123 réponses à ce sujet

[Spectre slayer]

Eurypterid wrote...

nightscrawl wrote...

You have to admit that a chart is a lot more convenient than wading through over a dozen posts with the various points all scattered throughout.

Not really, no. I'm not really a chart kind of person, so reading the posts makes it a lot clearer for me. YMMV.

Here's links to posts on this.


http://social.biowar...ndex/17580040/7

http://social.biowar...ex/4741328&lf=8

http://social.biowar...ndex/17378184/3

http://social.biowar.../index/17843581

http://social.biowar...x/14893267&lf=8

http://dgaider.tumbl...-i-hate-how-the

http://dgaider.tumbl...s-where-it-gets

[Eurypterid]

Spectre slayer wrote...

Here's links to posts on this.

*snip*

Thanks, but I already provided links to the dev posts up-thread.

[Spectre slayer]

Eurypterid wrote...

Spectre slayer wrote...

Here's links to posts on this.

*snip*

Thanks, but I already provided links to the dev posts up-thread.

Only saw one of them, so I posted more from them, some are recent and some are from Gaider's tumblr but anyway they're there for other people to look at aswell if they want to.

[CybAnt1]

CastonFolarus wrote...

The best way I've heard it explained in real-world terms:

What do you call people who follow the Jewish religion? Jewish.

What do you call the people who are descended from the tribe of Isreal, regardless of their religious status? Jewish.

Both an ethnicity and a religion.

That's true, but btw other terminology exists. Also, incidentally, we're also talking about a race when dealing with qunari (as in what practically seems to be a different species from humans, not even a human sub-race), whereas Jews are definitely not a race, in any sense. They are an ethnicity (Semitic). Ethnic differences are not biological. 

Anyway, Judaism is a religion, and many people might call those of the ethnicity Jew even if they are atheists or Pastafarians by religion. However, other terms exist, as I just said: for example, Hebrew or Israelite. 

Incidentally, at least theoretically, some people called "Jews" are Levites, which means they are in fact not of the tribe of Judah, which Jew/Judean/Judahite was originally supposed to indicate. Israelite means descended from any of the twelve tribes of Jacob (Israel). It COULD include other people. All Jews are Israelites, but not all Israelites are Jews. We won't get into the Ten Lost Tribes. A further afield complicated and annoying subject. But I digress. 

And BTW people will also say those terms are "archaic" yet they are still in use today. For example: the Union of American Hebrew Congregations (UAHC), or the American Israelite newspaper of Ohio. People say the term "******" is archaic, but the United ****** College Fund is still around, too. The other problem with Israelite is people sometimes confuse it with Israeli, which is a nationality, as Israel is now a modern nation-state. 

"******" and "Heeb" are considered unacceptable ethnic slurs, of course. Though "Heeb" magazine has tried to reclaim the latter term in the same way "****" magazine has done. There is some debate about the appropriateness of the term Yid, which originated from the fact that many Jews worldwide continue to speak the Ashke**** dialect of Yiddish. (Of course, that wouldn't cover Sephardim, who don't).

Here's the final point you hope I was getting to: what do you call a non-religious Jew? Well you might call him a Yid, a Hebrew, or an Israelite. See: there ARE terms that separate the religion and the ethnicity, to avoid confusion. 

Having listened to me drone on (TL;DR?) you perhaps want to go on staring at a chart. 

I find the small q/big Q differentiator works on the forums (it seems in Thedas, as no one has typed text, let alone ASCII, they don't care about capitalization). Only it seems far from universal. This is sometimes why I will use the pedantic-nerd anthropologism "k-word". As people don't always appear to know how you're differentiating from big Q to small q. 

I still think that people don't care and won't use differentiating terms in Thedas, doesn't mean we can't on the forums. :innocent:

[Iron Fist]

How about "Qun-ari" for the religious folk and "Qunari" for the species?

