yes i just used that as a verb

German Word of The Day

müllern (verb) - to ‘Müller’ it , named after world renowned footballer Thomas Müller, usually used in context relating to football : 

  • English
    • Gosh did you see that crazy goal Robert scored the other day?
    • Yeah he really müllered the ball into the goal! 
  • Deutsch
    • Hast du das Tor von Robert gesehen? 
    • Ja, er hat wirklich das Ball gemüllert! 

You know, it pisses me off whenever I hear people saying “all words in the English language were made up, so why can’t we make new pronouns?” and “new words are made every day, why can’t people accept my bunself pronouns?” 

Let me nerd out for a hot second and teach you guys a little linguistics. There are two lexical categories. Words in the “open” classes are nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs. It’s called open because new words are constantly added. I can make up a word right now, and as long as it has a meaning and is in an open class, people will be able to use it.

Then there’s the “closed” class. This includes prepositions, determiners, conjunctions, and yes, pronouns. Additions to the closed classes are very rare and difficult to grasp because they are part of the core of a language. You can’t just add things to a closed class because it just won’t work. It takes time to add or change things in closed classes, just look at how long it took for the singular “they” to become acceptable (and even then, it’s not entirely integrated into the English language yet).

That’s why trying to add new pronouns simply does not work.

The thing that’s always missing from those “don’t use said, use ___” posts is the fact that every sentence needs context.

You can’t switch out “said” for “expound” or “enumerate” if all that’s being said is “Yes.”

The idea behind these lists of “better words” is sound, but not all words in the English language are interchangeable, and the people who learn the most from them would also benefit from links to dictionary.com, because when you learn a new word you also have to learn what it means and how to use it.

I’d just like to see one post that lists a ton of dialogue tags and tone markers do the next step and define stuff and put it in context. They claim to help people make their writing better, but throwing a pile of verbs at aspiring writers isn’t actually that helpful.

It’s like handing someone the keys to a car and not telling them which pedal is the brake. Sure, maybe they’ll figure it out on their own, but why not just lead with that?

Hello!

Hi everyone!  I’m the other new co-mod here at the Gabriel Monthly Challenge! 

Originally posted by perditionraiser

I’m Rev!  I’m awkward and quite excitable and you can find me at @revwinchester (for fluff and angst) AND @impalasutra (for smut).

I have loved Gabriel since his days as the Trickster and was SUPER excited to find out this blog and it’s glorious mission existed when I joined Tumblr.  More Gabriel is always a good thing, if you ask me.  Now, I’m SUPER excited to join @lacqueluster, @ashiewesker, and @archangel-with-a-shotgun in this endeavor!

So, come write with us! Art with us (yes, I just used art as a verb, it’s what I do)! Love Gabriel with us! Because, really, what’s not to love??

Worried ( Laurens X Reader )

[ so ]

This is so fucking terrible idek why I’m posting it. Still doing it, yes, but God. I wrote it like a million years ago?? It was July, y’all. And um I had to change a lot of verbs because of P.O.V. and verbal tense so forgive me if anything slipped its way through my revision. And GOD I used to write like on the guys’ P.O.V.’s like first person. Wtf me.

Ugh. My head hurts. I actually took two school exams today so that should explain something. I might just lie down and stare at the ceiling for ten minutes or so now. Love y’all.


Word Count: 2.195

Warnings: (because there’s already too much drama about everything else in this fandom) straight Laurens, drinking, I think some swearing because it’s me but I’d never tell?

Setting: New York, Modern AU

Originally posted by hamiltongifs

Y/N yawned and forced herself to look back at the screen. Lafayette promised he’d text her when he and Hercules found John, and all she could do ever since they left was stare at her phone and worry. Alexander sat by her side, nervously typing and reading about disappearances on his computer, looking about as worried as she felt. She shifted on the bed, trying to get at least a little comfortable, and he looked at her.

“Hey”, Alex called. “Are you fine?”

