posted will even tell you what you're saying is wrong if you bothered to read it yourself.


Your the one not reading all of it and hopefully you now have.

Saber Prime wrote:http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/verb


Even your own info supports what I've been saying.


your link wrote: 1. The part of speech that expresses existence, action, or occurrence in most languages.


Calling Spiderman a "Mutate" is a part od speech that expresses his existence.

Thanks for helping me prove my point. :grin:

Saber Prime wrote:any member of a class of words that are formally distinguished in many languages, as in English by taking the past ending in -ed, that function as the main elements of predicates, that typically express action, state, or a relation between two things, and that (when inflected) may be inflected for tense, aspect, voice, mood, and to show agreement with their subject or object.

The part of speech that expresses existence, action, or occurrence in most languages.


As always you only see the parts that you think help your point and ignore the rest.

Its right there in your own post.

"Express existence"

Calling Spidy a mutate is "expressing his existance

Again thank you.

Saber Prime wrote:
a content word that denotes an action, occurrence, or state of existence


Wow you just keep helping me prove my point.

"State of existences"

Calling Spidy a mutate is "the state of his existence"

How many times can I thank you.

Saber Prime wrote:A word that represents an action or a state of being.


Boy you do love to help me out...

"state of being"

Calling Spidy a mutate is "a state of his being"

I'm running out of thank yous :lol:

Saber Prime wrote:A word which affirms or predicates something of some person or thing; a part of speech expressing being, action, or the suffering of action.


2 in one this time....

"A word which affirms or predicates something of some person" and "a part of speech expressing being"

Calling Spidy a mutate is "A word which affirms or predicates something of his person" and or ""a part of speech expressing his being"

Now your just way to helpful.

I just dont know how to thank you.
Predaprince wrote:I am very thankful to have posters like sto_vo_kor_2000 who is so energetic about improving others' understanding and enjoyment of the TF universe
Stormrider wrote:You often add interesting insights to conversations that makes the fledglings think and challenges even the sharpest minds

T-Macksimus wrote:I consider you and editor to be amongst the most "scholarly" in terms of your knowledge, demeanor and general approach

Image
sto_vo_kor_2000
Matrix Keeper
Posts: 7733
News Credits: 1
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 12:01 am

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby Saber Prime » Sun Nov 30, 2008 12:15 pm

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:
Saber Prime wrote:
But you CAN'T use a verb to describe a person. A verb is an ACTION not a DESCRIPTION.

You're confusing verb with adjative. An adjative is a word used to describe a noun.

Verbs can NOT be used as adjatives.


Here we go again.

Please read it this time......

VERB:

In syntax, a verb is a word (part of speech) that usually denotes an action (bring, read), an occurrence (decompose, glitter), or a state of being (exist, stand). Depending on the language, a verb may vary in form according to many factors, possibly including its tense, aspect, mood and voice. It may also agree with the person, gender, and/or number of some of its arguments (subject, object, etc.). action verbs involve people doing things.

Valency (linguistics)
The number of arguments that a verb takes is called its valency or valence. Verbs can be classified according to their valency.


Intransitive (valency = 1): the verb only has a subject. For example: "he runs", "it falls".
Transitive (valency = 2): the verb has a subject and a direct object. For example: "she eats fish", "we hunt deer".
Linking (valency = 3): State of being; does not require an action. The subject complements are related to subject rather than the verb. It simply reports a condition or asks a questions about a condition.

The section in budge lettering is how it applies.


The problem with that bold section. I can't seem to find where it says that anywhere on this page. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/verb and sence you didn't site a source either of the times you've posted, well, you're wrong.

A verb for the last time, IS AN ACTION. How can it not require an action when it IS AN ACTION.

Hell there are even several commercials on Disney Channel with the slogan "Verb, it's what you do!"

You're basically saying you can have an action, without haveing an action. Here does this make any sence...

ACTION:

In syntax, a action is a word (part of speech) that usually denotes an action (bring, read), an occurrence (decompose, glitter), or a state of being (exist, stand). Depending on the language, a action may vary in form according to many factors, possibly including its tense, aspect, mood and voice. It may also agree with the person, gender, and/or number of some of its arguments (subject, object, etc.). action actions involve people doing things.

Valency (linguistics)
The number of arguments that a action takes is called its valency or valence. actions can be classified according to their valency.


Intransitive (valency = 1): the action only has a subject. For example: "he runs", "it falls".
Transitive (valency = 2): the action has a subject and a direct object. For example: "she eats fish", "we hunt deer".
Linking (valency = 3): State of being; does not require an action. The subject complements are related to subject rather than the action. It simply reports a condition or asks a questions about a condition.

Go read the dictionary definition or site your source, one of the two.

Saber Prime wrote:Not everyone who gets bit by a real vampire will become one. Vampires can either turn humans or outright kill them at will.


And what I'm trying to say is that at the time of his creation Vampiresim in the Marvel Universe was more like a sickness.When exposed you contracted the illness.

So unlike other Vampire myths, where there is a set of circumstances in the turning of a human, or the killing threw feeding instead of changing, every one bitten and feed on would turn into a Vampire.

But like I said that has been changed in modern times.


Yeah, that's not the case for the movies. You said I was confusing Marvel Vampires with Vampires of myth but I wasn't. There have been several cases in the movies where people who were bitten by Vampires never turned and were just killed.

Of course the vampires in the movie allso never had the shape shifting abilitys. A cross had no real effect on them allthough there were a couple times when vampires faked a reation then gave the line "you watch too many movies." Garlic allso won't kill a vampire but it does have a reaction on them allthough I can't remember exactly what that is. Again this is all taken from the Blade movie.

Oddly enough, there were so many vampire movies comming out around the same time that there are now probly at least 5 different versions of what a vampire is, what it's abilitys are, and how to kill it.

Saber Prime wrote:http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/verb


Even your own info supports what I've been saying.


No it doesn't. Read more carefully.

your link wrote: 1. The part of speech that expresses existence, action, or occurrence in most languages.


exsistance, action, or occurance. Action and occurrance both mean the same thing. It's something that happens.

Existence could be the result of an action. "He fell and broke his arm."

Calling Spiderman a "Mutate" is a part od speech that expresses his existence.

Thanks for helping me prove my point. :grin:


No that would just be inproper English because you're apperently makeing up your own definition and blantantly useing it any which way you want.

He was "mutated" he is a "mutant" as a result of said "mutation" but he is not a "natural mutant" because he was not "born" a mutant.

Allso Magneto would not of ever contacted Spider-man because he was not born a mutant. Magneto hates humans and as far as he's conserned anyone born human is the enemy.

And just to clarify. How do you missunderstand that Spider-man WAS in fact called a MUTANT several times in the episode. It was allso said he was not a "real mutant" because he was not born that way but they did still call him a mutant.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPRJ74pf ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X26AAp36nsU

Here there were actully two episodes with the X-Men as guest stars. Watch them and pay attention to how many times Spider-man is refered to as a Mutant.

Its right there in your own post.

"Express existence"

Calling Spidy a mutate is "expressing his existance"


Not only have you missread me but you're apperently missreading the dictionary now.

That is not by any means how you exspress his exsistance. You are in fact useing "mutate" as an adjective, not as a verb. Did you read the definition I posted for what an adjective is?

The word could be used as a verb but the way you're useing it is not right.

Saber Prime wrote:a content word that denotes an action, occurrence, or state of existence


Wow you just keep helping me prove my point.

"State of existences"

Calling Spidy a mutate is "the state of his existence"

How many times can I thank you.


No, calling Spidy a mutate is not the state of his existence. Not the way you're useing it. You're useing mutate as an adjective.

Spider-man is a mutate. Spider-man is the noun in this sentence we can agree on that much right? Mutate, you keep insisting is a verb in this sentence but you're actully useing it as an adjective.

Spider-man's DNA was mutated. That is a verb. Mutated in this sentence describes something that happen to him that resulted in his current state of exsistance.

When you state something as "a noun is a..." you can not follow that up with a verb. Anything you say after "is a" becomes an adjective for that noun.

Saber Prime wrote:A word that represents an action or a state of being.


Boy you do love to help me out...

"state of being"

Calling Spidy a mutate is "a state of his being"

I'm running out of thank yous :lol:


Calling spidy a mutate is inproper english.

Saber Prime wrote:A word which affirms or predicates something of some person or thing; a part of speech expressing being, action, or the suffering of action.


2 in one this time....

"A word which affirms or predicates something of some person" and "a part of speech expressing being"

Calling Spidy a mutate is "A word which affirms or predicates something of his person" and or ""a part of speech expressing his being"

Now your just way to helpful.

I just dont know how to thank you.


And this one, you're ignoreing something because it doesn't help your case.

the suffering of action which is another way of saying state of exsistance.

"Billy is hurt." In this sentence hurt is an adjective because it does not describe HOW he got hurt. It only describes that Billy is hurt. Sence an adjective is a word describeing a noun Hurt in this sentence describes what Billy is. This is how you've been stateing "Spider-man is a mutate."

"Billy fell on the black top and hurt his arm." Hurt in this sentence is a verb because it describes what happen to him. Billy is a noun same as the first example. Fell is a verb. Black top is another noun. Hurt is a verb because in this sentence hurt doesn't describe what Billy is, it describes what happen to his arm when he fell. And arm is another noun.

Lets review.

When you say "Spider-man is a mutate" you are useing the word mutate as an adjective not as a verb. The word mutate in that sentence describes what Spider-man is. Spider-man is a noun and if the word describes a noun that word is an adjective.

When I say "Spider-man was mutated" mutated is a verb because it describes how he got into his present condition, it does not describe what he is.

The definition you've so blantantly pointed out so many times is that, a word that describes HOW a person got into their current state of exsistant. You keep ignoreing several points in the definition that state ACTION. Because you keep ignoreing this you keep getting Verb mixed with Adjective.

A state of exsistance is not a verb if it only describes the noun and not how the noun got into that state in the first place.

You addmitted earlier you couldn't even think of an example of how to use a verb as a state of exsistance. Well I gave you two examples.

"Spider-man was mutated"

"Billy fell on the black top and hurt his arm."

Again

Spider-man was states something that happen to him, a verb.

Spider-man is states a description for Spider-man, an Adjective.

YOU ARE USEING A WORD AS AN ADJECTIVE AND CALLING IT A VERB!
Image
Saber Prime
City Commander
Posts: 3239
News Credits: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 10:03 pm

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby Dead Metal » Sun Nov 30, 2008 1:11 pm

Motto: "Don't do drugs, beer's cheaper anyway!"
And to think I was seeing black as that newbie signed up and stated he hated that Stov and Sabe keep fighting like this....
This is far cooler then I don't know right now.

:D
Image


Jeep! wrote:Why do I imagine Dead Metal sounding exactly like Arnie?
Intah-wib-buls?

Blurrz wrote:10/10

Leave it to Dead Metal to have the word 'Pronz' in his signature.
User avatar
Dead Metal
God Of Transformers
Posts: 14429
News Credits: 35
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 5:18 am

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby Saber Prime » Sun Nov 30, 2008 1:23 pm

"Your DNA may have mutated perminatly" Dr. Conners

Notice how he said that. It's stated as something that's happening to Spider-man not to describe what Spider-man is.

"So that's it, I'm mutating. Into what I don't know. Can you cure me?" Spider-man

"I'm Sorry Spider-man, my work is not to cure mutants. I built this complex, this school to train them." Professor X

I'm keeping score and that's 1 point for calling Spider-man a mutant 0 points for calling him a mutate. Yes Professor X himself just called Spider-man a mutant. If he wasn't calling Spider-man a mutant why even go into that exsplination of why he can't cure him? He would of simply said "I'm sorry Spider-man but you're not a mutant."

"Watch your mouth pal, being a mutant's a gift." Wolverine.

This one wasn't really directed at Spider-man it was in reply to calling them freaks so I won't actully count this one on the score.

"Don't worry about my pain, worry about yours if I mutate into a dangerous creature and you have to stop me." Spider-man

Again, he used the word mutate to describe what's happening to him not to describe what he is.

Mutant 1 Mutate 0

"Spider-man don't go! He could be a big help to us." Jubulie (spelling?)

Allthough she didn't actully call him a mutant it's obvious she thought he could join the X-Men so she must of been thinking it. However haveing not said it, I'm only counting how many times they actully call Spider-man a mutant vs a mutate.

Mutant 1 mutate 0

"Look, he aint even a real mutant, he said it himself, it was an accident." Wolverine

"Then perhaps he has the right to seek a cure. There's a man at the brand coperation who has been researching mutant genetics, maybe he can help." Beast

Now this time Wolverine does blantantly call Spider-man a mutant. He says he is not a real mutant but he is still a mutant caused by an accident.

