« first day (1489 days earlier)      last day (3227 days later) » 

3:43 PM
@l'électeur その話を続けたいのですか
また口論になるでしょう
またファンが減りますよ
@l'électeur 知らなくたって
ちょっとぐぐるか辞書引くかすれば、
結構、載ってると思うんですが
品詞とか、くらいなら・・
@dinogeist 我ながら。。。
どうなんだろう・・・
ぐぐったら、載ってはいるけど
間違いではないのでしょうけど、あまり使われていないような・・
@l'électeur なんでですか
 
Anonymous
4:11 PM
@Earthliŋ Do you think we need ? I was thinking it could be merged into .
 
Anonymous
We don't necessarily need separate tags for inflectional and derivational morphology
 
Anonymous
could be renamed to
 
Anonymous
Maybe there could be a tag, I don't know
 
@Daniel I think すぐ(に) is like 'at once' 'immediately', もうすぐ is like 'before long'
@snailboat でんでん虫の写真が変わった
カラフル
 
Anonymous
@Choko It's supposed to be rainbow colored :-)
 
Anonymous
4:24 PM
 
へえ~虹色のでんでん虫
見つけた! Cuban land snail だって
 
Anonymous
Polymita picta!
 
Anonymous
They come in lots of colors.
 
ああ!
 
Anonymous
 
4:32 PM
 
Anonymous
Aww, sleepy snails :-)
 
Anonymous
I'm not sure what the Japanese term for polarity items is
 
@snailboat I don't even really know what it means. I think keeping related tags separated is only warranted if there are too many questions to browse through, so it's useful to keep the list of questions separate. Merging would result in 18 questions. That's not a lot, and it would avoid confusion when tagging. In my opinion, any question about morphology should just be tagged . If anyone looks for answers mentioning "derivational morphology", there's still the search function.
 
Anonymous
I've read about 否定副詞 like けっして or めったに
 
Anonymous
@Earthliŋ Morphology can be broadly divided into two categories: inflectional and derivational
 
Anonymous
4:44 PM
We don't have a tag for inflectional morphology...
 
Hm... I'm still for merging, just because we have few questions. Or maybe retagging is better, so we can use derivational-morphology and inflectional-morphology if we ever need them as separate tags...
 
Anonymous
Yeah, I'd rather merge too :-)
 
volitional-form is better, I think. It's also consistent with potential-form
and [potential] just looks confusing
@snailboat Did you see the message about the plurals I posted in chat (pinging you and jkerian)?
 
Anonymous
I'm not sure
 
Anonymous
I changed some tags to have plural form
 
4:48 PM
[song-lyric]?
 
Anonymous
Like phrase → phrases
 
Anonymous
@Earthliŋ That's weird, isn't it?
 
Yeah, what's a single song lyric anyway?
I saw you renamed [name] to [names]
What about [negative-forms]? I'd prefer [negation] instead, because [negative-forms] sounds like it's a specific conjugation of something...
@snailboat One more [formal-noun] → [formal-nouns]
 
Anonymous
Yes, [negative-forms] is ambiguous but it sounds like it's referring to negative inflections
 
Anonymous
Negation should unambiguously include lexical negation like 不- in 不可能
 
4:52 PM
yeah
 
Anonymous
For that matter, [negation] should include semantic topics like scope of negation
 
Anonymous
(Not that we ever talk about stuff like that here...)
 
But at the moment such a question would probably be tagged [negative-forms] or worse, [negation], which would result in a tag mess... I vote for [negation]
Sorry, I have to leave. Feel free to post more chat messages, I'll get back to them in a couple of hours.
 
Anonymous
Is copula okay being singular?
 
Anonymous
 
Anonymous
4:56 PM
People often say "the copula" when talking about Japanese, as though it has only one
 
I was wondering about that actually. Somewhere it said な came from なる...
 
Anonymous
Yes な < なる < にある I believe
 
Then there are at least two =)
or is な not a copula?
 
Anonymous
It can be considered 断定の助動詞「だ」の連体形「な」
 
Hm... What's the plural of copula. copulae or copulas?
 
