Middle Imperial

“I maintain that you are wrong!”

“Yes so you say, yet I notice a distinct lack of contravening evidence.”

“Evidence, bah! You claim to wish that I present evidence, yet your positions are presented axiomatically. I say that you must better defend yourself, rather.”

“Fool. I have presented evidence to support my position, yet you refute it without grounds for doing so. Stating that I speak of this matter as axiomatic is absurd, please refrain from such pedestrian aspersions if we are to maintain an effective dialogue.”

“No, I shall do no such thing. You have stated your belief in the possibility of deciphering the written tone of Middle Imperial, though you have done nothing but present one of their more ill mannered words and call it done.”

“Should you ever be so good as to read the articles I have published on the topic, I would be glad to debate the points you bring up in relation thereto. Sadly, as you have not done so, I can no more rebut your attacks than I can walk on the face of the sun.”

“This word around which you have based your argument represents a code that has never been cracked. It carries with it minimal standardization, the foundation for any linguistic evolution I take pride in reminding you, and it’s application to common grammatical structures of the era are likewise without pattern.”

“Again and again you demonstrate your ignorance of this subject. Occupying a linguistic position nearly unique among its contemporary languages, Middle Imperial was an incredibly fluid language. Given its representation across at least a plurality of the global population either as a first or second language, it is natural for elements to be inconsistent. Leaving quite aside the fact that it was the planet-wide language of commerce and entertainment. Yet the fascinating aspect of the use of this one word in particular is its broad applicability.”

“The mysterious linguistic superposition you mention in the article.”

“So you have read it.”

“You wound me by believing that I would be so gauche as to enter an argument for which I have not prepared myself.”

“Yet we began by hurling insults and false claims of ignorance.”

“Such is the nature of our profession. Though I must insist on my position, your translation of this word is incorrect.”

“You focus too heavily on the literal meaning of the word, my friend. Despite its precise meaning, as far as we can tell, being unfit for polite society, it is really a far more interesting and diverse an expression than we have previously given it credit for.”

“Others have mentioned as much, its utilization as a form of verbal ellipsis was proven concretely some forty years ago.”

“Those scholars were too content on their laurels. They were barely beyond the starting line before that race was declared complete, and thus they missed critical aspects of the subtleness of the experience.”

“Such as?”

“To begin with, the multi-purpose applications of the verb. See here, it is a noun, adverb, adjective, pronoun, proper noun, and, of course, a verb.”

“So what? Many languages have such a construct.”

“That may be the case, I have not made as complete a study of its contemporary languages as you it seems.”

“Please leave false accolades at the door, you know as well as I do that we shared attendance at the majority of those lectures.”

“Still, it must be agreed that you were more intensely focused on a breadth of education, rather than depth in any one topic. I don’t say that to insult you, and if you take such from my statement, then I fear you have only yourself to blame.”

“I grant you that no insult was intended, and thus I temper as much as I can the one received. But still, you called me ignorant in your turn, despite your later stated intentions of not carrying an insult. How then am I to interpret that?”

“You are to interpret it as it was intended, a rebuttal of your declarations of my own ignorance and worse still, of my lack of proper research. You claimed that my statements were axiomatic, though you admit to reading my articles and papers. How then can you possible defend such a statement, and do be so good as to tell me what the intention was there if not to insult.”

“A fair blow I grant. I was childish in my statement regarding the foundation of your opinion. I take responsibility and ask that we make so as to leave it behind us.”

“How could I say nay to such a request as that?”

“Middle Imperial is a difficult language to parse. It’s global reach did, as you mentioned, allow for greater fluidity of use. Especially considering that it was the foundation of computer development and thus of the global internet writ large. But it’s grammatical constructs are consistent and were forced to remain so.”

“My friend, it was consistent, yes. But I think where our disagreement reaches its pinnacle is that I maintain this one word’s use was consistently inconsistent.”

“A word means what it means. Even the standard linguistic drift of the times forced it to be so.”

“And yet a word need not always mean the same thing. Eastern Standard and Classical Islamic contained words that, though spelled the same where spelling was an option, nonetheless contained a multitude of meanings depending on tone.”

“But those were tonal languages. It was consistent within the language. Your assertion that the word, in a non-tonal language, was itself comparable to the tonal ones is what I take issue with.”

“Middle Imperial’s usage of the word WAS tonal. It was, in many respects, one of the most diverse words on the planet and we have evidence of it entering the lexicon of every language with which it had frequent overlap. Even among persons who did not speak Middle Imperial at all, or to a minimal degree of fluency, its usage was on the rise. And it was consistently inconsistent in its use.”

“FUCK! You’re infuriating.”

“Precisely. Now I imagine you did not mean that as a verb.”

“I cede the fucking point for now.”

“You’re a stubborn fucker aren’t you?”

“Now you’re just showing off.”