linguistic term

Any time someone tells you that “asexuality” is a stupid term because “isn’t asexuality about single organism reproduction and not someone’s sexual attraction?” …well… here’s what a PROFESSIONAL LINGUIST has to say about that bogus:

Words have definitions that are created by how a population uses them, not by what you see in a dictionary. Now, words might have roots and prefixes and suffixes that help build the meaning of the word, but ultimately what is important is how the word is actually used by native speakers of that language. So how a population uses a word is how a word receives its meaning or meanings.

It’s also to note that word meanings change over time; there is very little which is static in a language, but languages are constantly, always morphing. Those changes are valid and completely, utterly a part of the contemporary language. Once upon a time people scoffed at how “pants” was shortened from “pantaloons.” But nobody in today’s society would disagree that “pants” is a widespread, very real word of the English language. Words are simply what are used by a contemporary native speaking population of a language.

A dictionary is not an omniscient authoritative source of a language. A dictionary is not a prescriptive means by which to prove whether or not something is a word. A dictionary is an imperfect, human-created document regularly updated to record how a population currently uses a word. It’s an observational record, not a book of rules.

BUT… because dictionaries are records of things that change, the dictionaries’ definitions are very often outdated or incomplete.

So, yes. The dictionary does provide us a scientific term of the word asexuality related to single organism means of reproduction, and that term is still of course relevant in scientific discourse. That still is a meaning of asexuality, yes. But words often have multiple legitimate meanings (ex: bat meaning an animal, sports equipment, whacking something aside, or a way of moving one’s eyelashes). All of those meanings are equally valid so long as they are used by the population of English native speakers. The fact that a very, very large population of native English speakers uses “asexual” to mean “an individual who is uninterested in sex, or who has very little or no sexual attraction”… means that this is indeed a valid meaning of the word asexual! 

Linguist approval for the fact ASEXUALITY IS A REAL WORD ABOUT A REAL QUEER THING!

And if anyone tries to argue with a professional linguist because you think you have some authority and knowledge about your own language, well…

You might have a human body, but that doesn’t make you an expert in biology. You wouldn’t argue with a biologist about the chemical processes that occur within the stomach and other parts of the human digestive tract.

You might be able to see the sun and moon rise and set every day, but that doesn’t make you an expert in astronomy. You wouldn’t argue with an astronomer who tells you how the planets orbit around the sun. In fact, your personal, first-hand experiences of planetary bodies might lead you to make incorrect conclusions, like the earth being flat or the sun rotating around the planet.

Similarly, you might be able to speak a language, but that doesn’t make you an expert in linguistics. Many native speakers’ intuitions about their own language are wrong. For example, most English speakers don’t realize that the “t” in “star” is actually a different sound than the “t” in “tie.” So if you want to argue with me, a professional linguist, you can go and kiss my shiny grad degrees that pronounce me a literal expert in the field.

Asexuality is valid, friends. There is a reason why the term is so widely used by human beings: it’s because so many of us have similar, shared experiences in which we do not feel sexual attraction, or little sexual attraction, or have no or little interest in having sex. Humans don’t make up words that have no use in society. We use words because they are needed to explain something that is a real experience to us. The reason why the word “asexual” ACTUALLY DOES MEAN THE QUEER THING is because we humans have a need for this term to describe a widespread, common, legitimate, valid, understandable, real human experience.

You keep being rad, my fellow ace angels.

Asexual linguist signing off.

Langblr Vocabulary List Ideas

Household items
Christmas
Love
Spring
Autumn
Summer
Winter
School subjects
Social media terms
False Friends
Linguistic terms
Animal names
Nsfw terms
Political terms
Lgbt terms
Sports
Religious terms
Car interior and exterior
Countries
Languages
Nationalities
Food and drinks
Medical terms
Clothing
Colors
Personality traits
Moods and feelings
Body and hair
Space
Biology
Anatomy
Mathematical terms
Science terms
Driving
Makeup
Jobs and occupations
Legal terms
Essay terms and phrases
Travel phrases
At the airport
Easter
Halloween
Fairy tales
Childhood
Gerting old
Puberty
Adulthood
Thanksgiving
Music
Movies
New Year’s resolutions
Exercising
Cooking and baking
Talking
Shopping
Family
Numbers
Art
Likes and dislikes
Country-specific holidays and traditions
Grammar explanations
Idioms
Verb conjugations

5

Maya ceremonial dress

The Maya people (sometimes Mayans) are a group of Indigenous peoples of Mesoamerica. They inhabit southern Mexico, Guatemala, Belize, El Salvador and Honduras. The overarching term “Maya” is a collective designation to include the peoples of the region that share some degree of cultural and linguistic heritage; however, the term embraces many distinct populations, societies, and ethnic groups that each have their own particular traditions, cultures, and historical identity.

