English Language & Usage: Multi-Layered Discourse Room

9:00 PM

In English, we usually call not to-infinitives but -ing words verbal nouns (or sometimes deverbal ones, if they can’t take complements any longer).

But maybe I’m wrong.

To eat a juicy hot dog is better than to eat a dried-out one.

Cerberus

@JanusBahsJacquet So anyway, if your definition of infinitive includes non-finite, and if that means "cannot be the main verb of a complete sentence", then how about Latin and Greek infinitives? They can do that. Oh, and do you call the opposite of non-finite finite?

@tchrist Yeah kind of.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

@Cerberus How can Latin/Greek infinitives be the main verb of a verbal clause?

Yes, finite is the opposite of non-finite.

Cerberus

Well, they just can be.

And they can too in Dutch.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

No, I mean, give an example.

Cerberus

There is the infinitivus pro imperativo.

Of course I have to be careful if I'm going to make up an example of my own.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

9:03 PM

That is true—using the infinitive as an imperative is technically using it as the main verb in a clause; but I would argue that that is not syntactically an infinitive, but an imperative. It just happens to take the morphological shape of an infinitive.

tchrist

> And the Galician-Portuguese "inflected infinitive" (or "personal infinitive")[6] and the nasal vowels may have evolved under the influence of local Celtic languages[7][8] (as in Old French).

Cerberus

tchrist

@JanusBahsJacquet Spanish does that sometimes, uses an infinitive instead of an inflected imperative. I think they do it to make it seem less personal.

Cerberus

@JanusBahsJacquet Well, now you're on thin ice...

Janus Bahs Jacquet

@tchrist French, too, and German.

Cerberus

9:06 PM

And Dutch, and Greek.

But it can also be used instead of an indicative in Dutch and Latin, probably also Greek.

It may be of elliptic origin, or not.

tchrist

Janus Bahs Jacquet

Which part of that picture should I be trying to squint at and decipher?

Cerberus

No part.

Mitch

@JanusBahsJacquet The trademark.

tchrist

No pisar el césped.

Don’t step on the lawn.

Cerberus

9:07 PM

It explains the inf. pro imp.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

Yeah, I saw that at the end there.

Mitch

"Please to speak the English"

Cerberus

> Ik rennen, maar ik kwam te laat.

tchrist

I think the English have all by now to their beds long gone.

Cerberus

"I to run, but I came too late."

GnomeSlice

9:08 PM

@Cerberus nsfw

Cerberus

It expresses liveliness in the past.

Mitch

@tchrist The older ones. The rest are preparing for binge drinking.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

I got distracted by the yellow bits, wondering what πόλεϊ ἄκρῃ had to do with infinitives.

Cerberus

@GnomeSlice Depends on your workplace.

GnomeSlice

@Cerberus Hah!

Janus Bahs Jacquet

9:09 PM

@Cerberus Well, that’s just more bizarre than the Portuguese.

Cerberus

But I believe it is also possible in Latin.

I have to think really hard.

@JanusBahsJacquet I apologize, I don't get the yellow bits either.

Mitch

I'd rather not get yellow bits.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

@Mitch Sting like a mother

Mitch

Fly like a bee.

Cerberus

Ah, the infinitivus historicus, of course.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

9:10 PM

A bumbling one.

Cerberus

I forgot the name, but it works just like the praesens historicum.

> Et omnes ululare, clamare!

"And they all howled and shouted!"

So how "non-finite" is that according to your definition?

Mitch

pretty infinite, mighty white of you.

tchrist

> Temos ainda um dado da língua actual, desta vez de tipo morfossintáctico: a distinção típica e exclusiva do galego e do português, entre o infinitivo impessoal e o infinitivo pessoal, este último conjugado como qualquer outra forma verbal.

