Saturday, 1 August 2015

Does Anton Chigurh kill Carla Jean Moss?

I googled the question and came upon this discussion and if it's up to speculation then I agree with him checking the boots.That implies looking for blood and in addition no mentions the car wreck shorty after leaving her house.



If he killed her, he wouldn't want anyone to connect the dots of her murder and the car accident as they were only a few feet apart. Him walking away versus waiting for medical attention. Also adds to the fact that he did not want to be caught or connected to that location.

single word requests - What is the verb for knowing that I exist?

Sometimes you have to drop a particular style in favour of another. As many users have already mentioned, there is no verb in English which means "knowledge of one's existence". The terms id (the part of the mind in which innate instinctive impulses and primary processes are manifest), ego, and superego are sometimes used in connection with Alzheimer.




  • ... manifestations become murky as the clinical course of Alzheimer's disease advances. Generally, ego dysfunction is considerably more apparent than superego ...


  • Those at endstage dementia have been regarded psychodynamically as experiencing a complete breakdown of the ego and its defences with apparent reciprocal dedifferentiation of the id.
    [source]




However, it's my understanding that these Freudian terms have become dated, and not everyone agrees with their definitions. But don't quote me on that.



A newly coined term, “aware ego” (The Neurobiology
of the Aware Ego
) appears to have replaced Freud's Id, Ego and Superego, but I don't know how common or well-known this expression is. In the same medical article, the term anosognosia (lack of self awareness) is used.



Instead, may I suggest a different solution which covers all five of the above, and is easily understandable; identity loss. Google Scholar has about 58,600 hits for Alzheimer's identitiy loss (without speech marks). Swapping verbs with nouns would lead to this formation.




They lose their memory. Their understanding. Their identity


story identification - Teen soldier's brother is killed by the military, she goes on the run with the framed killer

There is a book I read once through, that had a sequel that I couldn't find at the time. In order to try to find the sequel now, I need to remember the title of the first book. Here's what I remember:



The genre is apocalyptic military, and the main character is in the military, and one day, her brother gets killed by a known enemy (who happens to be a very similar age AND a military prodigy as well) or so it's thought. However, from the boy's perspective, he didn't kill him, he was defending himself. So, angry and bitter, the girl goes after the boy, to hunt him down with intent to kill. So she finds the boy, but finds that he really isn't evil, and finds him very likeable, and no longer wants to kill him.



After they stick together for awhile, she asks him what happened that night and, come to find out, he didn't kill him, but did throw a knife toward him to stop him from following him (her brother was in the military and was trying to stop him after he stole medicine he needed) which, being the prodigy he was, accurately grazed his ear as intended, nowhere close to killing him. However, as he was getting away, he saw someone from the military murder him. So there is quite a conspiracy going on in the military.



Anyways, the military ordered the killing of her brother, which they don't know she knows. So, believing he is telling the truth, she starts hanging around him quite a bit, at which they start getting romantically involved (they're teens btw) the military discovers she's had plenty of time to kill him (or bring him in), but hasn't, and instead is just hanging out with him, considers her a traitor. So at this time, she goes on the run with the boy (whom was already on the run).



That's pretty much the summary of the first book, I just need to know what the title is so I can read the sequel.

grammaticality - Combining 3 sentences

Just a few small changes are required:




Most of the above methods often rely on {using / applying [CHOOSE ONE]} the crown height model (CHM) followed by seeking the local maxima, which is the peak position of the CHM.




While I'm not a big fan of applying or followed by, they're the norm in academic prose, and I'm not getting paid to revise this, so this is good enough to pass muster with most journal editors and reviewers.

Why didn't Bane reveal to the public that Bruce Wayne is Batman?

I think this is probably because in the bid that he can convince the people to go against the law that imposed the 'Dent Act' and realize they have "worshipped a false idol" Two-Face, he re-enforces his plea with the letter that Gordon wrote expressing how the true hero was the Batman: -



here is the speech:



"I present to you as the shining example of justice. You have been supplied with a false idol to stop you from tearing down this corrupt city. Let me tell you the truth about Harvey Dent from the words of Gotham's police commissioner James Gordon. The Batman didn't murder Harvey Dent, he saved my boy then took the blame for Harvey's appalling crime so that I could, to my shame, build a lie around this fallen idol. I praised the mad man who tried to murder my own child but I can no longer live with my lie. It is time to trust the people of Gotham with the truth and it is time for me to resign. And do you accept this man's resignation? Do you accept the resignation of all these liars?! Of all the corrupt?!"



Bane cared only to rally Gotham against the system that the lie helped create, i dont think the letter really showed the extend of Batmans involvement in the conspiracy, he simply saved the family, vanished and the police vilified him. Batman in a sense needed to appear a victim for Bane which is fine for him if it helps to promote his false hope, in fact the Batman returning is part of this hope while knowing Batman/Wayne are broken and forgotten in a pit to watch Gotham be ripped apart - that seemed to me all he cared about.

phrases - Not only... but also

The second and third sentences are correct:




  • You should be able to not only speak[,] but also write.

