I’m not an english speaker. In my region, a sticker is considered to be paper that initially has a sticky layer. The paper that needs to be glued with glue from a tube is just paper.
You can but you’d be wrong. I hereby declare that a sticker is defined as having a back layer that you easily peel off, exposing the adhesive, before applying. If you create something to that effect, sticker. Otherwise, it’s just glued on paper.
K. But the person applying glue to paper and setting said paper would then be called a sticker. And the way language works, in a generation or two, the word sticker will then reference that glue-paper arrangement.
If he manages to apply an easy removable layer to the gluey part, then the person will be holding a sticker in his hands.
It’s all about being able to carry it around without it sticking anywhere, but also just to stick it anywhere you like, after easily removing said layer.
In my language it will sound like “Sticked advertisement” or “Sticked piece of paper”. A sticker is a paper with a sticky layer that is applied to this paper at the factory. I’m just talking about the difference in languages.
Interesting question. Typically, advertisers use cheap glue, which makes it impossible to carefully peel off the advertisement. The paper will definitely tear. However, if the paper has a polyethylene base and a special type of glue is used, then I think such an advertisement can be peeled off and called a sticker.
I just haven’t heard of anyone peeling off advertisements and sticking them back.
You are right about something. The one who sticks advertisements and earns money from this is called a derivative word from the word “Sticker”. In english it would be something like “Stickers boy”. I don’t know how to translate this any other way.
It searches for a process named vim using grep (which searches within provided lines), but since grep vim also contains vim, we then exclude grep too, so only the actual vim process gets found without the grep vim process. Sounds a lot like this post, doesn't it?
Geuss I ain’t ever gonna pronounce this damn language correctly . You can’t blame this on French tho because in that language it’s saumon pronounced somon. They didn’t drop a consonant in the middle of the word.
The word comes ultimately from the Latin salmon, but we got it by way of French, as we did with so many other food words. The French, as was their wont, had swallowed up the Latin L in their pronunciation, so by the time we English borrowed the word, it was saumon, no L in the spelling and so no L in the pronunciation.
Pronouncing the word based on how another language says it is strange to say the least. Imagine if train had the same treatment. In French it’s a short tr-un instead of English tr-ayn.
Pronouncing the word based on how another language says it
French influence on English is rather unique in this regard. French was the language of the upper class, so an effort was made for English to sound more French when possible.
My favorite example of how this has carried into modern day is the expressions “cordial reception” and “hearty welcome.” They both effectively mean the same thing, but the first, which is latin-derived, sounds fancy, while the second, which is germanic-derived, sounds more informal.
The word comes ultimately from the Latin salmon, but we got it by way of French, as we did with so many other food words. The French, as was their wont, had swallowed up the Latin L in their pronunciation, so by the time we English borrowed the word, it was saumon, no L in the spelling and so no L in the pronunciation.
lemmyshitpost
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.