> Entre as línguas indoeuropeias, este fenómeno – presente também na região fino-úgrica – só é comum apenas à área celto-bretã (por exemplo, ev a ow clewes, ‘é preciso escutar’, ev a ow clewesyons, ‘é preciso que escutem’ [literalmente, ‘é preciso escutar-em’], *ev a ow leverelyn, ‘é preciso que escute’ [literalmente, ‘é preciso *escutar-mos’]).

Janus Bahs Jacquet

@Cerberus Couldn’t that simply be 3pl perfect?

tchrist

> Como é sabido, este fonema, presente no chamado
céltico «comum», desaparece em todas as línguas célticas históricas.
A sua presença no galaico (e no lusitano) é suficiente para a teoria
tradicional falar do não-celtismo da Galiza; como recentemente defendeu
Xaverio Ballester (2004c), o problema está ligado à situação geográfica:
se uma língua falada num território considerado originariamente
céltico pela teoria tradicional, num qualquer território do centro
europeu, mostrasse uma presença de /p/ pré-vocálico, esse vestígio

Cerberus

9:15 PM

@JanusBahsJacquet No, no, that would be a perfect stem.

Just plain old present infinitives.

tchrist

So those guys think it’s from a Celtic influence. Hm.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

Is there a difference (with these two verbs, I mean)? Ululāvere and clamāvere can be semi-regularly contracted, can they not?

tchrist

And ignore the bad asterisks. I just couldn’t get it to format right.

Cerberus

Umm those are the contractions.

I'm not sure what you mean.

tchrist

Paper is Alguns aspectos da Teoria da Continuidade Paleolítica aplicada à região galega.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

9:17 PM

Clamāvere > clamāre

Cerberus

I don't think that is possible.

At any rate, this is not restricted to verbs with a regular -v- perfect stem.

They might use, say, ferre, which is hardly a contraction of tulerunt/tulēre.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

If they do, then true

See here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_conjugation#Syncopated_verb_forms

Cerberus

Yup, it's simply the infinitivus historicus.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

So Dutch and Latin infinitives aren’t infinitives, then.

Cerberus

@JanusBahsJacquet Those contractions are common, yes, but you can't really contract clamavere any further, that I know.

@JanusBahsJacquet I would say they can function like finite verbs.

Which is of course outrageous.

But what can you do?

> só é comum apenas à

@tchrist Does this mean, "is less common than in"?

Or something similar?

Janus Bahs Jacquet

9:23 PM

No, “is only common in”

@Cerberus Exactly!

Cerberus

Ohh I mislooked, I thought it was followed by "Finno-Ugric", and then I didn't get it. But this makes sense.

Briton-Celtic.

I mislooked.

> não-celtismo

"Non-Celtism"?

Janus Bahs Jacquet

Yeah, apparently Breton has conjugated infinitives, too. Never knew!

Yup, the “non-Celticness of Galicia”

Cerberus

Ah OK, so the theory that Galicia was non-Celtic in some way (never colonised?).

I'm trying to read it without looking anything up...

Janus Bahs Jacquet

I’m guessing that’s what is meant, yes: the traditional theory being that Galicia was never part of the Celtiberian area … I guess.

Cerberus

Wait, so Galicia does not have the personal infinitive?

I assumed it did.

tchrist

9:29 PM

Yes, it does.

Cerberus

No, it does.

tchrist

Galician and Portuguese were the same language a thousand years ago.

Cerberus

So then why are they talking about how Galicia was not Celtic, if it and Portuguese took the personal infinitive from Celtic?

@tchrist Yeah I assumed they were...

But substrate influences can occur late, sometimes...

Janus Bahs Jacquet

The second bit is talking about the presence of the phoneme /p/, which was lost in Celtic

tchrist

Did you fetch the paper?

Cerberus

9:31 PM

No, just reading your quotations.

Either I made an interpretative mistake, or I don't understand their argumentation.

tchrist

Interesting that it’s the North of Spain rather than the northwestern reaches of the Iberian Peninsula. I wonder whether that is some political perspective?

