←back to thread

134 points denvaar | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
xianshou ◴[] No.42189760[source]
First you ask how the hell someone could come up with this construction.

Then you realize it was this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_Demaine

replies(5): >>42189962 #>>42190342 #>>42191446 #>>42191686 #>>42193578 #
heavensteeth ◴[] No.42190342[source]
>former child prodigy

I understand the idea behind that phrasing but I'm not sure I agree with it. Are you no longer a child prodigy once you turn 18? I don't think I'd ever say "former intelligent child".. Would I?

replies(8): >>42190355 #>>42190373 #>>42190591 #>>42190696 #>>42193158 #>>42193641 #>>42194004 #>>42194539 #
1. locallost ◴[] No.42194539[source]
Interesting take so upvoted, but calling him a child prodigy does not work as he's not a child.

Maybe "a child prodigy in his youth" would be both precise and succinct enough, but at the same time language is for humans and I feel humans know what is meant by former child prodigy.