Beast allso talks about recruting a researcher in "MUTANT" genetics to help cure Spider-man.

Mutant 3 Muatate 0

"Has been studieing your particular brand of mutation." Beast

This right here alone states there are two different types of Mutatants. The ones who are born like Beast, and the ones who are created like Spider-man.

"I knew if we watched Xavier's place long enough we'd find a mutant."

"But is Spider-man a mutatnt?"

"Who cares, there's Henry McCoy. Now we're talking mutants."

I cut parts out here but the basic jist of what's going is they're mostly talking about McCoy being a mutant. They know he is but one guy questions weather or not Spider-man is.

"I may be a mutant but I'm still Human." Beast

"Well that's were we're different, I'm not sure I still am." Spider-man

Spider-man just called himself a mutant but I won't count it sence this could have mutliple meanings.

Mutant 3 Mutate 0

"Why would you want to be with a mutated thing like me?" Spider-man

Again, mutated was used to describe what's happing to him not to describe what he is. Thing was used to describe what he is.

Mutant 3 Mutate 0

Another woman in the episode who's name I know I can't spell called them Muties rather than Mutants and Peter Parker got offended by it. Rather strange considering how he called them freaks earlier himself.

Now I'm not going to quote landon word for word but you seem to have missed the point of the episode. Landon is talking about CREATING MUTANTS something you said can not be done because they have to be born that way.

So at the end of the first episode the score is still Mutant 3 Mutate 0.

They did call Spider-man a mutant 3 times and NEVER called him a mutate.
Image
Saber Prime
City Commander
Posts: 3239
News Credits: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 10:03 pm

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby Dead Metal » Sun Nov 30, 2008 1:32 pm

Motto: "Don't do drugs, beer's cheaper anyway!"
Most of those lines are from him mutating into Man-Spider a horrible mutant spider creature with 6 arms.
Then he isn't a real mutant refers to him not being a mutant.

And they did try to create mutants which ended in fail.
Image


Jeep! wrote:Why do I imagine Dead Metal sounding exactly like Arnie?
Intah-wib-buls?

Blurrz wrote:10/10

Leave it to Dead Metal to have the word 'Pronz' in his signature.
User avatar
Dead Metal
God Of Transformers
Posts: 14429
News Credits: 35
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 5:18 am

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby Saber Prime » Sun Nov 30, 2008 1:52 pm

Now to review the second episode, lets see how the score turns up. Setting the scores back to 0 and keeping a new count.

"Mutants, activate the missle launchers and turn off thoughs alarms." Landon

Yes he just called both Wolverine and Spider-man mutants and only 2 min into the episode.

Mutant 1 Mutate 0

"Blast that mutant scum into oblivion." Landon

Right after he said that the weapons locked onto Spider-man. Spider-man was called a mutant TWICE in the same scene 2 min. into the episode.

Mutant 2 Mutate 0

"How ironic, he is becomming what he hated most, a mutant" Beast

This was in refrence to Landon so I'm not counting it but this is another example of YES YOU CAN BE A MUTANT WITHOUT BEING BORN THAT WAY.

"It's my worst fear, turning into some mutated thing like that." Spider-man

Again, used to describe an action not a noun.

Mutant 2 Mutate 0

So adding in both X-Men episodes the finnal score is Mutant 5 Mutate 0.

Spider-man was called a Mutatant 5 times and was NEVER called a mutate.
Image
Saber Prime
City Commander
Posts: 3239
News Credits: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 10:03 pm

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby Sabrblade » Sun Nov 30, 2008 1:57 pm

Motto: "It's not done right if it's not done well."
Weapon: Saber Blade
Saber Prime wrote:"Your DNA may have mutated perminatly" Dr. Conners

Notice how he said that. It's stated as something that's happening to Spider-man not to describe what Spider-man is.

"So that's it, I'm mutating. Into what I don't know. Can you cure me?" Spider-man

"I'm Sorry Spider-man, my work is not to cure mutants. I built this complex, this school to train them." Professor X

I'm keeping score and that's 1 point for calling Spider-man a mutant 0 points for calling him a mutate. Yes Professor X himself just called Spider-man a mutant. If he wasn't calling Spider-man a mutant why even go into that exsplination of why he can't cure him? He would of simply said "I'm sorry Spider-man but you're not a mutant."

"Watch your mouth pal, being a mutant's a gift." Wolverine.

This one wasn't really directed at Spider-man it was in reply to calling them freaks so I won't actully count this one on the score.

"Don't worry about my pain, worry about yours if I mutate into a dangerous creature and you have to stop me." Spider-man

Again, he used the word mutate to describe what's happening to him not to describe what he is.

Mutant 1 Mutate 0

"Spider-man don't go! He could be a big help to us." Jubulie (spelling?)

Allthough she didn't actully call him a mutant it's obvious she thought he could join the X-Men so she must of been thinking it. However haveing not said it, I'm only counting how many times they actully call Spider-man a mutant vs a mutate.

Mutant 1 mutate 0

"Look, he aint even a real mutant, he said it himself, it was an accident." Wolverine

"Then perhaps he has the right to seek a cure. There's a man at the brand coperation who has been researching mutant genetics, maybe he can help." Beast

Now this time Wolverine does blantantly call Spider-man a mutant. He says he is not a real mutant but he is still a mutant caused by an accident.

Beast allso talks about recruting a researcher in "MUTANT" genetics to help cure Spider-man.

Mutant 3 Muatate 0

"Has been studieing your particular brand of mutation." Beast

This right here alone states there are two different types of Mutatants. The ones who are born like Beast, and the ones who are created like Spider-man.

"I knew if we watched Xavier's place long enough we'd find a mutant."

"But is Spider-man a mutatnt?"

"Who cares, there's Henry McCoy. Now we're talking mutants."

I cut parts out here but the basic jist of what's going is they're mostly talking about McCoy being a mutant. They know he is but one guy questions weather or not Spider-man is.

"I may be a mutant but I'm still Human." Beast

"Well that's were we're different, I'm not sure I still am." Spider-man

Spider-man just called himself a mutant but I won't count it sence this could have mutliple meanings.

Mutant 3 Mutate 0

"Why would you want to be with a mutated thing like me?" Spider-man

Again, mutated was used to describe what's happing to him not to describe what he is. Thing was used to describe what he is.

Mutant 3 Mutate 0

Another woman in the episode who's name I know I can't spell called them Muties rather than Mutants and Peter Parker got offended by it. Rather strange considering how he called them freaks earlier himself.

Now I'm not going to quote landon word for word but you seem to have missed the point of the episode. Landon is talking about CREATING MUTANTS something you said can not be done because they have to be born that way.

So at the end of the first episode the score is still Mutant 3 Mutate 0.

They did call Spider-man a mutant 3 times and NEVER called him a mutate.


Well, he was only called a mutant for those episodes so they could play out that story. That cartoon series changed so much. It completely rewrote Electro's origin, it removed the Sandman, it replaced Gwen Stacy with Felicia Hardy, it rewrote who Madame Web is, it changed how Spidey got the Venom symbiote, and much more.

While I still consider it the best Spider-Man TV series, it's still a MAJOR departure from the stories Marvel already had written in the comics.

Can't we just say that he's not a "mutant", but a "mutated person". There seems to be a difference, not a big one, but still a slight difference.

Plus, you might want to have that other thread watched, in case someone, ya know, gives you a response. :wink:
"When there's gold feathers, punch behind you!!"

Shadowman wrote:This is Sabrblade we're talking about. His ability to store trivial information about TV shows is downright superhuman.
Caelus wrote:My wife pointed out something interesting about the prehistoric Predacons. I said that everyone was complaining because transforming for them mostly consisted of them just standing up-right. She essentially said, 'So? That's what our ancestors did.'
User avatar
Sabrblade
God Of Transformers
Posts: 28746
News Credits: 223
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:22 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Strength: 7
Intelligence: 10
Speed: 7
Endurance: 6
Rank: 9
Courage: 8
Firepower: 10
Skill: 9

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby sto_vo_kor_2000 » Sun Nov 30, 2008 3:02 pm

Motto: "Today is a good day to die......but the day is not yet over!"
Saber Prime wrote:
The problem with that bold section. I can't seem to find where it says that anywhere on this page. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/verb and sence you didn't site a source either of the times you've posted, well, you're wrong.


Not siteing a source or your inability to do the research and find it your self does not make what I posted or me wrong.

Boy how ignorant can you get?????

Here's to your further education.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verb#Valency

Examples of non action verbs
http://www.eslgold.com/grammar/nonaction_verbs.html

And more for you to see
http://www.chompchomp.com/terms/verb.htm
http://faculty.mdc.edu/jgarcia/1341Ldoc ... everbs.htm

Saber Prime wrote:A verb for the last time, IS AN ACTION. How can it not require an action when it IS AN ACTION.


See the links above....and next time ether do some "Real" research because we both know that you've admitted that your schooling was not up to par.

Saber Prime wrote:Go read the dictionary definition or site your source, one of the two.


Do some real research or go back to school.

I dont care to be your teacher.


Saber Prime wrote:No it doesn't. Read more carefully.


I'm not the one that need to read it more carfully.

here is all the examples in bold from your defintion:

any member of a class of words that are formally distinguished in many languages, as in English by taking the past ending in -ed, that function as the main elements of predicates, that typically express action, state, or a relation between two things, and that (when inflected) may be inflected for tense, aspect, voice, mood, and to show agreement with their subject or object.

The part of speech that expresses existence, action, or occurrence in most languages.

a content word that denotes an action, occurrence, or state of existence

A word that represents an action or a state of being. Go, strike, travel, and exist are examples of verbs. A verb is the essential part of the predicate of a sentence. The grammatical forms of verbs include number, person, and tense. (See auxiliary verb, infinitive, intransitive verb, irregular verb, participle, regular verb, and transitive verb.)

A word which affirms or predicates something of some person or thing; a part of speech expressing being, action, or the suffering of action.

A verb is a word whereby the chief action of the mind [the assertion or the denial of a proposition] finds expression

Saber Prime wrote:No that would just be inproper English because you're apperently makeing up your own definition and blantantly useing it any which way you want.


Not I...but as always your ignoring every thing that doesnt support what your saying just to save face.

Non action verbs are a part of the language.

Saber Prime wrote:He was "mutated" he is a "mutant" as a result of said "mutation" but he is not a "natural mutant" because he was not "born" a mutant.


Being a "mutated" person in the marvel u does not make you a mutant.

The Marvel definitions of both these conditions are quite clear...mutants are born with a gentic quirk

Thoses that are "mutated" are changed by some maner and are not called mutants because they dont have that genetic quirk.

Saber Prime wrote:
Allso Magneto would not of ever contacted Spider-man because he was not born a mutant. Magneto hates humans and as far as he's conserned anyone born human is the enemy.


Thats a bit of an over statement.

For a guy that you claim "Hates" humans he has had relationships with humans.Both in friendships as well as romantic.

Saber Prime wrote:
And just to clarify. How do you missunderstand that Spider-man WAS in fact called a MUTANT several times in the episode. It was allso said he was not a "real mutant" because he was not born that way but they did still call him a mutant.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPRJ74pf ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X26AAp36nsU

Here there were actully two episodes with the X-Men as guest stars. Watch them and pay attention to how many times Spider-man is refered to as a Mutant.


I said you misunderstood the reason he was called a mutant.And that reason was to be a plot devise.

And its funny I watch both episodes and not once is he called a "mutant" by any one character that would be in the know.

He's said to be "mutating" but thats not saying he's a mutant.

Pro-X does not call him a mutant nor does Beast.

About the only character of consequence that uses "Spiderman" and "mutant" together is Wolverine and he's no man of intellectual.

As I have already pointed out a being that is the result of a mutation is not considered a mutant in any Marvel universe.

The only time a "mutated" character was called a mutant in ether episode was when Beast called the "mutated" Landen a mutant and that could have just been a way of being ironic.

Saber Prime wrote:Not only have you missread me but you're apperently missreading the dictionary now.


We've been threw this already.

Not al verbs are a action.

Saber Prime wrote:
Saber Prime wrote:And this one, you're ignoreing something because it doesn't help your case.the suffering of action which is another way of saying state of exsistance.


I'm not ignoring anything.

Because it says "A word which affirms or predicates something of some person or thing; a part of speech expressing being, action, or the suffering of action."

"Or" as in an alternitive not as if it is the only use of a verb.