The pre-Columbian Maya population was approximately eight million.[3] There were an estimated seven million Maya living in this area at the start of the 21st century.[1][2]Guatemala, southern Mexico and the Yucatán Peninsula, Belize, El Salvador, and western Hondurashave managed to maintain numerous remnants of their ancient cultural heritage. Some are quite integrated into the majority hispanicized Mestizo cultures of the nations in which they reside, while others continue a more traditional, culturally distinct life, often speaking one of the Mayan languages as a primary language.

Maya blue is an ancient, long-lasting pigment with special significance to the Maya, associated with sacrifice and Maya deities, including the rain god Chaak.

Photo 1: Mayan Dancer Representing Jaguar in Pre-Hispanic Mayan Culture, Xcaret, Riviera Maya, Yucatan, Mexico

Photo 3: Honduras

Photo 5: Headdress with quetzal feathers

Sidhe

Author: kpopfanfictrash

Pairing: You / Jimin / Namjoon

Rating: PG-13

Genre: Fantasy, Fey!AU / Royalty!AU

Word Count: 5,323

Description: In the land of Humankind and the Otherworld, the Fey and Humans live side by side. Cursed are the Fey though, unable to use their own magic without a human wishing it so. You were born and raised to end this curse, to take down the system - so what happens when the Human you’re bound to, ends up becoming so much more? 

Keep reading

I grew up with the Bible. I learnt about Jesus, Esther and Ruth. On the television, Barney played on Kids’ Central. Sam was my favourite character on Totally Spies. The only Singaporean original kids’ show I remember watching is R.E.M.— Rachel, Ee Ching and Mo. Even then, the English was proper: British English, or at least an imitation of it, because, of course, Singapore had once been under colonial rule, and now English is our official language. No Singlish, teachers say. No lahs, no lors, no mehs. Don’t use Singlish in your oral. Don’t write it in your compositions. It’s not ‘Can I go to the toilet?’; it’s ‘May I use the bathroom?’. Even in Catherine Lim books, Singlish is italicised, isn’t it? to throw you off, emphasising how its Singlish words aren’t proper words, only bastardisations of the language by us quirky Singaporeans, trying so hard to be Western. Are we? What does it mean if we are?

Compare this: “We are not going, lah.”
To this: “We are not going lah.”

When you come across a comma, you pause, of course. But we don’t pause when we use ‘lah’. Singlish is a staccato language, quick and to the point. Why, then, should I pause before the ‘lah’?

If you Google ‘lah’, the first result that appears is, and I have reproduced it here: “"lah" in Singlish is a discourse particle in Linguistics terms, that is, a word or a particle that does not change the semantic meaning of the sentence, but for pragmatic functions such as indicating tone. Examples of Usage: “There’s something here for everyone lah.” (“There IS something here for everyone.”)” I largely agree with this definition. It is used to emphasise something, but the word itself is not emphasised. The thing about Singlish is that every word is unstressed. It is flat, monotone. It is a bored language, but it is not boring. The reason it is italicised so much is because it’s still not seen as “proper English”, even after we’ve been speaking it for decades. Years after the British abandoned us during the war, we are still not comfortable with our identity. We are, in a way, still the colonised subject looking up to its master. Why am I not writing this essay the way I speak? Why am I censoring myself?

If Singlish is a conglomeration of English, Malay, Tamil, Chinese and other assorted dialects, why can’t we treat Singlish as a language itself and normalise it? When I say gostan, must I italicise that too? Isn’t language a mutable construct? Isn’t English itself a potluck of words from different cultures? Why aren’t we proud that all of us are at least bilingual and this, combined with our multi-racial environment, influences the way we speak? Why is this cause for shame and why are we rejecting it?

I feel a disconnect with my heritage. I am Singaporean Chinese, but what stories do I have to tell? What folklore do I know? How much have I lost? I only learnt about 女郎织女 when I was 17, after watching 爱情合约, a Taiwanese drama, after I re-watched 流星花园, which I’d watched with my grandmother when I was 8. What other elements of Chinese mythology can I tell you about? I don’t know; I know too little to remember. I lived with my grandparents as a child for many years, and stayed over on weekends for years after that. I understand Hokkien because of that, but when I try to speak it, I cannot form the words. Everything slips away, and I feel more detached than ever. I can say ‘makan’ without a thought but it takes me a second to remember ‘jiak peng’. But I know how to speak it. I’m just afraid to forget. My grandparents can speak English pretty well, so my brother, having never stayed with them for any period of time, cannot understand Hokkien, and neither can my cousins. At home, we speak English as well. (Singlish? I’m not sure what to label it as.) In school, my Chinese was always bad. How dare I call it my mother tongue when I hesitate to order food from the fishball noodle uncle at the kopitiam?

There is currently a Speak Good English campaign and has been since 2000. Before that, there was the Speak Mandarin campaign in 1979. Funny Singapore, with all its campaigns. Even today, 3 March 2017, Cantonese or Hokkien shows are dubbed over in Mandarin. It is only recently that Singlish has been touted as our national identity, and local brands—even the army!— are using Singlish to be more relatable. I am glad about this, but I am afraid that maybe it might be too late. The pioneer generation, the ones here when Singapore was recovering from the war and had just achieved independence, are fading. Do we expect them to live forever and preserve our culture and heritage for us? Do we care?