Janus Bahs Jacquet

@Cerberus I’m guessing their argument is that the traditional theory (which says Galicia and Portugal were never Celtic, therefore Galician and Portuguese can’t have taken the conjugated infinitive from Celtic) is wrong, and that there was in fact a Celtic presence in that area that would enable the loan of the conjugated infinitive.

tchrist

@JanusBahsJacquet Right!

Cerberus

@tchrist Cool. So Gales is Wales, and oiro is...aes? Probably not aurum?

tchrist

@Cerberus Yes, Gales is Wales.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

9:35 PM

@Cerberus No, aurum

Cerberus

@JanusBahsJacquet Ohh...I thought what they said was the other way around. Let me read it again...

tchrist

Oiro is oro < aurum.

Cerberus

OK.

The root of aes is aer-, so it could have been either...

Janus Bahs Jacquet

Portuguese and Galician have lots of places where o becomes either ou or oi (somewhat at random, and sometimes interchangeably).

Cerberus

Or, rather, it is rhotacised between vowels.

OK noted.

tchrist

9:37 PM

@JanusBahsJacquet They’re very slippery, those Lusitanians: always sliding and gliding. Almost as hard on monophthongs as English, but not really.

Well...

They now tend to write ou to mean an unreduced o.

The glide is getting lost.

This varies. And if you catch an educated speaker and try to make him say words slowly in isolation for you, he’ll just put it back in without thinking, simply because it’s spelled that way.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

I’m lost in commas here:

> de facto, não só os territórios da actual Galiza foram povoados por populações célticas, como, desde o Paleolítico, já faziam parte, juntamente com as actuais Ilhas Britânicas – na época ainda não eram ilhas – e com os territórios do Ocidente atlântico francês, da pátria originária do protocéltico.

Are they saying there were already Celtic-speaking people in Galicia and the British Isles before the British Isles had become isles?!

And that Galicia/western France/the British Isles is in fact the Urheimat of PC?

Cerberus

> já faziam parte...da pátria originária do protocéltico.

This is how I read it.

@JanusBahsJacquet That is what I read.

I don't see how it could mean anything else...

Janus Bahs Jacquet

Well, that’s certainly brave talking.

Cerberus

If they locate the emergence of PC before the rising of the sea level in time, then that is probably very brave talking, right?

When were the British isles separated from the Continent?

I read the sentence as you do.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

About 5,700 BC, I believe

Cerberus

9:46 PM

Hmm.

So perhaps it is possible linguistically; but the Celts are always said to come from central Europe, and before that...from Asia Minor, i.e. Galatia, right?

Janus Bahs Jacquet

That means the article is basically Renfrewian. They are claiming (it was confirmed a bit further down) that the Indo-Europeans had been in Europe and Spain since Palaeolithic times.

Yup

Cerberus

Right.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

And the Indo-Europeans weren’t even in Europe at that time (by most accounts). They came much, much later.

Cerberus

Right.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

To the west of Europe, at least 3,000 years later.

Cerberus

9:48 PM

I believe the Celts settled in most of Europe in the first half of the first millennium?

Janus Bahs Jacquet

Something like that. Perhaps a bit early in the eastern-central parts.

Cerberus

Right.

Mitch

@JanusBahsJacquet Renfrewian?

Janus Bahs Jacquet

They’re also—as far as I know—wrong about their claim that conjugated infinitives exist in Finno-Ugric languages. Finno-Ugric languages have possessive suffixes that can be attached to infinitives, just as to any other noun, but I’ve never seen or heard anything about any of them having actual conjugated infinitives.

Cerberus

Probably some guy named Renfrew who has this theory.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

9:53 PM

@Mitch Colin Renfrew. Neolithic theory from the 1980s.

