The Off Topic Topic

[Josquius]

Anyone ever notice Google trying too hard to be clever?
Casually trying to get an answer to why Nederlands becomes Netherlands in English.
Just seems curious  that there's such a subtle change there. Th to d is a usual English to Dutch/vice versa thing even for that sort of V th?
Oh so many results about the difference between Holland and the Netherlands and why the Dutch are so called.
Jesus. I never asked that! Surely the level of my question implies I know this?

[Grey Fox]

Copilot is saying that Nederlands is use to denote the language while Netherlands is the country/kingdom.

Seems suspect.

[HVC]

Is is the complicated? Neder is Dutch for low and nether is low is English. If you look up nether in the goggle dictionary thing it breaks it down. Languages shift. Or am I missing the question?

*edit*

Oxford dictionary:

Old English nithera, neothera, of Germanic origin; related to Dutch neder- (found in compounds), neer, and German nieder, from an Indo-European root meaning 'down'.

So the "th" version goes all the way back to old English.

[Jacob]

HVC > AI

[Admiral Yi]

Anyone ever notice Google trying too hard to be clever?

Google is perfect.  Another fine member of the wonderful Alphabet family of brands.

Searches always give you related finds.  Did you expect a full page of neder is Dutch for nether?

[Syt]

Is is the complicated? Neder is Dutch for low and nether is low is English. If you look up nether in the goggle dictionary thing it breaks it down. Languages shift. Or am I missing the question?

*edit*

Oxford dictionary:

Old English nithera, neothera, of Germanic origin; related to Dutch neder- (found in compounds), neer, and German nieder, from an Indo-European root meaning 'down'.

So the "th" version goes all the way back to old English.

Hence why we call it Niederlande

[Josquius]

Is is the complicated? Neder is Dutch for low and nether is low is English. If you look up nether in the goggle dictionary thing it breaks it down. Languages shift. Or am I missing the question?

*edit*

Oxford dictionary:

Old English nithera, neothera, of Germanic origin; related to Dutch neder- (found in compounds), neer, and German nieder, from an Indo-European root meaning 'down'.

So the "th" version goes all the way back to old English.

If Google had given me an answer explaining this I would be happy
Though it does lead to other questions on the myriad pronunciations of th. 

Instead it guessed I meant to ask something completely different.

[Syt]

I guess there's themed weddings and then there's THEMED WEDDINGS.

[Duque de Bragança]

Cultural appropriation! 
 

[Josquius]

Finally neighbours Republicans and Democrats could agree about.

[crazy canuck]

Finally neighbours Republicans and Democrats could agree about.

Yes, both are upset. One because they were not invited.

[PJL]

It would have been a more appropriate story had it been in Argentina.

[Valmy]

This is all Hugo Boss' fault for making the Nazi uniforms so stylish. Nobody gets married in Soviet uniforms.

[HVC]

HVC > AI

It's bound to happen once in a while

[Syt]

So this story cropped up in my feed:

https://fox4kc.com/news/kansas-court-says-healthcare-providers-not-required-to-keep-medical-records-private/?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_medium=referral

Basically, a woman went in to the JayDoc Free Clinic of the University of Kansas Medical Center. The doctor asked if it was ok if two students joined the examination. During the examination, the woman noticed the doc taking a picture of her nether regions and sending it to the students' phones. She says she didn't give permission for that and that he violated safe keeping of medical records.

The court disagreed, and now the appeals court in Kansas confirmed the ruling. I was kind of expecting the article to misrepresent the decision to create the clickbait headline, but, according to the text of the appellate court's ruling:

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ks-court-of-appeals/116356721.html

The district court correctly found that Kansas does not recognize a duty by a healthcare provider to safeguard, protect, and maintain the confidentiality of a patient's medical records.

That seems wild. The plaintiff seems to have argued that this was part of common law (I assume there's no specific laws on the books in Kansas to cover this), which the courts rejected.