Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Page by page discussion of the comic.

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby 0beron » Sat Aug 17, 2013 12:39 am

CorrTerek wrote:Wait, [is Kriestor] saying that [he'll] use the fact that Jack had some kind of binding agreement with Charlie to shoot down any piece of speculation
No, it seems he's prepared to use that to try and shoot down canon material as well, assuming he actually decides to stick to one argument and that we're reading it correctly.
"I'm afraid I don't understand. And also afraid that I do."
GJC wrote:Two guys with basically the same name in a discussion about a character getting cloned.
There's gotta be a good joke in here somewhere.
User avatar
0beron
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
 
Posts: 2953
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:52 pm
Location: Morlock Wells

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby Kreistor » Sat Aug 17, 2013 1:03 am

0beron wrote:May I direct your attention to the post that started this entire discussion?
Kriestor wrote:Everything has to be reviewed. Absolutely everything. We now have to consider Jack as a mole for Charlie. It can begin with Charlie knowing when Parson became CW. No Archons, Thinkamancy tapping, hacking, or cracking. Jack bleedin' told him.
I don't give a rat's behind what you've said in previous threads, because in your own words "Everything has to be reviewed. Absolutely everything.", suggesting that you were completely reconsidering all of your previous opinions. So don't throw YOUR strawman garbage back at me, man up and stand behind your own statements when someone finds evidence your theory is flawed.


One big problem. Nowhere in that did I say Charlie couldn't hack. I said that in this one case hacking was no longer the only explanation, since Jack could leak the info. It was a sample of one instance, to indicate how such a review process can work against previous conclusions. New information casts doubt on associated conclusions, and so doubt is obviously cast on this event. That you extended that one sample case to decide I must entirely disbelieve in the possibility of his hacking in all cases is Strawman, and your mistake, not mine. You want a list of cases where Charlie provided evidence of hacking without Jack's presence? Eyebooks. Maggie's disconnected call. Failure to re-establish said call.

But the cool one? Top of page 38. "Please hold your Highness. Charlie is on another call at the moment." The suggestion is that he's listening to Parson speak to Wanda. But then the Archon would be lying. She wouldn't be lying if he was actually getting the info from Jack.

Want something more speculative? Who found the wounded dwagon stack, when the Warlord in charge wanted to stop looking? Golly gee, wasn't that coincidental? And gee, who's running the Table, and knows exactly where they are... And that's why we review. Suddenly, Jillian stumbling onto the wounded dwagon stack seems a lot less Fated than manipulated. Yeah, it's possible Charlie hacked the table, same as he did the Eyebooks. But that's Jack standing right there, and Jack's got a deal.

Further, a review does not indicate that anything will change, only that it may change, so deciding that I had drawn any conclusions at all is plainly a false path on your part. Until the review is complete, all conclusions are in question, but no conclusions are drawn. You certainly don't understand that such a process could take days, even weeks. You think I could complete it in minutes? I am far more thorough than that. That's something you could learn, since you still made the same, obviously faulty conclusion in two readings of the same text: a more fastidious analysis may avoid some of your tendency towards falsifying other people's statements. Anyone that sanity checked my statements would realize I was performing a full-story re-read as part of the process, and that takes days to complete, since it includes the full Summer Update and Book 0 texts. I could not possibly come to any conclusion in the minutes you overreacted in. So any suggestion of a conclusion on my part is, entirely, your misinterpretation, and obviously so, once you step back and take in the gestalt instead of quote mining. But then intentional misinterpretations are the method of quote miners.
http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/TBFGK_1 Here you can find all comic pages written as text for convenient quoting.

http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/Erfworld_Mechanics The starting page for accessing all known Erfworld "rules".
User avatar
Kreistor
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:59 pm
Location: K-W, Ontario, Canada

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby Shai_hulud » Sat Aug 17, 2013 1:13 am

Wait, why is Jack's skin so white all of a sudden, but on page 114 it is normal, like his eyes?
Shai_hulud
Pins Supporter!
Pins Supporter!
 