  • You should not only be able to speak[,] but also be able to write.



I would correct the first sentence thus:




  • Not only should you be able to speak[,] but also should you be able to write. OR

  • Not only should you be able to speak[,] but you should also be able to write.



I leave it to you to decide whether you want a comma before but. Either way is fine.

game of thrones - Are the Lannister siblings really who they say they are?

The "the liberties [Aerys] took during the bedding" as the basis of a theory for Jaime and Cersei doesn't fly according to information from the recently released book The World Of Ice And Fire, as quoted by Tumblr user joannalannister:




The theory “Jaime and Cersei are Secret Targs” was based on the idea
that Cersei and Jaime were conceived when Aerys allegedly raped Joanna
while taking “liberties” at the bedding on Tywin and Joanna’s wedding
night in 263 AC.



[...]



But even if Aerys HAD raped Joanna while taking “liberties” in 263,
it’s not physically possible for Jaime and Cersei to have been
conceived on Tywin’s wedding night in 263. Jaime and Cersei were born
in 266 AC at Casterly Rock. Joanna was not at court; she had been
dismissed immediately after “liberties” because Rhaella thought of her
as a “whore” and victim-blamed her. (Click here for relevant
quotes.
) Joanna was not in contact with Aerys again until they
moved the court to Casterly Rock for a year in 267 AC, which was after
Jaime and Cersei were born.





UPDATE: Tumblr user joannalannister writes this regarding Tyrion being a Targaryen (as the result of Joanna Lannister having been raped by Aerys):




I am certain Tywin would not continue to serve the man who raped his
wife, regardless of what Aerys wanted. Tywin resigned over Jaime being
taken from him; he would have resigned over Joanna being raped. I feel
very confident in saying that.




There is a lot more in her post, though it should be noted that there currently is no evidence to definitely rule anything out. But to me it does seem to be a case of GRRM trolling his readers; like she says:




Saving the world is not limited to Targaryens, secret or otherwise.





UPDATE 2: It appears influential ASoIaF blogger Sean T. Collins is now on board with "Tyrion Targaryen" after reading The World of Ice and Fire. And he doesn't seem to be trolling his readers.



I've just started reading TWoIaF so I don't know what "evidence" he found; I'll try to update my answer once I reach that part of the book.)




UPDATE 3: Elio M. García Jr. and Linda Antonsson, co-authors of The World of Ice and Fire, spoke in the Podcast of Ice and Fire about this topic:




They point out that the new book pretty much flat-out debunks the idea
that Aerys is secretly Jaime & Cersei’s real father. That’s a theory I
never thought cut any ice anyway, but they’re right, the timeline
doesn’t work in any way. With a surprisingly vocal degree of regret,
however, they also point out that it doesn’t debunk the idea that
Aerys is secretly Tyrion's father. Interestingly, they're on the side
of the many, many detractors of this theory here on tumblr — they
don't like it at all. Elio said something to the effect of “You know,
it's George's story, if that's where he wants to take it that's fine,
but…” and he and Linda went on to voice some of the same objections
I've seen here, off the top of my head the idea that it undermines the
weight of the similarities between Tywin and Tyrion, and that this
might be one secret Targaryen/Blackfyre too many. The whole
conversation is interesting insofar as if they'd had any inside
information about the truth of the matter, they surely wouldn't have
brought it up at all, and they dislike the idea enough to say so
publicly even though by their own admission it's entirely possible
their own co-author is headed in exactly that direction.




In conclusion: most likely we'll only know for certain after the publication of the final book in the A Song of Ice and Fire series.




UPDATE 4: I've read the relevant passages in TWoIaF, and it seems to me there is indeed no reason to assume Cersei and Jaime are Targaryens. However, Tyrion's origins seem to be deliberately vague. There is no report of Aerys II Targaryen bedding Joanna Lannister, but he had lusted after her even though he seemingly hadn't consumed that relationship before her marriage to Tywin.



I see it entirely possible that he abused her at the Anniversary Tourney of 272 AC, held to commemorate Aerys’s tenth year upon the Iron Throne, especially considering his foul remarks towards her (he asked her if giving suck to them had “ruined your breasts, which were so high and proud.”). Tywin attempted to return his chain of office the next morning, but the king refused to accept his resignation.



There are no "exact dates", but I think it is a bit too coincidental that she gave birth to Tyrion in 273 AC and that some of the descriptions match the descriptions of the miscarriages Aerys's wife suffered:




a malformed, dwarfish babe born with stunted legs, an oversized head,
and mismatched, demonic eyes (some reports also suggested he had a
tail, which was lopped off at his lord father’s command)




Then there's also Aerys's jealousy WRT Tywin having beautiful twins:




“I appear to have married the wrong woman.”




There's his insistence that Tywin bring them and their mother to court:




“And bring their mother, too, for it has been too long since I gazed
upon that fair face.”




And there's his pronouncement after the birth of Tyrion:




“The gods cannot abide such arrogance. They have plucked a fair flower
from his hand and given him a monster in her place, to teach him some
humility at last.”




None of that is evidence, of course.