Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply |
Member |
I think most of us have heard of the Ig Nobel prizes and am sure we all know about the Nobel Prizes. Andre Geim has won both prizes, in 2000 (Ig Nobel) and 2010 (Nobel). Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. | |||
|
Member |
We talked about the use of the word "treason" on the chat today. Here's the editorial in the Chicago Tribune that drives me nuts. Yes, the Democratic nominee shouldn't have used the phrase "economic treason," but does this really reach the level of an editorial? If the Tribune were to write an editorial on every dumb remark made by a politician, well, the entire paper would be editorials. Related to this gaffe, I think one can use the word "treason" in a less strict way than the U.S. Constitution does! | |||
|
Member |
Dictionary.com shows the third definition of "treason" as Still pretty strong, but not quite as bad as defined in your constitution. I think that most people, when seeking a definition, would look in a modern dictionary, not something written three hundred years ago. Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. | |||
|
Member |
Since no one, including me, seems to have known the answer, I looked it up. Subaru logo Wikipedia - Subaru
The [2] above refers to the Subaru website
I think that "six" is an error. Subaru Logo - Design and History:
Subaru 4WD Club of Queensland, Australia: What's In A Name?:
| |||
|
Member |
I'm sorry I called Kristin Davis a hooker Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. | |||
|
Member |
Now that's what I call an apology! "No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money." Samuel Johnson. | |||
|
Member |
I still didn't see the simple answer: "Subaru" in Japanese is "Pleiades" in English. a constellation of stars, a constellation of companies. It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society. -J. Krishnamurti | |||
|
Member |
So funny! Those of you outside the U.S. are beginning to see what we're experiencing in the upcoming election. Oy vey! | |||
|
Member |
"I could care less" turns 50. Interestingly, the variant isn't used over here in the UK. http://www.boston.com/bostongl...4/i_could_care_less/ Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. | |||
|
Member |
Interestingly, the variant isn't used over here in the UK. Not into irony, I guess. —Ceci n'est pas un seing. | |||
|
Member |
Isn't it ironic? Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. | |||
|
Member |
The Collins English Dictionary is apparently introducing a slew of "new" words to its latest edition. See the BBC report. Although I've seen a couple of the words mentioned used by journalists once or twice, so far as I'm aware they are nonce-words that will disappear a quickly as they've arrived. About the only one that has caught the public's fancy is "simples", and I have my doubts about the staying power of that, too. Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. | |||
|
<Proofreader> |
Looks like just the UK is stuck with those "words". | ||
Member |
More Sapir-Whorfism: 5 Insane Ways Words Can Control Your Mind. Hat-tip: Fully (sic). Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. | |||
|
Member |
Nice article, arnie, along with the response. I know we've discussed this here before. I think linguists are too quick to take a side with this question. Some real outcome research needs to be done. Not being a linguist, I am not sure how they'd design the study, but I am convinced they could. Instead, they seem to discuss the issue. I know there are some heavy weights doing the discussion (such as Language Log's analysis on Fully Sic), but let's do the research. Less intellectual and not word related, but I thought this lawsuit of the day was totally ridiculous: Link | |||
|
Member |
Here's an interesting article about the etymology of "cool" as it is used today: Link
| |||
|
Member |
An interesting article about Google's Ngram Viewer is at MercuryNews.com. Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. | |||
|
Member |
Yes, very interesting. And I learned a new word: culturomics - the application of massive amounts of data analysis to the study of human culture. | |||
|
Member |
From the article arnie cited:
Another article I read translated that increase into figures:
If the trend has held true, then we've added 85,000 more words since 2000, and if it continues some time in 2020 we'll have doubled the lexicon.This message has been edited. Last edited by: tinman, | |||
|
Member |
However, a lot of those words are techy (tweet, google, etc.) and will fall out of use fairly soon. | |||
|
Member |
Here's a fun article about what's right in America, and what is wrong. They started out with what is wrong, and I loved this analysis:
| |||
|
Member |
I ran across this article from August 1, 2009. "%$!" makes you feel better "%$!" makes you feel better
Timothy Jay is also the author of Cursing in America: A Psycholinguistic Study of Dirty Language in the Courts, in the Movies, in the Schoolyards and on the Streets.This message has been edited. Last edited by: tinman, | |||
|
Member |
From 1993 ... I hereby refute this almost unique grammatical error. (Hat-tip: English Language @ SFX.) Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. | |||
|
Member |
Ah, the late Miles Kington. I used to enjoy his quirky little pieces in the Independent - how he managed to come out with them five days a week I'll never know! (He lived not too far from here, as well - I occasionally saw him around town.) I would take issue with the claim that "law and order" requires a plural verb, though. It's not a regular example of two nouns joined by a conjunction, but a set phrase with a specific meaning. To write "law and order break down" suggests an analysis as "law breaks down and order breaks down", which I don't think is quite the intended meaning. To draw an analogy: you'd say "gin and tonic is extremely refreshing", not "... are ...", wouldn't you? | |||
|
Member |
To draw an analogy: you'd say "gin and tonic is extremely refreshing", not "... are ...", wouldn't you? This is an example of making grammar too simple. You take something like subject-verb concord and elevate one rule while squashing all exceptions into the ground under a twisting foot of some chain smoker. And this sort of thing has nothing to do with something so new-fangled as the Internet. In Classical Greek, neuter plural subjects often take a verb in the singular. Go figure. In the Greek's case, it was probably the invention of writing that led to this sorry state of grammatical affairs. At least subject-verb concord is a feature of grammar, whereas most usage fiats, though masquerading as grammar, are really based on something else: e.g., rhetoric, style, logic, etc. —Ceci n'est pas un seing. | |||