Posts: 668
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2012 11:57 pm

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby Lipkin » Sat Aug 17, 2013 1:27 am

Kreistor, when reading your original post, I came to the same conclusion as Oberon (0beron? Gonna call him Jack-O from now on if he doesn't object). It did sound as if you were blaming all info gathered by Charlie on leaks by Jack.
User avatar
Lipkin
 
Posts: 837
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:36 am

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby Kreistor » Sat Aug 17, 2013 1:28 am

CorrTerek wrote:Wait, are you saying that you'll use the fact that Jack had some kind of binding agreement with Charlie to shoot down any piece of speculation that you don't agree with so long as Jack is even remotely connected to it?

...That seems kind of pointlessly dickish.

At any rate, good to see Jack is still at least partially himself. I look forward to seeing where he goes from here.


Speculation, fundamentally, is always in competition with alternate theories. It's inherent in the process. I keep track of lots of it, so I already point out alternate theories; generally, they're the work of other people I've debated. When people come up with Spec, they're often unaware of the alternatives, but I make them aware that other factions already exist.

I don't "shoot down" speculation with other speculation: the only technique we have that can prioritize speculation is Occam's Razor, which only picks a favorite based on a metric of how much each proposal invents. That does not "shoot down" any speculation, only picks the most likely horse to back. I shoot down bad Spec with forgotten or misinterpreted facts. I cite source from the comic. I do not operate from memory when undermining someone's faulty proposal. I do that to ensure they know I took them serious enough to do that much work, and to set them up for a level of expectation for their next proposal. Next time, they'll know to do their homework. In that effort, Jack's Deal is useless, because it is currently undefined.

But for any Spec, alternate theories already exist, so any proponents must be prepared to face the believers of pre-existing theories. This place does not have a good history for handling competing ideas, and it has nothing to do with my presence. I was gone for two years, watching them tear each other apart over the Primary Discipline of the Arkenhammer, and so forth. (You can see the remnants of that debate on the Wiki. It's still pretty close to my last edit, so if you want to see how I treat Speculation, it's not a bad example of my work. I give supportable Spec equal time, wherever possible.)
http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/TBFGK_1 Here you can find all comic pages written as text for convenient quoting.

http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/Erfworld_Mechanics The starting page for accessing all known Erfworld "rules".
User avatar
Kreistor
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:59 pm
Location: K-W, Ontario, Canada

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby youngstormlord » Sat Aug 17, 2013 2:44 am

Lipkin wrote:
youngstormlord wrote:Completely unrelated to current update (art needs a little more work imo, I'd like text and pictures and not just a big picture btw), I think I know how to get Capital back to Gobwin Knob.

Step 1. Empty the city.
Step 2. Ask one of the barbarian casters to step through the portal.
Step 3. Barbarian caster has just captured your capital city! Stanley is free to name GK Capital again.
Step 4. Stanley does so.

Alternatively, ask a caster from some other side "Hey, do you want to capture a city for your side?"

I like this a lot. But I don't think Parson would trust a Barbarian caster with such a thing. Even under contract, they might be too tempted to break the contract and keep the city, or raze it instead.

But Wanda could order Jack or Ace to go barbarian and capture the city. They'd stay loyal, and turn back to Gobwin Knob when asked.


That's the beauty of it. He really doesn't need that city. Gobwin Knob stretched their forces in a decapitation strike that failed. Spacerock is out of the way, in the middle of the enemy territory and they have no way in hell to keep it. The only thing Parson needs and wants is Capital back in Gobwin Knob (city), because of the portal. So that caster can do whatever he or she wants once she captures the city.

Thing is, I think there's rule forbidding you to raze your Capital. Otherwise, it would be simple matter of switching Capital to new place, moving through portal, razing the 2nd Capital and switching back to original Capital. But, you can lose Capital and you can switch Capital to another Capital site, if the ruler is at that Capital site.
Don't click on this link, you might feel cheated if you do.
Hint:
Spoiler: show
It's my fanfiction. :)


My erf PC game (first test version): Jack Attack Update: Gone after fall of megaupload. Update2: Uploaded again on another hosting. Give it a go.
youngstormlord
I am a Tool!
I am a Tool!
 