Saber Prime wrote:You addmitted earlier you couldn't even think of an example of how to use a verb as a state of exsistance. Well I gave you two examples.


No what I said is that coming up with examples hurts my head.


Saber Prime wrote:Spider-man was states something that happen to him, a verb.

Spider-man is states a description for Spider-man, an Adjective.

YOU ARE USEING A WORD AS AN ADJECTIVE AND CALLING IT A VERB!


No I'm useing the word as a "non-action" verb.

Here are a few examples....

We have a brand new motercycle.........(Non-action verb)


We are having a difference of opinion now....(Action verb)

Spider-man was mutated......(Action verb)

Spiderman and other characters who's DNA are re-writter by outside means are considered "mutates"..........(Non-action verb)

The "Non-action verb" in this case indicate state of being or exsistance,it indicate the condition of the character as a result of an action, it is a word which affirms or predicates something of some person.

If you want to continue to ignore your all of this fine but I've proven my point.

Calling Spidy a "mutate" is correct.

In doing so I am:

1] I am useing the word "Mutate" as a part of speech that expresses his existence

2] making a point of his state of existence

3]I am pointing out his state of being.

4]I am useing the word "Mutate" a part of speech expressing his being

And I'm useing the word "Mutate" as A word which affirms or predicates something of the person in question.

I'm useing the word as a non-action verb.

I no longer have the stamina to continue this....if you want to remain ignorant that is your choice.

Saber Prime wrote:"Your DNA may have mutated perminatly" Dr. Conners

Notice how he said that. It's stated as something that's happening to Spider-man not to describe what Spider-man is.

"So that's it, I'm mutating. Into what I don't know. Can you cure me?" Spider-man

"I'm Sorry Spider-man, my work is not to cure mutants. I built this complex, this school to train them." Professor X

I'm keeping score and that's 1 point for calling Spider-man a mutant 0 points for calling him a mutate. Yes Professor X himself just called Spider-man a mutant.


Thats not Pro-X calling him a mutant.

Thats Pro-X stateing the fact that the school was designed to teach mutants not cure them.

Saber Prime wrote: If he wasn't calling Spider-man a mutant why even go into that exsplination of why he can't cure him?



Uhh maybe because Spidy asked him if he can cure him????To not have answerd with a reason would have been quite rude dont you think?????
Saber Prime wrote: He would of simply said "I'm sorry Spider-man but you're not a mutant."


How can you even assume to think what and or how a person or character would chose to answer a question???

Boy are you full of yourself.

Remember besides being an expert on mutants Pro-X is also one of the formost experts on Genetic Mutation of all kinds.

So what Spidy asked and how Pro-X answered is exactlly how it would have gone down.

Saber Prime wrote:
"Watch your mouth pal, being a mutant's a gift." Wolverine.

This one wasn't really directed at Spider-man it was in reply to calling them freaks so I won't actully count this one on the score.


Good that you dont because its not like Wolverine is an expert on whats a mutant.

Simply being one does not carry all knowledge on the topic.

Saber Prime wrote:
"Don't worry about my pain, worry about yours if I mutate into a dangerous creature and you have to stop me." Spider-man

Again, he used the word mutate to describe what's happening to him not to describe what he is.

Mutant 1 Mutate 0


Mutant still 0 and by my score every time the word "mutate" or mutation are used to describe whats happening to Spidy its a score....and so far the score is "Mutating" 4


Saber Prime wrote:
"Spider-man don't go! He could be a big help to us." Jubulie (spelling?)

Allthough she didn't actully call him a mutant it's obvious she thought he could join the X-Men so she must of been thinking it. However haveing not said it, I'm only counting how many times they actully call Spider-man a mutant vs a mutate.

Mutant 1 mutate 0


What does that have to do with it?

Not every member of the X-men has been a mutant.

And ahain he used "mutating again so its 5 to 0

Saber Prime wrote:
"Look, he aint even a real mutant, he said it himself, it was an accident." Wolverine

"Then perhaps he has the right to seek a cure. There's a man at the brand coperation who has been researching mutant genetics, maybe he can help." Beast

Now this time Wolverine does blantantly call Spider-man a mutant. He says he is not a real mutant but he is still a mutant caused by an accident.


Not a real mutant means not a mutant.

Your logic is full of holes.

Saber Prime wrote:
Beast allso talks about recruting a researcher in "MUTANT" genetics to help cure Spider-man.

Mutant 3 Muatate 0


A expert on Mutant genetic would also have to be an expert on mutations caused by outside means.

so were still looking at

"Mutated" 5 Mutant 0

Saber Prime wrote:
"Has been studieing your particular brand of mutation." Beast

This right here alone states there are two different types of Mutatants.The ones who are born like Beast, and the ones who are created like Spider-man.


No it state that there are different types and reasons for "Mutation".

As already stated Mutants are born that way.

And by the way the Beast is the result of both types of Mutation.

He was not born Blue and furry.

He was born with beast like hands and feet and the agility of an ape but he looked human.

In an attempt to alter his body he took some chemicals that resulted in changing his natural mutation.

Saber Prime wrote: "I knew if we watched Xavier's place long enough we'd find a mutant."

"But is Spider-man a mutatnt?"

"Who cares, there's Henry McCoy. Now we're talking mutants."

I cut parts out here but the basic jist of what's going is they're mostly talking about McCoy being a mutant. They know he is but one guy questions weather or not Spider-man is.

"I may be a mutant but I'm still Human." Beast

"Well that's were we're different, I'm not sure I still am." Spider-man

Spider-man just called himself a mutant but I won't count it sence this could have mutliple meanings.


No spiderman said he doesnt know if he's still human....he doesnt know what he's becoming and he greatest fear is that he'll become a 8 legged monster...which he later did.

Saber Prime wrote:
Mutant 3 Mutate 0


Nope still mutated 5 mutant 0

Saber Prime wrote:
"Why would you want to be with a mutated thing like me?" Spider-man

Again, mutated was used to describe what's happing to him not to describe what he is. Thing was used to describe what he is.

Mutant 3 Mutate 0


Or to describe what he's becoming

Mutated 5 mutant 0

Saber Prime wrote:
Another woman in the episode who's name I know I can't spell called them Muties rather than Mutants and Peter Parker got offended by it. Rather strange considering how he called them freaks earlier himself.


I know plenty of whites and non blacks that are offended by the use of the word nigger or colored....even when in their own past they used the word themselfs.

Maybe he was starting to identify with others that are different.People change and grow and it doesnt always take a lot of time to learn those lessons.

Saber Prime wrote:Now I'm not going to quote landon word for word but you seem to have missed the point of the episode. Landon is talking about CREATING MUTANTS something you said can not be done because they have to be born that way.


Again plot devise.

By the way this plot is somewhat loosely based on a few plots from the x-men comics.

1] Early in his supervillain career, the mutant Magneto created a headquarters in the Savage Land, a tropical jungle existing within Antarctica. Finding mutations occurred easily in this land due to high levels of radiation, Magneto assembled various natives from tribes all over the Savage Land and, calling himself "the Creator," subjected them to experiments that greatly enhanced their physiology, creating the Savage Land Mutates.

2] Genosha is a small island located south east of Madagascar on the eastern coast of Africa.Genosha was a thriving country, one of the richest in the world. However, the nation's wealth was due to using mutants as slaves. The government tested their citizens for the mutant gene, and any mutants found were stripped of basic rights and forced into slavery.

Citizens found to carry the ressive Mutant gene were forced threw experiments designed to activate the dorment genes and these characters were called "Mutates".

Both plots revolved around the idea of creating characters that differed from the normal humans.

The Spiderman animated serries,which was targeted at children, chose not to further complicate the classifications of the differences of what these characters would bne really called.

Saber Prime wrote:
So at the end of the first episode the score is still Mutant 3 Mutate 0.

They did call Spider-man a mutant 3 times and NEVER called him a mutate.


They never call him a mutant but do refer to him mutating at least 5 times.


Saber Prime wrote:Now to review the second episode, lets see how the score turns up. Setting the scores back to 0 and keeping a new count.

"Mutants, activate the missle launchers and turn off thoughs alarms." Landon

Yes he just called both Wolverine and Spider-man mutants and only 2 min into the episode.

Mutant 1 Mutate 0

"Blast that mutant scum into oblivion." Landon

Right after he said that the weapons locked onto Spider-man. Spider-man was called a mutant TWICE in the same scene 2 min. into the episode.

Mutant 2 Mutate 0


Boy are you stretching.

Landen did not examine Spidy or his blood,he has no knowledge about his past or how he came to be.

But he finds Spidy in the company of known mutants helping mutants and having "mutant like powers"....of course a man like Landen is gonig to jump to the conclusion that Spidy may be a mutant.

Its like JJ jumping to the conclusion that Spidy is as much of a memese as the bad guys he fights.

For a writter you have a poor imagination.

Score's still 0 to 0

Saber Prime wrote:
"How ironic, he is becomming what he hated most, a mutant" Beast

This was in refrence to Landon so I'm not counting it but this is another example of YES YOU CAN BE A MUTANT WITHOUT BEING BORN THAT WAY.


This is the only one I would count in your argument.

Its the only real time that its definitely stated......thou it was still a simplifying of the issue as a plot devise for a kids targeted show.

You wouldnt believe the up-rore that one statement made durring the comic book conventions of the 90's at the Spiderman tables.

Fan boys were up in arms over that one line.

As I said before basic marvel physics state that one can not become a "Mutant".

Saber Prime wrote:
"It's my worst fear, turning into some mutated thing like that." Spider-man

Again, used to describe an action not a noun.

Mutant 2 Mutate 0


I'm not going to re-hash theis action/verb/noun issue.

point is no Spiderman is a mutant statement yet.

Saber Prime wrote:
So adding in both X-Men episodes the finnal score is Mutant 5 Mutate 0.


Nope still "Mutated" 5 mutant 0

Saber Prime wrote:
Spider-man was called a Mutatant 5 times and was NEVER called a mutate.


Spidermam was said to be mutating 5 times but never said to be a mutant.

And "Mutating" does not = Mutant.

Sabrblade wrote:
Can't we just say that he's not a "mutant", but a "mutated person". There seems to be a difference, not a big one, but still a slight difference.


That is what Spiderman is...a "Mutated person".
Predaprince wrote:I am very thankful to have posters like sto_vo_kor_2000 who is so energetic about improving others' understanding and enjoyment of the TF universe
Stormrider wrote:You often add interesting insights to conversations that makes the fledglings think and challenges even the sharpest minds

T-Macksimus wrote:I consider you and editor to be amongst the most "scholarly" in terms of your knowledge, demeanor and general approach

Image
sto_vo_kor_2000
Matrix Keeper
Posts: 7733
News Credits: 1
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 12:01 am

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby Saber Prime » Sun Nov 30, 2008 10:18 pm

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:
Saber Prime wrote:
The problem with that bold section. I can't seem to find where it says that anywhere on this page. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/verb and sence you didn't site a source either of the times you've posted, well, you're wrong.


Not siteing a source or your inability to do the research and find it your self does not make what I posted or me wrong.

Boy how ignorant can you get?????


Sto, I did do the research myself. The thing about siteing your own sources is that I'm questioning weather or not YOU DID.

I not only gave my sources you even acnowaged them so you know I did the research don't even question me on that. The question is, where did you get your information from. It has nothing to do with me, it's all about you.

Saber Prime wrote:A verb for the last time, IS AN ACTION. How can it not require an action when it IS AN ACTION.


See the links above....and next time ether do some "Real" research because we both know that you've admitted that your schooling was not up to par.


While that's true, we both know I just sited the Dictionary on the defintions of the words, we both know that I did in fact research this, and we both know that not EVERY web site on the internet is going to be entirely reliable. You've said it yourself about wiki, anyone can edit a wiki entry so chances are someone could post wrong information.

Not anyone can edit an entry in the Dictionary and that web site as far as I know is just as reliable as a physical book dictionary.

I question how reliable any of your sources are.

Saber Prime wrote:He was "mutated" he is a "mutant" as a result of said "mutation" but he is not a "natural mutant" because he was not "born" a mutant.


Being a "mutated" person in the marvel u does not make you a mutant.

The Marvel definitions of both these conditions are quite clear...mutants are born with a gentic quirk

Thoses that are "mutated" are changed by some maner and are not called mutants because they dont have that genetic quirk.


Again, as I said at the begining of this disscussion, that's probly true for the comics but is not the case in the cartoon series.

I not only gave you links to the series but I took apart the dialog to show you just how many times Spider-man was in fact refered to as a mutant.

