Avatar

an argument of syntacticians

@synticity

wow.... linguistics. Check out my 3 Papers To Read tag :)

Here’s how to tell if a language is easy to learn

  • None of them are easy
  • They’re all stupid and terrible and will kick you in the nuts
  • That being said
  • Languages similar to ones you already speak
  • Languages you have a lot of motivation to learn
  • Languages that have a lot of resources and media to watch and/or listen to and/or read
  • So, if you’re reading this with relative ease (aka you speak English fluently) probably French or Spanish
  • Do whatever you want though idk
  • Don’t just choose a language based on how easy it is
  • Unless that’s what it takes to keep you motivated idk
  • Go learn Frisian or something

Frisian is an endangered language and it sounds just fine. Hitting you very very hard with a very large fish.

Respect minority languages or die by my comically large fish

The four horseman of the "don't call trans women dude" post

  • Well I'm from Northsouth Caliyorktana and we use Dude gender neutrally so like. i dont have to change anything about myself. surely OP couldnt possibly be aware of the unique and arcane culture of Major US Cities.
  • Oh my god i am SO SORRY im SO SORRY I CALLED A TRANS WOMAN DUDE ONCE can you please EXECUTE ME ON THE SPOT how will i EVER MAKE UP FOR THIS i am SO SORRY
  • Try cool fun gender neutral terms like Y'all! Comrade! Friendaroni! Call everyone Swashbuckler! This is definitely an actionable alternative! Bucko! My Fellow Possums!
  • Haha yeah no I use guy gender neutrally but if you ask i'll stop for you specifically. pinky promise.

Every once in a while you get a comment saying "yeah i used to use dude gender neutrally and then i heard that transfems generally dont like it so i just took care not to use it for them. its really not that hard" and those people are cool and i love them

and the gender neutral alternatives people uphold the idea that fem terms are inherently offensive or belittling and use this as an excuse to degender you

Anonymous asked:

can you do a 3 papers to read on indigenous languages?

this is another huge topic so I'm gonna err on the side of "these are just three really cool papers" rather than "this is representative of the entire linguistic field"

  • Riestenberg, Freemond, Lillehaugen, Washington. Prioritizing Community Partners’ Goals in Projects to Support Indigenous Language Revitalization. In: Decolonizing Linguistics. Ed. Anne H. Charity Hudley, Christine Mallinson, and Mary Bucholtz, Oxford University Press. doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197755259.003.0019, and the PDF is here.
  • Junker, M. O. (2018). Participatory action research for Indigenous linguistics in the digital age. Insights from practices in community-based research: From theory to practice around the globe, 164175. doi.org/10.1515/9783110527018-009, pdf on the author's website here.
  • Leonard, W. Y. (2021). Toward an anti‐racist linguistic anthropology: An Indigenous response to white supremacy. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 31(2), 218-237. pdf is here.

(TBH you could just sit down and read the entire Decolonizing Linguistics book, it's like 500 pages/20 chapters by a huge community of authors. It's open access!)

I realize that none of these links are actually describing the linguistic properties of indigenous languages directly, and are more about how and whether non-indigenous linguists should go about doing that. But all of the authors listed above also do linguistic description and analysis, so after you've read some of these pieces you can go look more into their other work.

Avatar
Reblogged

any chance you have any recommendations for entry point resources for learning about early childhood developmental linguistics?

Avatar

Sorry, I've been sitting on this ask for aaaaages. Work got busy lol. Anyways, this is far enough outside my field that I'm also going to give some general pointers on places to start finding information in linguistics on any given topic.

If there's an article that's not open access, I recommend asking your nearest college student or grad student friend to see if they can get access through their university library's online sign-on.

You're also asking about a very big field with a lot of research, so don't feel like you have to get through everything I link here - just pick a couple things and start reading slowly. If you can get through an article or two every month, that's awesome! This can be a fun excuse to organize a reading club with friends/classmates/colleagues, and discussing stuff as you read will help you learn and retain stuff, too.

Hope that helps!

Avatar

if you feel like you're always getting talked over, or if you feel like you're always accidentally interrupting people, you should consider looking into some of the linguistics research about conversation style and turn-taking. lingthusiasm podcast has a great episode called "how to rebalance a lopsided conversation" that goes over some of this research in a really accessible way; Deborah Tannen's book You just don't understand is an early book¹ that's aimed at general audiences on the same topic.

the thing is, when there's conflict in how a conversation flows, often what's going on is a mismatch in norms or expectations -- not that one person is necessarily acting "wrong" and the other person is "right." the mismatches in norms/expectations can and do align with existing power structures in society, but being more aware of them can really help you as an individual trying to navigate them.

you can train your brain for more linguistic awareness! start listening for pauses, intakes of breath, or back-channeling that's meant to support, not interrupt. try it out!

