Comments

2

yaaqov wrote

And another I tried to start was a catch-and-mouse where the chapters alternate between criminal and detective however the twist is they can read the previous chapters and thus there is a whole level of them discovering what the other is doing and even intentionally altering their actions and concealing their motives as best they can to deceive the other.

This sounds really interesting!

5

yaaqov wrote (edited )

Honestly? Fuck that shit. This "reason" here is a colonial weapon. "(Ir)rationality" is often, oxymoronically though it may seem, molded to fit whatever political ends those who have a monopoly on the production of knowledge need it for, wielded to discredit knowledges which are subversive of or unassimilated into the narrow band of thought validated by the West or Science or whatever (an ever shifting span, mind you).

Of course, the analytical tools in this tradition can be helpful at times. But they are not the only valid ways of producing knowledge. To suggest that they are (which goes along with your conflation of rationality with "quality") only abets global white supremacy's continued erasure of all realities that could challenge it.

5

yaaqov wrote

In a ridiculous way, too: "... they remain puppets, and do not have a sexual orientation". Yeah, well, puppets don't have hair or eyes or voices or houses or best friends, either. But they have representations of or are imagined to enact all these things. C'mon. I bet they'd say puppets don't have race, either.

Reply to comment by /u/ziq in Friday Free Talk by /u/ThreadBot

1

yaaqov wrote

Yeah, they certainly are sweet. I had the chance to try a Chinese smoked plum juice, called suanmeitang. It's bit less sweet and more complex, but still really refreshing. I recommend it.

1

yaaqov wrote (edited )

I mean... This criticism could be levied against words in general. I don't think color terms are fundamentally different from, say, words for dog breeds, or genres of music, or political ideologies. "Unless you refer to a specific base pair sequence, [dog breed names] are basically arbitrary."

I'd also note that, on a different level, CMYK codes, Hz and BPM values, and genomes, are themselves arbitrary.

3

yaaqov wrote

In my own usage, I tend to reserve "magenta" only for that extremely saturated color that, along with cyan and yellow, is a "true" primary (pigment) color. "Fuchsia" is a close synonym, to me. Anything right around #FF00FF, you know?

On the other hand, I feel like mulberry has a good bit more gray in it... like #C03080ish?

1

yaaqov wrote

I didn't mean to indicate that u/bloodrose did anything wrong. The fact that f/memer was the best choice right now is exactly the point I was trying to make: there is no clearly relevant place to talk about language, right now, though there should be (in my belief). I'm sorry if that wasn't clear.

I actually made a proposal about this here. I would love to hear your thoughts! I'm not sure if by "I hate language" you also mean that you think a place for discussion about it would be a bad idea?

5

yaaqov wrote

Definitely. There seems to be no subforum that this fits easily into, though. I wonder if something like an f/language would be a good idea.

(Right now we have f/languages, which is billed as a language-learning forum, but whose few posts range broadly from language learning to linguistic imperialism to Esperanto videos. Its sole mod is also not an active member.)

3

yaaqov wrote

As far as I know, every structure in Klingon can be found in some language. That's more than could be said of Lojban.

And, well, Esperanto also allows plenty of consonant clusters that are rare crosslinguistically, like /gn/ or /kv/ in word initial positions, for instance. Lojban allows things like /txl/ word internally, where /x/ is the ‹ch› sound in "Bach" or "Chanukah"—also really marked in such a sequence. Of the most widely spoken languages on Earth, only Russian (and Arabic, depending on the variety) approaches the permissiveness of Lojban or Esperanto with respect to these factors.

4

yaaqov wrote (edited )

Lojban isn't particularly speakable, though. In addition to allowing sequences of sounds that only a very small number of the world's languages already do (thus making pronouncing it difficult for anyone who doesn't speak one of those languages already), its syntax and semantics is utterly unnatural, in many ways unlike any natural human language at all.

2

yaaqov wrote

  • I find myself picking up bones, shells, and exoskeletons;
  • I often impulsively purchase musical instruments (typically small/cheap, like slide-whistles or student melodicas);
  • I have a large number of books about the game Go that I think I knew I'd never read (I sort of horde books in general, usually under some pretense of eventually reading them);
  • I keep digital collections of thousands of PDFs of language grammars and other linguistics stuff, mostly compiled by other people and shared online.
8

yaaqov wrote (edited )

Well, most languages on earth probably lack a morphological future tense (that is, a suffix, prefix, or other change to the verb itself). As pointed out by other users, English can express future tense via other means, like a modal/auxiliary (eg "will", "gonna"). Further, sentences like "On August 6th, we're snorkeling." manage to express futurity without even these words, instead using a phrase—"on August 6th"—that is in some sense external to the main proposition—"we're snorkeling".

A good number of languages use only this strategy, or just plain old context (Thelma: "What are you doing tonight?" Joaquin: "I'm watching a movie") Here, the future interpretation of Joaquin's response comes entirely from the conversational expectation that answers are relevant.

And this isn't limited to the future tense; languages range from expressing a large handful of tense-like distinctions with morphology (eg, Latin), to making use entirely of lexical and contextual strategies to situate actions in time (eg, Indonesian).