Umm... Awoke?

[FeelinShiny]

He has waked... He has awoke... He will awaken... He will wake...

I just don't get it? Why are there diferent words that can be used in the same place and mean the same things? Am I doing something wrong? I'm so befudled...  

[The Man who was Thursday]

FeelinShiny

He has waked... He has awoke... He will awaken... He will wake...

I just don't get it? Why are there diferent words that can be used in the same place and mean the same things? Am I doing something wrong? I'm so befudled...

He was waked = sometime in the past, he was disturbed from sleep.

He has awoke = just now, he was disturbed from sleep.

He will awaken = He will wake (though this is a little bizarre) = sometime in the future, he will be disturbed from sleep.  

[Ariomness]

For the first one: That one just sounds odd to be. "Waked." Yes, it's a real word, but an odd sounding word... I would prefer to say "He was awoken." Or something. "He was waked" sounds so informal and strange. It makes "waked" sound like some sort of blunt instrument hitting somebody repeatedly.
But that's just me.
Anywaaay...
Yes. The English language insists on being irritatingly complicated and having a hundred different words and phrases that all inevitably mean the same thing.  

[[Mammon]]

Ariomness

Yes. The English language insists on being irritatingly complicated and having a hundred different words and phrases that all inevitably mean the same thing.

I've been advocating the benefits of newspeak for a long time. I mean why call someone loquacious when you could just call them double-plus-wordy.

Hate synonyms? Here's why newspeak is for you:

Wikipedia

Basic principles of Newspeak

To remove synonyms
The basic idea behind Newspeak was to remove all shades of meaning from language, leaving simple dichotomies (pleasure and pain, happiness and sadness, good thoughts and thoughtcrimes) which reinforce the total dominance of the State. Similarly, Newspeak root words served as both nouns and verbs, which allowed further reduction in the total number of words; for example, "think" served as both noun and verb, so the word "thought" was unneeded and could be abolished. A staccato rhythm of short syllables was also a goal, further reducing the need for deep thinking about language. (See duckspeak.) Successful Newspeak meant that there would be fewer and fewer words -- dictionaries would get thinner and thinner.

In addition, words with opposite meanings were removed as redundant, so "bad" became "ungood." Words with comparative and superlative meanings were also simplified, so "better" became "gooder", and "best" likewise became "goodest". Intensifiers could be added, so "great" became "plusgood", and "excellent" or "splendid" likewise became "doubleplusgood." Adjectives were formed by adding the suffix "-ful" to a root word (e.g. "goodthinkful", orthodox in thought), and adverbs by adding "-wise" ("goodthinkwise", in an orthodox manner). In this manner, as many words as possible were removed from the language. The ultimate aim of Newspeak was to reduce even the dichotomies to a single word that was a "yes" of some sort: an obedient word with which everyone answered affirmatively to what was asked of them.

See, all that complexity and depth of meaning is gone with newspeak. Just, please, for the sake of everyone, don't pay any attention to the fact that the other aim of newspeak is to control and prevent thought. Let us worry about that.  

[splashseal]

That's funny about Newspeak. A friend and I just had a conversation on thought-control through language. Reducing ideas to simple dichotomies just leads to improper ways of perceiving everything (or how you think of it, anyways).

As for the words, saying "he waked up" does sound weird. I think of it in terms of "he woke up" and such. It's the same for words like 'sneak' and 'hang'. There's the idea of the strong verb changing your stem, as from shine to shone, rather than just adding the past-tense ending.

It is confusing without thinking of it like this (at least for me it is), but I have German to thank for helping me with the verb thing.  

[FeelinShiny]

Well thanks for that... I feel better about using these words now, seeing as they all meen the same thing. I'm glad English is my first language, it would've been hard to leard if I already had known something else.  

[Caleb Hellforge]

Ariomness

For the first one: That one just sounds odd to be. "Waked." Yes, it's a real word, but an odd sounding word... I would prefer to say "He was awoken." Or something. "He was waked" sounds so informal and strange. It makes "waked" sound like some sort of blunt instrument hitting somebody repeatedly.
But that's just me.
Anywaaay...
Yes. The English language insists on being irritatingly complicated and having a hundred different words and phrases that all inevitably mean the same thing.

