Sentences with phrase «with only a language»

The DVD gives us its version of the same main menu, with only a language selection screen beyond it (because scene selection would have been going too far?).

Through a process of poetic subtraction, Dizon works with only the language on the original page to write a decolonial counterpoint to a way of imaging the world centered on the West.

Not exact matches

Not only does this awareness allow founders to speak the language of — and better bond with — their tech teams, it also avoids costly confusion since they're able to clearly and concisely communicate what needs to be done.

IHSNO is an open - enrollment charter school with 565 students and claims to be the only high school in New Orleans to offer the rigorous International Baccalaureate Diploma Program (IBDP), which requires students learn a foreign language.

What usually happened was the other party figured this out and began to unwind the contract or comply only with the letter of the contract, seeking every loophole in the language they could find.

When hit with an indictment in South Korea at the end of December, CEO Travis Kalanick responded using the carefully calibrated language of a man who knows he's exploiting a loophole: «We firmly believe that our service, which connects drivers and riders via an application, is not only legal in Korea, but that it is being welcomed and supported by consumers.»

I know that getting here required many hours writing algorithms, studying computer architectures, learning new languages, fighting your way through problem sets, and holding your breath to see if your code compiles with no errors (and hopefully only a couple of warnings).

It's utterly insane that the one truly unique thing Google did with the Pixel Buds, on demand language translation, is a thing that will only work with Google's own smartphone.

Tmall Genie today is only offered with Mandarin language support.

But a March 14 conference call to begin finalizing rule language quickly bogged down, with only minor agreements reached.

Whilst there is an easy solution to this, the choice of language from Klee does suggest that this solution need only be intermediate, perhaps CheapAir.com are planning on working with BitPay to start supporting non-payment protocol wallets.

If your Christians there are only one set of rules you should follow with an additional one that is the laws and rules spelled out in the 10 Commandments written by God in Gods language and presented to Mosses on Mt Sinai.

Unless it was meant for us as a new system to drop Republican systems for the Royalist systems that are taking place now that Jordan and Morocco both Royelists are planed to join GCC as one with a change to the name of the GCC since the Royalist empire will be extending to countries outer of the Arabian Gulf Countries... What ever it is all we need is freedom of rights, justice, peace, equality and to live in prosperity... Egypt is not in the heart of Egyptions only but as well in the heart of every Arabic nation, Egyptions were our teachers in our schools and Egypt was the university of our Yemeni students... Egypt was the source of islamic educations, Egypt was the face of all arts, books, papers, TV plays and movies to all of Arabian speaking countries... Egypt is our Arabian Icon so please please other nations are becoming larger and stronger in the area on your account as a living icon for the Arabian Unity what ever our faiths or beliefs are we are brothers in blood, culture and language, God Bless to All.Amen.

Close students of the Supreme Court will tell you that they could see this coming: Compassion in Dying is only the first of many cases based on claims of autonomous individualism that the Court invited with its loose and grandiose Casey language.

In fact, in the past 9 years there have only been 3 topics people discussed, regardless of their race, religion (even atheists), culture, gender, or primary language: they only spoke of (1) God, (2) family, and (3) relationships with other people & regrets / joy for those relationships.

When you attack those whose ideas differ from yours with inflammatory language such as impossible, outrageous, dishonest, and threatened you run the risk of being the only one left to hear what you have to say.

Your reference to the uproar had nothing to do with my comment that it was illogical and ridiculous that people would believe a god would create a religion for everyone on the planet yet made that religion only comprehensible in one specific language.

But what we believe about others has nothing to do with the others, only with the language we use about them.

(I apologize to those that dislike metaphors, but I almost can't communicate if I don't get to use them, and as insufficient as they at times are, they are very close to the language of what I believe, because you can't really explain or define someone into believing... you can only live out your beliefs in a way that you share with others, and when given the opportunity shine a light, or point a direction, or walk along with someone for a bit).

At least he has an advantage over you, he's not only stuck with one language.

Christians should, given their tradition, be inclined to find sense in body language, not only because of the resurrection of the body but also because of the bread and wine of the eucharist as the body and blood of Christ, and the church as the body with Christ as its head.

All that we can say with confidence, however, is that our earliest knowledge of humankind takes us back only to the point where humans were already scattered into groups, living a tribal existence, each with its own language and culture.

In the midst of all this reading, I learned not only to empathize with the suffering and the oppressed, but also to empathize with the oppressors, who - let's face it - often shared my skin tone, my geography, my language, and my faith.

Another tells us that the modern Western reader can not easily recapture the Semitic mind's comfort with extremist language, that we must learn to know that Jesus is here talking only about preferences and priorities.

They only thing that happens is that some official body sometimes updates the language, otherwise they are not interfered with.

For this will is the eternal order that governs all things, that brings you into union with the dead, and with the men whom you never see, with foreign people whose language and customs you do not know, with all men upon the whole earth, who are related to each other by blood and eternally related to the Divine by eternity's task of willing only one thing.

For several decades, Charlie was probably the most widely known and beloved figure in the world — not only because he was a master clown communicating through the universal language of pantomime, but because he grappled comically with universal human problems.

The communicative enterprise would become a vast inductive project — a complex exercise in theory - building, leading tentatively and provisionally toward something which, in fact, the imputational groundwork of our language enables us to presuppose from the very outset.1 Only by using the resources of thought to free our communicative resources from the spatio - temporal processes of their employment can we manage to communicate with one another across the reaches of space and time.

