Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
Outside of the box / Re: levy, privy, (heavy), savy - not savvy, ...
« Last post by waive15 on December 04, 2020, 02:11:12 AM »

Essentials of English Grammar, Otto Jespersen [PDF]
Linguistics Links / Re: Takineko's Japanese Lessons
« Last post by waive15 on December 04, 2020, 01:19:03 AM »

Eiichi Kiyooka - Japanese in Thirty Hours [1953, PDF, ENG]

I hope that this link will last.

I am sorry for the inconvenience.
Outside of the box / Hercule Poirot
« Last post by waive15 on December 02, 2020, 05:58:12 AM »


Hercule is French for/of Hercules.




"Poirot's name was derived from two other fictional detectives of the time: Marie Belloc Lowndes' Hercule Popeau and Frank Howel Evans' Monsieur Poiret, a retired Belgian police officer living in London.

Poirot is pronounced without -t. So it sounds like poireau (in French) which is leek.


Peter Ustinov about Poirot/poireau/leek

01:02 minute

The best Peter Ustinov Hercule Poirot film (for me) is Evil under the Sun (1982). There is plenty of Mediterranean sun, great costumes/outfits, Cole Porter's music and of course Poirot's french accent (+ french phrases).


In "my first foreign language", there is/was the expression "Big leek" which means Big Nothing/I don't care(="Big deal")/...
It doesn't matter how smart Poirot is for the British he is an outsider, a foreigner, a French (pardon, a Belgian, but who cares) i.e. he is a Big Nothing. He is called Hercules Parrot or Mr. Porridge or ... ("There goes the most insufferable man in the world." Daphne Castle, Evil under the Sun)

porridge (n.)


Patrick Redfern: ... If Giuseppe Verdi had been an Englishman, his name would have been Joe Green.

Hercule Poirot: Yes, I suppose it would.


Hercule Poirot: Joe Green... It's rather more amusing than at first I thought.


Hercule Poirot... It's rather more amusing than at first I thought.
Outside of the box / Re: levy, privy, (heavy), savy - not savvy, ...
« Last post by waive15 on November 30, 2020, 10:05:06 AM »


6.5 2 . The simple vowel u was used for the short vowel as in up, us, nut, full (3.7), etc.,
and for the diphthong [iu] or [ju·], frequent in French words like duke, use, due, virtue,
but also found in native words, e.g. Tuesday, hue, Stuart (the same word as steward).
But at a time when angular writing was fashionable, it became usual to avoid the letter
u in close proximity with the letters n, m, and another u (v, w), where it was liable to
cause ambiguity (five strokes might be interpreted imi, inu, mu, um, uni, uui, especially at
a time when no dot was written over i)
; hence the use of o which has been retained in a
great many words: monk, money, honey, come, won, wonder, cover (written couer before
v and u were distinguished), love, etc.
A merely orthographic distinction is made between son and sun, some and sum.
6.6 1. In ME. vowels were frequently doubled to show length, and many of these
spellings have been preserved, e.g. see, deer, too, brood, though the sounds have been changed so that they no more correspond to the short vowels.

6.6 2 . But neither a nor u were doubled in that way; and instead of writing ii it became
usual to write y.
This letter, which in Old English served to denote the rounded vowel
corresponding to (=Fr. u in bu, German ü in über), has become a mere variant of i
used preferably at the end of words, while i is nsed in the beginning and interior of
words; hence such alternations as cry, cries, cried; happy, happier, happiest, happiness;
body, bodiless, bodily, etc. But y is kept before such endings as are felt more or less as
independent elements, e.g. citywards, ladyship, twentyfold, juryman. After another vowel
y is generally kept, e.g. plays, played, boys; cf., however, laid, paid, said (but lays, pays,
says: too much consistency must not be expected).
In some cases homophones are kept apart in the spelling: die (with dies, but dying,
because ii is avoided)—dye, flys, “light carriages,” but otherwise ƒlies (sb. and vb.).
Further, y is written in many originally Greek words: system, nymph, etc.
Before a vowel, y is used as non-syllabic , i.e. [j], e.g. yard, yellow, yield, yole, yule,
6.7. Doubling of consonants has come to be extensively used to denote shortness of
the preceding vowel, especially before a weak syllable, e.g. in hotter, hottest from hot,
sobbing from sob. Instead of doubling k, ch and g
the combinations ck, tch and
dg(e) are written, e.g. trafficking from traffic, etch, edge
On account of the phonetic development, however, a double consonant is now written
after some long vowels, e.g. in roll, all, staff, glass, which had formerly short vowels.
6.8. Though since the introduction of printing a great many minor changes have taken
place without any great consistency, such as the leaving out of numerous mute e’s, only
one important orthographic change must be recorded, namely, the regulating of i and j, u
and v, so that now i and u are used for the vowels, j and v for the consonant sounds,
while, for instance, the old editions of Shakespeare print ioy, vs, υpon, fiue, fauour=joy,
us, upon, five, favour. The old use of u for the consonant explains the name of w: double


p. 44, Essentials of English Grammar, Otto Jespersen


Before the 1700s, the pointed form v was written at the beginning of a word, while a rounded form u was used elsewhere, regardless of sound. So whereas valor and excuse appeared as in modern printing, have and upon were printed haue and vpon. Eventually, in the 1700s, to differentiate between the consonant and vowel sounds, the v form was used to represent the consonant, and u the vowel sound. v then preceded u in the alphabet, but the order has since reversed."