Posts: 116
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 7:48 am

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby mortissimus » Sat Aug 17, 2013 4:56 am

Shai_hulud wrote:Wait, why is Jack's skin so white all of a sudden, but on page 114 it is normal, like his eyes?


Since the decryption has not changed his skin color, we must conclude that something else happens before 114 changing his skin.

Aha! He is blushing in 114. But why? Nothing in 114 would cause that.

Well, a number of things could happen but Occam's razor forces the simplest explanation on us. And we already know a) that a lot of decrypted in the pyramid looks like something is stinking and b) Sizemore removes his pants in the pyramid and puts them on again before casting Breakout.

The theory that Sizemore has prepared material for a Crap Golem is growing evidence by the update.
mortissimus
 
Posts: 381
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 6:04 am

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby Oberon » Sat Aug 17, 2013 5:36 am

The word 'forswore' is not used correctly in context. To be forsworn is to break or abandon a vow. The context very much looks like Wanda is asking Jack if he is free to speak of matters about which they swore, not forswore, not to speak of. To rephrase it, it reads like this:
"Can you speak? Of what we have already broken our vow not to speak of?"
Makes no sense.

Kreistor wrote:Everything has to be reviewed. Absolutely everything. We now have to consider Jack as a mole for Charlie. It can begin with Charlie knowing when Parson became CW. No Archons, Thinkamancy tapping, hacking, or cracking. Jack bleedin' told him. And how Charlie knows so much about Parson... Jack told him. Every little side comment about his background, all of it laid bare for Charlie.
You prattle about Occam's Razor, a concept about which you have a vastly inaccurate understanding, and then you proceed to read far too much into the exchange between Wanda and Jack. There was nothing that suggested that Jack or Wanda were required by contract to be 'moles' for Charlie. You added that, which on top of being entirely your invention based upon zero canon, violates Occam's Razor by adding complexity. All that was suggested by their exchange was that Wanda and Jack had sworn not to speak of certain things, and that Jack is now free of that contract.

BCCroaker wrote:Jack was decrypted in the MC. Is it possible that decrypted casters can't use portals?
We won't know until we know. But going on the rule of least effort, since any unit except a caster which tries to enter the MK is croaked, there is little reason to put any effort into trying to prevent such units from leaving the MK. After all, they'll never be there in the first place, right? ;)

Zeroberon wrote:Especially his true nature as a Carny is likely something he wishes to conceal.
I tend to think it will be something a bit more important than his prior life as a carnymancer. I'm hoping it will be something which will tie all the lose ends together: Why Charlie is so solitary; why he runs a single city side when he could easily expand; why he has no units other than archons and golems.
Although that last could be related to the betrayal by Olive causing him to distrust all (semi-)free willed units, there has been nothing revealed to date which makes the first two matters obvious and explained.

Zeroberon wrote:Lastly, you missed something important. Despite the fact that Jillian and WANDA know about the 'Shoes, they haven't mentioned them in the present. Charlie's deal might play a role in that.
We all know what's going to become of the 'shoes. I mean, it's so obvious. Look at Parson: He's big, and fat. Then look at the titans. Also big, and fat. Quite a close resemblance. Parson will be transformed into a titan and will be wearing...wait for it...the blue suede 'shoes.

Zeroberon wrote:
Kreistor wrote:Would you like to continue embarrassing me by pointing out what an idiot I am?
So don't throw YOUR strawman garbage back at me, man up and stand behind your own statements when someone finds evidence your theory is flawed.
If you haven't figured it out by now, Keistor is always right, in his mind, even when his own words prove him wrong. He will refuse to acknowledge his error even if it is explained to him in careful detail, instead he will fill the space with vast quantities of flung poo and absolute rubbish in an effort to draw attention away from his mistake.
How using capslock wins arguments:
Zeroberon wrote:So we know with 100% certainty that THIS IS HOW TRI-LINKS WORK, PERIOD END OF STORY.
Oberon
 