The hawker centres are being replaced, torn down or commercialised. The Sungei Road flea market will soon be gone. There’s a suggestion of having a permanent pasar malam at Marina Bay Sands, which would actually be the total opposite of what a pasar malam is. Why not preserve and sustain culture? Why only seek to memorialise it instead of learning how to progress and retain our heritage at the same time? If lobster, once seen as a poor man’s dish, can now become a delicacy, why can’t we learn to accommodate our modernisation with our collective history? Must we always separate the two? In marketing ourselves as an economically stable and progressive nation, do we have to pretend we are who left us?

—  Venetta Octavia, from an essay titled “National Trauma”

When it comes to “cultural authenticity” discourses (of which “cultural appropriation” is one form) it’s hard to tell if they are speaking out of ignorance or willful lying because both certainly happen. 

 The identity politics premise that political knowledge emerges identity leads many to believe that knowledge of “their culture” can be obtained more or less through introspection because they believe the core of culture is a certain kind of “cultural spirit” and if that spirit ‘lives’ within them then they simply need to look inward to speak about it, almost like someone claiming to speak for a divine entity because they believe it is also “living in” and possessing them. Thus you get a certain kind of self-assured intuitionism that leads people to believe that someone talking about their own culture is infallible (the “decolonizeourmuseums” ppl that protested the Boston MFA used this exact argument more or less) so they dont need to do any research before speaking authoritatively about it and of course that leads to them saying complete bullshit sometimes. 

On the flip-side you also have the idea of a “noble lie”. Unlike a simple “white lie” which could simply be seen as a harmless pragmatic gesture (eg; always giving a positive response when someone greets you with “How are you doing today?”) the “noble lie” is intended to supposedly serve some higher moral purpose. In this sense the person comitting the “noble lie” will see themselves as actually being more faithful to higher truths or capital-T “Truth” than if they were to speak honestly about the matter. The example here would be when Benigos Ramos claimed that pre-Hispanic colonial Philippines had a political-linguistic unity under Tagalog identity in the context of an 1935 interview he gave to a Japanese nationalist friend of his when he was exiled in Japan. I’m confidant in saying that Ramos was a liar because anyone from the Philippines knows that Tagalog (which is an ethno-linguistic term, it means “People from the River”) is not the only language in the Philippines even if they dont know off the top of their head the fact that Tagalog-the-ethnicity and Tagalog-as-first-language are actually a minority in the Philippines. Plus the whole premise of a “Filipino national language” actually only makes sense if you know about the large linguistic diversity of the islands so Ramos implicitly let slip an acknowledgement that Tagalog is not synonymous with “Filipino” simply by speaking of the need for “Tagalog-ness” to be imposed as a national identity even if he was saying differently when speaking to a foreign audience. For someone like Ramos, lying about an imaginary pre-colonial past for the purposes of nationalist ideology (and in the case of that particular interview the propagation of what would be called “allyship” in current lingo) was fine because it served the higher purpose of propagating the glory of the volksgeist 

2

These are my notes from glossary of linguistic terms I need to study for a final exam at the end of the semester.😊10 terms finished, more than 200 to go! 💪

Taken from my studygram: jeristudies

[NCT 127 + Ten] Reaction to s/o being multilingual

A/N: Hello~ Thank you for the request! Sorry that it may have been a bit late as I am busy with examinations and studies at the moment! I also apologise that this reaction would not be as long as the other reactions.
I have slightly changed it to their s/o being multilingual to accommodate a larger scale. I hope you enjoy~

P.S. Wow you are for being able to speak 4 languages fluently?? I’m only bilingual –

P.P.S I realised I have been inconsistent in using ‘s/o’ and ‘you’ so I’ll just write in the assumption of you being the respective members’ s/o!!

Style/ Genre: Reaction / -
Date posted: 18/07/17



Taeil:

Originally posted by tuvns

I think Taeil would actually be quite amazed when he first learns about your ability to speak multiple different languages fluently. Even after claiming you as his, he would constantly admire you for this ability. He may sometimes forget about you being a linguist, and whenever you meet people of other nationalities/ race and speak to them in English/ their native language, or even go overseas with him, he would just look at you, mouth agape and you can sense that immense amount of admiration exuding from Taeil. 

Keep reading

Hebrew Basics #2: Pronouns, Sentence Structure

Hi Again!

Now that you’ve hopefully started to get Hebrew writing, it’s time to start with the language itself, beginning with the very base of the language - basic language structure.

