Career resources from the LSA annual meeting

Two useful linguistics jobs links from panels at the LSA annual meeting in Portland. 

Linguists in Industry panel

Skills – not your research topic – are key.

When you get asked about what you do, probably the first thing that comes to mind is your subfield within linguistics. In industry, you need to lead with your skills. ‘Doing linguistics’ is not a skill recognizable to most future colleagues. Think instead about what you do every day when you do linguistics.

Tatiana Libman, senior linguist at Google, listed some skills that give linguists an edge: Study design, project management, the ability to collect and analyze structured and unstructured data.

(MLC’s hint: all of these can go on your resume, rather than being hidden under a ‘research’ heading). 

Read the rest here.

There’s also a list of linguists with various industry/alt-academic jobs at the bottom of the post, which can give you some ideas. 

Special session on the academic publishing process in linguistics

On making your term paper or thesis into a publishable article: 

• A long literature review to show that you know the literature is generally unnecessary in a journal article
• You can assume your audience will know enough about the topic you are writing on that they won’t need a “Topic X for Dummies” section

Slides and typical timelines for linguistics journals available here.

Bellarke > All Others (Linguistically)

You know what I like about Bellarke? Well, other than the combined hotness and incredible chemistry. I love the name Bellarke. Look at it. It’s beautiful. Balanced. Compare Bellarke with other Clarke-related The 100 ship names.

Flarke? Sounds like a rude bodily function.

Clexa? Claven? What even?

Besides being less audibly pleasing than Bellarke, look at the composition. In every other instance, one name overpowers the other. 

F(inn) + (C)larke = overwhelmingly Clarke (rightly so) 

C(larke) + Lexa = literally 80% Lexa

Cl(arke) + (R)aven = A little bit better, balance-wise, but still weighted heavily toward Raven

Then look at Bellarke.

Bell(amy) + (Cl)arke.    B-E-L-L  +  A-R-K-E

Two names, taken apart and recombined to be perfectly balanced with four letters each. 

And then look at the way the names work together within the name. 


Bellamy is first and keeps the name grounded, but Clarke has all the power. And I could probably really dig into the different allusions in both Bell and Arke (especially as it pertains to The Ark and Clarke’s ties to the societal structures from that station), but I won’t.

TL;DR? I’m a huge nerd, I love linguistic analysis, and Bellarke is perfect. (Linguistically speaking.)

dduits87 asked:

Out of pure curiosity, is there a reason I don't see too many Kemetic devotees using the Kemetic names for the Netjeru on Tumblr (i.e. Wesir, Heru, Aset...) or is it mainly for general public ease of understanding?

I’m wondering if we’re seeing different people? because a lot of the people I’m seeing are using those names. Many of the names being used don’t differ btwn Greek and Egyptian (such as Sekhmet, Ptah, Sokar, Re/Ra, etc). But many of us do use the Egyptian formatting- Heru, Anup, Nebhet, etc.

I personally don’t use Wesir because I totally dislike how it sounds. Not to mention there are 385946856 ways to spell O’s name, and I just happen to like calling him O or Big O because reasons har har har.

And Hathor is purely out of preference as well. Hathor, Hethert, and Hetharu are really only a stones throw away from one another, and I will use different ones depending on how my fingers type it out.

I used Thoth over Djehuty because Thoth is half of the typing effort required. And Horus and Heru I just swap in and out because whatever.

So I guess for myself, I base it off of which sounds nicer to my ear or what is easier to type. Others may have other preferences/reasons for why they use the spellings that they do. I personally have never cared which format was used, where as other groups place more emphasis on using the “correct” versions. That could influence which is used, too.


Introduction to Linguistics.

I highly suggest watching this video if you’re in high school and are unsure of a future major. This is a topic that is never discussed in high school, but is pretty interesting. This is the primary focus of my own studies. Although mathematics is a passion of mine, there are certain aspects of linguistics that are far more interesting and captivating (in my own opinion).

There is no math required. This is something completely different from anything you’ve ever studied before.

Swedish is fun

Because you can make new words out of different words, as long as that mash-up creates one single item or thing.

For example

I made up a new word this morning. Lördagsbakiskaffe.

It means, directly translated “Saturday hung-over coffee”. A coffee you drink when hung-over on a Saturday.

Something cool I noticed a while ago is that Italian is like a mix of Spanish and French. Like, manger in French is eat, while mangiare is eat in Italian; catorce and quatorze are fourteen in Spanish and French, quattordici is fourteen in Italian, como estas in Spanish is how are you, it’s come stai in Italian, and so on. The most interesting one I found is with profanity; “shit” in Spanish is mierda, in French is merde, and Italian is merda, like it’s a mix of the two.

poomeister: A friend is wondering why do we sound different when talking different languages?

There are many factors that pertain to this certain topic so I will just gloss over the major ones since I do not want to tire you out in explaining this to your friend:

1. Each individual languages have a different set of phonetic (sound) systems. For example, /f/ and /v/ sounds that exist in English do not exist in Tagalog which is why many Tagalog speakers who learned English until much later in their lives have difficulty pronouncing these sounds; they end up using a sound close/similar to it: /f/ -> /p/ and /v/ -> /b/. This also applies to vowels as well and not just the consonants! 

