Dingus Dinguist

Your last warning before the Norman Conquest.

[Dingus Dinguist @DingusDinguist]

@franzsherbert So it may be helpful for them to learn that way (not a music person, so maybe I’m wrong there). Really, I think it’s a matter of whatever’s best for your field, and phonologists (at least IME) generally treat schwa as a mid central vowel regardless of whether it can carry stress.

[Dingus Dinguist @DingusDinguist]

@franzsherbert …use /ə/ for mid central vowel that can carry stress, and this is done for Akan, too.

Especially with singing, though, it’s not crazy to do it the way you’re describing. IINM, singers often have to be quite careful of the way they articulate vowels while singing.

[Dingus Dinguist @DingusDinguist]

@franzsherbert …⟨ə⟩ and illustrates different languages using “schwa” indiscriminately w/r/t stress.

So I don’t think the comic’s wrong, TBH. There’s at least nothing about the mid central vowel quality [ə] that’s repugnant to stress cross-linguistically, and AmE is a plausible example.

[Dingus Dinguist @DingusDinguist]

@franzsherbert …stressed and unstressed syllables and may lower to ≈[ɐ] when stressed.

AFAIK, stuff about schwa only being unstressed is an Americanist convention modern phonologists don’t strictly adhere to, IME.

The IPA handbook never defines “schwa” except as the name of the letter…

[Dingus Dinguist @DingusDinguist]

@theobronzor Happy birthday!!

[Dingus Dinguist @DingusDinguist]

@theobronzor So, if polygamous Christians have any sense about them or awareness of historical attitudes on this point (but, frankly, what are the odds of that?), they probably ought to conclude that it’s forbidden.

[Dingus Dinguist @DingusDinguist]

@theobronzor Can’t help with you modern polygamous Christians because I don’t know any and don’t think they have a formalized body of doctrine, but, TMK, mainstream historical Rabbinic Judaism and contemporary Islam both prohibit “multiple sexual activity” even within polygamous marriages.

[Dingus Dinguist @DingusDinguist]

@nyttypos …linguistics since the ’70s (and appear interpretively different from possessor-marked subjects, so the two aren’t always interchangeable), so they’re hardly ungrammatical, and many cases you post seem sincerely ambiguous between a gerund and a restrictive participle, anyway.

[Dingus Dinguist @DingusDinguist]

@nyttypos May I politely ask why you care about fused participles? This is a recurring theme on your account (which I genuinely find interesting!). Is it just because they’re a style violation? I only ask because object-marked subjects of gerunds in natural English have been discussed in…

[Dingus Dinguist @DingusDinguist]

@PatrologyVotary @punishedgnoll @lymanstoneky AFAIK, the reviewed view in the West is not that the exercise of the marriage act creates moral impurity if “impurity” is proper fault. The fathers can sometimes be hard to interpret on this, but, like, at least as early as Aquinas, theologians were teaching it was meritorious.

[Dingus Dinguist @DingusDinguist]

@theobronzor TBH, I wouldn’t necessarily trust that Everett’s representation of Pirahã epistemology is 100% accurate, either. His linguistic work is pretty middling, IMO, and part of the reason is that he makes very controversial, unsubstantiated theoretical claims on limited (real) data.

[Dingus Dinguist @DingusDinguist]

@RudeJackalope @godspeed_aflame But this doesn’t need the title. You can see the human mother with her young and the beast with its cub in the background, which immediately invites the comparison.

Even generously interpreting the first painting, the sword’s connection to the child’s father is much less direct.

[Dingus Dinguist @DingusDinguist]

@pourfairelevide I don’t think writing standards are wrong, so DFW isn’t bad for this per se, but “Authority and American Usage” betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of what language really is and linguistics as a discipline, so I wouldn’t say he’s doing it for good or even intelligent reasons.

[Dingus Dinguist @DingusDinguist]

@hf_222222 It’s of course possible in reality to be a wicked person and profit materially from it; but, when a story shows someone suffering the consequences of his own immorality, it’s typically portraying the intrinsic defects in evil acts, not giving a portrait of evil people IRL.

[Dingus Dinguist @DingusDinguist]

@hf_222222 But the movie isn’t reality. To me, this is like criticizing Glengarry Glen Ross for depicting real-estate sales as a morally and personally hazardous enterprise when, in reality, it’s likely very possible to be a lucrative, happy man in that profession (maybe even a moral one!).

[Dingus Dinguist @DingusDinguist]

@hf_222222 Maybe I’ve missed something, but, TBH, I don’t think the story’s moral dimension hinges on whether the gods are real and able to judge. The danger in Odysseus’s actions is that they per se disintegrate trust and social bonds (or at least this seems to be the movie’s suggestion).