Mitch

Sounds like a Monty Python character.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

Anatolian hypothesis

The Anatolian hypothesis proposes that the dispersal of Proto-Indo-Europeans originated in Neolithic Anatolia. The hypothesis suggests that the speakers of the Proto-Indo-European language (PIE) lived in Anatolia during the Neolithic era, and associates the distribution of historical Indo-European languages with the expansion during the Neolithic revolution during the seventh and sixth millennia BC. The alternative and more academically favored view is the Kurgan hypothesis. The main proponent of the Anatolian hypothesis was Colin Renfrew, who in 1987 suggested a peaceful Indo-Europeanization of...

@Mitch Some in the field of Indo-European linguistics would perhaps afford him the same level of seriousness and esteem as one. ;-)

Cerberus

@JanusBahsJacquet Hmm but those languages are agglutinative, right? So perhaps they just mean all the stuff (number, person, tense) is added to verbs as multiple suffixes, so there is no real distinction between ending and (proper) suffix?

But I know nothing about those languages.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

They’re mostly agglutinative, but well on their way towards inflectiveness.

Cerberus

Oh.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

9:56 PM

There are definitely personal endings for verbs, and a completely different set of possessive endings for nominals. Infinitives take the latter.

Cerberus

OK so they do have a clear distinction.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

For example, taking the Finnish verb _antaa_ ‘take’, the finite (present) forms are:
annan – annat – antaa | annamme – annatte – antavat

The possessive forms on the infinitive _antaa_ are:
antaani – antaasi – antaansi | antaamme – antaanne – antaansa

So many of them are similar, but they are different sets.

Actually, I thought that looked odd when I was typing it. To add possessives to first infinitives—there are five ‘infinitives’, or noun-like forms, of Finnish verbs—you have to put it in the translative case first. Thus, the infinitive antaa has these forms:

annakseni – annaksesi – annakseen(sa) | annaksemme – annaksenne – annakseen(sa)

Cerberus

Interesting.

I see some similar endings/suffixes, as you say, but otherwise they look more like our finite verbs and infinitives, respectively.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

10:12 PM

0_o

Fanfic. :-S

Cerberus

Ummm...

Are you sure you are on the right Internet?

That is unreadable in so many ways.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

Anything that involves Justin Bieber getting his dick mangled off is definitely the right Internet.

:-þ

Cerberus

Oh, that was Justin Bieber?

I am at a loss.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez, yes

Cerberus

I don't know that last name. And, unless she is a talented linguist, I probably don't need to.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

10:27 PM

Bieber’s girlfriend (or ex, I don’t know)

Cerberus

Ugh.

I was talking to this straight bloke a while ago who occasionally had sex with men because it was just far easier to arrange.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

So, ‘straight’, then

Cerberus

They didn't require the ritual that women do.

I'm not sure.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

A Kinsey not-quite-1

Cerberus

What?

His mother and his sister are lesbians.

And the last time he had sex with a man was 8 years ago.

He said he was just very open-minded and didn't care, just wanted a non-ugly warm body.

tchrist

10:35 PM

@Cerberus There’s a ritual? Never knew that. This explains . . . much.

Cerberus

Yes.

You have to woo them and all.

tchrist

Oh, bother.

Cerberus

Whereas (some) men are more direct, you can just tell them you want sex and they might simply agree to do it right now.

Which is what he was looking for at the time.

tchrist

Doesn’t it work that way with women, too?

Cerberus

So I suggested.

But he said no, usually not.

They don't use certain websites or applications where you can hoop up right now in the middle of the night, apparently.

tchrist

10:37 PM

I remember a buxom and clearly horny young girl calling out for some guy — any guy — to have sex with at Burning Man, and within five seconds some stud had taken her arm and off they went to do the nasty somewhere.

Cerberus

Heh.

Well, what if there is one woman for every ten men who is willing to do that?

tchrist

Like, I NEED A MAN — RIGHT NOW!

Cerberus

Then it must be horrible to have to compete as a man.

Hilarious.

tchrist

Ten minutes later both emerged from the tent they’d retreated into. The stud was grinning. We all applauded.