Anonymous
4:58 PM
Yes
 
Anonymous
I'm partial to irregular plurals :-)
 
4
Q: Plural of "copula", does "copulas" or "copulae" sound more professional?

hippietrailWhen talking in linguistics topics about the word "to be" and its foreign language equivalents like Spanish "ser" and "estar", the name of this kind of special verb is "copula". But copula has two plural forms: Regular English plural: "copulas" Irregular Latin plural: "copulae" In a formal c...

 
Anonymous
Phalanges, atlantes
 
is data plural for you?
 
Anonymous
Generally no
 
5:00 PM
so "the data suggests"...
hm...
 
Anonymous
Yes, the data suggest is highly marked
 
anyway, I have to leave
ttyl
 
Anonymous
But I think it sounds normal to some speakers
 
Anonymous
Later! :-)
 
Anonymous
The weird thing is that Japanese has な < なる < にある and た < たる < てある but not だ < *だる < である
 
Anonymous
5:10 PM
Why do we have a tag but not a tag?
 
Anonymous
Most of our tags have translations now! :-) But the tags still need some cleaning up.
 
Anonymous
6:01 PM
すみてしよう maybe? I am not sure. — Kaizokugari 2 mins ago
 
Anonymous
「すみてしよう」?
 
7:45 PM
@snailboat Great! That brings us to macrons. We have but or . Since we can have macrons, I think it'd be nice to use them, but they're not very user-friendly: typing reny finds the tag [renyōkei], but renyo doesn't! Would that be something we can request as feature (i.e. treat ō as o)?
 
Anonymous
@Earthliŋ I can try setting up a tag synonym
 
I guess that works
 
Anonymous
Now if you type renyo, then renyōkei comes up
 
ooohhh, wonderful
another one [rōmaji]
and [joyo-kanji]
 
Anonymous
8:00 PM
I added 文語 to the tag wiki for
 
Anonymous
I can't help but feel our tag wikis could be better if we weren't constantly trying to outsmart the misfeature that hides text before "is" and such
 
hm...
maybe that feature could be disabled...?
 
Anonymous
Putting in that hack was not one of SE's finer moments
 
I found a number of other ones as well... that are apparently also hides itself and anything that comes before it...
But all in all I should like to say our tag wikis look a lot more professional in comparison to two weeks ago...
 
Anonymous
27
Q: New tags page mangles tag wiki excerpts

mindcorrosiveWith the tag page changed, there are some.. let's call them "controversial" opinions whether it's an improvement or not; I'd rather not comment on that, but point out a certain "feature" in the tag excerpts wikis which are shown on the \tags page: Case in point from the TeX-SE tags page: http:/...

 
8:11 PM
I want my Meta account back, just to downvote the answer there... =)
(and upvote your comment, of course)
 
Anonymous
 
Anonymous
This could become causatives or possibly causation
 
I'm for causation, like negation. I think causatives sounds clumsy...
Or causative-fom if it's a "form"
I vote causation
 
Anonymous
Linguists do tend to say morphological causatives and lexical causatives
 
Anonymous
But then, they also say causation
 
Anonymous
8:19 PM
The Wikipedia article is titled causative
 
Anonymous
In linguistics, a causative (abbreviated CAUS) is a valency-increasing operation that indicates that a subject causes someone or something else to do or be something, or causes a change in state of a non-volitional event. Prototypically, it brings in a new argument (the causer), A, into a transitive clause, with the original S becoming the O. All languages have ways to express causation, but differ in the means. Most, if not all languages have lexical causative forms (such as English rise → raise, lie → lay, sit → set). Some languages also have morphological devices (such as inflection) that change...
 
hm... I'm not familiar enough with linguistics to be entitled to an opinion
 
Anonymous
Hmm, well, I think both causatives and causation would work
 
but for us "causative" sounds like there's only one, presumably -(s)ase-
"causation" sounds more general
negatives would also have made sense, right?
I'm quite happy with negation, though.
 
Anonymous
I think so, but I like negation
 
Anonymous
8:22 PM
I think when you just write causative as a tag, it sounds like an adjective, and I think it sounds weird having adjective tags
 
Anonymous
I went with causation for now
 
Anonymous
We can always revise things if people have strong opinions :-)
 
Anonymous
 
there's imperatives, should we make that imperation? ;)
 
Anonymous
@Earthliŋ Let's not and say we did! :-)
 
Anonymous
8:25 PM
Conjunctions is an interesting case
 
@snailboat Why?
 