In the cartoon series there are two different kinds of mutants, the ones who were born with the mutant gene and the ones who were mutated in some freak accident. As far as the cartoon series is conserned a mutated human is still a mutant.

This may not be the case for the comics but I won't even try to dispute that as everyone knows I don't even read the comics. So we'll just say you're right when it comes to the Marvel Comics universe but not when it comes to the animated universe.

Saber Prime wrote:Allso Magneto would not of ever contacted Spider-man because he was not born a mutant. Magneto hates humans and as far as he's conserned anyone born human is the enemy.


Thats a bit of an over statement.

For a guy that you claim "Hates" humans he has had relationships with humans.Both in friendships as well as romantic.


He's a guy at war with the human race. As far as I know depending on the fiction, the only human to side with Magneto was Juggernuat. But even he was bound to be betrayed by Magneto once his usefullness ran out.

Some universes Juggernaut is actully a mutant, in others he's a normal guy who gets his powers from an outside source. That's why I said depending on the universe. Juggernaut has been changed so many times it's not even funny, in some versions he's actully related to Xavier as a step brother. It's not a blood relation, only by marrage but they are still related. In other universes Juggernaut never even met Xaiver till he started working for Magneto.

I said you misunderstood the reason he was called a mutant.And that reason was to be a plot devise.

And its funny I watch both episodes and not once is he called a "mutant" by any one character that would be in the know.

He's said to be "mutating" but thats not saying he's a mutant.

Pro-X does not call him a mutant nor does Beast.

About the only character of consequence that uses "Spiderman" and "mutant" together is Wolverine and he's no man of intellectual.

As I have already pointed out a being that is the result of a mutation is not considered a mutant in any Marvel universe.

The only time a "mutated" character was called a mutant in ether episode was when Beast called the "mutated" Landen a mutant and that could have just been a way of being ironic.


I know what you said. I was saying it was you and not me who was confused.

From that last paragraph it's obvious you're not going to belive facts in this case. You're apperently stateing your own opinion as a fact there.

Beast blantantly calls the mutated Landon a mutant and you still don't want to belive that mutated humans are mutants. Well fine that's your opinion but there is nothing in the cartoon at least to suport that as fact.

Saber Prime wrote:Spider-man was states something that happen to him, a verb.

Spider-man is states a description for Spider-man, an Adjective.

YOU ARE USEING A WORD AS AN ADJECTIVE AND CALLING IT A VERB!


No I'm useing the word as a "non-action" verb.


No you're not. I did some research on these suposed non-action verbs and check this out.

http://www.eslgold.com/grammar/nonaction_verbs.html

That page gives several examples of right and wrong was to use them. Every wrong example included the word "is" where have I heard that before, oh I know your sentence. "Spider-man IS a mutate." You were in fact useing improper grammer and the dictionary confirms that yet again.

Mr. Tactful is seeming like a nice guy.
(Wrong!)

Mr. Tactful seems like a nice guy.
(Correct)

This salad is tasting delicious.
(Wrong!)

This salad tastes delicious.
(Correct)

I am liking banana cream pie.
(Wrong!)

I like banana cream pie.
(Correct)


Here are a few examples....

We have a brand new motercycle.........(Non-action verb)


We are having a difference of opinion now....(Action verb)

Spider-man was mutated......(Action verb)

Spiderman and other characters who's DNA are re-writter by outside means are considered "mutates"..........(Non-action verb)

The "Non-action verb" in this case indicate state of being or exsistance,it indicate the condition of the character as a result of an action, it is a word which affirms or predicates something of some person.

If you want to continue to ignore your all of this fine but I've proven my point.

Calling Spidy a "mutate" is correct.


The same page I posted above gives examples of this as well. Some non-action verbs can allso be used as action verbs. In fact some of your examples you gave here are not actully non-action the way you just used them.

I've taken the liberty of correcting your examples

We have a brand new motercycle.........(Non-action verb)

We are having a difference of opinion now....(action verb)

Spider-man was mutated......(Action verb)

Spiderman and other characters who's DNA are re-writter by outside means are considered "mutates"..........(Adjective)


As I said before, any word used to describe a noun is an adjective. Mutates in that sentence describes several nouns.

Have or haveing do not describe a noun.

In the first sentence you listed Have was used to state one nouns relation to another, that we have a motorcycle. Have doesn't describe who "we" are nor does it describe the motorcycle.

In the second sentence haveing states that we are doing something in this case, a difference of opinion.

In the third statement, Mutate is used to describe what genetically altered people are. Because it describes what a group of people are that makes it an adjective. An adjective is a word that descibes a noun. You are describeing a noun.

If you want to continue to ignore your all of this fine but I've proven my point.


I'm not ignoreing anything nor have you proven anything other than you don't know what an adjective is.

Calling Spidy a "mutate" is correct.


No it isn't.

If you said. "Spider-man is mutateing." "Spider-man mutated." "Spider-man has a mutation." or "The spider bite caused Peter Parker to mutate." any of thoughs would be correct.

To say "Spider-man is a mutate." is wrong because in that sentence mutate is being used as an adjective.

In all the correct statement examples the mutate word is being used to describe something that happened, is happening, or will happen to him. In the wrong statement the word mutate is being used to describe what he is.

Spider-man being a person is a noun. An adjective is a word that describes a noun. When you say "Spider-man is a..." you are describeing what he is which mean any word you say after "is a" becomes an adjective.

You've pointed out in the past where I've missworded sentences. In this case you're misswording a sentence. You might be trying to use mutate as a verb and it can be used as a verb but as I told you before the way you're useing it is incorrect because you're useing it to describe a noun which turns it into an adjective.

As I pointed out in the episode, they did use the word "mutate" several times in regards to Spider-man but never to describe what he is. The way you're useing it describes what he is.

1] I am useing the word "Mutate" as a part of speech that expresses his existence

2] making a point of his state of existence

3]I am pointing out his state of being.

4]I am useing the word "Mutate" a part of speech expressing his being


No you are not. You would be if it wasn't for the way you phraised it. You're not useing mutate as his state of exsistance, you are useing it to describe what he is. There is a difference here's an example, AGAIN.

Billy is in pain. (Verb)

Billy is a pain. (Adjective)

I'm useing the word as a non-action verb.


You are useing the word as an adjective.

In the following replys you seem to have blantantly ignored everything I said and everything that was happening in the cartoon. I'm going to have to break this down little by little to exsplain exactly how you did this.

Thats not Pro-X calling him a mutant.

Thats Pro-X stateing the fact that the school was designed to teach mutants not cure them.


I had antisipated you were going to reply with this and my very next statement questions how what you just said is even possible. So you're first strike is failing to answer said question.

Saber Prime wrote: If he wasn't calling Spider-man a mutant why even go into that exsplination of why he can't cure him?


Uhh maybe because Spidy asked him if he can cure him????To not have answerd with a reason would have been quite rude dont you think?????


Again, you posted a reply without reading the full statement as this again was answered in my next quote. So you have two strikes of failing to even read my post before responding to it.

Saber Prime wrote: He would of simply said "I'm sorry Spider-man but you're not a mutant."


How can you even assume to think what and or how a person or character would chose to answer a question???


OK at least with this one you only missunderstood me. But you did read it.

Now what I don't understand is that you appearently read and replyed to little segments of my post and failed to realize the next little segment anticipated thoughs verry replys so you really didn't answer me at all untill now. Again, read the full section before you reply to little segments.

Anyway, to clear this bit up. Spider-man asked for a cure and Professor X answer for why he can't cure Spider-man is because he does not cure "mutants". What you fail to realize is that if Spider-man is not a mutant how is that a suffeciant exsplination for why he can't be cured? If Spider-man is not a mutant than "because I don't cure mutants" has absolutly nothing to do with Spider-man asking for a cure for his condition so why would he give that as an exsplination?

I said nothing about being rude and not answering him and I wasn't trying to be an exspert on how that character would have reacted. What I was doing was giveing an example of an answer that would have actully protained to Spider-man's condition. If Spider-man is not a mutant as you say, and Prof. X was not calling him a mutant as you say than the answer he did give had absolutly nothing to do with why Spider-man can't be cured.

Boy are you full of yourself.


See abouve.

Remember besides being an expert on mutants Pro-X is also one of the formost experts on Genetic Mutation of all kinds.


Which has absolutly nothing to do with how he replyed to Spider-man.

Saber Prime wrote:"Don't worry about my pain, worry about yours if I mutate into a dangerous creature and you have to stop me." Spider-man

Again, he used the word mutate to describe what's happening to him not to describe what he is.

Mutant 1 Mutate 0


Mutant still 0 and by my score every time the word "mutate" or mutation are used to describe whats happening to Spidy its a score....and so far the score is "Mutating" 4


No because again. You said Spider-man was a mutate. The way you used it and the way it's being used in the show are completly different.

You used Mutate to describe what Spider-man is, the show uses it to describe what's happeing to him.

The point of the score was to show that no one ever said he was a mutate. Weather or not he was mutating was never up for debate so it's not even on the score. We know he was mutating, the question was "what is he" not "what's happening to him".

You said he was a mutate, no one has ever called him that. The score is 0.

Saber Prime wrote:"Spider-man don't go! He could be a big help to us." Jubulie (spelling?)

Allthough she didn't actully call him a mutant it's obvious she thought he could join the X-Men so she must of been thinking it. However haveing not said it, I'm only counting how many times they actully call Spider-man a mutant vs a mutate.

Mutant 1 mutate 0


What does that have to do with it?

Not every member of the X-men has been a mutant.

And ahain he used "mutating again so its 5 to 0


Again, useing the word does not automatically give you a point. They have to use it to describe what he is like you did in order for you to gain a point. Sence that never happens you never gain any points.

Please pay attention to the full sentence of how they use the words vs. how you were useing it. You useing it to describe what Spider-man IS they use it to describe what Spider-man is GOING THOUGH.

It's not about the word by itself, it's how you're useing it wrong.

Saber Prime wrote:"Look, he aint even a real mutant, he said it himself, it was an accident." Wolverine

"Then perhaps he has the right to seek a cure. There's a man at the brand coperation who has been researching mutant genetics, maybe he can help." Beast

Now this time Wolverine does blantantly call Spider-man a mutant. He says he is not a real mutant but he is still a mutant caused by an accident.


Not a real mutant means not a mutant.

Your logic is full of holes.


No it isn't you're twisting words around to fit your own argument. Not a real mutant means not a mutant? And I'm full of myself? That statement looks like an act of desperation. Do you really want to win this argument so bad you're willing to say anything to help your case even when it makes no gawd damn sence by any means?

Seriously, at this point I don't care anymore. It's abvious no matter what the facts say you're going to let your own opinions take over and I want no part of that. This will be my last post unless you stop stateing your opinions as facts here.

Saber Prime wrote:Beast allso talks about recruting a researcher in "MUTANT" genetics to help cure Spider-man.

Mutant 3 Muatate 0


A expert on Mutant genetic would also have to be an expert on mutations caused by outside means.

so were still looking at

"Mutated" 5 Mutant 0


While you might be right but it allso suports that born or by outside means it doesn't matter you are still a mutant either way. Thanks for helping me prove my point.

Saber Prime wrote:"Has been studieing your particular brand of mutation." Beast

This right here alone states there are two different types of Mutatants.The ones who are born like Beast, and the ones who are created like Spider-man.


No it state that there are different types and reasons for "Mutation".

As already stated Mutants are born that way.

And by the way the Beast is the result of both types of Mutation.

He was not born Blue and furry.

He was born with beast like hands and feet and the agility of an ape but he looked human.

In an attempt to alter his body he took some chemicals that resulted in changing his natural mutation.


Technically speaking no mutant is born with their powers. They're born with the gene but powers don't manifest till puberty. Nightcrawler is an exseption to this rule as he was born that way.

Saber Prime wrote:Mutant 3 Mutate 0


Nope still mutated 5 mutant 0


Nope Mutated was never even on the score to begine with. It's not relivant to this conversation.

Saber Prime wrote:"Why would you want to be with a mutated thing like me?" Spider-man

Again, mutated was used to describe what's happing to him not to describe what he is. Thing was used to describe what he is.

Mutant 3 Mutate 0


Or to describe what he's becoming

Mutated 5 mutant 0


That's what I said you just phraised it differently.

What he's becomming, what's happening to him, same meaning.

Saber Prime wrote:Another woman in the episode who's name I know I can't spell called them Muties rather than Mutants and Peter Parker got offended by it. Rather strange considering how he called them freaks earlier himself.