Cerberus

Well.

tchrist

10:39 PM

She was obviously pleased, too.

Or else we would hardly have applauded.

Cerberus

Who did the other 100 men have sex with that instant who also wanted to do it?

tchrist

Each other, I suppose.

Cerberus

One guy got lucky, 99 did not.

tchrist

Naw.

Cerberus

@tchrist There you go.

tchrist

10:40 PM

Bodies are bodies.

Cerberus

So a straight man might turn to gays, because there is too much competition for the scarce easy girls.

tchrist

If that’s what you want, they are not hard to come by.

Cerberus

I don't know, I imagine it must be harder to get a girl if easy girls are scarce.

tchrist

That raises lots of questions I’m too tired for right now.

Plus I mistrust all these gender-studies majors anyway.

Cerberus

Even if girls are only 20% less likely to have instant sex, then there will be fierce competition among men.

tchrist

10:42 PM

Only if they aren’t very horny.

If they are, the obvious solution has already been proffered and accepted. :)

Most people have done certain things on less common occasions. Like, I dunno, speeding in one’s vehicle.

Cerberus

Which is?

That is true.

tchrist

Does that make the "occasional speeder" a speeder? Or is he a non-speeder? Or is it a game of mindless and pointless taxonomy?

Cerberus

Well, it depends.

tchrist

I would nominate your own example of that fellow as why these things aren’t all that useful to pigeon-hole. Or glory hole, for that matter.

Cerberus

I personally can't imagine arranging to have sex with a woman.

If I were 10% straight, I might.

tchrist

10:47 PM

Hm.

Cerberus

So what does that mean?

tchrist

I don’t know.

I do know that I don’t much believe in "10% straight" though.

user116848

hi. On which SE sites can I ask questions like "How do I focus much longer on studies", "How do deal with xyz person" etc. I tried "Personal Productivity SE" but my Qs was not welcomed there. Any ideas about which SE to use? Because I hate yahoo answers for that because I can't interact with the answerer there etc.

tchrist

No idea. You need a coach or some such newagey thingy.

You know, there are times I go through phases when I dream about eating meat. But I don’t eat meat. These dreams bother me a little bit, but they go away. I suppose if they bothered me more I might reconsider matters.

Janus Bahs Jacquet

@Arrowfar There is no SE for questions like that. SE are specifically not meant to be like a discussion forum, but to provide final, decisive answers that can be judged as correct or not. Questions like the ones you cite can have no conclusive answers and are not good fits for the SE format.

user116848

10:51 PM

@JanusBahsJacquet I see. Thanks.

tchrist

@Cerberus I kinda think it means that you have grown used to your own skin.

Which I mean in the most generous possible way.

Cerberus

@tchrist How do you mean?

tchrist

People get used to things. This conditions their responses.

Cerberus

@Arrowfar You can always try in chat.

user116848

@Cerberus Okay thanks Cerbs :D

Cerberus

10:54 PM

But I can tell you right now that nobody has solved the question "How do I focus much longer on studies" yet.

user116848

I see :)

user116848

Yes I find it hard too

Cerberus

@tchrist Um, I have never wanted to be with a woman.

I have not changed at all in that regard.

tchrist

I for example have never understood foot-fetishists, nor how this comes to be an erotic focus for them. I can only imagine that at some point something happened that reinforced that, and they got hooked on it.

I told you, I honestly don’t know.

Cerberus

It is possible to discover inclinations. But you have to have them in the first place. It is also possible to do things that you are not at all inclined towards.

(to?)

tchrist

10:56 PM

I’m not especially good at thinking like I don’t think. I’m sorry.

Cerberus

I think some people are more inclined to one sex than others.

tchrist

The funny thing is that I’m mostly just like your fellow but reversed. I guess I’m not good with commitment or something.

Cerberus

And they do not always know this about themselves, to what extent they are inclined to which sex.