English, Etymology 1


In Middle English, -u- and -v- were used interchangeably, though with a preference for v- as the initial letter (vnder, vain, etc.) and -u- elsewhere (full, euer, etc.). The distinction into consonant and vowel identities was established in English by 1630, under influence of continental printers, but into 19c. some dictionaries and other catalogues continued to list -u- and -v- words as a single series.


Have a nice day.
Outside of the box / levy, privy, (heavy), savy - not savvy, ...
« Last post by waive15 on November 09, 2020, 04:39:39 AM »
* Space.

   * Space "has" Logic (Rules).

   * Space may have (sub)Spaces.
      * (upper)Space is Connection_without_order(Set) (or NonGenitive_Connection) for/to its (sub)Spaces.
      * Logic(Rules) of (sub)Space doesn't(don't) contradict Logic(Rules) of (upper)Space.

Written English(language) is Space.

"Language is the dress of thought; every time you talk your mind is on parade."
Samuel Johnson

/in another words/
Written (English) language matches (English) thought.
/at "a certain point of time"/

 * Written (English) Word depends on its origin.

 * Written (English) Word is Elegant (in (an) English way/Logic).
    /dictionary com - elegant/



1st  syllable: lev-
2nd syllable: -y



1st  syllable: priv-
2nd syllable: -y



1st  syllable: heav-
2nd syllable: -y


savy (not savvy)

1st  syllable: sav-
2nd syllable: -y

/dictionary com - levy/privy/heavy/savvy - press on SHOW IPA (to see syllables)/
/etymonline com - origin/

-vv- is as "ugly" as -ii- (in English). Written(English) words don't end in -i or -u (except for thou and you) nor have -ii- or -vv- within/inside.
/lie - liing   -   lie - lying; .../


* Written (English) Word does not indicate Stress.

   The farm was used to produce produce.
   The soldier decided to desert his dessert in the desert.
   Since there is no time like the present, he thought it was time to present the present.
   The insurance was invalid for the invalid.


* Written (English) Word does not indicate (in general) Open/Close Syllable.
   /although Open and Closed syllable is well defined, Long/Short vowel has different (practical) meaning on the "Island(-s)" and on the "Continent".
  /for example: stop - stopping. -pp- 
                                                     on the "Island(-s)"  - 1st  -p- is pronounced
                                                     on the "Continent"  - 2nd -p- is pronounced

* ...


affixes org

etymonline com



Rene Magritte "Prohibited Reproduction... Portrait of Edward James" 1937

Gödel, Escher, Bach /a book by Douglas Hofstadter/

Some expect Portrait of Edward James (recursion/embedding in a "somewhat circular" way).
/well, ... if one looks closely .../


Outside of the box / Re: Spelling (and Morphology (and Syntax (and Punctuation)))
« Last post by waive15 on November 02, 2020, 12:21:08 AM »


Written word, Spoken word, Misspelled word, Mispronounced word, ... , Meaning.

That above is a Set (Connection without order) or Equivalency (for now it is of little importance whichone it is). Let's take it as a Set for simplicity. Also for simplicity Word will mean what everyone is accustomed to (but later Word will be used with a broader meaning).

Written word - encoding of letters (and signs)

Spoken word - encoding of sounds

Misspelled, Mispronounced word - encoding Recognized as the word in question


Meaning - encoding of/through Things  and Spaces

(The) Set of the above is (the) Word.

Meaningful_Word is the Set(Word) which contains Meaning.

not_Meaningful_Word(gibberish, babble) is a Set(Word) which does not contain Meaning.

Yes, it is strange that the Meaning (of (a) Word) is the same type as Written Word or Spoken Word. Written and spoken Word are understood as "physical"/"real" and Meaning (of (a) Word) is understood not as such (as something different). Well, that is not the case.


(grapheme, phoneme, gesture, ...  Let's use Letter and -graph for simplicity)



Mono-, Di-, Tri-, ... -graph

Monograph is Letter.

#-graph(-s) is/are made of Letter(-s).


Morpheme(-s) is/are made of #-graph(-s).

Linking Letters(actually Monographs) are Morphemes.
/Monograph is used for simplicity/


Word(-s) is/are made of Morpheme(-s).


Mono-, Di-, Tri-, ... , -phrase

Monophrase is Word.

#-phrase(-s) is/are made of Word(-s).


Sentence(-s) is/are made of #-phrase(-s).

So /a generalization/

Letter is Word, #-graph is Word, Morpheme is Word, Word is Word, #-phrase is Word, (...) Sentence is Word.
/now one can see how Sentence is a Phrase made of phrases (Noun phrase(-s), Verb phrase(-s), ...)/


/let's say for simplicity that what is above is in "one" "logic"/

"Logic" (some (other) logic)

is/is not; +/-; true/false; good/bad; ...

Set(Connection without order) of 2 (3, 4 ...)
/People like Set_of_2 "logic". There are other/different "logics"/


Punctuation marks/signs

... (what are they/what is their meaning and purpose/...)

  ( )    -    '    .    ,    and so on
/(empty) space is a punctuation mark/sign too/

 - Line (1d); directions on that line (including Embedding)
 - Square/Rectangle (2d); directions on these (including Embedding)
   /Chinese and other characters, hieroglyphs, .../

 - ("combinations" of the above)

/2d; directions on the page; .../

  - Text ...


"Logics"("layers/levels" of "logics") in different languages



Outside of the box / Spelling (and Morphology (and Syntax (and Punctuation)))
« Last post by waive15 on October 31, 2020, 11:18:12 AM »

Linguistics Links / Re: Takineko's Japanese Lessons
« Last post by waive15 on October 31, 2020, 02:10:50 AM »

Japanese Writing and Pronunciation

In writing, a Japanese employs Chinese characters and kana together. A Chinese character has its individual meaning as well as the sounds, and it is employed for nouns, verbs, adjectives and such "solid" words. A kana represents merely a syllable sound and it has no meaning of its own. It is employed for endings, post-positions and such parts of less import. There are forty-eight letters in kana while there are a limitless number of Chinese characters.

It is not impossible to write everything in kana, but (1.) that will betray the lack of education on the part of the writer. Indeed, the original meaning of the word kana is substitute letter, and the Chinese characters are considered real letters (hon-ji). (2.) Although the Chinese characters are difficult to learn, once they are learned and mastered, they make a most rapid reading possible, because they convey the meaning directly to the eyes without resorting to the "sound".
p. 169, Japanese in Thirty Hours, Eiichi Kiyooka

Have a nice day
Linguist's Lounge / Re: Is preserving languages a good thing?
« Last post by FlatAssembler on October 28, 2020, 10:48:35 PM »
Quote from: panini
But obviously, you have to be in a context where there are sufficient numbers of fluent English speakers that you can actual speak English (and not just quasi-English).
And that would be a lot easier if Croatian (and other small languages) didn't exist, right?
Quote from: Rock100
The healthy nationalism according to me is when one is proud to be the member of the group and, probably, is ready to die for it.
Being proud to be a part of the group often blinds people to reality about that group. Nationalism prevents people from seeing that their government is corrupt, that they are better off if they move somewhere else... Not to mention "healthy nationalism" often leads to unhealthy nationalism.
Quote from: Rock100
And of course languages are a kind of “free” solution to the problem.
Again, languages aren't free. A lot of resources are spent on language learning and translation.
Linguist's Lounge / Re: Is preserving languages a good thing?
« Last post by Rock100 on October 28, 2020, 11:38:55 AM »
> So, what is healthy nationalism, according to you?
The healthy nationalism according to me is when one is proud to be the member of the group and, probably, is ready to die for it. The unhealthy nationalism is when one is ready to kill for it. The history classes make me think about the nationalities and religion groups as of examples when people are ready to kill other people just because they do not belong to their group.
>> Conspiracy…
> The vast majority of people have no such need. Those that do often happen
> only to speak the same language most people around them do. Furthermore,
> using a made-up language (yet alone an already existing language) is probably
> less secure than even the simplest ciphers.
I live in a country that is ranked third place in the world for immigrants (so it is probably the third best country in the world). I just describe what I see. For example, there is a behavioral codex to switch to the native language in your presence or to continue speaking their native immigrants’ language to demonstrate they do or do not care about or you are not welcomed. Migrants usually switch to their native languages in cases when they need to discuss something in secret, for example, you. This is not good or bad – this is just convenient for locals to estimate the attitude towards you. And of course languages are a kind of “free” solution to the problem. And when people see a “free” thing they usually do not care about quality too much. And the languages are the simplest ciphers that served this purpose for thousands of years. Of course, there are better solutions nowadays. But in too many cases the languages are enough.
>> Authentication purposes.
> Very unreliable. Furthermore, somebody being of your nation is no guarantee
> they won't harm you.
I have not estimated the quality of the solution. I have just pointed out on of the reasons for the peoples to preserve their languages. Of course, for some kinds of activity one would need to invent a stronger cipher. From the linguistic point of view the notion of the thieves' Latin is expressed with absolutely different words in Indo-European languages that makes at least me think the concept is relatively new. Languages are very simple and quick way to work as ciphers. Even a thieves' Latin is hard enough for the total majority of people to be fluent in – you may double check it with your very language if you will. So “nobody” uses a stronger ciphers (that would require a pencil and paper or a computer nowadays). For the total majority of practical cases the foreign language is just enough. During the World war II Americans did use Navajos for their secret military communications. They were the cipher and the authentication means including the protection from the man-in-the-middle threat.
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]