Terms that are thrown a round

[JonathanTheBold]

That is your opinion however many people, including myself, would describe Tyrion's actions as atrocities; as in wicked and ruthless.

Everyone's actions in the books are ruthless to one degree or another which would give the term atrocity less impact and meaning. Which was my point in the original post is your use of the word in that context is meaningless

[JonathanTheBold]

I have the same thought! I've never heard of the word "enormity" meaning anything other than "something really big" until now. After all, we have the word "enormous" which is a way to describe something of great size.

I don't know what to tell u read a book

[BanzaiZ]

Everyone's actions in the books are ruthless to one degree or another which would give the term atrocity less impact and meaning. Which was my point in the original post is your use of the word in that context is meaningless

Or it could be that the world of ASoIaF is a terrible place to live with multiple atrocities on varying scales happening constantly. The context isn't meaningless at all. The context is showing that this is a very dark world with many, many terrible things happening all over.

[BanzaiZ]

I don't know what to tell u read a book

That was very uncalled for, and now you're being rude.

[David Selig]

I'd say burning thousands of men alive definitely qualifies as an atrocity.

But what do I know, I am not a native English speaker.

[JonathanTheBold]

Let's see:

Multiple rapes

patricide

Murder

ya, I can't blame people for calling these atrocities. No, it's not on par with the Holocaust, but I personally find any sexual assault to be an atrocity.

Ps: I'm a native English speaker

pss: this board has many non native English speakers and English speakers from many regions (California, the south, England, east coast, ect) and all of these places have nuances. I think if you can't try to read between the lines to determine what they're trying to convey or ask them to clarify, then maybe you shouldn't be here. People should accept each other.

You can accept someone and correct them at the same time their not mutually exclusive. Also if something isn't on par with another thing tht can be clearly defined as an atrocity I.e the hollocaust then you should use another word to discribe it

[JonathanTheBold]

Let's see:

Multiple rapes

patricide

Murder

ya, I can't blame people for calling these atrocities. No, it's not on par with the Holocaust, but I personally find any sexual assault to be an atrocity.

Ps: I'm a native English speaker

pss: this board has many non native English speakers and English speakers from many regions (California, the south, England, east coast, ect) and all of these places have nuances. I think if you can't try to read between the lines to determine what they're trying to convey or ask them to clarify, then maybe you shouldn't be here. People should accept each other.

You can accept someone and correct them at the same time their not mutually exclusive. Also if something isn't on par with another thing tht can be clearly defined as an atrocity I.e the hollocaust then you should use another word to discribe it that's why there's so many word in the English language. You should always try o say what u mean and say it as accurately as possible other wise why have language

[butterbumps!]

Oh, I know. I was just using it as an example of there being a variation from the original definition. To be honest, this is the first time that passage is registering with me. Normally any time I see the word I default to the definition I mentioned and move on.

lol, I figured. Honestly, I was just looking for an excuse to post the Jaime passage because I find it hilarious.

You can accept someone and correct them at the same time their not mutually exclusive. Also if something isn't on par with another thing tht can be clearly defined as an atrocity I.e the hollocaust then you should use another word to discribe it that's why there's so many word in the English language. You should always try o say what u mean and say it as accurately as possible other wise why have language

Where are you getting the idea that "atrocity" can only refer to actions that are both extremely morally reprehensible and done at an egregious scale? It simply means a "wicked act."

I agree that it's loaded to connote more horror than some other terms, but I hardly think that people are wrong for declaring that some of Tyrion's actions qualify as "atrocities."

ETA: other than "enormity" (my preferred choice), what would you consider more precise?

barbarousness

heinousness

monstrosity

fiendishness

evilness

abomination (I actually like using this one)

turpitude

I kind of think all of these are a bit hellish, no?

[JonathanTheBold]

Or it could be that the world of ASoIaF is a terrible place to live with multiple atrocities on varying scales happening constantly. The context isn't meaningless at all. The context is showing that this is a very dark world with many, many terrible things happening all over.

Ues but these actions are not all on the same level and if distinctions aren't made between them in language then you can compare and contrast them. Also when everything happening Is an atrocity what meaning does the word really since its used to denote something abnormally bad. There's a difference between something ba and an atrocity that's why the word exist. My point if you use a word like atrocit to discribe Tryions actions then what would you use to discribe The Moutain putting the whole of castle Darry to the sword they don't quite equal out yet you want to use the same word to discribe them.

[Maxpey]

Certainly they do, if they are trying to explain themselves at the best of their skills and are being unaware of their mis-interpretation of some words or can't find proper words to say something.

If you've ever been in such a situation of need, you understand pretty well this thing.