I know plenty of whites and non blacks that are offended by the use of the word nigger or colored....even when in their own past they used the word themselfs.

Maybe he was starting to identify with others that are different.People change and grow and it doesnt always take a lot of time to learn those lessons.


He calls them freaks later on after that too when Landon mutates.

Saber Prime wrote:Now I'm not going to quote landon word for word but you seem to have missed the point of the episode. Landon is talking about CREATING MUTANTS something you said can not be done because they have to be born that way.


Again plot devise.

By the way this plot is somewhat loosely based on a few plots from the x-men comics.


And? Sounds like you're finally addmitting to being wrong.

Saber Prime wrote:So at the end of the first episode the score is still Mutant 3 Mutate 0.

They did call Spider-man a mutant 3 times and NEVER called him a mutate.


They never call him a mutant but do refer to him mutating at least 5 times.


Again weather or not they refer to him mutateing was never in question. The question was "what IS he?"

Saber Prime wrote:Now to review the second episode, lets see how the score turns up. Setting the scores back to 0 and keeping a new count.

"Mutants, activate the missle launchers and turn off thoughs alarms." Landon

Yes he just called both Wolverine and Spider-man mutants and only 2 min into the episode.

Mutant 1 Mutate 0

"Blast that mutant scum into oblivion." Landon

Right after he said that the weapons locked onto Spider-man. Spider-man was called a mutant TWICE in the same scene 2 min. into the episode.

Mutant 2 Mutate 0


Boy are you stretching.

Landen did not examine Spidy or his blood,he has no knowledge about his past or how he came to be.

But he finds Spidy in the company of known mutants helping mutants and having "mutant like powers"....of course a man like Landen is gonig to jump to the conclusion that Spidy may be a mutant.

Its like JJ jumping to the conclusion that Spidy is as much of a memese as the bad guys he fights.

For a writter you have a poor imagination.

Score's still 0 to 0


Wrong and total fail on your part.

Earlier you said no one who was "in the know" called Spider-man a mutant however Landon, Beast, Professor Xavier all call him a mutant at some point and all of them are exsperts in the subject and you just keep making exscuses for why anything they say doesn't matter just to help your case. Again, I'm ending this conversation if you keep doing that.

Saber Prime wrote:"How ironic, he is becomming what he hated most, a mutant" Beast

This was in refrence to Landon so I'm not counting it but this is another example of YES YOU CAN BE A MUTANT WITHOUT BEING BORN THAT WAY.


This is the only one I would count in your argument.

Its the only real time that its definitely stated......thou it was still a simplifying of the issue as a plot devise for a kids targeted show.

You wouldnt believe the up-rore that one statement made durring the comic book conventions of the 90's at the Spiderman tables.

Fan boys were up in arms over that one line.

As I said before basic marvel physics state that one can not become a "Mutant".


And again, in the comic universe you're probly wright and I not knowing anything about the comics am not even going to try to dispute that. But when you use the comic story line to prove something in the cartoon, that just doesn't work.

In the cartoon you can be made a mutant, you don't have to be born that way. I really only needed 1 example to prove this true and you just agreed with me on this point or you just couldn't find any way to work around it, either way I was right. In the animated universe, you do not have to be born that way.

And again this may ONLY be true for the animated universe.

Saber Prime wrote:So adding in both X-Men episodes the finnal score is Mutant 5 Mutate 0.


Nope still "Mutated" 5 mutant 0


Again, that was never even in question and isn't even on the score board.

Saber Prime wrote:Spider-man was called a Mutatant 5 times and was NEVER called a mutate.


Spidermam was said to be mutating 5 times but never said to be a mutant.

And "Mutating" does not = Mutant.


Spider-man WAS called a mutant 5 times, Landon was even called a mutant once and you even admitted to that one.

Weather or not Spider-man was said to be mutating was never in question and BTW that's the first time you used that properly in a sentence.

Sabrblade wrote:Can't we just say that he's not a "mutant", but a "mutated person". There seems to be a difference, not a big one, but still a slight difference.


That is what Spiderman is...a "Mutated person".[/quote]

There's another proper use cortasy of Sabrblade.

The whole point of this was partially to prove that you don't have to be born a mutant to be a mutant in the animated universe which I did and the other part with the score board was to show you how you were useing mutate wrong in a sentence and that's still up for debate weather or not you figured that one out.
Image
Saber Prime
City Commander
Posts: 3239
News Credits: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 10:03 pm

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby sto_vo_kor_2000 » Mon Dec 01, 2008 1:50 am

Motto: "Today is a good day to die......but the day is not yet over!"
Saber Prime wrote:Sto, I did do the research myself. The thing about siteing your own sources is that I'm questioning weather or not YOU DID.

I not only gave my sources you even acnowaged them so you know I did the research don't even question me on that. The question is, where did you get your information from. It has nothing to do with me, it's all about you.


Point is you didnt do the right research.

You kept going on an on about how every verb pertains to an action....I told you that there were verbs that did not.

Instead of seeing if I was right you looked for infomation to just prove yourself right and nothing else.

A simple Google search with the words "Non-action verbs" would have lead you to the information I sited.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=no ... h&aq=f&oq=

The point of doing research is not to just prove yourself right but to try to learn new things....to further your education, to better yourself.

Stop trying so hard to win a debate with me and you might learn something from time to time.

Saber Prime wrote:While that's true, we both know I just sited the Dictionary on the defintions of the words, we both know that I did in fact research this,


But you did so soley for the wrong reasons as I said above.

Do the research to learn not to compete in a debate.

Saber Prime wrote: and we both know that not EVERY web site on the internet is going to be entirely reliable. You've said it yourself about wiki, anyone can edit a wiki entry so chances are someone could post wrong information.


Wiki was not the only site I posted.

Saber Prime wrote:Not anyone can edit an entry in the Dictionary and that web site as far as I know is just as reliable as a physical book dictionary.

I question how reliable any of your sources are.


A] I provided more then one source

B] you can ether go back to school and learn about it or you can go to the libery.

What I posted was in support of what I remembered from school.

Granted I didnt remember it all in such detail but I knew that there were "non action verbs" and I also knew from reading comics that there were a catagory of characters called "Mutates".

So even if it was in bad vocabulary to do so I would have only been repeating what Marvel them self had labeled some characters as.

One way or the other I wasnt wrong.

Saber Prime wrote:Again, as I said at the begining of this disscussion, that's probly true for the comics but is not the case in the cartoon series.


I'm not going to get into the semantics of this again.

Even in the cartoon serries, in every mention of what is a mutant in the X-men animated serries it says being a mutant means being born that way.

It was only once in the Spiderman episode that called a "changed" Landen a mutant.

Wether that was to simplfy things or to try to make a ironic statement nobody knows but out of 76 episodes of the 90's X-men serries and 65 episodes of the 90's Spiderman serries there was only 1 episode between the 2 shows that suggests anything about making a mutant.

Its far eazyer to dismiss that one story arc then to dismiss the 100's of statements made threw out the 2 serries as well as other Marvel cartoons that state "mutants are born not made".

Saber Prime wrote:I not only gave you links to the series but I took apart the dialog to show you just how many times Spider-man was in fact refered to as a mutant.


And he was only called a Mutant 1 time by 1 character.

Saber Prime wrote:
In the cartoon series there are two different kinds of mutants, the ones who were born with the mutant gene and the ones who were mutated in some freak accident. As far as the cartoon series is conserned a mutated human is still a mutant.


See above.

Saber Prime wrote:
This may not be the case for the comics but I won't even try to dispute that as everyone knows I don't even read the comics. So we'll just say you're right when it comes to the Marvel Comics universe but not when it comes to the animated universe.


Again.

Saber Prime wrote:He's a guy at war with the human race. As far as I know depending on the fiction, the only human to side with Magneto was Juggernuat. But even he was bound to be betrayed by Magneto once his usefullness ran out.


The fact that you dont read comics limits your information.

I wont bore you with years of detain but to make it short, he has had romantic relations with normal humans.

In the comics he's not so clear cut evil.There's more shades of grey to his character.

For a while he was a member of the X-men and the headmaster of Xaviers School.

Saber Prime wrote:
Some universes Juggernaut is actully a mutant, in others he's a normal guy who gets his powers from an outside source. That's why I said depending on the universe. Juggernaut has been changed so many times it's not even funny, in some versions he's actully related to Xavier as a step brother. It's not a blood relation, only by marrage but they are still related. In other universes Juggernaut never even met Xaiver till he started working for Magneto.


More changes to simplfy things.

Saber Prime wrote:I know what you said. I was saying it was you and not me who was confused.

From that last paragraph it's obvious you're not going to belive facts in this case. You're apperently stateing your own opinion as a fact there.

Beast blantantly calls the mutated Landon a mutant and you still don't want to belive that mutated humans are mutants. Well fine that's your opinion but there is nothing in the cartoon at least to suport that as fact.


Explained somewhere above.

Saber Prime wrote:No you're not. I did some research on these suposed non-action verbs and check this out.

http://www.eslgold.com/grammar/nonaction_verbs.html

That page gives several examples of right and wrong was to use them. Every wrong example included the word "is" where have I heard that before, oh I know your sentence. "Spider-man IS a mutate." You were in fact useing improper grammer and the dictionary confirms that yet again.


Thats just because of the exanmples chosen its not a rule of gramer.

If it were explain this example from the very same page

Craig is a real estate agent......(Non-action)

Billy is being naughty today.......(Action)


As you can see the word "is" was used in both the action and non action examples.

Proving again that you only see the things that you think prove your argument.

And in the long run all you ever do is prove me right when you do that.
'
Stop trying so hard to prove me wrong....you fail every time.

Saber Prime wrote:The same page I posted above gives examples of this as well. Some non-action verbs can allso be used as action verbs. In fact some of your examples you gave here are not actully non-action the way you just used them.

I've taken the liberty of correcting your examples

We have a brand new motercycle.........(Non-action verb)

We are having a difference of opinion now....(action verb)

Spider-man was mutated......(Action verb)

Spiderman and other characters who's DNA are re-writter by outside means are considered "mutates"..........(Adjective)


As I said before, any word used to describe a noun is an adjective. Mutates in that sentence describes several nouns.

Have or haveing do not describe a noun.

In the first sentence you listed Have was used to state one nouns relation to another, that we have a motorcycle. Have doesn't describe who "we" are nor does it describe the motorcycle.

In the second sentence haveing states that we are doing something in this case, a difference of opinion.

In the third statement, Mutate is used to describe what genetically altered people are. Because it describes what a group of people are that makes it an adjective. An adjective is a word that descibes a noun. You are describeing a noun.


I'm not going to get into this one again.

I used the word properly and your just trying to save face.

Useing "Mutate" as a non-action verb describes the state of being of theses characters.

Saber Prime wrote:I'm not ignoreing anything nor have you proven anything other than you don't know what an adjective is.


See above.

And you can also take up this argument with marvel if you like.

Saber Prime wrote:No it isn't.


Yes it is.

If you dont like it take it up with Marvel.

Saber Prime wrote:
If you said. "Spider-man is mutateing." "Spider-man mutated." "Spider-man has a mutation." or "The spider bite caused Peter Parker to mutate." any of thoughs would be correct.

To say "Spider-man is a mutate." is wrong because in that sentence mutate is being used as an adjective.


No.... by useing the word "mutate" [non action verb] I amy categorizing the character based on his state of being caused by the events of a mutation and the suffering of action [action verb]

Saber Prime wrote:As I pointed out in the episode, they did use the word "mutate" several times in regards to Spider-man but never to describe what he is. The way you're useing it describes what he is.


It describes his state of being as a result of the action of mutation.

Now I'n not going to say that its impossible that I'm useing it the wrong way but if I'm useing it wrong then so has Marvel and your doing a piss poor job of proving it to me.

Based on every thing we've both posted on verbs and non action verbs it appears to be proper english to me.

And as I said Marvel has refered to "mutated" characters as Mutates from time to time.

Saber Prime wrote:.

In the following replys you seem to have blantantly ignored everything I said and everything that was happening in the cartoon. I'm going to have to break this down little by little to exsplain exactly how you did this.


Ok lets see.....
Saber Prime wrote:
Thats not Pro-X calling him a mutant.

Thats Pro-X stateing the fact that the school was designed to teach mutants not cure them.


I had antisipated you were going to reply with this and my very next statement questions how what you just said is even possible. So you're first strike is failing to answer said question.


What??????

Saber Prime wrote:
Saber Prime wrote: If he wasn't calling Spider-man a mutant why even go into that exsplination of why he can't cure him?