Keep reading

anonymous asked:

Quick question with lesson 13 -을 거예요. With the verb 사다 and ㄹ 거예요 would turn into 살 거예요 which could also be the future tense of the verb 살다. Is there any way to tell the difference, or would I just have to look at the context of the sentence?

Hi anon, great question!

Yes, you are correct: for situations like this you would need to have a look at the context of the sentence to figure out what’s going on. In this particular instance, it’s pretty easy to determine 사다 vs 살다 in a sentence.

For instance: 편의점에서 우유를 살 거예요. (I’m going to buy milk at the convenience store). I don’t think the milk is coming alive any time soon!

The bigger problem with using context clues, especially for verbs (but this goes for nouns and adjectives in Korean as well) is when it comes to homonyms–words that are spelled the same and sound the same. Korean has a ton of homonyms and sometimes figuring out which one is being used can be tricky. The only way to mitigate that is to study a lot of vocab. :)

Hope this helps!

greymichaela replied to your post “is it plagiarizing if you read someone’s writing and their style is…”

It’s almost impossible not to absorb bits and pieces of styles we admire when we read. I consider that more an homage to the original writers than plagiarism, especially if you’re not straight up taking their words and using them yourself, like Sarah said. <3

yes, exactly - god only knows how much of my bullshit was a horrifying pastiche of gaimanesque sentence constructions after i first read anansi boys. like, thanks for the use of your structural integrity, neil, and also, i am so sorry.

fandom is kind of known for this sort of thing, too - we’re all transforming the work we ingest, sometimes very quickly and within very constrained circles of influence, so we pick up and create linguistic trends amongst ourselves. and this isn’t plagiarism. it really is just the definition of “transformative work.” one of my favorite examples is the verb “toeing” as in “toeing off one’s shoes,” which is apparently something we invented, and i now cannot use without smiling and thanking my fandom forebears.

Using the Genitive case in German

So in this post I’ll be explaining the case which everyone hates in German; the Genitive. I’ll make things really simple and explain how it works + verbs + prepositions + pronouns and some other things.

But no-one uses the Gen-

Shut up. Genitive is still used, yes definitely less and less, but you cannot just refuse to learn it because it is still used in print often!!!

1. What is it and how do I use it?

Good q!! The genitive case is used primarily for talking about posession - equivalent in English to saying “of the” or the good ol’ easy english apostrophe + s. Note: just because something is possessed, it does not make it genitive by default. Some examples:

Example: That is the man’s car. (Das ist der Auto des Mannes)
Example: Where is the girl’s cat? (Wo ist die Katze des Mädchens)
Example: I ate the cat’s mouse. (Ich aß die Maus der Katze)
Example: Those are his parent’s clothes (Das sind die Kleidung seiner Eltern)
Example: Jane’s book (Janes Buch - note NO APOSTROPHE)

These sentences thus read literally “That is the car of the man, where is the cat of the girl” etc. The last one is a small exception; if you’re talking about an individual you can just shove an s on their name and put the object after. Easy!

For those already familiar with the dative case, you’ll know that you can just put “von” instead. There are reasons why i dislike doing this in writing (dative has 3 diff articles you can mess up with, genitive requires less words etc), however if there is no article preceeding the genitive word you must use “von + dative” instead.

2. How do I form it (articles & pronouns)?

All of these are in order masculine, fem, neuter, plural
Definite: Des (+(e)s), Der, Des (+(e)s), Der
Indefinite: Eines (+(e)s), Einer (+(e)s), Eines (+(e)s), Keiner
Possessive: Meines (+(e)s), Meiner (+(e)s), Meines (+(e)s), Meiner
Personal pronouns: Meiner, Deiner, Seiner/Ihrer/Seiner, Unser, Eurer, i/Ihrer
Demonstrative: dessen (masc), derer (fem.), dessen (neut.), derer (pl.)

When you use masc/neut words in genitive you must add s or es to the end of the word!! Fem & Plural remain unchanged. The genitive personal pronouns are rarely used.

3. If I wanna say ‘my’ do I use Genitive cuz possession?

NO. You only use the genitive when saying my/your/his/her/its/ones/our/their if you need to say “OF my/mine/your/yours/ours/his/ etc.”