First and foremost, here is a table of personal pronouns, since they’re pretty necessary for this lesson, and don’t require too much explaining behind them:

An easy way to remember them is:

  1. 1st person pronouns always start with אֲנ an-.
  2. 2nd person pronouns also always start with א alef, but always have a ת tav in them.
  3. 3rd person pronouns always start with ה he, and are monosyllabic.
  4. Male plural pronouns always end in a מ mem, while female plural pronouns always end in a נ nun.

אֲנוּ ánu is pretty much only used in formal settings, speeches, documents etc., not even in Biblical texts (it rose later in history).

אָנֹכִי anokhí is archaic these days, used primarily in Biblical texts and in some set phrases (e.g. אֲנִי וָאָנֹכִי aní va’anokhí ‘me, myself and I’), as well as serving as an adjective meaning ‘selfish.’

Moreover, some speakers merge the 2nd and 3rd person masculine and feminine plural pronouns, using only the masculine form. I don’t like prescribing you a correct and an incorrect way to say something - but I’ll let myself do so here. This is a language changing as we speak, and as of now this in-distinction is still pretty much universally viewed as incorrect. You can, and probably will, see it online or in speech, but most speakers (at least those I speak to) still make the distinction, especially with verb conjugations (as explained further in the lesson), and some will correct you if you don’t make it yourself.

What you might have noticed as well is the lack of a neutral pronoun. Hebrew nouns are all either male or female, and to refer to an inanimate noun you would simply refer to it by its appropriate pronoun. שֻׁלְחַן shulchán (table) is of masculine gender, so one will refer to it as הוּא hu (he); קַעֲרָה ka’ará (bowl) is of feminine gender, so one will refer to it as הִיא hi (she).

Side note: as there are no gender neutral 2nd and 3rd person pronouns, this creates some problems in feminist and LGBT circles. It’s simply impossible to refer to a group of people by a gender-inclusive pronoun, neither is it possible to refer to someone without explicitly saying what binary gender your referring to them with.


Before I explain sentence types I need to set out word order. Since verbs are conjugated to encode tense, number, gender and person (1st, 2nd and 3rd persons) of the subject, Hebrew generally has pretty free word order. This is because it is usually clear who the subject is through conjugation and context. Another consequence of this is frequent dropping of subject pronouns, since it is already specified through the verb.

However, most sentences still fall under SVO word order - where the subject comes first in a sentence, then the verb, then any objects the subject acts upon. For example:

1. אָכַלְתִּי תַּפּוּחַ. akhálti tapúach. - I ate an apple. (literally: I-ate[S+V] apple[O].)
2. יוֹנָתָן לִטֵּף אֵת הַכֶּלֶב. Yonatán litéf et hakélev. - Yonatan pet the dog. (literally: Yonatan[S] pet[V] direct object preposition the dog[O].)
3. הַסַּפְרָן יִתֵּן לִי אֵת הַסֵּפֶר. hasafrán yitén li et haséfer. - The librarian (m) will give me the book. (literally: the-librarian[S] will-give[V] to-me[O] direct object preposition the-book[O].)

(Note: even if it doesn’t look like it, the period / full stop comes after the text - to the left. So do exclamation and question marks. Typing right-to-left text embedded in a left-to-right language is very annoying, so you should get used to punctuation, vowel points and generally everything to not fall where you actually put your cursor. It’s terrible. Also, vowel points don’t get bolded with the rest of the text?? w h y)

Occasionally, in more higher speech as well as in Biblical texts, Hebrew also shows VSO word order. Hence, all of these sentences could alternatively be said like so:

1. אָכַלְתִּי תַּפּוּחַ. akhálti tapúach. - I ate an apple. (literally: I-ate[S+V] apple[O].)
2. לִטֵּף יוֹנָתָן אֵת הַכֶּלֶב. litéf Yonatán et hakélev. - Yonatan pet the dog. (literally: pet[V] Yonatan[S] direct object preposition the-dog[O].)
3. יִתֵּןהַסַּפְרָן לִי אֵת הַסֵּפֶר. yiténhasafrán li et haséfer. - The librarian (m) will give me the book. (literally: will-give[V] the-librarian[S] to-me[O] direct object preposition the-book[O].)

In 1, the verb and the subject are conjoined, therefore flipping their order doesn’t make any sense and the sentence stays the same.

That being said, these days SVO word order is a lot more common that VSO, especially in speech, so don’t worry too much about it, just know it’s used. Personally, I tend to used VSO in some cases for school essays, but that’s about it - and even this is mostly my personal tendency. Again, don’t think about it too much.

Sentence Structure - Syntax!

Hebrew sentences are generally separated into two categories: verbal sentences and nominal sentences. A verbal sentence, מִשְׁפָּט פָּעֳלִי mishpát po’olí (more commonly pronounced po’alí), is a sentence that contains a subject (some type of noun or verb phrase) and an action verb, also called the predicate. This, you might recognize, is the basic sentence structure of English as well. In fact, the vast majority of languages only possess this type of sentence. Nominal sentences are where stuff gets interesting.