|
Member |
Odd that you set grammar and logic in opposition - but it does seem to be the case at times.This message has been edited. Last edited by: Geoff, It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society. -J. Krishnamurti | |||
|
Member |
Odd that you set grammar and logic in oposition - but it does seem to be the case at times. Why odd? Logic, grammar, and rhetoric were all separate subjects of study from classical times down to the present. Logic is about argumentation using rules of inference and deduction. Rhetoric is about convincing people of your argument using non-logical and non-grammatical means (sometimes). Grammar is about how to analyse the various parts of language (morphology) and how to put them together (syntax) according to convention (i.e., arbitrary rules). When people argue that some bit of grammar is not logical or what have you I assume they don't know their grammar from a hole in the ground. —Ceci n'est pas un seing. | |||
|
Member |
Quite so in my case, since I've forgotten most of what I thought I knew. While I do see your point re grammar, rhetoric, and logic, do you argue that it is unreasonable to expect the three to be in accord? Politicians and, as you mentioned, academicians often intentionally separate them, but it seems disinengenuous to do so. It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society. -J. Krishnamurti | |||
|
Member |
While I do see your point re grammar, rhetoric, and logic, do you argue that it is unreasonable to expect the three to be in accord? I'm not sure what "in accord" might mean in this case. There's nothing particularly logical about how a language might divide the world up, and having done so, how the bits fit together. Some languages decline nouns and adjectives, and conjugate verbs, but others do nothing of the sort. Is one way "better", more "correct", or more "logical" than the other? It's a serious question. Chinese has almost no morphology at all. A word can be a noun or a verb with no change in form. (English is closer to Chinese than Latin in this regard.) What is inherently logical about dividing qualifiers into three degrees of comparison: i.e., the positive (good), the comparative (better), and the superlative (best)? Why not two or fifteen? Politicians and, as you mentioned, academicians often intentionally separate them, but it seems disinengenuous to do so. It's not just the two groups you've mentioned. Everybody obfuscates when it's to their advantage. Occasionally politicians and academics can communicate as well as the rest of the herd. It just depends on what they're up to. —Ceci n'est pas un seing. | |||
|
Member |
How Language Shapes Thought This article is in the February 2011 edition of Scientific American and is definitely worth reading. The link above only shows you the first 2 paragraphs. You have to buy the issue for $5.99 to read the rest of the article. Or you can read it free at your local library. That's what I did. | |||
|
Member |
This link has the full article. "No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money." Samuel Johnson. | |||
|
Member |
Very interesting. I'd read about the article in the blogosphere before, but not seen the whole thing. Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. | |||
|
Member |
Another example: "I didn't see nothing" means "I saw nothing", not "I saw something" - which is what we might expect if language was logical. In many languages, double negatives don't cancel each other out. | |||
|
Member |
| |||
|
Member |
Mind vs. Machine. A really interesting article from a man trying to prove he's human. (Hat-tip: Language Log.) Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. | |||
|
Member |
The Guardian has a review of what looks like an interesting book: The Language Wars, by Henry Hitchings. EDIT: Two other reviews - The Independent and The Observer. Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. | |||
|
Member |
Interesting, arnie. I may read it. Has anyone here read it? I found two things interesting in that first link. First of all, "nice" means "subtle?" We've probably discussed that before, but I don't remember it. Second, apparently in England you say "Hell in a handcart." In the US we say, "Hell in a handbasket." | |||
|
Member |
Bilingual babies cue in to languages Two languages better than one for infant perception
| |||
|
Member |
Sounds odd to me... | |||
|
Member |
Blog early, blog often: the secret to making boys write properly. Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. | |||
|
Member |
Two things struck me. First, does England focus more on boy education than on girl education? Second, is "pupil" routinely used when speaking of students? It would seem outdated here...along with "when school commences..." | |||
|
Member |
I hated to start a thread with this article because it really isn't word or language related...but how funny! Read about the Illinois's roadkill bill: Link
| |||
|
Member |
Yes, but only during season with the proper permits.
| |||
|
Member |
True, but what in the world would be the purpose? With our extreme budgetary issues, that is what they focus on? | |||
|
Member |
This was written over 10 years ago, but is still apt: A cycle of Pedantry. [Hat-tip: Plain Text. Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. | |||
|
Member |
Loved the cycle of Pedantry! It clearly takes them hours to debate something! Here is an article about "Poetry" magazine that I thought was good. Who'd have thought how controversial a poetry magazine could be: Link | |||
|
Member |
There was an article in the Chicago Tribune yesterday about dying languages. While I couldn't find it online, I found the article here. It apparently was originally published in June. I know we've talked about dying languages before, but I found it interesting. There was also this accompanying article. To our prescriptivists: Texting may not be so bad for the language, after all! | |||
|
Member |
Twitterology This article in the NY Times about Twitterology is interesting. Apparently it is being used more and more by social psychologists and linguists to analyze language. For example:
| |||
|
<Proofreader> |
PLANE CRASH LANDS IN POLAND Headline on a story in the Huffington Post. Can anyone spot the ambiguity? | ||
Member |
Who's that, Ossy Osbourne? Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. | |||
|
Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 15 |
Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |