Blotter updated: 06/17/12Show/Hide Show All

Image

Tag History
(edit info)
Rating

Prev | Index | Next

Comments

Roboshi
#302453
1 year ago
yeah they slip up sometimes
Anonymous
#302458
1 year ago
did they really slip up there? must rewatch episode...
AdrianBrony
#302461
1 year ago
people, short for person. Technically, person isn't synonymous for Human. The only reason it seems that way is because humans are the only creatures we have encountered that qualify to be described as a person.

If ponies like this existed, they would probably be described as a person as well.
Jackarunda
#302463
1 year ago
ooooooooh
Jackarunda
#302464
1 year ago
Adrian sums up my thoughts
Anonymous
#302465
1 year ago
Ninja'd by roboshi. That's a first for me...
Anonymous
#302470
1 year ago
So the term people is used to describe sentient creatures?
AdrianBrony
#302487
1 year ago
#302470
more along the lines of creatures that qualify for basic rights and citizenship.
For instance, for a while in America, slaves were considered 3/5'ths of a person.
AdrianBrony
#302491
1 year ago
And sentient can describe any animal that senses anything and can intelligently sort the information out.

Also, sapient is closer, but apes and some other animals are also considered sapient while not legally a "person."
Drasvin
#302493
1 year ago
@anon 470 Sapient creatures. There's a difference between sentient and sapient. Sentient is being able to feel and be aware of self (which covers most animals in the world). Sapient is higher level thinking and abstract thought.
Bnau
#302494
1 year ago
people
this means grif and all other too
(my english is today the horror.jpg..... again)
Drasvin
#302495
1 year ago
-_- ... Ninja'd by Adrian. ... Damn ninjas.
AdrianBrony
#302518
1 year ago
basically put (sorry for the ninja)
plants, bacteria, some sea life = non-sentient life
most animals and insects = sentient
some great apes, elephants, arguably some dolphins = sentient
humans, anything comparable such as ponies on this show = people
applebeans
#302594
1 year ago
Yeah people, as in "our people" or "my people" in reference to anyone who can refer to themselves as 'people' in the first place; it's cool that way.
Anonymous
#302613
1 year ago
AdrianBrony@518: I assume you meant to put "sapient" as your third line.

But yeah. The whole "everypony" thing seems a bit racist against all the intelligent non-pony species in Equestria. Maybe it's a relic from an ugly past, like the use of masculine pronouns as default in our own languages.
Lancer
#302632
1 year ago
Only people ever have a reason to ask themselves "What do I want to do with my life?" or "What do I want to be when I grow up?"

So, if you can imagine asking that, you're people.
Anonymous
#302661
1 year ago
there's a part in the fanfic "The Thessalonica Legacy" where one of the human characters makes a specific point of referring to the ponies as "people"
Fluttershy-
#302803
1 year ago
I tried explaining the same concept to my sister a few days ago. The only slip-ups I've ever caught are when some ponies say "everybody" or "somebody", which doesn't necessarily have to refer to humans.
Vindell
#302879
1 year ago
i always learn such interesting things in such odd places. the internet sure is a wonderful, weird, wild (and some times horrible) place :)
Anonymous
#302913
1 year ago
I don't think the use of 'pony' in place of 'body' relates to a racist past or anything. It appears that very few ponies ever venture out of Equestria (whose size is yet to be determined in canon) and come into contact with other species on a regular basis. Therefore, they grow accustomed to being around just other ponies, and that ends up being reflected in their speech. It is worth noting, however, that when a non-pony is present, the word 'body' tends to be used but not all the time.

I don't think any harm is meant by it, rather than it being a relic of an ugly past, it is probably a relic from a time where nopony, except for brave adventurers, ever met a sapient creature that wasn't a pony.

Either way, using 'body' or 'people' isn't <i>wrong</i>, because those words are not applicable only to humans.
Darkie
#304242
1 year ago
I thought the mistake was at the "old mare's tail" :/