A nominal sentence, מִשְׁפָּט שְׁמָנִי mishpát shemaní, as you might have guessed, is a sentence where instead of a nominal subject and an action verb - there’s just another noun (or adjective) acting as the predicate. These are characteristic to Semitic languages and Russian (I’m not sure about other Slavic languages), among others. For example:

1. הַדֹּב הַזֶּה מְאֹד יָפֶה. hadóv haze me’ód yafé. - This bear is very pretty. (literally: bear this very pretty.)
2. אֲנִי רְעֵבָה. aní re’evá. - I am hungry. (literally: I hungry (female))
3. הוּא כֶּלֶב. hu kélev. - He is a dog. (literally: he dog).

To negate the sentence, simply put לֹא

As you might have noticed, the key characteristic is where English would put the verb to be, Hebrew just doesn’t put anything, because there is no equivalent in Hebrew. The languages simply lacks a copula (the linguistic term for verbs like to be, whose purpose is linking the subject to a non-verb predicate).

Well… not quite.

You see, without a copula, there would be no way of indicating different tenses. When the sentence is word-for-word ‘I hungry’ or ‘he dog,’ where do you mark the tense? For this there’s a nice and clever solution - copulae! Yep, Hebrew didn’t wanna feel left out of the copula club so it made itself copulae of its own.

There are many types of copulae, to mark different types of relations, but for now I’ll introduce you to most common and most simple one. To mark present tense sentences use the 3rd person pronouns הוּא, הִיא, הֵם, הֵן, and for past and future tenses it uses conjugations of the verb הָיָה hayá*, ‘to be,’ as following:

*I refer to all verbs in this series with their 3rd person, masculine past tense form. This is because verb infinitives in Hebrew, as you will learn, are not a great way to represent the verb, and the 3rd person masc. form of a verb is considered the most basic form of the verb in all different conjugations.

If this seems like a lot to take in - it’s because it is. Hebrew verb conjugation is pretty complicated, and it doesn’t help that הָיָה hayá is quite an irregular verb. I don’t recommend you try and understand it fully, as I’ll be teaching everything you need to know about Hebrew verb conjugation pretty soon. For now, just take it at face value.

Notes:

  1. If you have keen eyes, you might notice the /i/ after the /h/ in the transliteration of all future tense conjugations, that shouldn’t be there according to the vowel points. If not, notice it now. This is because it’s difficult to pronounce a /h/ without any consonant afterwards, so a dummy vowel was inserted after it. This is a common phenomenon in Hebrew with some consonants, but I won’t explain it now, as it’s quite complicated. (the different vowel points in the 1st person is just that I found two different vowel markings that seem to have no real difference between them)
  2. For the present tense 1st and 2nd persons no copula is used. My guess is that this is because the subject can only ever be ‘I’ or ‘you’ when talking about 1st and 2nd person subjects, so repeating the same pronoun twice is useless. This is the case for 3rd person subjects as well: if the subject itself is ‘he,’ ‘she’ or ‘they,’ you don’t repeat the same pronoun as a copula.
  3. This is getting a bit into verb conjugations, but the 2nd person plural past tense forms (now try saying that three times in a row) have two pronunciations: the top is the ‘correct’ one used formally, and the bottom is the one you’d actually hear pretty much everywhere, as it fits the conjugation pattern more regularly.
  4. The 2nd and 3rd person feminine plural future tense conjugation, as marked on the table, is very rare nowadays, and shifting towards merging with the equivalent masculine conjugation. In fact, even the 2nd person plural past tense conjugations (marked with the 3), are starting to lose their distinction between masculine and feminine, just like the pronounced mentioned in the beginning of this lesson, but this is still widely considered a grammatical mistake and I do advise that you keep the distinction - people will just correct you otherwise.

The examples above in different tenses would be:

Past:
1. הַדֹּב הַזֶּה הָיָה מְאֹד יָפֶה. hadóv haze hayá me’ód yafé. - This bear was very pretty. (literally: bear this was very pretty.)
2. אֲנִי הָיִיתִי רְעֵבָה. aní hayíti re’evá. - I was hungry. (literally: I was hungry [female])
3. הוּא הָיָה כֶּלֶב. hú hayá kélev. - He was a dog. (literally: he was dog).

Future:
1. הַדֹּב הַזֶּה יִהְיֶה מְאֹד יָפֶה. hadóv haze yihiyé me’ód yafé. - This bear will be very pretty. (literally: bear this will-be very pretty.)
2. אֲנִי אֶהֱיֶה רְעֵבָה. aní eheyé re’evá. - I will be hungry. (literally: I will-be hungry (female))
3. הוּא יִהְיֶה כֶּלֶב. hú yihiyé kélev. - He will be a dog. (literally: he will-be dog).


Exercise

For the next 10 sentences, I’ll leave out the copula, and you should fill it in according to the tense and gender given in the brackets… if you even need the copula!!! muahahahaha

Don’t worry, they’re as simple as it gets.