I have heard countless people say that English is one of the hardest languages to learn, primarily because many similar sounding words have completely different meanings. "Raze" and "raise" are a classic example.

At the risk of besmirching my fellow Americans, I can tell you that many of us have difficulty with the English language. :drool: "Irregardless" is not a freakin word!

[JonathanTheBold]

lol, I figured. Honestly, I was just looking for an excuse to post the Jaime passage because I find it hilarious.

Where are you getting the idea that "atrocity" can only refer to actions that are both extremely morally reprehensible and done at an egregious scale? It simply means a "wicked act."

I agree that it's loaded to connote more horror than some other terms, but I hardly think that people are wrong for declaring that some of Tyrion's actions qualify as "atrocities."

Because it demeans real atrocities. Would you walk up to a holocaust survivor and tell them what the nazis did to him or her is the same as want Tyrion did to the bed slave I don't think so

[JonathanTheBold]

That was very uncalled for, and now you're being rude.

I was being cheeky

[Consigliere]

Everyone's actions in the books are ruthless to one degree or another which would give the term atrocity less impact and meaning. Which was my point in the original post is your use of the word in that context is meaningless

I don't find it to be meaningless. In the context of describing rape, murder or patricide the word "atrocity" simply means wicked and/or ruthless act.

[butterbumps!]

Because it demeans real atrocities. Would you walk up to a holocaust survivor and tell them what the nazis did to him or her is the same as want Tyrion did to the bed slave I don't think so

Oh boy.

No, it doesn't, and I think you're on a rather unfortunate precipice if you want to start indexing levels of suffering in order to codify the "correct" usage of terms. Calling what Tyrion did to the bed slave "the Holocaust" would be misusing the word. Calling it an "atrocity" is correct in that it is a gravely horrific act.

[BanzaiZ]

Ues but these actions are not all on the same level and if distinctions aren't made between them in language then you can compare and contrast them. Also when everything happening Is an atrocity what meaning does the word really since its used to denote something abnormally bad. There's a difference between something ba and an atrocity that's why the word exist. My point if you use a word like atrocit to discribe Tryions actions then what would you use to discribe The Moutain putting the whole of castle Darry to the sword they don't quite equal out yet you want to use the same word to discribe them.

Because they still qualify as the definition of atrocity. It doesn't matter what scale, they're still atrocities. That's why we have qualifiers in language, and that's why we have this thing called elaboration.

[BanzaiZ]

Because it demeans real atrocities. Would you walk up to a holocaust survivor and tell them what the nazis did to him or her is the same as want Tyrion did to the bed slave I don't think so

Would I walk up to a Holocaust survivor and compare what they went through to a fictional character? No. I don't think anyone on this board would, and the entire notion is absurd.

Furthermore, you're starting down the road for the Suffering Olympics. Who are you to determine an individual's suffering degrees?

[Dany Girl]

You can accept someone and correct them at the same time their not mutually exclusive. Also if something isn't on par with another thing tht can be clearly defined as an atrocity I.e the hollocaust then you should use another word to discribe it that's why there's so many word in the English language. You should always try o say what u mean and say it as accurately as possible other wise why have language

that's your opinion, but as many others have stated, words can have several degrees of meaning. I'm sure if you told a rape victim that what happened to them wasn't an atrocity they'd frankly punch you in the face. One person's hell does not diminish another person's hell.

[JonathanTheBold]

Oh boy.

No, it doesn't, and I think you're on a rather unfortunate precipice if you want to start indexing levels of suffering in order to codify the "correct" usage of terms. Calling what Tyrion did to the bed slave "the Holocaust" would be misusing the word. Calling it an "atrocity" is correct in that it is a gravely horrific act.

Then what would you call the holocaust, and are you implying that we don't quantify evil and have different levels of it?

[JonathanTheBold]

that's your opinion, but as many others have stated, words can have several degrees of meaning. I'm sure if you told a rape victim that what happened to them wasn't an atrocity they'd frankly punch you in the face. One person's hell does not diminish another person's hell.

Right because all you have to do is say that my opinion that makes you right? No you can be of the opinion that 2+2=6 your still factually wrong,and my statement that you can accept someone and still correct them was a factual one.Lastly said rape victim wouldn't tell a holocaust survivor that their rape is on the same level as what the survivor went through

[Mladen]

Because it demeans real atrocities. Would you walk up to a holocaust survivor and tell them what the nazis did to him or her is the same as want Tyrion did to the bed slave I don't think so

Oh, God... Holocaust is not the only atrocity...

Would I walk up to a Holocaust survivor and compare what they went through to a fictional character? No. I don't think anyone on this board would, and the entire notion is absurd.

Furthermore, you're starting down the road for the Suffering Olympics. Who are you to determine an individual's suffering degrees?

I agree...