Anonymous
In Japanese, 接続詞 'conjunctions' and 接続助詞 'conjunctive particles' are two different parts of speech
 
Anonymous
Looking over the questions that have been tagged this way, the tag appears to span both of them.
 
Uh-oh
So... 接続 or 接続詞・接続助詞?
 
Anonymous
Which makes sense. There's a lot of overlap between those categories to begin with. Like, けど can be either one.
 
Anonymous
8:28 PM
@Earthliŋ How about we go with the latter? That way we're explicitly covering both parts of speech
 
@snailboat ahem... example?
 
Anonymous
See, it's a 接続助詞 when it's clause-final, and it's a 接続詞 when it's clause-initial
 
I see
なので is also a 接続詞, then?
(and a 接続助詞, too?)
 
Anonymous
That's a newer one so not all dictionaries list it, but 明鏡 does list the sentence-initial usage as a 接続詞
 
Anonymous
8:32 PM
But it's not usually listed as a 接続助詞 because it's still thought of as a 連語 consisting of な+の+で
 
I see
I made it 形容詞・形容動詞 and not 形容(動)詞. I think the former looks prettier and parentheses aren't really used in Japanese, so I think we should go with 接続詞・接続助詞. Agreed?
 
Anonymous
At least in its standard usage at the end of a clause
 
Anonymous
@Earthliŋ I like it better with the dot :-)
 
ok, done
 
Anonymous
Yay!
 
8:34 PM
diminutive
 
Anonymous
Like hypocoristics!
 
Anonymous
Sorry, I can never pass up an opportunity to say "hypocoristic"
 
Yes, like hypocoristics
=)
 
Anonymous
I didn't know what to suggest for a translation for that tag
 
キュート化語
 
Anonymous
8:38 PM
Oh, right, that should be plural, huh? diminutives
 
diminutives, yes
 
Anonymous
My dictionary says 指小辞
 
Anonymous
> 日本語のチャン,ドイツ語の-chenのように,・・・
 
Anonymous
Looks like it might be right! :-)
 
8:39 PM
Yeah, that looks good.
 
Anonymous
The subject tag could become subjects, and doesn't have a tag wiki yet
 
Anonymous
I'm not sure whether aspect should be 相 or アスペクト
 
Anonymous
I put 相 for now
 
Anonymous
And 時制 for tense, although I could change those two to テンス and アスペクト
 
Anonymous
I don't see any singular tags left, although I do see adjective tags ()
 
Anonymous
8:48 PM
This could be colloquial-language or colloquialisms
 
Anonymous
We have , and that could be 挨拶, but then the Japanese term would be broader than the English
 
Anonymous
So I wasn't sure what to put as the translation
 
Anonymous
I wish I could see who wrote all these tag wikis.
 
Anonymous
Most of them were "written" by Community.
 
9:05 PM
@snailboat What does that mean? Low-rep users wrote them and reviewers approved them?
as for [colloquial] I'm not sure if people really distinguish it from [spoken-language]
 
Anonymous
That's a good point.
 
I think of them as different
So I'd prefer colloquialisms
but I just choose between them by gut feeling, so I'm not sure there really is a difference
 
Anonymous
If distinguishing will confuse our users, maybe we shouldn't
 
I haven't looked at the questions, so I don't know for sure
 
Anonymous
Do you think it's okay to use 挨拶 as a tag translation even though it's not quite perfect?
 
9:12 PM
Are colloquial-language and spoken-language synonyms for you?
 
Anonymous
For greetings
 
Anonymous
No, not for me personally
 
OK
@snailboat yeah, I thought about 挨拶, too
is there a better English word?
 
Anonymous
Salutations? :-)
 
9:45 PM
Not better
Oh, another one I'm not sure about is [contractions]. 省略 is already a translation for [ellipsis]
縮約?
 
 
2 hours later…
11:54 PM
その話て、おっさんの話?
これ以上好感度下げられへん、
ぐぐれても、苦手な人は一生苦手なんちゃう?文法て?
普段から意識してないと、急に人には説明できひんってゆうか。
なんでて、ここにおっても居場所あらへんし。
おらん方が、こいさん活動しやすいんちゃうの?
 

« first day (1489 days earlier)      last day (3227 days later) »