1. הַכּוֹס ___ יְרֻקָּה. hakós ___ yeruqá. (fem. sing. past)
2. בְּנִי ___ חָכָם. bní ___ chakhám. (masc. sing. future)
3. מָסָךְ הַטֶּלֶוִיזְיָה שֶׁלִּי ___ לָבָן. masákh hatelevízya sheli ___ laván. (masc. sing. past)
4. הַלֵּב ___ הָאֵיבַר הֲכִי חָשׁוּב בַּגּוּף. halév ___ ha’evár hakhí chashúv bagúf. (masc. sing. present)
5. כְּרוּבִית ___ יֶרֶק. kruvít ___ yérek. (fem., sing., present)
6. מֶזֶג הָאֲוִיר מָחָר ___ קַר. mézeg ha’avír machar ___ kár. (masc. sing. future)
7. הֵן ___ בָּנוֹת נִפְלָאוֹת. hen __ banót nifla’ót. (fem. pl. present)
8. הַשֻּׁלְחַנוֹת שֶׁלָּהֶן ___ חֻמִּים. hashulchanót shelahen ___ chumím.(masc. pl. future)
9. הַהֲלִיכוֹן ___ מָהִיר מִדַּי. hahalichón ___ mahír miday. (masc. sing. past)
10. מִשְׁקָפַי ___ חֲזָקִים. mishkafái ___ chazaqím. (masc. pl. present)


Answer Key

1. הָיְתָה haytá (The cup was green.)
2. יִהְיֶה yihiyé (My son will be smart.)
3. הָיָה hayá (My TV screen was white.)
4. [הוּא] / - hu / - (The heart is the most important organ in the body.)
5. [הִיא] / - ; hi / - (Cauliflower is a vegetable.)
6. יִהְיֶה yihiyé (The weather tomorrow will be cold.)
7. - (They are wonderful girls.)
8. יִהְיוּ yihiyú (Their (f) tables will be brown.)
9. הָיָה hayá (The treadmill was too fast.)
10. הֵם / [-] ; hem / - (My glasses are strong.)

In the present tense examples I marked the option more likely to be heard with square brackets. I’m not sure why it is for each example, but the other option just sounds less natural.


Aaaaand that’s it for today!

Next time… Verbs??? probably

See you next week :)

לְהִתְרָאוֹת!

@rineharts did you ever take that history of the English language class? I feel like you did. Do you remember the term for a breaking point in a word? The prof said you could find it by putting “fucking” in the middle of the word. Like effer-fucking-vesent or abso-fucking-lutely

I really wanna remember what it’s called by I have no idea.

People who may also know wtf talking about: @lamentforboromir @hiatustohitdice @bookworm428

「Learn Japanese」 Kansai-ben and Intro to Japanese Dialects  (What is Hougen?)

方言 (ほうげん/hougen) is a linguistic term that means “dialect.” Similar to how English is spoken differently depending on where you are regionally, the Japanese language sounds varied depending on the background of the speaker. The most general division of language and culture for Japanese would be between Eastern Japanese and Western Japanese. Eastern Japanese is broadly represented by Tokyo-type Japanese, otherwise known as standard Japanese, e.g. that which is taught in formal education, used in media, etc. As for Western Japanese, a lot of different dialects attribute to it, but perhaps the most well-known is Kansai-ben/Osaka-ben (弁/べん/ben here is the suffix that means “dialect, speech”). 

While the dialects of the United States for the most part showcase minor discrepancies, the dialects of the Japanese language are distinct not only in terms of peculiar vocabulary (such as set words, phrases, and slang) and pronunciation stlye (particular intonation, emphasis, etc.) but also notably different grammar rules.
To date, all of the formal grammar videos posted on this channel have been in accordance to Eastern, Tokyo-type Japanese, due to it being the standard Japanese.

Here is a brief demonstration of the Kansai dialect and how its grammar, specifically conjugation of verbs, differs from standard Japanese.

Intro to Kansai-ben:

3 Common Kansai-ben Phrases:

Standard Japanese: だめ (dame)
Meaning: “no good”
Kansai-ben: あかん (akan)

Standard Japanese: とても (totemo)

Meaning: “very”

Kansai-ben: めっちゃ  (meccha)

Example: めっちゃかわいい (meccha kawaii) as opposed to とてもかわいい (totemo kawaii), both of which mean “very cute”

Standard Japanese: (baka)
Meaning: “idiot”
Kansai-ben: あほ (aho)

Grammar Differences between Kansai-ben and Standard Japanese:

The ない in the Negative-ない Form becomes へん (and sometimes even just ん)
知らない (しらない/shiranai) becomes しらへん (shirahen) or しらん (shiran)
分からない (わからない/wakaranai) becomes わからへん (wakarahen) or わからん (wakaran)

The ません in the Negative Polite Form becomes まへん
食べません (たべません/tabemasen) becomes たべまへん (tabemahen)
飲まへん (のみません/nomimasen) becomes のみまへん (nomimahen)