[ChaosMorning]

Hmm... I wonder if we'll be able to choose whether our Inquisitor was/is a Vashoth or Tal-Vashoth.

If I understand the codex correctly, then I believe Vashoth are those who have left the Qun but do not directly oppose it while Tal-Vashoth are outcasts from the Qun that violently oppose the Qunari.

[Ser Alicia]

ChaosMorning wrote...

Hmm... I wonder if we'll be able to choose whether our Inquisitor was/is a Vashoth or Tal-Vashoth.

If I understand the codex correctly, then I believe Vashoth are those who have left the Qun but do not directly oppose it while Tal-Vashoth are outcasts from the Qun that violently oppose the Qunari.

Gaider has recently confirmed that our PC will be Tal-Vashoth.

David Gaider wrote...

Drblingzle wrote...
Ok we can play as Qunari that much has been made very clear what I want to know is are we able to play as members of the same species who have abandoned the Qun: the Tal-vashoth.

All PC Qunari are Tal-Vashoth.

David Gaider wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...
Mr. Gaider, I always assume Qunari born outside the Qun are just called Qunari while the Tal-Vashoth are those who abandoned the Qun, so when you said Tal-Vashoth, does it mean we're ex-quanri?

Mary tells me that the PC would technically just be Vashoth. Either way, it's a distinction that's only going to be relevant to the Qunari themselves. Everyone else will simply say "Qunari", no matter where you were born.

Modifié par TheBioticAssassin, 02 février 2014 - 05:35 .

[CybAnt1]

MevenSelas wrote...

How about "Qun-ari" for the religious folk and "Qunari" for the species?[

That could work, should your shift or caps lock keys become disabled. 

Look, I understand the dev's points that in-game it won't be a meaningful distinction *"Qunari is as Qunari does", but we can treat it as a meaningful distinction before we enter the imaginary world where it isn't one. 

Modifié par CybAnt1, 02 février 2014 - 05:52 .

[CybAnt1]

ChaosMorning wrote...

Hmm... I wonder if we'll be able to choose whether our Inquisitor was/is a Vashoth or Tal-Vashoth.

If I understand the codex correctly, then I believe Vashoth are those who have left the Qun but do not directly oppose it while Tal-Vashoth are outcasts from the Qun that violently oppose the Qunari.

Yet ... in DA2, I don't remember any Tal-Vashoth we met, telling us they violently oppose the Qun, whereas they simply say they don't give a crap about it, and have decided to live la vida loca as mercenaries. 

And, again, call me thick (or convex), but see, why exactly are "true" "grey ones" different from "grey ones". Perhaps I need to update my studies of qunlat. (Somebody needs to do a dictionary of it as an imaginary language, kind of like has been done with Klingon.) I guess this is idiom, but can someone make the idiom make sense? :innocent:


Granted, only one of the Wounded Coast Tal-Vashoth would talk to us, as opposed to attacking on sight, for the most part. And he, like many other qunari, seemed determined to stop making sense at certain points. 

[leaguer of one]

Dodok wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

Dodok wrote...


A little much, don't you think?

Kossith, even as an archaic term, works well to identify all types of horned ox-men.
That includes those which are rarely (I imagine) born outside of the Qun.
I've myself found the interchanging usage of 'Vashoth,' 'Tal-Vashoth' & 'Qunari' to be at best, strange.

Especially when one considers the fact that we're on the internet, not Thedas, so we generally have more knowledge.

How many time do have to be told that term is wrong. The writers say it is. The chracters in the story don't even us it. The qunari says it's wrong. 
 It just the wrong term point blank. It's like calling french men gales. 
It not what they are called point blank.

Honestly, I've no care if it's wrong or right in Thedas, it's just something that causes less confusion online.
People need an all-in-one term to refer to all the horned ox-men people by, for 'qunari' in all its forms is strange.