Posts: 1191
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 7:59 am

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby Lilwik » Sat Aug 17, 2013 5:53 am

Oberon wrote:The word 'forswore' is not used correctly in context. To be forsworn is to break or abandon a vow. The context very much looks like Wanda is asking Jack if he is free to speak of matters about which they swore, not forswore, not to speak of.
It's not clear that you are right about that. To me it looks like the number one definition of "forswear" is "to reject or renounce under oath: to forswear an injurious habit." To me, that looks like she is saying "Can you speak of what we forswore to speak of?" which should mean that they rejected or renounced speaking of it under oath. None of the definitions that I see have "forswear" meaning what you claim it means.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1126
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby 0beron » Sat Aug 17, 2013 7:48 am

Lipkin wrote:0beron? Gonna call him Jack-O from now on if he doesn't object.
Haha I like it! Most people have been phonetically spelling my name "zeroberon" for clarity but that's even funnier :)
And yes Ohberon, I've come to that conclusion about Kriestor too.
"I'm afraid I don't understand. And also afraid that I do."
GJC wrote:Two guys with basically the same name in a discussion about a character getting cloned.
There's gotta be a good joke in here somewhere.
User avatar
0beron
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
 
Posts: 2953
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:52 pm
Location: Morlock Wells

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby Mad Raven » Sat Aug 17, 2013 10:18 am

Tune in next week for Count Downer - Decrypted:

"Oh, Titans... it just keeps getting worse..."
User avatar
Mad Raven
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 4:53 pm

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby Lamech » Sat Aug 17, 2013 12:05 pm

mortissimus wrote:The theory that Sizemore has prepared material for a Crap Golem is growing evidence by the update.

I approve of this theory. Its not a bug. Its a feature.
Lamech
 
Posts: 1384
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 9:23 am

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby atalex » Sat Aug 17, 2013 1:56 pm

Thought #1: Wanda tells Jack to "call me what you please" and he immediately latches onto a name that establishes her in a peer relationship rather than a master-servant relationship. I find this interesting because so far the only Decrypted to turn so far (or really to even have less than total devotion to Wanda) has been Ossomer, who is also the only other person she has allowed to call her something other than "Mistress." At the time, it was because she was distracted by the presence of both Ansom and Jillian in the battlespace and she was squicked out by Ossomer (whom she actively disliked) calling her Mistress. In text update 29, we get some of his inner monologue and find he seems almost miffed that she wants him to call her "commander." That was the first hint that Ossomer might turn, and I later wondered whether Wanda opened the door for it by inadvertently directing him to think of her in terms other than as a Mistress who must be obeyed.

Thought #2: Regardless of what NDAs governed Wanda and Jack, I don't think there were any such NDAs governing Jillian that date back to the Inner Peace era. None of Jillian's Book 2 interactions with Charlie even hint that she knows any of his secrets, whereas a Wanda-Charlie connection is foreshadowed all over the place. I predict that IPTSF will somehow end with Jillian's memories of Charlie's involvement being erased.

Thought #3: We STILL don't know whether Decrypted casters can still cast!
atalex
 
Posts: 281
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 3:08 pm

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby Kreistor » Sat Aug 17, 2013 2:03 pm

Oberon wrote:The word 'forswore' is not used correctly in context.


Interesting how Lipkin took you down on a definition. Isn't it? Your claims to understand definitions has been called into doubt, which definitely amuses me. And it's useful.

You prattle about Occam's Razor, a concept about which you have a vastly inaccurate understanding,


The only one that makes that claim is you, and Lipkin has demonstrated that your own concepts are inherently faulty. Since you do not cite Occam's Razor, your claim has no foundation.

Just for the edification of the readership, here is the official definition that I have always used:

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/424706/Ockhams-razor wrote:Ockham’s razor, also spelled Occam’s razor, also called law of economy or law of parsimony, principle stated by William of Ockham (1285–1347/49), a Scholastic, that Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate, “Plurality should not be posited without necessity.” The principle gives precedence to simplicity; of two competing theories, the simpler explanation of an entity is to be preferred. The principle is also expressed as “Entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity.”


"Entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity." Everyone is welcome to investigate exactly what that means, and I urge you to. It means, simply, invent as little as possible in order to explain what lacks adequate evidence to explain without any invention. Between competing theories, we choose the one for which the minimal invention is necessary, and discard inventions that are not necessary for the explanation. With the Razor we shave away at invention until only the bare minimum remains to explain the event.

Veterans here know that is how I have always presented the Razor. I've had many arguments about the use of the modern version "The simplest answer is the best" vs. the original on this forum. "Simple" is not an objective judgement since it is relative to the observer and susceptible to egotistical perversion and really is only a subjective opinion, but the entity count is objective and immune to ego.

You make grandiose claims as to what I do not understand, but you never actually demonstrate that you understand anything about what you talk about, nor demonstrate how I fail to understand. And yet here I can write a treatise not only on the version I use, but on the versions other people use.

Try a dictionary next time. They come in handy, for those humble enough to use it. Oh, and look up "prattle" in the dictionary, too. Then grab a mirror.
http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/TBFGK_1 Here you can find all comic pages written as text for convenient quoting.

http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/Erfworld_Mechanics The starting page for accessing all known Erfworld "rules".
User avatar
Kreistor
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:59 pm
Location: K-W, Ontario, Canada

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby Lipkin » Sat Aug 17, 2013 3:22 pm

Well, it was Lilwik, not me, who made the correction. So maybe you should also check yourself before you wreck yourself.
User avatar
Lipkin
 
Posts: 837
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:36 am

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby Tonot » Sat Aug 17, 2013 4:29 pm

Foreswore is certainly wrong in context. But that is no biggie really, people misuse words in the normal course of events.
Tonot
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 1:06 am

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby Venthus » Sat Aug 17, 2013 4:35 pm

Tonot wrote:
randint wrote:What if Charlie actually IS the Arkendish?

He was attuned to the Arkendish, someone stuck a knife in his kidneys, he began to go where Erfworlders go when they are croaked, and thought real hard about it instead, and has stayed thinking real hard about it all along, running like a programme inside the Arkendish.

This is why no one has ever seen him, except the three "personal" Arkhons who are always closeted "with" him, and transmit his orders. Also why he is so supremely capable of Thinkamancy. It is all he is capable of now, because it is all he is, just a Thinkamancy call he started with his last breath, between himself and the Arkendish, that he never allows to disconnect


My personal favored theory-- that Charlie is effectively 'the ghost in the machine'. This would be a rather important piece of knowledge since it would imply that, under certain conditions (or maybe just the Arkendish by virtue of its specialty), the Arkentools can become sentient and the only way to kill him would be to destroy one of the tools that shaped the world. Or overwrite him, but since he was presumably attuned, the Dish may not allow that.

Just a side thought-- has it ever been stated that the Arkentools come with their own, fixed, abilities, or is it possible that their effects vary based on the user? Like the Pliers, rather than conferring the ability to decrypt, might just be 'amplification of user's primary capabilities'.
Venthus
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:52 pm

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby Lilwik » Sat Aug 17, 2013 4:50 pm

Tonot wrote:Foreswore is certainly wrong in context.
But it doesn't seem wrong according to this dictionary. Like many words it has several meanings and some of them make more sense than others. Perhaps in your everyday usage of the word it means something that makes no sense here, but that only indicates that Wanda is using a different sense of the word than you use. There's nothing wrong with using a word with one of its alternate meanings, especially when that meaning is listed first in the dictionary, unless you know of something in the etymology that suggests the usage is rooted in a mistake.

Venthus wrote:Just a side thought-- has it ever been stated that the Arkentools come with their own, fixed, abilities, or is it possible that their effects vary based on the user? Like the Pliers, rather than conferring the ability to decrypt, might just be 'amplification of user's primary capabilities'.
The list of capabilities if the Arkenhammer is long and diverse, and it is a hammer, a tool famous for having a limited range of applications. I strongly suspect that the pliers are capable of far more than what we've seen. It wouldn't surprise me if they were capable of enhancing all disciplines of magic, just like ordinary pliers make almost any task easier by providing a superior grip.