Plain-Form だ becomes や
忙しいだった (isogashii datta) becomes 忙しいやった (isogashii yatta)
忙しいだから (isogashii dakara) becomes 忙しいやから (isogashii yakara)

Sentence-ending particle よ becomes で
楽しかったよ (tanoshikattayo) becomes 楽しかったで (tanoshikattade)

Sentence-ending particle ね becomes な
いいね becomes ええな
*Additionally, ええ is used in lieu of いい to mean “good”

The いる in て-Form Verb + いる becomes ねん
何をしている becomes 何してねん

anonymous asked:

I thought Egyptians who are Arab are not indigenous because the ancient Egyptians were black ?? Or dark skin at least

1. Black is a modern racial construct, Ancient Egyptians weren’t calling themselves black back then

2. Yes there were Ancient Egyptians that existed that would be classified as black in today’s society and there were those who wouldn’t

3. Arab is a political, cultural, and linguistic term, not an ethnic one. Egypt began identifying as Arab during the 1950s as a resistance to British’s colonalism when Gamal Abdel Nasser came into leadership and the pan-Arabism movement began to take hold 

4. Dark skinned Arabs exist

Like what Researcher  S. O. Y. Keita at Howard University and  any others who’ve studies Egypt say:

“The results of analyses of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and the Y chromosome in the living Egyptian population show the existence of very old African lineages that are consistent with the fossil remains and of younger lineages of more recent evolution, along with evidence of the assimilation of later migrants from the Near East and Europe; mtDNA is passed only through the female line, from mother to offspring, and the relevant part of the Y chromosome, the nonrecombining section, passes only from father to son. The basic overall genetic profile of the modern population is consistent with the diversity of ancient populations that would have been indigenous to northeastern Africa and subject to the range of evolutionary influences over time, although researchers vary in the details of their explanations of those influences…There is no scientific reason to believe that the primary ancestors of the Egyptian population emerged and evolved outside of northeast Africa…. The basic overall genetic profile of the modern population is consistent with the diversity of ancient populations that would have been indigenous to northeastern Africa and subject to the range of evolutionary influences over time, although researchers vary in the details of their explanations of those influences"

And one from Lloyd

“Despite increasing foreign influence after the Second Intermediate Period, not only did Egyptian culture remain intact  but the people themselves, as represented by the dental samples, appear biologically constant as well”

Linguistic observation: the word “reaper” has a negative connotation (i.e. death), but the most common usage of “to reap” is positive (i.e. benefits). So, statistically speaking, a given reaper will probably not be “grim,” much more likely being in a good mood, a “glad reaper” if you will,

@defenestratethepies replied:

So is “¿Qué miércoles?” like “what the frick”?

That’s exactly what it’s like.

The linguistic term for this is “minced oaths” [I think that’s like a play on "swear words”], but it’s like saying “shoot” instead of “shit”, “dang” instead of “damn”, “heck” instead of “hell”, or “shut the front door” instead of “shut the fuck up” etc

In Spanish the most well-known one is caray or caramba which are minced oaths for carajo 

anonymous asked:

Hello mister cave boy, can you please give me some exam/ revision tips? My first ever exam season starts this week and I am very nervous and unsure of what I am doing. Thank you v much, have a super day!

It’s different for different subjects. For maths, I like to start by doing a past paper, untimed ((without using my notes or googling stuff)), and mark it. Highlight areas where u messed up or something and make a list of what topics u need to go over. Read over those topics one my one and construct 1 or 2 pages of notes for each one. Make them nice and neat and colourful and simple to read. For me handwriting notes helps get the information in more than typing but its up to u. Do some practice questions if u’d like. Then once you’ve gone over all those topics, do another past paper, untimed, and highlight any more areas ur struggling with. Keep doing this until you can complete a past paper without feeling unsure about any of the topics and are getting good marks, then move on to timed papers to practice getting all the work done in the time. I think this approach would work well for sciences too

For academic subjects like english and psychology and stuff where u get a question then gotta write an essay, revision is harder. For me I think its best to make sure u know ur linguists/theorists etc, key terms and definitions. For each topic pick 2 theories or studies, one supporting one side of the argument and one supporting the other, and write notes about the details of their methodologies, dates, findings, and positives and negatives. Test urself by writing flashcards with a question like “When did blabla do the blabla test” on one side and the answer on the other side. Look at the essay questions from past papers and practise writing bullet points of essay structures. U dont really need to write the essays but u need to know what ur gonna write and what to include to get the marks. Make sure u have in ur mind which key points and theorists and studies ur gonna bring up when ur asked about each topic. You could come up with some starting sentences to use for the real thing because starting an essay is usually the hardest part

For artistic subjects like music with lots of coursework, focus on the coursework and usually you’ll learn a lot of what u need to know for the written exam through the coursework. For the written exam try the first method I talked about, going through past papers and narrowing down problem areas.