'Tis like calling all tibetans- buddhists, then saying it specifically means the ethnic group, not the practitioners.
A similar issue has been brought up in real life between lesbians (sexual orientation) and lesbians (lesbos).

Note: I am in no means one to think that the term, 'Kossith' is used on Thedas often, for it is indeed 'outdated.'
However, I do believe it's the least confusing term to refer to all the horned ox-men people by, while on the forums.

For it's so much easier for people to start arguing here in random qunari threads, when people start using the
term, 'qunari'-because yes, someone (who has knowledge of that) will eventually come in and correct them-
then someone else corrects them: etcera, etcera, the cycle continues. That'll go on, up until the game is released.

Now I should say, the intention of my original post was only supposed to defend the usage of the term, 'Kossith,'
for the sake of simplicity- not lore/political correctness (I found Maclimes remark- belittling, hypocritical & stereotyping). However, since then, I've hoped to broaden that view so others might understand what I was originally on about.

And the op posted pictures to make it clear what they are called. It not so hard, Kossith is just wrong...Stop using it.

[Ser Alicia]

CybAnt1 wrote...

And, again, call me thick (or convex), but see, why exactly are "true" "grey ones" different from "grey ones". Perhaps I need to update my studies of qunlat. (Somebody needs to do a dictionary of it as an imaginary language, kind of like has been done with Klingon.) I guess this is idiom, but can someone make the idiom make sense? :innocent:

Well, we don't have a Qunlat dictionary (yet), but we do have this on the Dragon Age Wiki. It contains all of the words and phrases we know of.

According to the wiki, Vashoth are those who abandon the Qun. Tal-Vashoth, on the other hand, are the more violent outcasts.

[CybAnt1]

Yes, I have seen the Wiki, I think I've even 'met' the editor.

I'm still confused on two things.

1) Why are "gray ones" simply passive-ambivalent towards the Qun, whereas "true" "gray ones" violently oppose it? That would seem to imply violent opposition is "truer" "grayness". I know what's on the Wiki, I just want it to make linguistic sense. :innocent:

2) How come none of the Tal-Vashoth in DA2 ever explained this to us? It seemed to me they were hanging out outside the confines of the Qun, and certainly were violent, but not doing much violent opposing to it. Or do they become "Tal" simply for being violent, regardless of how they direct that violence?

Modifié par CybAnt1, 02 février 2014 - 06:22 .

[Ser Alicia]

CybAnt1 wrote...

2) How come none of the Tal-Vashoth in DA2 ever explained this to us? It seemed to me they were hanging out outside the confines of the Qun, and certainly were violent, but not doing much violent opposing to it. Or do they become "Tal" simply for being violent, regardless of how they direct that violence?

Yup. According to Mary Kirby, anyway.

Mary Kirby wrote...

Violent ones become Tal'Vashoth. Which is mostly the ones who were former soldiers, because they have no other useful skills. Many of them never fight the Qunari, they just become mercenaries because what the heck else are they supposed to do? When they actively strike at the Qunari, they usually just murder the most defenseless civilians they can find, because they don't have numbers, officers, goals, equipment, or organization that would make them a match for the antaam.

Modifié par TheBioticAssassin, 02 février 2014 - 06:35 .

[Nefla]

This was never a problem, never "confusing" before the world of thedas was released with that tiny footnote about an obscure and no longer existing culture (not even a race but a culture) I think those people are either:

A) lazy and don't want to type any qualifiers such as qunari convert or elf qunari or use terms (that imo help spice up the game and make it seem like a real place) such as vashoth/tal'vashoth/viddithari/etc...

(and this seems more likely to me)they are hipsters that want to have some "cool" practically unknown term to bandy about and "correct" people on. They bring up arguments about how "confusing" qunari is as an excuse. No one was confused before. If "kossith" was in the game (which it wont be) and used by every player, they wouldn't want to use it anymore.

C)Stupid: they can't grasp the concept of one word meaning multiple things and have no idea how to understand context. Words like meal, race, kid, etc...make their brain explode.