2. Dialectal/Idiolectal differences affect the way we sound and the manner in which we speak. Another example: when I talk in English, I tend to talk fast, and when I talk in Tagalog, I talk slow. That is because the American English dialect I speak/learned to speak is the Philadelphia dialect which is one of the more fast-paced American English dialects and the Tagalog dialect I speak is the Batangas one which is considered one of the older and slower-paced Tagalog dialect. Our speech speed affects our pitch, tone, etc, so of course that affects the way we sound.

Idiolect simply means our unique individual speech pattern. We all speak/ sound differently from one another and have developed different speech patterns for each language we speak. Our idiolect is based on the dialect/s, vocabulary, jargons, syntactic/semantic features, and other linguistic factors we were and still are exposed to. Our social interactions affect our idiolect as well. Some people say I sound more mature when I talk in Tagalog than in English and it may be because: 1. the Tagalog dialect I speak is considered formal/traditional, and 2. I mostly use Tagalog when talking w/ adults and English w/ my peers; therefore, my speech pattern is affected by the people I share a conversation with.    

3. And this is related to #1 and #2; the size/shape of our oral cavity, nasal cavity, and articulators (lips, teeth, tongue) affect our sound production. And since each language have a different sound system, we would articulate sounds differently. Our dialect/idiolect knowledge is already integrated and accounted for whenever we speak, and we do not need to make a conscious effort to shape our articulators to sound a certain way. Unless of course if we want to sound a certain way.

 Hope this helps!

I tried to make it simple as possible, just ask if you have further questions^^ if u want, i can also post some scholarly articles if your friend wants to read about it, but he/she can just google it 


This strange sound can mean ‘yes’ in the Swedish language.



I did some illustrations for the lovely people at Babbel, a fun place to learn languages.

These are the sounds phones make, and the sounds (“words”) people make when they pick them up.

There’s some more over in their magazine section to have a looooook

(Also available in French, German, Spanish, Portuguese and Italian)

twitter | facebook | instagram | shop


The dude map: How Americans refer to their bros

Digital news outlet QUARTZ article on a study of slang use using Twitter as a dataset, in this case occurrances referring to males:

When Hill wrote his history of “dude,” understanding such trends in slang was close to impossible. There simply weren’t enough data. Not so today. To uncover the hidden shape of vocative use, linguists can draw on one of the best datasets the English language has ever had: Twitter.

Forensic linguist Jack Grieve has been working with several billion tweets, collected by Diansheng Guo of the University of South Carolina, to analyze the geography of language using location data attached to the tweets. Quartz asked Grieve to take a look at “dude” and its bros.

More Here

Uptalk, in case you’ve missed several years of media frenzy, is using a rising intonation at the end of a phrase or sentence. What’s the matter with that? Well, that rising intonation is similar (although not identical) to how any English speaker sounds when asking a question, so to some people it sounds as if uptalkers are speaking only in questions, and are thus not very confident.

Or so they tell young women. But the funny thing is, uptalk isn’t actually just used by the young and female. When you’re on the lookout for it, you’ll hear uptalk from people of many demographics. Yet I’ve never heard anyone condemn New Zealanders’ speech for not being authoritative or confident enough, despite their rampant use of uptalk at all ages and genders. I also hear many men, including former President George W. Bush, using uptalk, and have yet to hear any of them be chastised for not sounding authoritative enough. In fact, there’s no conclusive evidence that women even use uptalk more than men.

But even if women did uptalk more than men, we’ve all heard enough uptalk to know that its rising intonation doesn’t indicate a question. No one’s actually confused. So why should anyone have a problem with it? The thing is, this pastime of critiquing women’s speech is not limited to American English speakers. It’s easy to find these attitudes in any culture that devalues femininity and women. In Belfast English, stereotypical women’s speech falls at the end of a sentence, while men’s speech rises before it plateaus—basically, the men are uptalking. And yet Belfast women’s speech is still perceived as more expressive or emotional, showing that it’s not about their actual intonation at all: It’s about whose mouth the speech is coming from. (In fact, vocal fry leads to a lower-pitched voice, essentially the opposite of uptalk, and yet somehow that’s bad when young women do it too.) […]

But just because sexism exists doesn’t mean that the sexists are right about it: Women shouldn’t have to wear pantsuits to be treated like human beings, and we shouldn’t have to contort our voices to sound masculine (but not too masculine!) to make people hear us. […]

The notion that my uptalk means I was unsure of what I said is not only wrong, it’s misogynistic. It implies that if women just spoke like men, our ideas would be valuable. If women just spoke like men, sexist listeners would magically understand us, and we would be taken seriously. But the problem is not with feminized qualities, of speech or otherwise, the problem is that our culture pathologizes feminine traits as something to be ashamed of or apologize for.


Marybeth Seitz-Brown, “Young Women Shouldn’t Have to Talk Like Men to Be Taken Seriously

(See the full article for links to the various studies mentioned.)