Hope this helps, I’m no expert at revision at all I’m lazy as hell but if I was clever and actually revised properly this is how I’d do it

Best of luck 

“You’re a Linguist? How Many Languages Do You Speak?”

Linguists get this question quite often whenever they reveal their field of study. 

There are as many reactions to the question as there are linguists.

I do want to talk about this question, because I believe that linguists can often be unnecessarily harsh about it.


Here are some important points:

Linguists are not translators or interpreters.

Linguists are scientists who study phenomena that take place within languages.

In order for a linguist to do his/her job, he/she does not need to fully competent (able to speak, read, and write) in the language of his/her study.


There are probably two main types of people who ask “How many languages do you speak?” 1) The ones who believe “linguist” is merely a fancy term for “translator” or “interpreter,” and 2) those who believe that in order to do linguistics one has to have some level of competency in various languages.

The first people are simply mistaken. It is, true, however, that the term “linguist” is used in that manner. Normally a response with an elaboration of one’s job will clear that up.

The second people are onto something. And this is why I believe people are often unnecessarily harsh about it. 

Here’s why I believe they’re onto something:

In order to do research, one has to be able to understand data and other research. If someone is studying, say, something about Spanish syntax, then either 1) one is working with raw Spanish data, 2) working with Spanish data that has been interpreted in a language that is not the one’s language, or 3) working with Spanish data that has been interpreted in one’s language.

In other words, either you yourself are dealing with a language foreign to your own, or you are reading someone else’s research which the researcher (or someone else) translated into your own language.

Given that 2 of those 3 options involves having competency in another language (and here I openly admit we’re disregarding research into one’s own language and other forms of communication that do not involve spoken language), it’s not irrational to expect a linguist to have some competency in another language.

I’m not here to claim that any one form (or part) of research is more valid than the other, mind you. I’m just stating facts.

We’ll also add that the farther one goes in academia (particularly in the humanities,) the more languages one is expected to have some competency in, in general.

For example, philosophers are expected to have proficiency in German, French, Ancient Greek, or Latin. At the doctoral level, you have know at least two one modern language (German or French) and one ancient language (Greek or Latin.) Other fields that often have language requirements are International Relations, Political Science, Business, Sociology, and Religion.


In my personal experience:

My mentor is a person who has commendable competency in perhaps a dozen languages. He has refused to list off all the languages he has studied. I believe one of the reasons he is so good at his job is because he knows so many languages and that he has access to a myriad of books and papers and data that one cannot have access to when one hasn’t studied a language for acquisition purposes. 

Research, for me, has tended to lead me to raw data. Translated materials start with more than basic information start to become scarce very quickly. 

Then one enters a phase where everything one reads is raw data or research papers written in a foreign language (either the language one is studying or a common research language like French or German.) [I once had to read a Latin text talking about Byzantine Greek. That was rather… unpleasant.] 

Then the third phase one enters is when one is reading very recent research papers, which are often in English or in the language one is researching. The trade-off here is that they’re so technical that you often understand each word individually but can’t make heads or tails about what they’re talking about all together. 

The fourth phase is when you want to start truly doing pioneering work where you’re either studying very historical things, so looking at an old version of a language (like Middle English, Old Japanese, Classical Armenian, etc.) or a regionalized version of a language that nobody really writes down very often. People who are interested in Kansai-ben, the “Western dialect” of Japan, often spoken by one or two characters in any given anime, quickly discover that there isn’t a lot written in Kansai-ben, that it is not really taught as a language, and that almost all information on it is in Japanese. It’s at this level that you really have to be competent in another language. There is no getting around it. 


In conclusion,

It’s very likely that a linguist has to know another language. I’d personally bet that on average a linguist has a high proficiency is one other language and a minor proficiency in yet another. The linguists who know a huge amount languages are in the minority, but they do exist, and this ability of theirs does help their research.

_______________________________________________________________________

Okay, so how many languages do I speak? Since I’ve been writing about this, it’d be wrong for me to not speak about my situation. The short answer is that I speak four languages: Spanish, English, French, and Japanese. I can also read German and Ancient Greek. 

What languages are on my learning list? For work reasons, I will eventually need to know Middle Japanese, Old Japanese, Middle Chinese, Classical Chinese, and Korean. I don’t have to learn these. For personal reasons, I will probably eventually end up studying more German, French, and Latin. 

So that’s eight more languages.

I have a teacher with the last name Canard…

Canard in French means ‘duck’, but then while I was reading something about En Marche! I ran across something. They were talking about the criticism they get, and one of the criticisms it listed was from a paper called 'Le Canard enchaîné’.

This translates literally into

-the chained duck

But the thing is, in France if you use the word 'Canard’ as a verb, it becomes a slang word that means 'newspaper’.

It literally is called 'the chained newspaper’.

I just thought this would be funny to a few people that know this person *cough* @0tptrash @emberandshadow @tayleece *cough*