And so, it’s happened. It happened to The Huffington Post. It happened to The Guardian. And now it’s happened to us, too. Oh, how the mighty (!) have fallen. It was always going to happen, really, …
A new blog post! On funky quirks of the English language you may well do on a daily basis, but may not know have names, structure and really cool explanations!
I’m pretty sure I’m very late to the game on this one, but I’ve recently discovered Postmodern Jukebox and want to make sure no one else misses it.
Postmodern Jukebox is a project by Scott Bradlee and friends that re-imagines current pop hits using vintage ’40s, ’50s and ’60s music styles, like jazz, swing and Motown.
Bastille’s "Pompeii" (featured) becomes a Mad Men-inspired song, Ellie Goulding’s "Burn" becomes a ’60s girl-group piece, complete with Flame-O-Phone, and Pitbull and Ke$ha’s "Timber" becomes a 1950s doo-wop ditty.
All their stuff is great, and you can watch all of their videos here.
Q:Why do dogs tilt their heads to the sides in that adorable way when they are confused/thinking?
Well, we don’t really know, but there’s some evidence that it has to do with the shape of their faces. Dogs are constantly scanning the faces of their owners (and other dogs) searching for emotional context. We know that for sure, which is pretty cool. But it appears that their big adorable dog noses actually prevent them from seeing the lower part of your face when they’re looking at you. When they turn their heads to the side, the muzzle isn’t blocking your mouth anymore so they can get the full picture again.
This clever hypothesis was tested by seeing if dogs without large muzzles tilted their heads less and, indeed, they do!
This is pretty cool. Also, SciShow is great.
So you know what I don’t get? Why people repeat words. (x)
Grammar time: it’s called “contrastive reduplication,” and it’s a form of intensification that is relatively common. Finnish does a very similar thing, and others use near-reduplication (rhyme-based) to intensify, like Hungarian (pici ‘tiny’, ici-pici ‘very tiny’).
Even the typologically-distant group of Bantu languages utilize reduplication in a strikingly similar fashion with nouns: Kinande oku-gulu ‘leg’, oku-gulu-gulu ‘a REAL leg’ (Downing 2001, includes more with verbal reduplication as well).
I suppose the difficult aspect of English reduplication is not through this particular type, but the fact that it utilizes many other types of reduplication: baby talk (choo-choo, no-no), rhyming (teeny-weeny, super-duper), and the ever-famous “shm” reduplication: fancy-schmancy (a way of denying the claim that something is fancy).
screams my professor was trying to find an example of reduplication so the next class he came back and said “I FOUND REDUPLICATION IN ENGLISH” and then he said “Milk milk” and everyone was just “what?” and he said “you know when you go to a coffee shop and they ask if you want soy milk and you say ‘no i want milk milk’” and everyone just had this collective sigh of understanding.
Another name for this particular construction is contrastive focus reduplication, and there’s a famous linguistics paper about it which is commonly known as the Salad Salad Paper. You know, because if you want to make it clear that you’re not talking about pasta salad or potato salad, you might call it “salad salad”. The repetition indicates that you’re intending the most prototypical meaning of the word, like green salad or cow’s milk, even though other things can be considered types of salad or milk.
Can I make love to this post?… Is that a thing that’s possible?
A survey by the Pew Research Center in conjunction with Rutgers University has found that social media doesn’t encourage discussion on controversial subjects. It may, in fact, cause people to stay quiet.
The survey, conducted among 1,801 U.S. adults, asked people about their willingness to discuss the Edward Snowden leaks on social media and in person. Social media users demonstrated a particular hesitance to discuss the topic — 86% of those surveyed said they wold be willing to have an offline discussion on Snowden, while only 42% of Facebook and Twitter users said they would post about it online.
Interesting article. Plus, as people who know me in person might be able to tell, that’s me in that photo at the top of the post. I took that image and posted it to Flickr in 2009. It sure would have been nice to be given credit, as is clearly required in the Attribution-ShareAlike Creative Commons license I used for the photo. I will note that my photo was not used for Mashable’s article on their website, just on the blog post; perhaps that is how it got overlooked.
I’m not really mad, but it’s clearly very easy to take an image/content from the web and not give credit to its creator(s), and I wanted to point out when it happened to one of mine.