I know unfiltered is low hanging fruit and all, but when OP is this dense after boasting about how clever they are?
Honestly, OP comes off as one of those ivory tower people who are very, very knowledgeable about some field (linguistics, in this case), but are not practically-minded at all and not much aware of modern society, such as the existence of chat bots.
I must admit that it didn’t occur to me the OP was talking to a chat bot. What did occur to me was how incredibly condescending and superior they were through their inner monologue and the fact that they contacted the site in the first place. All the while thinking that this story is doomed from the start as it is essential we know the name of the company, but for obvious reasons we will never be told it.
Anyway, it wouldn’t surprise me if the company was called something like “Orchid”. It’s a word that not many people know the etymology of, but would also be appropriate for a legal firm seeing as they frequently will have you by the balls.
Yes, without knowing the company name, this story becomes rather weak. Paradoxically, leaving the name out and just mentioning it, focusing solely on the interaction with the alleged agent would make it slightly better. OP would probably still be a condescending know-it-all, though.
My guess was similar: something to do with the word testify. Though that would be a little more blatant. But it sounded like the name meaning was Latin rather than Greek.
Also possible that they mixed their roots and OP got offended by that. Or that it was named after a fake Latin place name - some people did stuff like naming something after Latin and then adding a bit to make it sound like it was an indigenous name. That’s something that happened quite a bit over here. Or it could be named after a legal term that’s become a little butchered, like crimen injuria (meant to be something like “criminal charge of injury”, but actually means “injury to a criminal charge”).
Though I suggest that the name was actually correct Latin and OP does not understand Latin. Mostly because I think that would be the most hilarious outcome.
Maybe a false friend? Plenty of other languages have them.
I think it’s not latin – as far as I know, it’s not “one that lawyers should know little snippets of”, they have to know a whole lot of it.
If I had to bet, I would say Greek.
…but we’re trailing off-topic here (I’m not sure if this warrants a separate thread though – maybe as a kind of guessing game regarding the language and word?)
The story is basically OP getting a chatbot and thinking it’s a real, quite dim, person. It’s like a voicemail answer tree where none of the prompts fit your query and there’s no “Please wait to talk to a customer service rep” option. Even if OP managed to get an actual person, it’s unlikely they’d get their answer.
Don’t lots of law things come from Latin? Like mens rea.
Yes, but mostly terms for concepts divorced from the rest of the language. If you studied law and learned all the law terms, you’d still be unable to speak Latin because it doesn’t teach anything about how to construct a sentence or how verbs work or why there are four systems of declension that all look like each other but if you use the wrong one you are an uncultured pleb.
Another possibility: the law firm name isn’t actually Latin. I mean, there are a ton of languages descended from Latin. Certain phrases could look like incorrect or weird Latin, but be correct Romanian or Italian.
Maybe we need a dedicated language thread.
Yeah but that’s what I understood by them being expected to know “little snippets of” the language. If you’re a lawyer you know a bunch of little Latin words. Possibly with OP thinking that because the words come from Latin lawyers should know some of the language, instead of just learning it as a law term the same way a doctor learns medical terms.
Me, I don’t know any Latin. I just ad lib
Because as we all know wearing pajamas in front of boys makes you the spawn of satan
Honestly, the mother in the story doesn’t sound too unreasonable. Some kids fall off bunk beds, especially if they tend to toss and turn all night. I’ve fallen off the top bunk before and probably got a concussion. And one person should not be taking up all the shelf space.
Exactly! I’m not sure I trust OP’s narration on how pushy the mother was being when her complaints all sound reasonable.
As for the cell phone part. I want to hear people’s suggestion on how OP could have delt with other children wanting their cell phone if they had allowed (broken foot girl) to have a cell phone out of the bedroom?
I just remembered this story; some commenters definitely don’t share OP’s vaguely positive assessment of her grandma.
If we’re going to be policing the thread to keep it from getting too offtopic, maybe it would be a good idea not to try to defend people in the stories. For one thing, it’s historically been the cause of the majority of thread derailments. Plus, it’s offtopic to begin with. The topic of the thread is stories that the majority of the commenters disagree with or that have a mixed reception. Defending the people in the stories is therefore offtopic, while elaborating on why the commenters disagree is not.
Defending can go on the story itself.