Uhh maybe because Spidy asked him if he can cure him????To not have answerd with a reason would have been quite rude dont you think?????


Again, you posted a reply without reading the full statement as this again was answered in my next quote. So you have two strikes of failing to even read my post before responding to it.


Again your loseing me.

Point is Spiderman asked the leading research in "gentic mutation" if he could cure him.

Pro-X is just not an expert in mutants but in mutation in all its forms.

Not only was it still right for Spidy to ask the question but it was the correct answer for Pro-X to give.

Pro-X became an expert in "mutation" so that he could help mutants to live and cope with being mutants not to cure them.

Pro-X would have been more incline to help Pete live with his mutation then to remove it.

Saber Prime wrote:
Anyway, to clear this bit up. Spider-man asked for a cure and Professor X answer for why he can't cure Spider-man is because he does not cure "mutants". What you fail to realize is that if Spider-man is not a mutant how is that a suffeciant exsplination for why he can't be cured? If Spider-man is not a mutant than "because I don't cure mutants" has absolutly nothing to do with Spider-man asking for a cure for his condition so why would he give that as an exsplination?


As I said above Pro-X would have been more inclined to help Pete live with his mutation then to cure him.

He did the same for Nightcrawler who wanted nothing but a cure so he could look normal

He did the same for Rouge who wanted a cure so she could touch people.

He told Pete that he helps mutants not cures then because thats what he does.

The little fact that he didnt go into the "your not a mutant" issue isint of any value because wether mutant or mutated Pro-X helps people to live with the proplem, not cures them.

As I said not every member of the X-men or his other teams have been mutants.

Pro-X has helped and had Aliens,Mutated characters,other demention characters on his teams and helped them to deal with their problems.

Saber Prime wrote: If Spider-man is not a mutant as you say, and Prof. X was not calling him a mutant as you say than the answer he did give had absolutly nothing to do with why Spider-man can't be cured.


I hope you understand me a bit better now.

Saber Prime wrote:Which has absolutly nothing to do with how he replyed to Spider-man.


It does when you put all the facts together.

He answered that way because wether mutant,alien,mutated,or what ever Pro-X helps you live with what you are and doent cure the issue.

Saber Prime wrote:No because again. You said Spider-man was a mutate. The way you used it and the way it's being used in the show are completly different.

You used Mutate to describe what Spider-man is, the show uses it to describe what's happeing to him.


When this this become a debate about how they used the word in the show???/

I thought those were 2 seprate debates.

Regardless Spiderman is a Mutate and was becoming a Mutate because he was mutating again in that episode.

The first Mutation was the original spider bite the second mutation was what ever cause what was happening in that episode.

I cant tell you what it was in the toon but in the comice it was cause by a different character.

Saber Prime wrote:
The point of the score was to show that no one ever said he was a mutate.


I never said they said mutate in the show.

I said that it was how the characters are categorized in the comics.

Saber Prime wrote:

You said he was a mutate, no one has ever called him that. The score is 0.


See above

Saber Prime wrote:Again, useing the word does not automatically give you a point. They have to use it to describe what he is like you did in order for you to gain a point. Sence that never happens you never gain any points.

Please pay attention to the full sentence of how they use the words vs. how you were useing it. You useing it to describe what Spider-man IS they use it to describe what Spider-man is GOING THOUGH.

It's not about the word by itself, it's how you're useing it wrong.


Like I said I "NEVER" said they used the word "mutate in the toon....I said in the comics.

Saber Prime wrote:No it isn't you're twisting words around to fit your own argument. Not a real mutant means not a mutant? And I'm full of myself? That statement looks like an act of desperation. Do you really want to win this argument so bad you're willing to say anything to help your case even when it makes no gawd damn sence by any means?

Seriously, at this point I don't care anymore. It's abvious no matter what the facts say you're going to let your own opinions take over and I want no part of that. This will be my last post unless you stop stateing your opinions as facts here.


If thats what I'm doing then tell me how calling him "not a real mutant" is "blantantly calling him a mutant"?????

Saber Prime wrote:While you might be right but it allso suports that born or by outside means it doesn't matter you are still a mutant either way. Thanks for helping me prove my point.


How do you figure that????

It only proves that the conditions are similar not the same.

Look at diabetes......there's type 1 and type 2 but nether are the same nore do they work the same but the end results are the same.

Simply put to be a mutant is to have an active mutant gene.

Those that are mutated do not always have the mutant gene in any sence.

Saber Prime wrote:


Technically speaking no mutant is born with their powers. They're born with the gene but powers don't manifest till puberty. Nightcrawler is an exseption to this rule as he was born that way.


Technically speaking your incorrect.

There are a small number of mutants that were born with their mutant powers manfesting at birth or with physical sings of their mutation at birth.

Nightcrawler is one of a small few.

Saber Prime wrote:He calls them freaks later on after that too when Landon mutates.


Fear of becoming what he see in fount of him can lead anyone to useing slurs.....

Saber Prime wrote:And? Sounds like you're finally addmitting to being wrong.


Again how do you figure??????

Fasct is there have been plenty of plots to create mutated characters.....and one of them ended with a group of characters that were called "Mutates".

Saber Prime wrote:They did call Spider-man a mutant 3 times and NEVER called him a mutate.


Again I never said they called him mutate in the cartoon.

And again Landen was the only one to call him mutant.


Saber Prime wrote:
Wrong and total fail on your part.


Not by how I see it.

Saber Prime wrote:Earlier you said no one who was "in the know" called Spider-man a mutant however Landon, Beast, Professor Xavier all call him a mutant at some point and all of them are exsperts in the subject and you just keep making exscuses for why anything they say doesn't matter just to help your case. Again, I'm ending this conversation if you keep doing that.


Nether Beast or Pro-X called him a mutant and Landen is not in the know.

He did not speak to Spidy about his condition,he did not examine Spidy....even the best Doctor can not diagnose your problem by seeing you standing there.

Saber Prime wrote:And again, in the comic universe you're probly wright and I not knowing anything about the comics am not even going to try to dispute that. But when you use the comic story line to prove something in the cartoon, that just doesn't work.

In the cartoon you can be made a mutant, you don't have to be born that way. I really only needed 1 example to prove this true and you just agreed with me on this point or you just couldn't find any way to work around it, either way I was right. In the animated universe, you do not have to be born that way.

And again this may ONLY be true for the animated universe.


Like I said above....that episode has the only 1 mention of that out of 70+ episodes of X-men that state mutants are born not made.

I can dismiss that one error far eazyer then to dismiss all the other times they said you have to be born a mutant.

But hey to each his own.

Saber Prime wrote:Spider-man WAS called a mutant 5 times, Landon was even called a mutant once and you even admitted to that one.


Landen statement was the only time Spidy was called a "mutant".

The only other thing you proved was that no one said "hey your not a mutant" but non of the other characters called him a mutant.


P.S. do me a favor and shorted the next round.....you know how my health has been.
Predaprince wrote:I am very thankful to have posters like sto_vo_kor_2000 who is so energetic about improving others' understanding and enjoyment of the TF universe
Stormrider wrote:You often add interesting insights to conversations that makes the fledglings think and challenges even the sharpest minds

T-Macksimus wrote:I consider you and editor to be amongst the most "scholarly" in terms of your knowledge, demeanor and general approach

Image
sto_vo_kor_2000
Matrix Keeper
Posts: 7733
News Credits: 1
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 12:01 am

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby Saber Prime » Mon Dec 01, 2008 2:36 pm

You know what, just forget it. The whole mutate not a mutant debate is pointless now.

Just do me a favor and read the definition of the word Adjective.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/adjective

I'll give you three examples where "Mutate" is a verb.

"if I mutate into some 8 legged freak and you have to stop me." verb

"The spider bite caused Peter Parker to mutate." verb

"Spider-man will mutate." verb

The way you were useing it, not the word itself, just the way you used it was as an adjective.

In the 3 verb examples I gave you mutate describes something that will happen to him, that's what state of being means.

The way you used it you describe what he is. "Spider-man is a mutate." in that context mutate is not describeing a state of being, it's describeing a noun. An adjective is a word that describes a noun. So in the sentence "Spider-man is a mutate." the word mutate is an adjective.
Image
Saber Prime
City Commander
Posts: 3239
News Credits: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 10:03 pm

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby Sabrblade » Mon Dec 01, 2008 3:05 pm

Motto: "It's not done right if it's not done well."
Weapon: Saber Blade
Okay, now you're both wrong.

In this sentence, "Spider-Man is a mutate." The word "mutate" is not being used as a verb OR an adjective. It's being used as a NOUN.

Ignoring the obvious grammatical error in that sentence, the word "mutate" is not showing an action (in this case) or describing a noun, it is a noun!

While both "Spider-Man" and (this incorrect use of) "mutate" are nouns, there is one difference. "Spider-Man" is a proper noun and the other word is (being used as) just an ordinary noun.

It's the same condition if one were to rewrite it as "Spider-Man is a thing". Both "Spider-Man" and "thing" are nouns, but "Spider-Man" is a proper noun and "thing" is another noun.

Another example like this would be "Peter is a man." Both "Peter" and "man" are nouns, but "Peter" is a proper noun and "man" is just a noun.

Now an adjective in this sentence would describe either "Peter" or "man". For example, in the sentence "Peter is a tall man." the word "tall" is an adjective describing the noun "man". Or, in the sentence "Old Peter is a man." the word "old" is an adjective describing the (proper) noun "Peter" (though, it would make a little more sense to write the sentence out as "Peter is an old man." cuz "Old Peter is a man." sounds a little awkward).

Lastly, I'm going to sum up this whole "mutant" deal by saying what Spider-Man truely is, no matter what the form of fiction is: "Spider-Man is a metahuman!"
"When there's gold feathers, punch behind you!!"

Shadowman wrote:This is Sabrblade we're talking about. His ability to store trivial information about TV shows is downright superhuman.
Caelus wrote:My wife pointed out something interesting about the prehistoric Predacons. I said that everyone was complaining because transforming for them mostly consisted of them just standing up-right. She essentially said, 'So? That's what our ancestors did.'
User avatar
Sabrblade
God Of Transformers
Posts: 28746
News Credits: 223
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:22 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Strength: 7
Intelligence: 10
Speed: 7
Endurance: 6
Rank: 9
Courage: 8
Firepower: 10
Skill: 9

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby Saber Prime » Mon Dec 01, 2008 4:45 pm

Sabrblade wrote:Okay, now you're both wrong.

In this sentence, "Spider-Man is a mutate." The word "mutate" is not being used as a verb OR an adjective. It's being used as a NOUN.

Ignoring the obvious grammatical error in that sentence, the word "mutate" is not showing an action (in this case) or describing a noun, it is a noun!


Actully it IS describeing a noun. Spider-man is the noun in that sentence and Mutate describes what Spider-man is.

Now an adjective in this sentence would describe either "Peter" or "man". For example, in the sentence "Peter is a tall man." the word "tall" is an adjective describing the noun "man". Or, in the sentence "Old Peter is a man." the word "old" is an adjective describing the (proper) noun "Peter" (though, it would make a little more sense to write the sentence out as "Peter is an old man." cuz "Old Peter is a man." sounds a little awkward).


Not really. In the sentence "Old Peter is a man." Old Peter could be a nick name in which case Old would be a noun as part of his name and could allso be an adjective as part of how he got that name in the first place.

The current play I'm working on "Christmas Foundling" actully has a character named "Old Jake" and throughout the play "Old" is used both as his name and to describe him.

Lastly, I'm going to sum up this whole "mutant" deal by saying what Spider-Man truely is, no matter what the form of fiction is: "Spider-Man is a metahuman!"


Again, no, you're mixing media. Metahumans are from DC comics and even in the DC universe, some Metahumans are born that way others are created.
Image
Saber Prime
City Commander
Posts: 3239
News Credits: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 10:03 pm

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby Sabrblade » Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:28 pm

Motto: "It's not done right if it's not done well."
Weapon: Saber Blade
Saber Prime wrote:
Now an adjective in this sentence would describe either "Peter" or "man". For example, in the sentence "Peter is a tall man." the word "tall" is an adjective describing the noun "man". Or, in the sentence "Old Peter is a man." the word "old" is an adjective describing the (proper) noun "Peter" (though, it would make a little more sense to write the sentence out as "Peter is an old man." cuz "Old Peter is a man." sounds a little awkward).


Not really. In the sentence "Old Peter is a man." Old Peter could be a nick name in which case Old would be a noun as part of his name and could allso be an adjective as part of how he got that name in the first place.

