the game is (still) on

Conclave | Cardinal Lawrence, save your precious doubts for your prayers

“but what about platonic soulmates?? not everything has to be romantic. friendship is just as important—” shut uppp. i have plenty of friends. i don’t need to live vicariously through some fictional character’s friendship. i want to see them fuck nasty. i want to see them be weird about each other

what will it be, boss? the comfort of misery or the pain of change?

They don't let you write linguistic papers like this no more :(

[Screenshot that reads: "This paper brings the reader the following news: Lexicalism is dead, deceased, demised, no more, passed on…. The underlying suspicion was wrong and the leading idea didn’t work out. This failure is not generally known because no one listens to morphologists."]

Guy really has a way with words huh

["I will scream in agony if I read or hear anyone summarizing this paper as, “Marantz argues grammatical theory would be simpler without a lexicon,” or, “the paper shows that-"]

["word-sized domains are morphologists, and when morphologists talk, linguists nap."]

And also very very sad people don't care about morphology :( </3

[3. “Remarks on Nominalization” kills lexicalism to death]

sir, vamo arriba loco

official linguistics post

My favorite tumblr thing is when I stumble upon academic dialog and don't have a clue what any of it means.

I get to be one of today's lucky 10,000

The Pitt: 7:00AM vs 9:00PM

Gay ppl can never be normal and say I love you they always gotta say some shit like, "It may be that you are not yourself luminous, but you are a conductor of light. Some people without possessing genius have a remarkable power of stimulating it. I confess, my dear fellow, that I am very much in your debt.”

if you see this post you’re legally obligated to reply to it with your current favorite song

JET LAG: THE GAME - SCHENGEN SHOWDOWN (2025) TWO OF THESE PEOPLE ARE LYING (2019)

Eligo in Summum Pontificem

details under cut

i read the conclave book in less than a day and watched the conclave movie twice and i feel like i can say edward berger definitely read the book and thought "you know what the problem here is. not enough benitez as a jesus allegory content"

just a few changes to showcase this:

1. In the book Benitez is constantly portrayed being welcomed by Filipinos, Africans and other nations due to his reputation. Multiple times the book has shown Benitez being dragged into groups and numerous nationals listening intently to what he has to say, which is why he rose so slowly but prominently.

In the movie, Benitez is almost always alone--the scene where Lawrence finds him looking at the late popes turtles alone was originally Benitez talking to a group but deciding to leave to speak to Lomelli instead. The movie frames Benitez in the same quiet but thoughtful work as it does the nuns and all the important female figures in the Church--watching, listening, saying nothing until the spirit moves him to speak the truth. The book shows Benitez still being involved in the politics of the Conclave, dragged around his social groups, whether he wants to be or not; the movie expressly separates Benitez entirely from the politics, placing him in a kind of objective, angelic watcher position.

2. Jacopo Lomelli's name is changed to Thomas Lawrence. The book is likely referring to Jacopo as Jacob, the man who wrestled God, but in the movie he is clearly focused on being Doubting Thomas, the man who interrogates and sees proof of Jesus's resurrection from an abdomen wound. Guess who Lawrence was interrogating about the treatment of an abdomen wound in the movie

3. Speaking of the treatment, the movie changed Benitez's condition from having a fused labia to having ovaries, and also changed the way he found out from a car bomb explosion injury to an appendectomy. Again. This is probably an allusion to Doubting Thomas checking out Jesus's wound. But the fact that even this major detail was changed to fit the "Benitez as a Jesus allegory" narrative is hilarious to me

4. This is my biggest, funniest observation of the Conclave Book vs Movie Benitez. Book Benitez is determined to make Lomelli win. He gets up and speaks after the discovery of the terrorist attack to expressly say that the conclave has already had a majority vote (Lomelli) and that all the 24 people who voted for Benitez should vote for Lomelli instead to strengthen the church. He doesn't outwardly express any disdain for the conclave, just that he wishes they could work together to strengthen the Church. Movie Benitez is VASTLY different because he just straight up says sth along the lines of "all of you are petty and weird and know nothing about the conflict youre getting into and i cannot wait to go back to kabul and do some actual good for this world instead of being stuck here with all of you. " its just such a holy takedown of the church that clearly separates Benitez not as a member of any faction but as a voice of God

I love both the movie and the film for completely different reasons and I think everybody who reads or watches one should check out the other just to get a complete picture of both visions

Innocence

a bathroom crash out is mandatory at this job