[Mirrman70]

can we not have this discussion? its old and neither side will ever concede defeat. I can stomach the mage vs. templar threads and the Dalish vs. human threads because they get so worked up its funny. you guys though are kicking the fossilized horse ancestor. it has no real relation to DA:I outside of the playable race, which I doubt will ever be called Kossith due to the writers wishing they never made that codex entry, so unless they make a game that focuses on some conflict with the Qunari that delves deeper into their lore (I hope they don't because there will nothing but stupid threads about a what a fictional race should be called, because the minority of the few vocal fans think they have the right to make demands or force the writers to do what they want) they will most likely never even come close to touching this topic.

[Angarma]

leaguer of one wrote...
And the op posted pictures to make it clear what they are called. It not so hard, Kossith is just wrong...Stop using it.

Like I said, I've no care, my friend.

People seem to be getting their feathers all ruffled over choice of language on the internet.

Talk about pedantic! <_<

CybAnt1 wrote...

I find the small q/big Q differentiator
works on the forums (it seems in Thedas, as no one has typed text, let
alone ASCII, they don't care about capitalization). Only it seems far
from universal. This is sometimes why I will use the pedantic-nerd
anthropologism "k-word". As people don't always appear to know how
you're differentiating from big Q to small q. 

I still think that people don't care and won't use differentiating terms in Thedas, doesn't mean we can't on the forums. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/angel.png[/smilie]

Finally, someone else who both sees my point of view and is also trying to mediate/explain the issue.
It feels so nice to not be the only one. But unfortunately, it seems you're doing a better job than I ever did.
Maybe you should tutor me, oh wise one.

Nefia wrote...
(and this seems more likely to me)they are hipsters that want to
have some "cool" practically unknown term to bandy about and "correct"
people on. They bring up arguments about how "confusing" qunari is as an
excuse. No one was confused before. If "kossith" was in the game (which
it wont be) and used by every player, they wouldn't want to use it
anymore.

Not everyone who uses the term, 'kossith,' wants to falsely correct others with it.
And I do feel that 'qunari' as it is, *is* confusing, for if it weren't, why do such debates happen?
I'm more than sure that I've seen people easily start correcting others when they use it.

That isn't just with 'kossith,' but with 'tal-vashoth,' then 'vashoth'- before someone explains the
whole 'qunari' with a lowercase q is now a descriptor for the horned ox-men, lore wise. But such
arguments will easily occur again, because when describing 'tal-vashoth/vashoth' - newcomers will
think when one refers to say, Maraas, as a qunari: that they're obviously incorrect, for he's tal-vashoth.

This has to do with how the horned ox-men have been displayed in-game, I think.
When one uses such as 'qunari' in dialogue, in-game, a tal-vashoth would correct them.
So in turn, rightfully, people will correct others on such usage, making this a whole magic roundabout.

Modifié par Dodok, 02 février 2014 - 01:40 .

[Aremce]

Thanks for the chart and for the links to what the devs have posted!
(I admit I have been a bit confused, after reading some threads here on the BSN ...)

[CybAnt1]

The problem with words that can have two meanings based on context, are the vast variety of people too lazy, speaking of laziness, to provide that context.

This may mean another word has to do.

I guess one could also clarify by saying they are talking about racial Qunari vs. Qun-following all-racial Qunari. See? That did it. Same word + context.

But then what about others who don't do it? Then we will get a dozen MORE threads about people complaining that they have to play Qunari, when in fact they are playing qunari, i.e the k-word, "horny-folk," "ox-men" who are "Qunless"/Vashoth. (See what I did there?)

I like reducing ambiguity the simplest way, which is what most humans do in real languages.

Using lots of the qunlat terms are fine, for people who read the qunlat lexicon daily, I'll stick with English. I have enough trouble with real languages to nitpick over imaginary ones.

P.S. it would be cool to be thought of as a hipster, again.

[Trolldrool]

I just tend to think of Kossith as perhaps the name of the tribe or nation or city state from where the Qun originated following the epiphany of Koslun that changed their name to Qunari.

As for its use among Qunari, I tend to think of it like if I walked around the USA and addressed everyone as puritans. Most people would just be confused, some would give a small awkward chuckle given the origin of the first settlers. Nobody would take me seriously.

Modifié par Trolldrool, 02 février 2014 - 02:28 .

[CybAnt1]

Well, here's another analogous situation.

People from the USA often call themselves "Americans".

However, I have never known why that would exclude other people in North America (such as Canadians), Central America (such as Mexicans), or South America.

It's all the Americas, yet USAians have managed to appropriate the word just for themselves.

And then there's the problem with that word "Indians," too.

[TurretSyndrome]

CybAnt1 wrote...

And then there's the problem with that word "Indians," too.

Happens to me sometimes. 

Igno-runt: Hey, you don't sound american.
Me: I'm  Indian.
Igno-runt: So you're Native-American?
Me:*sigh...*

On topic: As CybAnt1 said, there's no biological term to identify the qunari race with, so the Jew argument doesn't work here. Humans are called humans, elves as elves and dwarves are dwarves.

It's true that Kossith is incorrect, but so is qunari when refering to non-qun followers. Now don't bombard me with links to Gaider's posts, I know what he said, and it's because of what he said that I chose to use Kossith over Qunari.

It's an antiquated term, it's not used anymore, meaning it's now free to take up another role which is now refering to non-qunari horned men. So yeah, I'll use it whether you like it or not, deal with it. 

Modifié par TurretSyndrome, 02 février 2014 - 06:25 .

[Battlebloodmage]

TurretSyndrome wrote...

CybAnt1 wrote...

And then there's the problem with that word "Indians," too.

Happens to me sometimes. 

Igno-runt: Hey, you don't sound american.
Me: I'm  Indian.
Igno-runt: So you're Native-American?
Me:*sigh...*

On topic: As CybAnt1 said, there's no biological term to identify the qunari race with, so the Jew argument doesn't work here. Humans are called humans, elves as elves and dwarves are dwarves.

It's true that Kossith is incorrect, but so is qunari when refering to non-qun followers. Now don't bombard me with links to Gaider's posts, I know what he said, and it's because of what he said that I chose to use Kossith over Qunari.

It's an antiquated term, it's not used anymore, meaning it's now free to take up another role which is now refering to non-qunari horned men. So yeah, I'll use it whether you like it or not, deal with it. 

As long as you don't intentionally make a thread titled "kossith" and make every possible post with the mention of "kossith" just to annoy people. 

[CybAnt1]

You know, I would say, "Call them (*) what you feel like and provides clarity (**)," but I can see that solution also pleases nobody.

Thank the Maker we are not discussing a game feature. :innocent:

(*) the horny-folk who don't follow the Qun: small-q, k-word, ox-men
(**) as opposed to ambiguity.

P.S. the one thing I will certainly agree with from that chart is I will keep calling elves, dwarves, and humans ... elves, dwarves, and humans, regardless of whatever whack-job belief system they have bought into.

(non-Tal-)Vashoth works, but there are presumably dwarf/elf/human Vashoth who have left the Qun, too. There are people who convert, then change their minds. 

Modifié par CybAnt1, 02 février 2014 - 07:01 .

[Grieving Natashina]

reh123 wrote...

Thanks for the chart and for the links to what the devs have posted!
(I admit I have been a bit confused, after reading some threads here on the BSN ...)

We're in an information drought, so there is rumors flying everywhere.  You should probably take most information that is on the forums with a grain of salt, unless there is a confirmed source.  Specter is actually really great about providing any links you need on dev information.  

Also,  check out the DA:I Twitter thread.  The tweets gave me an idea of what the devs were working on.