I like the idea that the arkenpliers are the tool that allowed the Titans to create the first life on Erfworld using an enhanced version of Dollamancy much like decryption is enhanced Croakamancy. On the other hand, maybe not, because that would suggest that the pliers are capable of creating Life, which would suggest they are a Life-based tool, but I have serious doubts about the decrypted having Life. They seem totally alive, but they still dust instead of croaking just like uncroaked, and the appearance of life could possibly just be from the vast Titanic power of the pliers giving them flawless uncroaking.
Last edited by Lilwik on Sat Aug 17, 2013 5:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1126
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby CorrTerek » Sat Aug 17, 2013 5:06 pm

Kreistor wrote:WORDS WORDS WORDS


Y'know, you could've just said "Whoa, not trying to come across that way, man." No need to write a treatise on the subject.

Kreistor wrote:Veterans here know that is how I have always presented the Razor. I've had many arguments about the use of the modern version "The simplest answer is the best" vs. the original on this forum. "Simple" is not an objective judgement since it is relative to the observer and susceptible to egotistical perversion and really is only a subjective opinion, but the entity count is objective and immune to ego.


Perhaps, though the way you jumped to "Jack was a mole for Charlie the whole time!" rather than "Jack (and Wanda) were under NDAs the whole time!" does lead me to question its effectiveness. After all, it would seem that the former requires far more invention than the latter, yet the former is the one you seem to be supporting in spite of the Razor.

And I'm actually a bit of a veteran here myself. Posted for awhile, got into some stupid fights I regret, stopped posting but kept watching. I'm well aware of how you present Occam's Razor.
Image
CorrTerek
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 2:57 am

Re: Book 2 – Epilogue 02 – Jack Decrypted

Postby Tonot » Sat Aug 17, 2013 6:34 pm

Lilwik wrote:
Tonot wrote:Foreswore is certainly wrong in context.
But it doesn't seem wrong according to this dictionary. Like many words it has several meanings and some of them make more sense than others. Perhaps in your everyday usage of the word it means something that makes no sense here, but that only indicates that Wanda is using a different sense of the word than you use. There's nothing wrong with using a word with one of its alternate meanings, especially when that meaning is listed first in the dictionary, unless you know of something in the etymology that suggests the usage is rooted in a mistake.



Yes, I read your post before, and I do understand what you meant by it mate*. I also knew both uses of the word, and I had actually read it as the writer using it with the first, non-archaic definition in his mind. And I am not saying it is everyday usage for me, far from it, I just don't think it is the correct word in the circumstance.

We can leave aside the fact that it is not mellifluous in the sentence, though this is usually an indicator that a word is out of context. I think it is simply wrong usage.
The word doesn't carry anything of the meaning of "Swore this before, at an earlier date". The "fore" part of the compound doesn't mean that, it is a suffix meaning negate, deny, against.

Aha, trying to explain my resistance to the words usage, I have found the perfect example of why it is just ENTIRELY the wrong word. If the sentence from the comic was instead "Can you speak?. Of what we swore?" meaning "Swore not to speak of?", it would be correct for the meaning that it is attempting to convey.
It is the "to" in the sentence as it stands, that makes it wrong. "Of. . . what we foreswore to" . It would need to be a more detailed sentence to recover from that, imho. "Of. . . what we foreswore to speak of".
Anyway, not the end of the universe type of mistake, for all we know Wanda was struggling hard to make sense simply because a more direct, accurate use of "Language" would tread on the oath magic she indicates still binds her?. And who knows, I may even be wrong, I seem to remember it happening on occasion. :P


* :) That is my half of a magic spell by the way, do you now speak your half, and ever after we can be friends and tell one another "Arrgh, how could you be so wrong?" without fearing that the other will take offence. There can be no candour with restraint, you ken?.
Tonot
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 1:06 am

PreviousNext

Return to Reactions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Radagast and 3 guests

cron