4. Genitive Phrases, Verbs, and Prepositions

Phrases: Some set phrases in German are already genitive - e.g. “eines tages” (one of these days). You’ll just learn these as you come across them, they’re nothing that special.

Verbs: Just like dative verbs, you can also get genitive ones though these are few and far between and most people will just use the accusative. I am only aware, of the top of my head, of three genitive verbs:

bedürfen - Ich bedürfe eines Hemds (I require a shirt).
sich erfreuen - Ich erfreue mich deiner Anwesenheit (I enjoy your prescence)
gedenken - Wir gedenken ihrer (We commemorate them)

There will probably be more but using these in the genitive sounds stiff, I would say perhaps do it in formal writing and speech but never casually.

Prepositions: *weeps* There are a small number of genitive prepositions… well I’ve actually read before that a book had something like 100+ genitive prepositions recorded down, but most of those aren’t gonna appear ;). The most common will be:

trotz (in spite of), wegen (bcause of), [an]statt (instead of), während (during), jenseits (beyond), inner/außerhalb (inside/outside of), infolge (as a result of).

trotz & wegen are used much more often in the dative by far, because they were originally dative then changed to genitive for some reason idek.

5. Anything else?!

One more small thing regarding so-called “da words” (damit, dagegen etc.). You can’t do this with genitive prepositions but instead you have to combine the preposition + demonstrative pronoun so;

trotz dessen (despite that)
während dessen (in the meantime/during that) > these can all be 1 word.
statt dessen (in spite of that)

And wegen has a very sexy special form for saying “for X sake”. You combine wegen with the genitive personal pronouns and replace the r with a t:

meinetwegen (for all I care/for my sake), deinetwegen (for your sake), seinetwegen (for his/its/ones sake), ihretwegen (for her/your/their sake), unsertwegen (for our sake),  euretwegen (for your lots sake).

I have also read in the past that genitive reflexive verbs do exist, but I have never found an example. I have searched the internet for a single example and I can’t find one, so if you find one… tell me… lmao.

6. Thanks! So should I use the Genitive or not?

In speech, probably not. I tend not to unless I’m using a genitive preposition (that isn’t trotz or wegen). In writing I do use the genitive over dative quite often, but I don’t use genitive personal pronouns/verbs unless the writing is really formal like an essay. It is really down to you but I would say as a general rule to avoid using it in casual speech excessively,

I hope this helps in some way - enjoy!

A Few Words About Kanae’s German in Chapter 51

Borg = castrated boar
It’s a very old word and not in use anymore! It literally just means “castrated male pig”, not pig fucker or anything like that. We don’t even have a word like that.

Ya is a misspelled Ja, which means Yes.
It’s basically pronounced the same way, that’s why this mistake happens pretty often. I still remember people writing Attack on Titan’s Eren Jäger as Eren Yaeger. Same mistake.

On a side note:
In chapter 12, Kanae remarks that Haise would be “a ridiculous name” and Imperial Scans’ translator’s note says “Heisse is a German verb that means to be called.” That’s kind of half-true. The correct infinitive is heißen.
Heiße
is the first singular person like in Ich heiße … = I’m called …
It’s probably just peanuts, but it kind of bothered me …

this-url-was-not-yet-taken  asked:

Hi. :) I need to say this to somebody who gets language. When you talk about someone who died you use the simple past for content and grammar reasons. I get that. We all know that among other things simple past is used to indicate a concluded situation. Here is what makes me angry. When I talk about my late grandparents I have to say 'loved' not love. How is it fair that I have to use simple past despite the fact that the love didn't die with them? Thanks for for letting me vent.