Spanish is worse.  

[FeelinShiny]

Have you tried French? They never pronounce consonants and have about 10 deferent ways to make the sound 'oo' confused  

[Ame Yuki Kaze]

The alarm clock woke him up. He was awakened by the alarm clock. The alarm clock will wake him up. The alarm clock will awaken. I believe all of these are acceptable.


deferent different


This is a properly formatted sentence. The first letter of a sentence is ALWAYS capitalized. A sentence always ends in a punctuation mark, usually a period, but sometimes a question mark or exclamation point. Punctuation such as the comma, the colon and the semicolon are used as sentence pausers. Never should a sentence end with one of these.  

[DarkElf27]

[Mammon]

Ariomness

Yes. The English language insists on being irritatingly complicated and having a hundred different words and phrases that all inevitably mean the same thing.

I've been advocating the benefits of newspeak for a long time. I mean why call someone loquacious when you could just call them double-plus-wordy.

Hate synonyms? Here's why newspeak is for you:

Wikipedia

Basic principles of Newspeak

To remove synonyms
The basic idea behind Newspeak was to remove all shades of meaning from language, leaving simple dichotomies (pleasure and pain, happiness and sadness, good thoughts and thoughtcrimes) which reinforce the total dominance of the State. Similarly, Newspeak root words served as both nouns and verbs, which allowed further reduction in the total number of words; for example, "think" served as both noun and verb, so the word "thought" was unneeded and could be abolished. A staccato rhythm of short syllables was also a goal, further reducing the need for deep thinking about language. (See duckspeak.) Successful Newspeak meant that there would be fewer and fewer words -- dictionaries would get thinner and thinner.

In addition, words with opposite meanings were removed as redundant, so "bad" became "ungood." Words with comparative and superlative meanings were also simplified, so "better" became "gooder", and "best" likewise became "goodest". Intensifiers could be added, so "great" became "plusgood", and "excellent" or "splendid" likewise became "doubleplusgood." Adjectives were formed by adding the suffix "-ful" to a root word (e.g. "goodthinkful", orthodox in thought), and adverbs by adding "-wise" ("goodthinkwise", in an orthodox manner). In this manner, as many words as possible were removed from the language. The ultimate aim of Newspeak was to reduce even the dichotomies to a single word that was a "yes" of some sort: an obedient word with which everyone answered affirmatively to what was asked of them.

See, all that complexity and depth of meaning is gone with newspeak. Just, please, for the sake of everyone, don't pay any attention to the fact that the other aim of newspeak is to control and prevent thought. Let us worry about that.

I hope I'm not the only one who knows where the reference of "Newspeak" comes from?  

[[Mammon]]

DarkElf27

I hope I'm not the only one who knows where the reference of "Newspeak" comes from?

Of course you're not. You can join the rest of the people who know where it comes from at the party we're throwing for them in Room 101.  

[Zealot of Insanity]

Yami no Hitokiri

The alarm clock woke him up. He was awakened by the alarm clock. The alarm clock will wake him up. The alarm clock will awaken. I believe all of these are acceptable.


deferent different


This is a properly formatted sentence. The first letter of a sentence is ALWAYS capitalized. A sentence always ends in a punctuation mark, usually a period, but sometimes a question mark or exclamation point. Punctuation such as the comma, the colon and the semicolon are used as sentence pausers. Never should a sentence end with one of these.

Shouldn't the last one be "The alarm clock will awaken him"?  

[Missy Wyvern]

Vadatajs

Ariomness

For the first one: That one just sounds odd to be. "Waked." Yes, it's a real word, but an odd sounding word... I would prefer to say "He was awoken." Or something. "He was waked" sounds so informal and strange. It makes "waked" sound like some sort of blunt instrument hitting somebody repeatedly.
But that's just me.
Anywaaay...
Yes. The English language insists on being irritatingly complicated and having a hundred different words and phrases that all inevitably mean the same thing.

Spanish is worse.

Oh, don't remind me...
The worst are the words that are almost like the english word, but you have to pronounce it with the spanish accents.

IT'S THE SAME WORD, WHY CAN'T I JUST SAY IT LIKE I WOULD NORMALLY?! scream