Showing posts with label Linguistics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Linguistics. Show all posts

Thursday, 4 October 2012

How do I remember stuff from a unit I did almost five years ago?

It's irks me when a conversation shifts from talking with someone to talking to someone.

At that point, it's no longer a conversation.


At that point, I don't know what it's become. I can't put a name to it.


At that point, it seems like I'm being annoying. Which I probably am.

But I know it's become something that I no longer want to be a part of. Who wants to be deliberately annoying? Not me. Unless it's someone that I despise.

And there you have it. A scenario that's randomly jogged a memory of mine retained from first-year Linguistics. Something about the rules of conversation.

But yeah, like, whatevor. I'm fairly over it. If you don't want to converse, I'm not going to force you to. Not that I would be able to anyway.

Word of the Day: Conversation

Wednesday, 18 April 2012

Til there was you.



I love this song. So cheesy, but so pleasing to the ears. Kind of like most Beatles songs actually.

Also, if you're interested in linguistics at all (I know, who would be?), the first time I properly listened to this song was when my Linguistics lecturer from last semester was all like, "Hey, this song is a great example of the rhotic 'r' that's found in American English."

See, The Beatles overcompensate for their lack of rhotic Rs, because they're from Liverpool (innit), and so, I dunno, they feel insecure or something. So yeah, that's why you get the ridiculously overemphasised, and oftentimes made-up, rhotic R on words such as saw(R). Yep.

Word of the Day: Rhotic  

Monday, 22 August 2011

Superfluous linguistic funness!



Props to my good friend Meng for this engrossing and interesting video. I have no idea why he posted it on my wall (I think he may have been taking a dig at me). But it's good stuff. I highly recommend that you watch/listen.

I did a bit of research to find out the background of this speech/video. This website explains it quite well. Essentially, it's a well-constructed rant on language change and overly-pedantic people.

This, along with my Linguistics lecturer this semester (goes by the name of Howie), have re-affirmed my belief that language should be fun, and that we shouldn't be all that pedantic about languagy things. I still do think, however (and I think this is where I disagree with Fry...I think), that there's wrong, and then there's wrong. I still think that well-written prose, or, at least, readable prose, has its place in society. Yes, often we can infer from context what something means. Yes, we all get things wrong, and we think they're right.

But surely I'm not the only person who cringes when people write 'your' instead of 'you're'. To me, it just looks stupid. And yes, I do think it is a marker of education. And it is a very important indication of whether someone cares about something or not.

I have never read something beautiful, or moving, or has any sort of impact on me, written in text speak. Well, maybe that time I got rejected by that girl. But you know what I mean. And that wasn't even in text speak.

So, I guess, to clarify, there's wrong, and then there's really, really, hurt-your-eyes kind of wrong. There's no point getting into a fluster about the fine points of grammar that nobody knows about, but I think the basics, like there, their and they're, shouldn't even need to be thought about.

I am aware that language change occurs. All the time. The English that we speak now is very different to English spoken a hundred years ago. Which is fine. I just don't think that that should be used as an excuse for screwing up 'you're' and 'your'.

Finally, I would like to agree with Stephen Fry about his point regarding how nobody has fun with language anymore. I would know. I get shot down for using 'big' words. Most of the time, they're not even big. They're just slightly obscure. Often they're not even that obscure. But sometimes, I just find it difficult to convey ideas without using them. And other times, I may think that it's a really suitable word to use in the circumstances. But I'll get shot down because of it, because people think I'm being pretentious, or whatever.

It's this horrible social pressure of dumbing yourself down to fit in, I think. It kind of relates to this thing that Sarah and I were discussing the other day. People worship pop stars, or whatever. But when a guy is in high school, any high school (probably bar Melbourne High), he will get ridiculed. It's odd how people think that pop stars just appear out of thin air. So the guy in high school stops singing.

It's the same with language. It's the reason why black people, if you've ever read Freakonomics, speak the way they do. Because they get picked on for speaking 'white'.

I'm thankful that most of the people I know aren't like that, but I know there are people that think, and act in this way.

Anyway, that's my little (big) rant for the day (or possibly the week. Or month). Watch the video, and have some fun.

Word of the Day: Engrossing

Monday, 21 March 2011

Yeeeeeeeeeeeaaah man

Taking a break from Linguistics, because it's doing my head in at the moment.

Usher gig was sublime. Trey Songz opening spoiled it a little I think, because that guy was atrocious. He just kept singing about how he was single, how good he is at life, how he's single and ladies should get with him, and that he was single and that he liked ladies.

Maybe it was a ploy by Usher to make himself look even more awesome in comparison.

And he was awesome. All-singing, all-dancing, all-talking. And he did all of that to perfection.

I thought that the best thing about the whole gig was that he sang so much of his old stuff. Kind of makes me wish I'd gotten better tickets for the spectacle. Don't know how much longer it's going to be until he performs his old stuff again.

See the thang, about you, that caught my eye
Is the same thing that make, me change, my mind


His MJ tribute was also very classy. Just dancing, no singing. Reminded me of the very touching John Mayer rendition of 'Human Nature' at the MJ memorial. All guitar, no singing. Something about not knowing him personally, so it wouldn't be right to sing. Here it is here.




Why, why, tell them that it's human nature.


Still gives me shivers.

Even though Usher did know him personally, I still think it was a great idea. So he put on the MJ shoes, and danced.



All hail the King.


I thought the whole thing was really a subtle MJ tribute. The red leather jacket, the MJ-aping dance moves.

Good stuff all around.

I'm going to leave you with this little video today. I thought I'd posted it at least a million times already, but I don't think I have, because the official vid won't let me embed it. You can have this pirated version instead.



Laters, Usher fans.

Word of the Day: Usher

Credit to Sarah Huang for the photo.