« first day (909 days earlier)      last day (3790 days later) » 

12:12 AM
@TokyoNagoya 早起きですねええ
 
いやマジで。だから読み専だったころ、変わったサイトだなと思ってた。丸写しでもめっちゃ評価される可能性が高いから。他のサイトなら潰されるタイプのやつがむっちゃ点数‌​稼ぎできるようになってる。
早寝早起きだよ。病院みたいな生活・・
 
 
4 hours later…
Anonymous
4:09 AM
English has something that Huddleston & Pullum call "covertly negative lexical items" in CGEL
 
Anonymous
That is, lexical items that take clausal complements, in which they license negative polarity items, even though there's no explicit negative or interrogative marker
 
Anonymous
This came up not too long ago on ELL
 
Anonymous
They put them into six categories: 1. failure, avoidance, and omission; 2. prevention and prohibition; 3. denial; 4. doubt; 5. counter-expectation; and 6. unfavorable evaluation
 
Anonymous
They were discussed before CGEL was written, where they had different names
 
Anonymous
So they're a fairly well known phenomenon. For example, the negative polarity item at all usually only appears in negative clauses, or in questions:
 
Anonymous
4:13 AM
"I don't like beef at all." (Negative)
 
Anonymous
"Have you cleaned anything at all?" (Interrogative)
 
Anonymous
The idea being that NPIs are incompatible with affirmative contexts, not that they require negative contexts
 
Anonymous
A covertly negative lexical item would be like the verb "doubt" or "forbid"
 
Anonymous
"I doubt he'll do well at all." (The presence of "doubt" licenses "at all" in the clausal complement)
 
Anonymous
I wonder if there's anything like this in Japanese
 
4:21 AM
"I doubt he'll do well at all." is something I accept but not something I'd produce, interestingly
Hmm, I would produce "I doubt he'll finish anything at all" though, I think.
 
Anonymous
Man, non-native speakers ask tough questions.
 
Anonymous
Someone asked why "here you are" means "I'm giving this to you"
 
Anonymous
@DariusJahandarie I was thinking about something we talked about a little while ago
 
Anonymous
I think the reason I came up with the wrong answer re: 投げない + は → 投げはない
 
Anonymous
Is because I forgot the idea of su-support, adding する to support the affix -ない
 
Anonymous
4:27 AM
投げない → 投げはしない
 
Anonymous
Do you like that any better?
 
ssb
4:51 AM
i'm sorry to change the subject but I was just asked something
"the girl who talked to you yesterday [is/was] my sister"
which one is correct?
i feel like both are right but with different nuance
@snailboat do you have an interpretation for this one?
 
@snailboat Yeah, I do like that
 
Anonymous
@ssb She was your sister yesterday, and she still is
 
Anonymous
So it doesn't really matter, since the use of the past tense is to indicate past time
 
Anonymous
and doesn't change the truth conditions
 
ssb
so would it be wrong to ask the question "Who was the person who talked to me yesterday?"
"That was my sister"
 
Anonymous
5:04 AM
I think it's fine, although my preference is to use a that-relative to avoid repeating who
 
ssb
ah yeah well repetitive who notwithstanding
 
Anonymous
Tense is relatively flexible in English
 
Anonymous
If you want to talk about the nuance, well, I think there's a difference, but not a relevant difference
 
Anonymous
But since there is one, you could come up with a context that makes the difference relevant
 
Anonymous
"The girl who talked to you yesterday was my sister, [but now she is dead / she has retroactively become an alien unrelated to me by blood]"
 
ssb
5:07 AM
but see I think if it's in the context of asking the question "Who was the girl who talked to me yesterday?" it doesn't really feel like it's implying that the girl is no longer that person
 
Anonymous
Yeah, it's not. In most cases, there is no contrast made
 
ssb
ok right, just wanted a confirmation of my instincts before i tell this person definitively one way or another!
 
Anonymous
I think you can come up with a lot of cases in English where usually no distinction is made, but it's possible (perhaps under very rare circumstances) to draw one
 
Anonymous
And this seems like one of those cases to me
 
Anonymous
5:59 AM
Hmm...
 
「大切な」って、「大事な」より、ちょっと女性っぽくない?
 
Anonymous
I don't understand user54609's reply to my comment (here)...
 
Anonymous
@ちょこれーと Really?
 
なんか、優しいていうか・・
 
Anonymous
Do you think so?
 
Anonymous
6:00 AM
Oh! The reply went away
 
事務的・フォーマルでなく、口語的だからかもしれないけど
消えたん?
 
Anonymous
I guess they deleted it . . . never mind!
 
読まなかったわ~
このチャットで一回だけsawaさんと話したんだけど、「うそをつけ!」「ばかを言え!」って、なんで「うそつくな!」「ばかを言うな!」って意味で使うんでしょうか、っ‌​て話したのよ
これはなぞのままだわ
 
いろいろググって読んだけど、「なるほど」と思うような答えは見つからなかった
おっと
 
Anonymous
6:06 AM
I guess you probably already read this :-)
 
これは読んだの覚えてる→ home.alc.co.jp/db/owa/jpn_npa?stage=2&sn=113
でもこれも「すっきり!」しなかった・・・
うそつけ、と ばかいえ くらいしかないもんね
「たべろ!」とか「ねろ!」とかないし
「しゃべれ!」とかも
 
Anonymous
 
Anonymous
Pages 232-233 talk about these idioms
 
Anonymous
(I haven't read this book, I just found it on Google)
 
そおか~英語でも say that again! とか
pragmatics とかspeech act の世界になるんだぁ
「もう一度いってみろ!」があった
英語のsay that again!はなんとなく、「もう一度いってみろ、(そしたらひどい目にあうぞ)」
みたいな気がする
日本語もきっとそう・・
夜にでもTNのおじさんに聞こう
TNのおじさん、こわいでしょ
ふふふ
おこりんぼだもんね
@TokyoNagoya おこりんぼ!
@TokyoNagoya 健康的でいいじゃん
「東欧を覆う」って耳で聞いたら「え、なんて?」っていいそう
「連声」>>「れんじょう」
「声」←じょう
読めなかった!
れんせい
 
Anonymous
6:31 AM
@ちょこれーと My input method doesn't let me convert れんじょう to 連声, either
 
Anonymous
I type れん<convert>こえ<convert>
 
Anonymous
I forgot where I learned that word...
 
Anonymous
It's pretty rare, isn't it
 
ssb
連声
score another for google~
 
Anonymous
Hah!
 
Anonymous
6:33 AM
The dictionary included with Anthy is all sorts of inadequate
 
ssb
why not try that mozc one?
 
Anonymous
Path dependence, I guess
 
Anonymous
I have a sizeable custom dictionary, and it's a pain switching, and even then it doesn't sound particularly promising
 
Anonymous
mozc doesn't use the data gleaned from Google's searches
 
ssb
ah yes, you and your custom dictionaries
 
Anonymous
6:35 AM
So it wouldn't work as well as the Google IME on Windows
 
Anonymous
Can you type all the radicals out of the box? Like 鬥 or 辶・辶
 
Anonymous
Or 扌 or 氵
 
I like when linguists wander onto the site.
Whether their answers are correct or not, they're always interesting.
 
ssb
typing 部首 gives me a very comprehensive list
𩙿
plus all the names of them as well, interesting. I need to learn more of those
 
Anonymous
Can you type them by name?
 
Anonymous
6:41 AM
Like とうがまえ or しんにゅう/しんにょう or さんずい or てへん
 
ssb
yes
 
Anonymous
Yay
 
ssb
 
Anonymous
Ooh, you've got three forms available for しんにょう
 
@DariusJahandarie I definitely agree, though in many instances I think input from non-linguists is as or more interesting
 
ssb
6:42 AM
之繞
 
actually, isn't there a decently significant population of linguists on the site already?
 
Anonymous
Haha
 
Anonymous
@rintaun Go team linguistics! ;-)
 
ssb
it's great to have a healthy balance of linguists and laity
laypeople
whatever
 
@snailboat yeah! high five
 
Anonymous
6:43 AM
I like laity.
 
Anonymous
I've never seen it before, but I likes it.
 
Anonymous
@DariusJahandarie Oh! I didn't notice my question had an answer, somehow :-)
 
@snailboat Impressive :)
@ssb Yup. Personally I like the knowledge, research, and mindsets that folks from linguistics bring, but the insane terminology and mathematics and such isn't always so great... it's good to keep the site oriented to normal folks.
 
@DariusJahandarie When I post linguisty answers, I try to define my terms, but it tends to become repetitive doing it in every single one... =/
 
Anonymous
I should have written a longer answer earlier when I used "matrix clause" without an explanation
 
Anonymous
6:58 AM
But I was writing it as I was falling asleep, from my phone
 
Anonymous
That's my excuse.
 
Plus, it's hard for me to know what terms need definition and which are commonly known, and I don't want to come across as condescending
 
Anonymous
"A verb is..." "I know what a verb is, you condescending jerk! It's a doing word."
 
lol
 
Anonymous
Also, a noun is a person, place, or thing.
 
Anonymous
6:59 AM
Semantic essence forever!
 
@snailboat Heh... Linguists and Laity... wonder if we could mix that into the site focus somehow
(usually I hear that as "Clergy and Laity")
which, in some ways, makes this all the more funny
 
the meaning of "matrix clause", though I'd never heard it before, seemed pretty clear from the context. I just wasn't sure of any nuances it held
 
Anonymous
@jkerian Yeah, apparently laity can be in contradistinction to other professions
 
Anonymous
I think Chomsky made up the matrix part. I still have no idea why "matrix"
 
I have a ~thousand dollar piece of junk sitting on my desk, that is unable to properly play a CD
 
7:02 AM
@jkerian true, linguists are basically the priests of the site ;)
 
Anonymous
Me too! Although mine is also not a CD player
 
ahahahahaha
 
@snailboat This is theoretically a computer, with a CD player. A characterization that I'm beginning to doubt.
 
Anonymous
I have a large number of CDs. They live in CD cases and in my closet, where I don't use them, ever :-(
 
@snailboat because Chomsky, yo. you don't question that. amirite?
 
Anonymous
7:03 AM
@rintaun I question Chomsky all the time. I think generative linguistics doesn't make any sense
 
Anonymous
But it works as a fun metaphor for describing language
 
Anonymous
It just fails as a formalism
 
Anonymous
Of course, I don't really question Chomsky all the time. I don't even know him!
 
sorry, forgot my sarcasm tag
 
Anonymous
Yes, please make sure it is attached next time.
 
7:06 AM
@snailboat One of the last things I purchased in the age of CDs was a 400disc CD changer. It's full... and it's honestly no more or less convenient than an iPod
 
@jkerian except that it's big enough to hold 400 CDs, right? :)
 
Anonymous
I'm having a discussion with user54609 in comments. It's going to get too long to keep in comments, though.
 
Anonymous
Necropost, but 行こう comes from ウ音便 too. The correct analysis should be 未然形 /~a/ + う + ウ音便; ikau -> ikoo. For some reason traditional grammar uses the unworkable kludge of proposing a 未然形 ending in /o/ though... — user54609 44 mins ago
 
Anonymous
Starting there
 
Anonymous
Also, I never argued that おう is not a single morpheme. A 未然形 doesn't really add a morpheme; I agree that such an analysis is too bound to kana. It is simply an irregular way of binding morphemes to the root, namely by adding in vowels. Historically endings with the same stem vowels had related meanings, so it makes sense to group them into things like 未然形 (talking about unfulfilled things), 已然形 (talking about fulfilled things), 連用形 (random other stuff), etc. — user54609 2 mins ago
 
Anonymous
7:08 AM
The thing that's weird about that is that the other 活用形 do all exist independently
 
Anonymous
That's why Bart Mathias denies that the 未然形 exists--because it doesn't have an independent existence
 
Anonymous
So depending on how you think about it, one of these things is not like the other...
 
how do you mean they exist independently?
 
Anonymous
Well, like 連用形 serving as the 中止形, for example
 
Anonymous
Or in my earlier example, if you add は to 投げない, you get 投げはしない
 
Anonymous
7:10 AM
It seems to be able to function as a word without stuff added to it at the word level
 
Anonymous
The 連体形 and 終止形 obviously can
 
Anonymous
And there are 命令形 that exist without stuff added to them: 聞け!
 
Anonymous
But when can you ever say 聞か
 
Anonymous
Or, for that matter, 行こ, not counting as an abbreviated form of 行こう
 
interesting point. that's definitely true, if you analyze the 仮定形 and 命令形 as the same
 
Anonymous
7:17 AM
Is 早かれ遅かれ an example of 已然形?
 
Anonymous
I was thinking that was evidence for the 已然形 existing independently at least historically
 
yes
 
Anonymous
Of course, you have ならば → なら, but that's cheating, I think
 
已然形 does exist independently historically
for example in 係り結び where こそ induces 已然形 in the main verb
 
Anonymous
Ooh, yes
 
Anonymous
7:20 AM
I didn't think of that
 
Anonymous
I really don't know that much about 文語 yet :-)
 
I've only just started learning myself :) mostly from researching answers for questions here, rather than my graduate research lol
 
Anonymous
I really like the topic of asyndetic coordination in Japanese
 
Anonymous
I was just thinking どうのこうの is another example, [ [ どう-の ]-∅ [ こう-の ]-∅ ]
 
yeah, it's pretty interesting.
 
Anonymous
7:30 AM
Of course, it's probably better treated as a single word, but you can divide up a lot of lexical items, like その →「其(そ)」+助詞「の」
 
Anonymous
I have yet to find a good description of asyndetic coordination in Japanese
 
Anonymous
So I've been collecting examples for the last year or so
 
Anonymous
Oh, I talked the chat room to death
 
Anonymous
Such is my wont!
 
@snailboat NO SURVIVORS!
 
Anonymous
7:34 AM
@jkerian Yay
 
what are some other examples you've come up with, out of curiosity?
 
