SickleCider wrote: »SickleCider wrote: »I can't recall a lot of the lines specifically (it's been a minute), but one I heard all the time from him was, "You wish to engage in badinage?" While not particularly wordy, nor incorrect, no one in contemporary English would greet another this way! Unless, I suppose now, they were trying to be flamboyant, in an attempt to charm or amuse. Maybe that was his goal. Truth be told I didn't spend enough time with him; lines like that made me go, "AAAAGGH!" 🤣
Isn't that word French in origin? To be honest I only knew it from French so far (and I think it's used in classical music too - although quite specifically for some 18th century style, if I'm not completely wrong now). Maybe an attempt to let him use terms related to older arts or loanwords from other languages because ZOS finds that exotic? Although badinage is a word at least. The thing that's cringe to me is the abundance of false Latin they use in Apocrypha. I understand they wanted to employ it, considering it was the lingua franca or common language of scholars for a long time (later it was French for some time), but if one does that, it would be wise to do it properly. It's not like no one could have helped with that, there are still many Europeans who have learned it (in Germany you even need a certificate that you have studied Latin for at minimum 5 years to be allowed to study certain courses, for example medicine and law - so everyone who is a doctor or a lawyer has at least learned Latin sometime in the past).
Thank you for confirming a suspicion I had about the "Latin." 😁 We're not taught that here in the United States so I could only speculate about its authenticity.
SickleCider wrote: »Maybe they just thought no one would catch it.
I guess so. It's still a pity, in my opinion. Of course one could argue whether it's worth the effort if only a lower percentage of players would notice it anyway, but then again they also include easter eggs that even less people recognize. Also, being thorough also with such things would show special dedication and care for what they're writing.
SickleCider wrote: »Right. For example, in the very same DLC, they included little nods to a short story by Lovecraft called "The Colour Out Of Space." Surely the number of people who have read that is lower than the number of people who have studied a little Latin.
Hard to say. Lovecraft grew quite popular here within the last 15 years (I don't know how well-known he is in the USA, of course). It's strange to see how an author that was quite of a niche interest suddenly grew so famous, especially 70 years after his death (I mean, it's not the first time that happens in arts, but I still find it remarkable). When I mentioned him in the early 2000's, no one had a clue. The popularity also shows in film adaptions. For The Colour Out Of Space, there wasn't only one but several movies from 2009 on or so.
BretonMage wrote: »With the absence of labels, though, how does one encourage others to try to understand that unusual personal quirks and struggles may be deeply ingrained and deeply felt, and not just annoying whims that one can "overcome"?
BretonMage wrote: »In Azandar's case, for example, would he have made so many enemies if they were understanding of his struggles?
BretonMage wrote: »I agree that ideally everyone in our society should be understanding and considerate, but unfortunately though most people are kind, many are not, and unkind people don't need a label to act weirdly around us.
BretonMage wrote: »On the other hand, would a label help us understand our own struggles or those who struggle?
AnduinTryggva wrote: »The "Latinized" words in ESO are generally completely wrong. That little I still know from my five years Latin course in school.
SickleCider wrote: »Did you see the "Colour Out Of Space" adaptation with Nick Cage? It was so tonally dissonant and unhinged. 🤣
I think that, even if it's difficult and takes time (and sometimes the result may only be a compromise or a workaround of some kind), a lot of things can be overcome. Maybe not hypersensibility, or just not understanding how someone acts in some way (I find it especially frustrating if people can't even explain why they did a thing - how would I be able to learn to understand that then?), but I think the human mind is still able to adapt in many cases (as I said, my first partner managed to talk to other people in the end, even if it took him 10 years to get to that point).
From my perspective, if it's a quirk that truly affects others negatively (otherwise it's none of their business anyway), it's also an matter of politeness to at least try to find a solution somehow. There are indeed people (in general, not specifically people with autism) who just use "I'm like that, I can't do anything against it" as a simple excuse without ever having tried to do something. But if you showed efforts, and show that you care for the impact your behaviour has, a person who takes you seriously would recognize that.
But back to the topic of hypersensibility, as I think that's another good example: I think that someone who takes you seriously as a person just accepts if you say that, for example, a certain noise or smell really causes you problems, no matter with a diagnosis or without (Like, why would you even make that problem up? What kind of strange insinuation is that?). If you say something causes you serious problems and someone begins to haggle and doesn't accept your explanation, questions it, or maybe makes fun of it - that's a lost cause anyway and they most probably won't change their mind even if you could present them a diagnosis. And even if it might sound harsh: I'd rather focus on people who listen to what I say and take my words seriously, instead of desperately trying to get someone to believe me, who for some reason is unwilling to do so (which is respectless in itself).
Often an explanation will help us find a good solution more effectively, I think.For me, the name or an explanation doesn't change anything at all because it's not a solution for the actual problems (I'm very much focused on solutions, less on explanations). As I said, some smell that makes me nauseous still makes me nauseous if I know the cause is hypersensibility caused by autism.
I don't need a diagnosis or a label to take people seriously. If a friend tells me he gets nauseous from a certain smell, it doesn't matter to me if it's neurology, a temporary sensibility caused by an infection, or just a personal quirk. Why would I even demand an explanation? And who would fake nausea in front of a friend, and what for?
Same goes for other things like phobias, for example. If I see a friend gets really nervous in a crowded place, I'll suggest we go somewhere calmer. He doesn't even have to tell me he's phobic, I don't care for an official diagnosis, it doesn't even matter if it's even a fear clinically relevant enough to be diagnosed as a true phobia; I see he's unwell, so I react accordingly.
Also, people who aren't considerate if someone tells them they are unwell (about a smell, noise, a big crowd of people, or anything else really) usually don't care for a medical diagnosis either. They still won't care or even mock the person more.
BretonMage wrote: »For hypersensibility, sadly most people out there would just say, "just get over it" and get angry if you don't/can't.
BretonMage wrote: »Often an explanation will help us find a good solution more effectively, I think.
I conceptually understand that other people have different sensory experiences than me, and of course I want people to be comfortable. But it's difficult for me to intuitively understand, so if I'm not careful I end up assuming things aren't serious. I've unintentionally hurt people in the past because of this, which I'm not proud of.
From a different angle, people's expression of their internal experience doesn't always line up with what they're actually experiencing, people have reasons to exaggerate or minimize. Someone might make a big deal of a small discomfort if they thought their small discomforts were more important than other people's feelings (this would be consistent with readings of Azandar as arrogant).
On the other hand, someone (aka me) might say things are fine when they're actually very distressed, because they don't want to cause a fuss or bother anyone.
SilverBride wrote: »I've never seen Azandar as anything more than an older intelligent man (He is a Scholar, darn it!") who has picked up a few quirks on his life journey.
In general I have the impression that society was more accepting before autism gained much media attention, to be honest, because people were just seen as a bit "quirky". It does make a difference after all if someone is perceived as "one of us, but a little quirky" or as being in a different box altogether.
BretonMage wrote: »If someone can manage "one of us but a little quirky", that would be great, regardless of era.
BretonMage wrote: »Even in the past, one could be ostracised even with the smallest difference in behaviour. The way you carried yourself, the way you spoke, the clothes you wore.