¹ I am linking to the wikipedia page for the book rather than a link to buy the book because it's kind of outdated and the criticism section on the wiki page is pretty reasonable. If you do read this book, be prepared for uhhhh period-typical gender essentialism that, to my knowledge, Tannen has not particularly updated her views on in the intervening time. But it is an influential and important book, just read it skeptically imo

If you enjoyed this post, may we also suggest our episode 'Small talk, big deal' for more behind the science chat on conversation styles, the fine art of media references from memes to movies, and our own tested strategies for dodging awkward small talk questions while keeping the conversation flowing.

any chance you have any recommendations for entry point resources for learning about early childhood developmental linguistics?

Avatar

Sorry, I've been sitting on this ask for aaaaages. Work got busy lol. Anyways, this is far enough outside my field that I'm also going to give some general pointers on places to start finding information in linguistics on any given topic.

If there's an article that's not open access, I recommend asking your nearest college student or grad student friend to see if they can get access through their university library's online sign-on.

You're also asking about a very big field with a lot of research, so don't feel like you have to get through everything I link here - just pick a couple things and start reading slowly. If you can get through an article or two every month, that's awesome! This can be a fun excuse to organize a reading club with friends/classmates/colleagues, and discussing stuff as you read will help you learn and retain stuff, too.

Hope that helps!

Avatar
Reblogged

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

if you feel like you're always getting talked over, or if you feel like you're always accidentally interrupting people, you should consider looking into some of the linguistics research about conversation style and turn-taking. lingthusiasm podcast has a great episode called "how to rebalance a lopsided conversation" that goes over some of this research in a really accessible way; Deborah Tannen's book You just don't understand is an early book¹ that's aimed at general audiences on the same topic.

the thing is, when there's conflict in how a conversation flows, often what's going on is a mismatch in norms or expectations -- not that one person is necessarily acting "wrong" and the other person is "right." the mismatches in norms/expectations can and do align with existing power structures in society, but being more aware of them can really help you as an individual trying to navigate them.

you can train your brain for more linguistic awareness! start listening for pauses, intakes of breath, or back-channeling that's meant to support, not interrupt. try it out!

¹ I am linking to the wikipedia page for the book rather than a link to buy the book because it's kind of outdated and the criticism section on the wiki page is pretty reasonable. If you do read this book, be prepared for uhhhh period-typical gender essentialism that, to my knowledge, Tannen has not particularly updated her views on in the intervening time. But it is an influential and important book, just read it skeptically imo

I’ve been listening to the people in the apartment below me have arguments for two years now and I still can’t figure out what language they’re speaking. The best I can narrow it down is like if Portuguese and Hebrew had a baby. Is that a common pidgin combination

I just listened to a clip of this and jesus christ you fucking got it. there are like 3500 people in the whole united states who speak this and two of them are in a very fraught marriage four feet below me

People who don't want to be referred to with neutral pronouns are correct and get to establish their own boundaries, and their reasoning is sound and deserving of respect. But. I'm very bothered by the alchemy neutral gender has undergone. "They" is now treated as a third gender all its own. A fragile untergender generally mocked and treated with hostility at its approach. The whole purpose of neutrality is that it's neutral. It can refer to any person. It is an inert pronoun that imparts no bias one way or the other when addressing someone. Characterizing it as a gender indicator in itself is one location in a long campaign, deliberate or not, which has eroded all ground stood on by nonbinary people. Ideologically, there is less and less space left for people like me to occupy. An othering, adversarial tone has been set which I think broadly ignores the ways everybody has non-gendered aspects to themselves in varying degrees. Any commonalities seem to be purged. Gender becoming an ideological battlefield has caught a lot of noncombatants in the crossfire.

Avatar
Reblogged

Gesture: A Slim Guide - Five Fun Facts

To celebrate the publication of Gesture: A Slim Guide I've selected five facts from/about the book to share:

1. The cover is a deepcut reference to my first gesture research project

Gawne & Kelly (2014) is actually work from my honours project in 2007 - it took us a while to write it up for publication. In that experiment, participants watched a short video narrative and marked everything they thought was a 'gesture' without being given a definition. On the whole, people agree at a minimum level with Gesture Studies researchers about what a gesture is, but tend to include far more in their definition. The cover illustration from Lucy Maddox captures some of the key gestures from that video. Because we had no budget, I filmed the video of myself narrating the story.

2. Learning a signed language will affect the way you gesture in spoken language

Research on learners of ASL shows that learning a signed language affects the gestures of people who have spent their whole life speaking English. Gesture and signed languages are two very different uses of the same modality, but they influence each other in interesting ways.

3. You can make people imagine emphasis differently by changing the placement of emphatic gestures

Hans Rutger Bosker and David Peeters created experimental video clips that you can see here. They took inspiration for their experimental work from the classic McGurk effect in phonetics, where watching a mouth closing like a /g/ while a /b/ sound is played will make the viewer hear a /d/.

