3 ms·
Yes. Perfect. I've never seen that before. Thanks for sharing. It will never sell in the US though, the mere inclusion of Darwin will make it a political nightm
by bluejekyll 10y ago
Yes. Perfect. I've never seen that before. Thanks for sharing. It will never sell in the US though, the mere inclusion of Darwin will make it a political nightmare as people would be convinced we're atheists trying to kill their god.
- reflexive 10y ago> people would be convinced we're atheists trying to kill their god When the reality is much less exciting... replacing the old gods with a deified version of Science.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- Asooka 10y agoOr, we use Latin names of numbers. So, Unusber, Duober, Tresber, Quattorber, Quinber, Sexber [rename as necessary for America], September, October, November, December, Undecimber, Duodecimber, Tredecimber.
- fao_ 10y agoUnusber It might not be correct, but I would prefer "Unober"
- talideon 10y agoThese would be better names from a purely phonological point of view: Unusper, Tresper, Quattober, Sexper. That way you don't have awkward clusters of both voiced and unvoiced consonants. The -ber affix having originally come from mensris (-mens-ris > *-membris > -ber), devoicing the initial 'b' to 'p' in those circumstances is reasonable enough. 'Quattober' is a simplification that makes it fit the pattern better. Alternatively, you would rely on the ordinals, dropping the -us ending and replacing it with -ilis as in Sextilis and Quintilis.
- boterock 10y agofour decembers would endorse extremely premature christmas decoration
- vidarh 10y agoIntroduce it as a means to purge the name of non-Christian gods from their current months and days, and suggest any opponents can't be monotheists after all given that they give other deities such a prominent position in their lives.
- serge2k 10y agoI'd vote against it. Mostly cause it's lame though.