Those familiar with Hartshorne may immediately notice that Brightman's distinction between the given and The Given precisely parallels Hartshorne's distinction between relative and absolute — and the whole host of phenomena which may be distinguished as either externally or internally related to one another.39 In Hartshorne's language, The Given is only externally related to the given, while the given is internally related to The Given.

By way of response to Pixley's challenge, I will utilize for the most part this «post-systematic language,» with only occasional lapses into metaphysical language.

Keillor has a keen ear for parody, and makes use of it in unlikely ways, as in the marvelous «Your Wedding and You» with its explanation of the «alternative wedding» (only Garry Trudeau's «Doonesbury» has caught this «60s and «70s language as accurately), and in his more recent homage to punk rock in «Don: The True Story of a Young Person.»

When we use such a vocabulary, we find ourselves thinking about the world in different ways — and sometimes, at least, we may find common ground with other Christians from whom we were divided when our only language was that of contemporary politics.

«Until recently some owners believed their profits from serving only locals were sufficient, and due to the language barrier, they may have left foreign visitors with a feeling that they were not welcome.»

Such a miracle would involve the suspension of the laws of nature at the level of primitive actual occasions, but if we accept the principle that God «speaks» to a given actual occasion in its own «language,» and if the «language» of primitive actual occasions in nature is such that the character of the data available for aesthetic synthesis in the concrescence of such occasions admits only of absolutely miniscule contrasts with the givenness of the character of the past, then God has no leverage via subjective aims to introduce shifts in the social structures conditioning the possibilities available for aesthetic synthesis in the concrescences of such primitive actual occasions.

Only as a relatively recent evolutionary development do we have developed natural languages with their sentences and combinations of sentences as forms of discourse.

Only if young people learn to employ language gracefully and with discrimination can they hope to enter into the full measure of their humane patrimony.

The directness of the relationship is established not only through the mediation of the senses, e.g. the concrete meeting of real living persons, but also through the mediation of the «word,» i.e. the mediation of those technical means and those fields of symbolic communication, such as language, music, art, and ritual, which enable men ever again to enter into relation with that which is over against them.

There are four affirmations about Jesus Christ that historically have been stressed in Christian faith: (1) Jesus is truly human, bone of our bone and flesh of our flesh, living a human life under the same human conditions any one of us faces — thus Christology, statement of the significance of Jesus, must start «from below,» as many contemporary theologians are insisting; (2) Jesus is that one in whom God energizes in a supreme degree, with a decisive intensity; in traditional language he has been styled «the Incarnate Word of God»; (3) for our sake, to secure human wholeness of life as it moves onward toward fulfillment, Jesus not only lived among us but also was crucified for us — this is the point of talk about atonement wrought in and by him; (4) death was not the end for him, so it is not as if he never existed at all; in some way he triumphed over death, or was given victory over it, so that now and forever he is a reality in the life of God and effective among humankind.

The project has two subjects, Koko and Michael, who have learned to use American Sign Language (Ameslan), to understand spoken English, and to read printed words.10 Koko's instruction, begun in 1973, is the longest ongoing language study of an ape, and the only one with continuous instruction by the same teacher.

It's not the first nor the last time this poor excuse of an individual will regurgitate hate language no matter what the subject is with the only intent of getting paid... he would probably throw her mother under the bus if it had the slightest potential of attracting public interest...

This manifests itself not only in the way in which Aristotelian notions of the «unmoved mover» or neo-Platonic ideas of «being - subsisting from - itself» have been taken to be the proper definition of what is meant when we speak of «God», but also in liturgical language where all too often the basic concept implied or (as most often seems to be the case) affirmed is the utter immutability of deity, along with the rigidly legalistic moralism which it is suggested should mark those who claim to «obey» the divine mandates.

But of course the creedal statement, hallowed as it is by centuries of use during the celebration of the Eucharist, can be understood only when it is seen as a combination of supposedly historical data, theological affirmation put in a quasi-philosophical idiom, and a good deal of symbolic language (with the use of such phrases as «came down from heaven», «ascended into heaven», and the like).

This becomes a problem only when people are inexcusably sloppy with their language — which has been far too often.

This is one, and only one of the major problems with language: it can hide the truth while giving the appearance of revealing it.

By working out a neoclassical theory of nonliteral religious discourse consistent with his neoclassical theism generally, he has not only overcome the notorious contradictions involved in classical theism's use of analogy and other modes of nonliteral language, he has also given good reasons for thinking that our distinctively modern reflection about God results from two movements of thought, not simply from one.

With all due respect, Dr. Borg may have a head of «knowledge» to speak the most advanced Christianese; however, I hope his is a language of the heart and not just of the mind only.

It needs only a slight acquaintance with the traditional Jewish eschatology to recognize that these writers are all using language which implies that the eschaton, the final and decisive act of God, has already entered human experience.

When you can not speak a given people's language, you can only talk at them and not with them.

The Bible (especially the lyrical King James version) is full of useful phrases and metaphors — indeed, that may be its most valuable contribution to civilization — and the English language would be poorer by far if we were required to use them only with the meaning and in the context in which they were originally written.

Theologians influenced by positivism, whose adherents saw reality as strictly that which can be experienced through the senses and knowledge as that which can be obtained through a narrow definition of the scientific method, and linguistic analysis, which purported that the only proper function of philosophy is the study of the usage of words and sentences, also treated science and religion as separate realms, distinct «language games,» each with its own set of rules.