4. Dolphins and seals demonstrate the capacity to follow human pointing gestures

While there is evidence that many domestic animals can follow human pointing gestures, this is the only documented evidence to date that shows this skill in wild animals that aren't primates.

5. People still gesture even if their audience can't see them, but the way they gesture changes

Speech and gesture are so closely linked up that we can't help but gesture, even if our audience can't see us. Experiments show that changing the audience conditions changes how large or frequent gestures are, but nothing stops us gesturing completely.

The official launch party for Gesture: A Slim Guide will be the April episode of Lingthusiasm, stay tuned!

Book overview

The gestures that we use when we speak are an important, if often over-looked, part of how we communicate. This book provides a friendly, fast-paced introduction to the field of Gesture Studies. Gestures are those communicative actions made with the human body that accompany spoken or signed language. Paying attention to gesture means paying attention to the fuller context in which humans communicate. Gesture is absolute, in that every human community that has language also has gestures as part of that language. But gesture is also relative, in that it is far more heavily context dependent than other elements of communication. This book provides a broad introduction to current understandings of the nature and function of gesture as a feature of communication. This Slim Guide covers the ways gesture works alongside speech and the different categories of gesture. The way these categories are used varies across cultures and languages, and even across specific interactions. We acquire gesture as part of language, and it is deeply entwined with language in the brain. Gesture has an important role in the origin of language, and in shaping the future of human communication. The study of gesture makes a crucial interdisciplinary contribution to our understanding of human communication. This Slim Guide provides an introduction to Gesture Studies for readers of all backgrounds.

Order links

Bookshop .org (affiliate link)

Amazon (affiliate link)

Booko page (for Australians)

Anonymous asked:

What do you mean by some linguists think verbs / syntax are fake as hell? What are the reasonings behind that?

some linguists think verbs are fake as hell because:

"verb" is not a consistent cross-linguistic (or even within-language) category that behaves uniformly. the "little v" hypothesis in minimalist syntax, for example, comes from the branch of syntax where lexical items aren't specified for category in the lexicon, they're just bare roots that combine with a special functional head that tells them to be verblike. (in other words: words aren't inherently verbs, words can just be put in verb positions and therefore do verb stuff)

syntax is fake as hell

the entire field of cognitive-functional linguistics just rejects the entire premise that there's an underlying cognitive process (the "grammar") that forms constituents recursively, and some proponents of e.g. construction grammar will tell you that it's easier to explain human language behavior by looking at relative frequencies of what words tend to co-occur (collocations). i have many reasons personally to disagree with these linguists, but by god they are real-ass linguists with real linguistics research programs and it's sort of silly to discount them

Avatar
Reblogged

sign language & linguistics resource!

linguist Adam Schembri has been updating his amazing resource, What All Linguists Should Know (about sign languages). It's a really fantastic repository of info, including some really great basics that are great for students and non-linguists as well. Please share widely! I'll also copy a few links from his page, just as highlights:

I recommend that anyone interested in or studying linguistics at any level (from hobbyist to professional!) ask themselves (and colleagues, instructors, students, etc), frequently: wait - is that true about languages in general, or just spoken languages? Have we done any research about how this works in other modalities? Keep asking the question!

Avatar
Reblogged

For you or your followers: Thoughts on binary branching in generative syntax and the way that, last I'd heard, we haven't worked out a binary structure to cover ditransitive verbs? Do you think we'll eventually work out a binary structure for everything?

Avatar

i have it on good authority that at least one syntactician follows this blog so have at it

Avatar

rather than thinking of the structure as branching, think of it like this. i pull two legos out of a bag and stick them together. call that operation "merge." once they're stuck together, they get to act like a single lego, meaning if i now pull another lego out of the bag im allowed/able to stick it to that thing, because i have a hand free.

trees aren't, like, real. theyre a diagram of an attempt to make an abstract model of a real thing. some abstract models use this "merge" operation and limit it to 2 legos at a time because like, basically, two is the smallest number of legos thats more than one lego. this is just trying to bake in the idea that the operation needs to be the simplest possible version of itself.

anyways lots of syntacticians who work in that framework do indeed have ways of drawing the tree for a ditransitive verb using only binary branches. it's pretty easy: you just do the merge operation twice. i think if you're really hung up on the concept of trees and branches you will not like the trees that result from this, but that's okay, there's no consensus in theoretical syntax. lots of syntacticians think merge is fake as hell but its a convenient placeholder til we figure out a better way of doing it. (lots of syntacticians also think verbs are fake as hell, tbh)

Avatar
Reblogged

The Translator Agenda

Ten years from now, I want all English speakers to be reflexively they/them-ing everyone, and everything, all the time. Delete he/she/it. No mandatory gender/personhood implications! No distinction between singular and plural!

This will make it easier to translate to English while maintaining the ambiguity present in the original Japanese.

You are using an unsupported browser and things might not work as intended. Please make sure you're using the latest version of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, or Edge.