The current play I'm working on "Christmas Foundling" actully has a character named "Old Jake" and throughout the play "Old" is used both as his name and to describe him.


I just knew this would be brought up. I probably shoud've mantioned that, in this particular case, it all depends on what the writer of the sentence intends for what the word is for. When I wrote that sentence, I intended for the word "old" to be an adjective, not a nickname. I had to capitalize it since it was the first word of the sentence.

Saber Prime wrote:
Lastly, I'm going to sum up this whole "mutant" deal by saying what Spider-Man truely is, no matter what the form of fiction is: "Spider-Man is a metahuman!"


Again, no, you're mixing media. Metahumans are from DC comics and even in the DC universe, some Metahumans are born that way others are created.


I'm sure that I've heard metahuman used as a generic term outside of DC (as well as within it).

...

Oh crud! Looks like Sto was right all along. When he said "Spider-Man is a mutate." turns out he wasn't exactly misusing the word after all. In this particular case, the word "mutate" is not a verb, but a noun that is a synonym for "non-mutant mutated human". Like how DC has beings called "Metahumans", Marvel got beings called "Mutates". I seriously cannot believe I haven't heard this term before. And I'm a much bigger Marvel fan than DC.
"When there's gold feathers, punch behind you!!"

Shadowman wrote:This is Sabrblade we're talking about. His ability to store trivial information about TV shows is downright superhuman.
Caelus wrote:My wife pointed out something interesting about the prehistoric Predacons. I said that everyone was complaining because transforming for them mostly consisted of them just standing up-right. She essentially said, 'So? That's what our ancestors did.'
User avatar
Sabrblade
God Of Transformers
Posts: 28746
News Credits: 223
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:22 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Strength: 7
Intelligence: 10
Speed: 7
Endurance: 6
Rank: 9
Courage: 8
Firepower: 10
Skill: 9

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby Saber Prime » Mon Dec 01, 2008 6:01 pm

Sabrblade wrote:
Saber Prime wrote:Again, no, you're mixing media. Metahumans are from DC comics and even in the DC universe, some Metahumans are born that way others are created.


I'm sure that I've heard metahuman used as a generic term outside of DC (as well as within it).

...

Oh crud! Looks like Sto was right all along. When he said "Spider-Man is a mutate." turns out he wasn't exactly misusing the word after all. In this particular case, the word "mutate" is not a verb, but a noun that is a synonym for "non-mutant mutated human". Like how DC has beings called "Metahumans", Marvel got beings called "Mutates". I seriously cannot believe I haven't heard this term before. And I'm a much bigger Marvel fan than DC.


Again, I'm not even going to try to dispute the comics. I don't read them.

But you did just say "Mutate" was not a verb which Sto said it was when he used it. I'm just trying to get him to realize that in that context, Mutate is not a verb.
Image
Saber Prime
City Commander
Posts: 3239
News Credits: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 10:03 pm

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby Sabrblade » Mon Dec 01, 2008 6:58 pm

Motto: "It's not done right if it's not done well."
Weapon: Saber Blade
Saber Prime wrote:
Sabrblade wrote:
Saber Prime wrote:Again, no, you're mixing media. Metahumans are from DC comics and even in the DC universe, some Metahumans are born that way others are created.


I'm sure that I've heard metahuman used as a generic term outside of DC (as well as within it).

...

Oh crud! Looks like Sto was right all along. When he said "Spider-Man is a mutate." turns out he wasn't exactly misusing the word after all. In this particular case, the word "mutate" is not a verb, but a noun that is a synonym for "non-mutant mutated human". Like how DC has beings called "Metahumans", Marvel got beings called "Mutates". I seriously cannot believe I haven't heard this term before. And I'm a much bigger Marvel fan than DC.


Again, I'm not even going to try to dispute the comics. I don't read them.

But you did just say "Mutate" was not a verb which Sto said it was when he used it. I'm just trying to get him to realize that in that context, Mutate is not a verb.


When he originally used it, before the major chunks of this debate, it was being used as a noun, and we thought he was using bad grammar by using what we thought was a verb as a noun. Because, that was before either of us knew that Marvel's term for non-mutants was in fact "Mutate", which would be the Marvel equvalent to DC's "Metahuman".

So, in some way, he did kinda prove us both wrong, sort of.
"When there's gold feathers, punch behind you!!"

Shadowman wrote:This is Sabrblade we're talking about. His ability to store trivial information about TV shows is downright superhuman.
Caelus wrote:My wife pointed out something interesting about the prehistoric Predacons. I said that everyone was complaining because transforming for them mostly consisted of them just standing up-right. She essentially said, 'So? That's what our ancestors did.'
User avatar
Sabrblade
God Of Transformers
Posts: 28746
News Credits: 223
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:22 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Strength: 7
Intelligence: 10
Speed: 7
Endurance: 6
Rank: 9
Courage: 8
Firepower: 10
Skill: 9

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby sto_vo_kor_2000 » Tue Dec 02, 2008 12:20 am

Motto: "Today is a good day to die......but the day is not yet over!"
Saber Prime wrote:You know what, just forget it. The whole mutate not a mutant debate is pointless now.


Ok fine by me.

Saber Prime wrote:
Just do me a favor and read the definition of the word Adjective.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/adjective


Why should I if you want to drop it????

BTW I know what an adjective is.

Saber Prime wrote:
I'll give you three examples where "Mutate" is a verb.

"if I mutate into some 8 legged freak and you have to stop me." verb

"The spider bite caused Peter Parker to mutate." verb

"Spider-man will mutate." verb

The way you were useing it, not the word itself, just the way you used it was as an adjective.


I thought you wanted to drop this?????

Saber Prime wrote:
In the 3 verb examples I gave you mutate describes something that will happen to him, that's what state of being means.

The way you used it you describe what he is. "Spider-man is a mutate." in that context mutate is not describeing a state of being, it's describeing a noun. An adjective is a word that describes a noun. So in the sentence "Spider-man is a mutate." the word mutate is an adjective.


Look plain and simple the way I used it is the very way Marvel has....aas in to categorize those characters who's DNA was altered by outside means.

By reading all the defintions on non action verbs it would seem that both I and Marvel used it in a correct way.

I no longer wish to continue an endless debate.

Saber Prime wrote:
Again, no, you're mixing media. Metahumans are from DC comics and even in the DC universe, some Metahumans are born that way others are created.


Actually the term "Metahumans has been used by Marvel but its not used all that often.

Sabrblade wrote:
Oh crud! Looks like Sto was right all along. When he said "Spider-Man is a mutate." turns out he wasn't exactly misusing the word after all. In this particular case, the word "mutate" is not a verb, but a noun that is a synonym for "non-mutant mutated human". Like how DC has beings called "Metahumans", Marvel got beings called "Mutates". I seriously cannot believe I haven't heard this term before. And I'm a much bigger Marvel fan than DC.


Told you guys....althou I still think I was correct in useing the word "Mutate" as a non action verb.

But reguardless I told you guys that I wasnt wrong in saying it was a term Marvel has used to describe some characters.

Saber Prime wrote:But you did just say "Mutate" was not a verb which Sto said it was when he used it. I'm just trying to get him to realize that in that context, Mutate is not a verb.


Actually I wasnt the one who first brought up the "verb issue".

I called Spidy a "mutate" and both of you jumped on me telling me I had to be wrong because of the verb issues.

I still believe that the non action verb statement apply and so far none of you have shown me otherwise.

Sabrblade wrote:
When he originally used it, before the major chunks of this debate, it was being used as a noun, and we thought he was using bad grammar by using what we thought was a verb as a noun.


Excacty.

I didnt bring up the "verb" debate....it was first "Sabrblade" who brought it up to correct what he thought was bad grammer and then "Saber Prime" who hungrily jumped all over it because he's been trying to come out on top of a debate with me for years now.

First "Saber" jumped on the statement that all "verbs" are about action and when I proved that there was such a think as a "non-action verb" you jumped on the grammer issue.

Your to needy to win a debate with me that you'll jump on any opportunity to try.

As I said from the beginning Marvel calls characters like Spiderman and the Hulk "Mutates" not Mutants.

Sabrblade wrote: Because, that was before either of us knew that Marvel's term for non-mutants was in fact "Mutate", which would be the Marvel equvalent to DC's "Metahuman".

So, in some way, he did kinda prove us both wrong, sort of.


Thank you :grin:

But I wasnt trying to prove anyone wrong....I was just trying to state a fact.

BTW.....Never argue about Marvel characters with a guy who once worked for Marvel comics.
Predaprince wrote:I am very thankful to have posters like sto_vo_kor_2000 who is so energetic about improving others' understanding and enjoyment of the TF universe
Stormrider wrote:You often add interesting insights to conversations that makes the fledglings think and challenges even the sharpest minds

T-Macksimus wrote:I consider you and editor to be amongst the most "scholarly" in terms of your knowledge, demeanor and general approach

Image
sto_vo_kor_2000
Matrix Keeper
Posts: 7733
News Credits: 1
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 12:01 am

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby Saber Prime » Tue Dec 02, 2008 12:53 pm

They're different subjects.

Saber Prime wrote:In the 3 verb examples I gave you mutate describes something that will happen to him, that's what state of being means.

The way you used it you describe what he is. "Spider-man is a mutate." in that context mutate is not describeing a state of being, it's describeing a noun. An adjective is a word that describes a noun. So in the sentence "Spider-man is a mutate." the word mutate is an adjective.


Look plain and simple the way I used it is the very way Marvel has....aas in to categorize those characters who's DNA was altered by outside means.

By reading all the defintions on non action verbs it would seem that both I and Marvel used it in a correct way.

I no longer wish to continue an endless debate.


To clairify Marvel or your use of the word isn't really in question. What is in question is weather or not that use of the word is actully a verb and it isn't.

I gave you 3 examples of how it could be a verb but in your example it's not a verb. If you're trying to use it as a verb then it's an incorrect use. I highly doubt Marvel stuck "this is a verb" next to it when they wrote it so weather or not they used it that way doesn't even enter into it.

You say Mutate is a verb in the sentence "Spider-man is a Mutate."

Sabrblade seems to think it's a noun.

And I think it's an Adjective. Sence the word mutate in that sentence describes Spider-man I would be right and the definition of the word Adjective would back me up on that.

Saber Prime wrote:But you did just say "Mutate" was not a verb which Sto said it was when he used it. I'm just trying to get him to realize that in that context, Mutate is not a verb.


Actually I wasnt the one who first brought up the "verb issue".

I called Spidy a "mutate" and both of you jumped on me telling me I had to be wrong because of the verb issues.

I still believe that the non action verb statement apply and so far none of you have shown me otherwise.


Because you've failed to read the definitions I sent you and only looked at the parts that helped your case. You didn't even get the right definition.

Again, "Spider-man is a mutate." mutate in that sentence does not describe his "state of being" it just describes HIM and there is a difference. That difference is what seperates Mutate being a noun from being an Adjective.
Image
Saber Prime
City Commander
Posts: 3239
News Credits: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 10:03 pm

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby Sabrblade » Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:39 pm

Motto: "It's not done right if it's not done well."
Weapon: Saber Blade
Saber Prime wrote:Sabrblade seems to think it's a noun.


I say it's a noun because it's the NAME of that particular type of human. Names are nouns, proper nouns to be exact.
"When there's gold feathers, punch behind you!!"

Shadowman wrote:This is Sabrblade we're talking about. His ability to store trivial information about TV shows is downright superhuman.
Caelus wrote:My wife pointed out something interesting about the prehistoric Predacons. I said that everyone was complaining because transforming for them mostly consisted of them just standing up-right. She essentially said, 'So? That's what our ancestors did.'
User avatar
Sabrblade
God Of Transformers
Posts: 28746
News Credits: 223
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:22 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Strength: 7
Intelligence: 10
Speed: 7
Endurance: 6
Rank: 9
Courage: 8
Firepower: 10
Skill: 9

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby sto_vo_kor_2000 » Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:14 pm

Motto: "Today is a good day to die......but the day is not yet over!"
Saber Prime wrote:They're different subjects.


What?????

Saber Prime wrote:To clairify Marvel or your use of the word isn't really in question.


Yes it was since it was my use of the word that you said was incorrect based on the fat that the word is a verb.

Saber Prime wrote: What is in question is weather or not that use of the word is actully a verb and it isn't.


No thats what you turned the debate twards because you want so baddly to win a debate with me.

Saber Prime wrote:You say Mutate is a verb in the sentence "Spider-man is a Mutate."


I said nothing till you jumped all over me for it being improper to use the word in the way that I did.