@tchrist Reversed how?

tchrist

@Cerberus Oh, sure. That’s pretty clear.

Cerberus

Right.

TRiG

10:58 PM

@Cerberus Nor can I. I mean, the concept just seems ... odd.

Cerberus

@TRiG I know! Such weird bodies!

tchrist

@Cerberus When younger I would sleep with women far more out of convenience than out of desire. I decided it wasn’t all that much fun, so stopped.

Cerberus

Hmm.

I guess it is more convenient to sleep with women in places where men are more taboo.

tchrist

That.

Cerberus

But on the modern Internet, and in modern phone applications, that is different.

tchrist

11:00 PM

I stay “stopped” but it is not like stopping eating meat. I just don’t get around to it.

Cerberus

Not getting around to it implies that it was fun.

tchrist

@Cerberus It’s really all too much hassle, thank you very much.

Cerberus

Of course you don't have to.

tchrist

Times change. People change. I don’t know what will happen tomorrow. But it seems extremely unlikely.

Cerberus

But it can be fairly easy to just talk to someone nearby and meet for drinks.

tchrist

11:01 PM

So you say.

But this I have never done.

With anybody.

Cerberus

Have drinks?

tchrist

It feels creepy-weird.

TRiG

@Cerberus I've never tried a phone app for sex. Generally, it's Pride events that work for me ....

tchrist

You know what I mean.

@TRiG You are not alone. Which, I suppose, is the point.

Cerberus

You can do anything you want with people from the Internet. You can have several sexless dates with someone, then decide you don't want anything more. Or you can sleep with him or her the same night. Or whatever.

tchrist

11:03 PM

So they say.

TRiG

Aug 10 '13 at 0:48, by TRiG

I met a very nice guy whom I completely failed to get off with.

Aug 10 '13 at 0:49, by tchrist

If it were any other day but Pride, I’d’ve suggested “hit it off with” instead.

Cerberus

@TRiG Well, phone apps are not only for sex! You can do anything you want with those people.

@tchrist So it is.

tchrist

I’m post-human, I guess. The posthumous are often like I am in this.

Cerberus

Nonsense.

You don't have to do anything, of course.

Just know that you could, if you would.

tchrist

Blah.

I think my funny bone was broken long ago.

TRiG

11:05 PM

in The Upper Room, Apr 4 '12 at 4:47, by TRiG

@waxeagle Asexual people do exist, you know.

tchrist

And I never found it again.

Cerberus

@tchrist I don't believe it.

tchrist

I don’t know how to have fun anymore. Sex is just one kind of having fun.

Cerberus

Don't you just mean you haven't had much fun of late? Because of all the misery?

tchrist

It gets no especial negligence of its own. Everything gets the same treatment.

@Cerberus It’s all connected somehow, I imagine.

I probably need to enroll in laugh-therapy.

TRiG

11:07 PM

@tchrist That surprises me. You are intelligent and quick witted. ... Actually, on reflection, I suppose that doesn't always lead to a life of fun.

tchrist

Or tickle-therapy, or something.

Cerberus

@tchrist Sounds like a good idea.

tchrist

When I used to interact with human beings, such liaisons were not uncommon. I just . . . don’t do that anymore.

Cerberus

At any rate, there are always lots of men and women of all ages on those sites and apps. It is never too late.

It might take your mind off your troubles.

tchrist

I think the “hope” part of me got burnt out in a series of traumatic events.

Cerberus

11:09 PM

Understandably so.

But, if you don't expect too much, it can be fun meeting new people.

tchrist

I’m just going through the motions now. Doing what I have to do. Can’t even conceive of doing something I want to do.

Cerberus

Maybe you need more therapy?

tchrist

They always just want me to hang out with human beings again.

Probably the most accurate analysis was that I incurred a very PTSD-like blow that took a long time to crawl out of, and that afterwards, I was never myself again.

There were a bunch of them, conglomerated.

This is glum. I’m going to play with kitties.

TRiG