Ah, yes… This is where language breaks down. Every single language has issues like this, but they’re hard to spot. The situation here is that our tense system was devised mainly with action verbs in mind as opposed to stative or experiential verbs. So a verb like “jump” works just splendidly with our tense system. If you jumped, that happened and is done. There’s no way that that action could be continuing, and the tense morphology happens to align quite well with it. “Love”, however, is really a state of mind, more than anything else. It’s a property of the lover, and doesn’t affect the lovee (in fact, someone/thing that’s loved does not ever need to know about the fact that they’re loved. The lovee is simply the person or entity that engenders a feeling within the lover). Consequently, if you love your grandparents (which is the ideal situation), your grandparents need not be present—or, indeed, alive—for you to experience that sensation. And just because someone dies, it’s not like your love—your state of mind—evaporates. Of course it continues! That’s why we ache for those we lose. How “convenient”, in a utilitarian sense, it would be if it were literally impossible to love someone who wasn’t alive. The very instant they died, you suddenly wouldn’t care, and there would be no heartache. As tough as heartache is, though, I think I prefer the way things are.

Anyway, getting back to the grammar, the conventional interpretation of saying something like “I loved my grandparents” if they have both passed is that you loved them while they were alive, and of course still remember them fondly. That is a conventional interpretation based on the way the world works, though; there’s nothing in the grammar that suggests that that should be the interpretation. Indeed, as far as the grammar is concerned, “I loved my grandparents” is functionally equivalent to “I saw my grandparents” (e.g. at the mall earlier in the day. It happened, it’s done, you don’t see them right now because they’re not present). The dissonance you feel is certainly not wrong, but unfortunately there’s no grammatical fix. The only thing you can do is add more verbiage, and say something like “I loved my grandparents, though they are no longer with me” or “I loved my grandparents and continue to do so even though they’ve passed”. Very clunky; definitely not ideal. The good news is that most—if not all—people you will encounter never get the interpretation that you loved your grandparents at some point in time in the past and now you don’t anymore. If you think about it, that’s why we have to supply extra verbiage when you fall out of love with someone (e.g. “I loved her back then”, or “I used to love him”—of course then we apply our cultural conventional wisdom that if that was the case, then it wasn’t “real” love—as if “real” love is the kind that can never wane, so if it did, it wasn’t actual love. How silly! It’s a state of mind, a state of being, and you have no knowledge of your future. Who says it wasn’t real love back then?).

One annoying area of English grammar that I have trouble with is possessives. Possessives are very simple when it comes to objects (e.g. I’m wearing my jacket right now. It’s mine because it was given to me as a gift by my mother and I’ve had it for several years now. According to the law of the US, I legally own this jacket. Plus, conventionally, I’m understood to be the owner of the jacket. Furthermore, it is currently on me, so it is mine just by virtue of it being currently in my possession, just like a plastic fork I happen to be using will be “my” fork even if I throw it away later). That is simple. This is much less simple:

“You are my hero.”

“You are my idol.”

“You are my enemy.”

It’s like, “Oh, really? And how did you decide that? Did you ever think to ask my permission?” I mean, of course the meaning of it is totally understandable and these roles aren’t ones you need a person’s permission for (just like the lovee need have no knowledge of the lover), but the fact that we use possessive morphology makes it seem like an analogous relationship as “my jacket”. With the jacket I own, the jacket obviously never gave me permission: it’s an inanimate thing that humans can do with as they please. It has no agency. Humans do, though. So it’s weird to use this construction that very strongly implies physical ownership with another person that you may never have met and may not know you at all. It’s as if you’ve been claimed and purchased without ever being aware of it or consenting to it.

But this, of course, is just my issue with it. There’s nothing in the grammar that suggests that my interpretation has any validity: it’s just an association I drew. Furthermore, conventionally this issue with possession has to be vanishingly rare (I don’t know anyone else who’s ever thought the same thing). It’s just a weird quirk that I’ve got to deal with—like the fact that there’s no plural for “who” (so weird to me!).

Anyway, I sympathize with your issue. There’s nothing really to be done, unfortunately: You just have to deal with it or make it explicit when you speak. You can always try to create a new idiom and see if it catches on, but it’s really hard to do that. (No one uses my word tumblorg, for someone who uses Tumblr! I think it’s great!) But hey, though we suffer, we suffer together. Solidarity!