After that I said it was a "non action verb" and again you still havent proven its not.

Saber Prime wrote:Because you've failed to read the definitions I sent you and only looked at the parts that helped your case. You didn't even get the right definition.


No I read all the defintions and found evidence to support my case.

You on the other hand just dismiss that evidence and offer nothing to refute it.

Saber Prime wrote:Again, "Spider-man is a mutate." mutate in that sentence does not describe his "state of being" it just describes HIM and there is a difference.


How does it not describe his state of being??????

The "state of being" in question is "being a mutate".

Calling him a mutate is also a way to "describe or to report on a subjects state condition."The subject in question being Spiderman himself.

Calling him a mutate is also useing the word as "A word which affirms or predicates something of some person or thing".

How does my use of the word not fit these definitions of a non-action verb?????

I'm not ignoring anything.

I'm seeing it all as its described.

This argument is exactly the same as the one we had over my use of the word "obvious" in are debate about the ARK on TFA.

You continued to ignore how the word "obvious" can be used when a person is speaking useing his personal experance.

You kept ignoring the portions of the definitions that stated this fact just to try to win that debate.
Predaprince wrote:I am very thankful to have posters like sto_vo_kor_2000 who is so energetic about improving others' understanding and enjoyment of the TF universe
Stormrider wrote:You often add interesting insights to conversations that makes the fledglings think and challenges even the sharpest minds

T-Macksimus wrote:I consider you and editor to be amongst the most "scholarly" in terms of your knowledge, demeanor and general approach

Image
sto_vo_kor_2000
Matrix Keeper
Posts: 7733
News Credits: 1
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 12:01 am

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby Sabrblade » Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:56 pm

Motto: "It's not done right if it's not done well."
Weapon: Saber Blade
sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote: This argument is exactly the same as the one we had over my use of the word "obvious" in are debate about the ARK on TFA.

You continued to ignore how the word "obvious" can be used when a person is speaking useing his personal experance.

You kept ignoring the portions of the definitions that stated this fact just to try to win that debate.


:shock: Oh, no, no, no. Please, let's not start that again.
"When there's gold feathers, punch behind you!!"

Shadowman wrote:This is Sabrblade we're talking about. His ability to store trivial information about TV shows is downright superhuman.
Caelus wrote:My wife pointed out something interesting about the prehistoric Predacons. I said that everyone was complaining because transforming for them mostly consisted of them just standing up-right. She essentially said, 'So? That's what our ancestors did.'
User avatar
Sabrblade
God Of Transformers
Posts: 28746
News Credits: 223
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:22 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Strength: 7
Intelligence: 10
Speed: 7
Endurance: 6
Rank: 9
Courage: 8
Firepower: 10
Skill: 9

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby sto_vo_kor_2000 » Tue Dec 02, 2008 4:28 pm

Motto: "Today is a good day to die......but the day is not yet over!"
Sabrblade wrote:
sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote: This argument is exactly the same as the one we had over my use of the word "obvious" in are debate about the ARK on TFA.

You continued to ignore how the word "obvious" can be used when a person is speaking useing his personal experance.

You kept ignoring the portions of the definitions that stated this fact just to try to win that debate.


:shock: Oh, no, no, no. Please, let's not start that again.


Yeah your right.

I'm sorry I even brought it up. :sad:
Predaprince wrote:I am very thankful to have posters like sto_vo_kor_2000 who is so energetic about improving others' understanding and enjoyment of the TF universe
Stormrider wrote:You often add interesting insights to conversations that makes the fledglings think and challenges even the sharpest minds

T-Macksimus wrote:I consider you and editor to be amongst the most "scholarly" in terms of your knowledge, demeanor and general approach

Image
sto_vo_kor_2000
Matrix Keeper
Posts: 7733
News Credits: 1
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 12:01 am

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby Saber Prime » Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:42 pm

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:
Saber Prime wrote:Because you've failed to read the definitions I sent you and only looked at the parts that helped your case. You didn't even get the right definition.


No I read all the defintions and found evidence to support my case.

You on the other hand just dismiss that evidence and offer nothing to refute it.


1. If you read all the definitions why have you not figured out the difference between "state of being" and just "describeing a noun".

You have not really found ANY evidence to suport your case other than to warp the meanings till they fit your case.

2. I have not dismissed any evidence, you on the other hand have because as far as I can tell you still have not even read what an Adjective is.

And I have offered evidence to refut it. Again which you have not read.

Now if you had read what an adjective is than prove it. Exsplain the difference in your own words between "describeing a noun" and "state of being".

Saber Prime wrote:Again, "Spider-man is a mutate." mutate in that sentence does not describe his "state of being" it just describes HIM and there is a difference.


How does it not describe his state of being??????

The "state of being" in question is "being a mutate".


That's not a state of being. That's just what he is. You still don't understand the difference between describeing HIM and describing THE STATE HE'S IN?

Look at the examples.

Spider-man will mutate. State of being, it describes something that will happen to him.

If I mutate into... State of being, again describes something that may happen to him.

The spider bite caused Peter Parker to mutate. State of being, AGAIN describes something that happened to him.

Every use of the word in which Mutate is a verb describes something that happens, it does not describe him directly but it does describe something that happenes to him.

Spider-man is a mutate. Adjective, mutate describes a noun, it describes Spider-man. It doesn't say anything about his state of being, it's just in direct relation to him.

Here's another example for you.

Batman is a human. What is human in that sentence? Noun, Adjective, or verb?

Calling him a mutate is also a way to "describe or to report on a subjects state condition."The subject in question being Spiderman himself.

Calling him a mutate is also useing the word as "A word which affirms or predicates something of some person or thing".

How does my use of the word not fit these definitions of a non-action verb?????


Because that use of the word does not do either of these things which you say it is.

It does not describe or report on a subject's "state or condition".

It does describe the subject.

Spider-man is a mutate. Doesn't tell me anthing about Spider-man's condition, it only tells me about Spider-man himself.

It does not affirm or predicates anything of Spider-man. It describes Spider-man.

Both your definitions of a verb talk about conditions relating to the noun but in the sentence "Spider-man is a mutate." there's no condition stated relating to the noun. There is a condition stated in the other 3 examples.

"If I mutate into..."

"Spider-man will mutate."

"The spider bite caused Peter Parker to mutate."

But in "Spider-man is a mutate." There's nothing. Just "Noun is a Adjective." Any time you start a sentence with a noun and follow it with "is a" you have to end the sentence with an adjective because the only thing you can do at that point is describe the noun.

Again, there is a difference between describing the noun and describeing the noun's state of being. Nothing in that sentence describes his state of being, it only describes him.

I'm not ignoring anything.

I'm seeing it all as its described.


You are ignoreing everything and seeing it all as YOU describe.
Image
Saber Prime
City Commander
Posts: 3239
News Credits: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 10:03 pm

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby Sabrblade » Wed Dec 03, 2008 3:01 pm

Motto: "It's not done right if it's not done well."
Weapon: Saber Blade
Let me put this way. It's not describing his state of being. It's identifying his state of being.

"Spider-Man (proper noun) is (copula/linking verb) a (indefinite article) Mutate (different proper noun identiying the first noun)."
Last edited by Sabrblade on Wed Dec 03, 2008 3:33 pm, edited 3 times in total.
"When there's gold feathers, punch behind you!!"

Shadowman wrote:This is Sabrblade we're talking about. His ability to store trivial information about TV shows is downright superhuman.
Caelus wrote:My wife pointed out something interesting about the prehistoric Predacons. I said that everyone was complaining because transforming for them mostly consisted of them just standing up-right. She essentially said, 'So? That's what our ancestors did.'
User avatar
Sabrblade
God Of Transformers
Posts: 28746
News Credits: 223
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:22 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Strength: 7
Intelligence: 10
Speed: 7
Endurance: 6
Rank: 9
Courage: 8
Firepower: 10
Skill: 9

Re: The Official Transformers: Animated Discussion Thread!

Postby sto_vo_kor_2000 » Wed Dec 03, 2008 3:03 pm

Motto: "Today is a good day to die......but the day is not yet over!"
Saber Prime wrote:1. If you read all the definitions why have you not figured out the difference between "state of being" and just "describeing a noun".

You have not really found ANY evidence to suport your case other than to warp the meanings till they fit your case.

2. I have not dismissed any evidence, you on the other hand have because as far as I can tell you still have not even read what an Adjective is.

And I have offered evidence to refut it. Again which you have not read.


Again I've read everything you have posted as well as having a full understanding about what an Adjective is and how it works.

And I completly admit that the word appears to be able to be used in the fashions you stated but that by no means suggested that it does not also function as a non-action verb.

And again you havent proven to me how the word does not fit into the defintions that govern the uses of a non action verb.

Saber Prime wrote:Now if you had read what an adjective is than prove it. Exsplain the difference in your own words between "describeing a noun" and "state of being".


Why???So I can feed into this insane need of yours to win a debate with me?????

A] You started this verb debate

B] you havent proven your argument

I'm not going to feed into this any more.

Saber Prime wrote:That's not a state of being. That's just what he is. You still don't understand the difference between describeing HIM and describing THE STATE HE'S IN?


State:

1;mode or condition of being
2;a condition of mind or temperament <in a highly nervous state> 3;a condition of body or physical condition <in a state or stage of illness>
4: a condition of abnormal tension or excitement
5;a condition or stage in the physical being of something or someone<insects in the larval state> <the gaseous state of water>

Being:

1;the quality or state of having existence
2: something that actually exists
3: the totality of existing things
4;the fact of existing; existence

How it applys:

"the quality or state of having existence" & "a condition or stage in the physical being of something or someone" & "a condition of body or physical condition"

Non action verb:

1;a word that describes or to reports on a subjects state of condition.
2;"A word which affirms or predicates something of some person or thing".
3;A word that represents a state of being.

So if state of being can describe the "condition or stage in the physical being of something or someone" then saying "Spiderman is a mutate" can describe his "condition or stage in the physical being" at it is his "state of being".

Mutate is a word which affirms or predicates something of Spidermans person.

Mutate is a word that describes or to reports on a subjects [Spidermans] state of condition.

Saber Prime wrote:Because that use of the word does not do either of these things which you say it is.


It does from my prespective and you've done a piss poor job of showing me other wise.

As I said above I'm not going to feed into this any more.

Sabrblade wrote:Let me put this way. It's not describing his state of being. It's defining his state of being.


I can agree with that.
Last edited by sto_vo_kor_2000 on Wed Dec 03, 2008 10:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Predaprince wrote:I am very thankful to have posters like sto_vo_kor_2000 who is so energetic about improving others' understanding and enjoyment of the TF universe
Stormrider wrote:You often add interesting insights to conversations that makes the fledglings think and challenges even the sharpest minds

T-Macksimus wrote:I consider you and editor to be amongst the most "scholarly" in terms of your knowledge, demeanor and general approach

Image
sto_vo_kor_2000
Matrix Keeper
Posts: 7733
News Credits: 1
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 12:01 am

PreviousNext

Return to Transformers Cartoons and Comics Forum

Ending Soon On eBay

NWT  Deluxe Transformers Optimus Prime Costume Battle Shield 2T Free Shipping - Time Remaining: 6 days 23 hours 15 minutes 36 seconds
New Transformers Planet X PX-09 Mors FOC Starscream Figure In Stock - Time Remaining: 3 days 2 hours 20 minutes 48 seconds
Transformers Fall of Cybertron Deluxe Class OPTIMUS PRIME Figure generations - Time Remaining: 17 days 5 hours 38 minutes 26 seconds
New Transformers Cloud 9 Toy W-01B Quakeblast Black Shockwave G1 Style In Stock - Time Remaining: 13 days 4 hours 41 minutes 46 seconds
Transformers Prime Arms Micron AM-07 Voyager Takara Starscream loose complete - Time Remaining: 2 days 22 hours 56 minutes 32 seconds
RARE!! Takara Tomy Transformers Unite Warriors TACTICIAN CYCLONUS Separate sale - Time Remaining: 5 days 14 hours 5 minutes 28 seconds
SDCC Transformers Generations Masterpiece Bumblebee G1 Figure 6" Spike Witwicky - Time Remaining: 1 day 15 hours 13 minutes 55 seconds
Transformers Energon Scorponok 100% Complete 2004 - Time Remaining: 6 days 20 hours 15 minutes 2 seconds
Transformers Podcast: Twincast / Podcast #186 - NYCC 2017
Twincast / Podcast #186:
"NYCC 2017"
MP3 · iTunes · RSS · View · Discuss · Ask
Posted: Monday, October 16th, 2017
Website Security Test