• RBG@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    29 days ago

    One wolf killing a moose is a very difficult feat. But when that wolf succeeds he gets more than half of the meat still.

    Six wolves will have a much easier time killing a single moose. They will have almost all meat for themselves, but now have to divide it among them. If that would be done fairly every wolf would only get a third of what they would get if they killed a moose alone.

    I don’t think what’s said in the screenshot is as straightforward as they think it is. I’d be more convinced hunting in packs has a lot more to do with being able to tackle stronger prey. A moose isn’t defenseless.

  • itsnicodegallo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    29 days ago

    Actuallyyy…

    Goose comes from Old English, where they pluralized [go:s] (think “goes” with a soft S) by adding [iz] (like “ease”).

    When saying [go:siz], it was kinda hard for the mouth to switch the vowels from the [o] to the [i] quickly, so to save themselves the trouble, they’d change the first vowel to make it a little more similar to the second, so [go:siz] became [ge:siz].

    Then, that was too long, so they dropped the [z]. [ge:si] (think “guessy” but the “e” lasts a bit longer than usual).

    Then, that was too long, so they dropped the [i]. [ge:s] (“guess” with that same drawn out “e”).

    📯It’s the Great Vowel Shift!📯 Now, [go:s] and [ge:s] become [gu:s] and [gi:s]. Almost there!

    The vowels become a tad short over time, and now, you have [gus] and [gis] which are written “goose” and “geese”.

    But “MOOSE”? That’s Algonquin. It has nothing to do with all that noise. “But they sound the same and are written the same?!” So? Haven’t you heard? English orthography is a dumpster fire. Nobody knows what they’re doing. Not even the words.

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      28 days ago

      Two words on completely different paths, probably headed in completely different directions, but then they smashed together and because they sound similar, one could end up inheriting the evolution of the other.

      • itsnicodegallo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        28 days ago

        Yup. That phenomenon is called “analogical change”. The opposite happens too though! For example, “person” and “parson”.

  • TheControlled@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    29 days ago

    What’s up with these percentages? How could these possibly be known? You would have to know how much the animal weighed before hand and have control over a lot of variables.

    And they cited Reddit…

    [more citations needed]

  • thesporkeffect@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    29 days ago

    I am struggling to imagine a lone wolf killing an adult moose. A juvenile or elderly/sick one maybe. Unless it managed to hamstring it real early on it just seems implausible

    • cm0002@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      29 days ago

      A wolf is a lot bigger than you think, also, they have greater agility over a moose id reckon

      • thesporkeffect@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        29 days ago

        Sure, but moosen are like 15 foot tall multi ton kaiju with bone spikes and an attitude problem. Ive been to wolf sanctuaries and I understand wolf size, but it’s not in the same league