Anonymous
> 咳、くしゃみが続く
 
Anonymous
> 時代劇などで「いざ、尋常に勝負しろ」などという「尋常」は、「素直」「潔い」といった意味で、これも「普通」の意味から転じたものである。
 
Anonymous
Examples / quotes are often listed together with symbols separating them in print, like 「素直」「潔い」
 
oh yeah I guess that is asyndetic coordination. neat
 
Anonymous
7:37 AM
And things often get listed with a center dot:
 
Anonymous
> ____の言葉の読み方として最もよいものを、1・2・3・4から一つ選びなさい。
 
Anonymous
"Listing" is a shorter, simpler way of describing these
 
Anonymous
> 逆らう者、命令を果たせぬ者は誰であろうとも容赦なく処刑する残虐非道さ……。
 
Anonymous
Here 逆らう者 is coordinated with 命令を果たせぬ者
 
Anonymous
> 子供、大人、老人—みんな本が好き。
 
Anonymous
7:38 AM
That one's from Wikipedia.
 
Anonymous
A lot of different things can be zero coordinated
 
Anonymous
One thing I considered was whether するしない and similar (「食べる食べない」「あるなし」など) were examples of coordination
 
Anonymous
But if we say that reversibility is one of the criteria for coordination, then they fail
 
Anonymous
You can't say *なしある, *食べない食べる, or *しないする, as far as I know
 
those are indeed zero coordinated. I'd never thought about any of those
 
Anonymous
7:41 AM
But! I think you can zero-coordinate verbs more generally
 
Anonymous
And this is simply an idiomatic pattern with additional requirements
 
that seems reasonable
 
Anonymous
I had found an example like 「食べる・飲むはできる。」
 
Anonymous
I have to distinguish which examples are marginal or ungrammatical at some point
 
hmm... that's odd to me. can you even say 飲むはできる?
 
Anonymous
7:45 AM
@rintaun I think maybe it would normally be 飲むこと?
 
Anonymous
I asked Chocolate about that one in chat. I asked "When you see 「食べる・飲むはできる」, does that seem a little strange in modern Japanese? Or does it seem normal? "
 
Anonymous
I was expecting to hear that it was strange
 
Anonymous
And the reply was "変じゃないですね~自然です" (link)
 
that's surprising to me
 
Anonymous
7:47 AM
10
A: What is the nuance when は directly follows a verb in plain form?

Tsuyoshi ItoThis construct was common in classical Japanese, but now it is archaic or poetic. In classical Japanese, the attributive form of conjugating words can be directly followed by particles which attach to nouns (without inserting の). 目指すは would become 目指すのは in modern Japanese, 吹きやまぬは would become 吹...

 
Anonymous
We found that answer in the discussion
 
Anonymous
@ちょこれーと Hello! :-)
 
へへ
@TokyoNagoya あらもうご飯の時間?
 
Anonymous
Maybe it's as though it's quoted: 「食べる」「飲む」はできる
 
but the example did get me thinking actually, is zero-coordination inside a noun-phrase different? e.g. 日々の業務で使う英語は、「聞く」「話す」より、Eメールを「読む」「書く」ことが多い仕事はかなり多いと思います。
 
Anonymous
7:50 AM
Different how?
 
そうかも。「食べることと飲むことはできる(けど何か他のことができない)」ってかんじ
 
Anonymous
I have some examples of zero coordinated noun phrases (I think I pasted a couple in here already)
 
Anonymous
I think quotes can be used like nouns syntactically
 
sorry, I wasn't clear what I meant
 
Anonymous
Actually, I've never been entirely clear on the status of quotes in Japanese grammar
 
Anonymous
7:53 AM
At least sometimes, they're used like nouns.
 
actually, I think I was just confused, and in typing my explanation, I have cleared that up
 
Anonymous
Ah!
 
Anonymous
I get confused pretty often when talking about Japanese :-)
 
but in something like 食べる、飲むこと what exactly is being nominalized?
 
Anonymous
ええと
 
7:54 AM
is it [ 食べる、飲む ] こと
 
Anonymous
食べること、飲むこと?
 
so the こと is being distributed through the coordination?
 
Anonymous
Is 食べる、飲むこと marginal?
 
Anonymous
(without quotes)
 
i think that it is
 
Anonymous
7:56 AM
I had actually asked about [ [ 食べる・のむ ] の ] が
 
assuming my understanding of the word "marginal" is not mistaken, which it may be
i think that it is
 
Anonymous
And one person said it was ギリギリ大丈夫
 
Anonymous
Which I translate as marginal :-)
 
brb, chat is freaking out
ah. lol
 
Anonymous
I assume the same applies to こと
 
Anonymous
7:58 AM
An example from a video game: HP、MPが回復した
 
Anonymous
> 何をもって本・雑誌を「読み終わった」とみなしますか?
 

« first day (909 days earlier)      last day (3790 days later) »