Language Overflow

Anonymous

00:00

@DamkerngT. In Japanese, there's nothing grammatically quite like these phrasal verb thingies, but verb-verb compounds are somewhat similar.

Anonymous

So for example, 落ち込む (lit. 'fall + go in' = fall in a hole) is idiomatized with the meaning 'feel down; feel sad'

Anonymous

So if someone says 落ち込むな 'Cheer up!' they're literally telling you "Don't fall in a hole!"

Anonymous

:-)

Damkerng T.

I think Thai doesn't have them either.

:-)

Anonymous

@Man_From_India Was this discussion helpful at all? Do you feel like you understand what a phrasal verb is?

Damkerng T.

00:03

(I mean the alternation of "put X down" or "put down X".)

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Yeah, Japanese has nothing like particle shift.

Anonymous

Speaking of which:

Anonymous

> 1. I turned on the light.

Anonymous

> 2. I turned the light on.

Anonymous

> 3. This is the light [ which/that/∅ I turned ＿＿ on ].

Anonymous

00:04

> 4. *This is the light [ on which/that/∅ I turned ＿＿ ].

Damkerng T.

It's odd that 3 works, but 4 doesn't, logically, but that's the way it is.

Anonymous

But did you notice where I put the gap in 3? I put it before on. Why?

Damkerng T.

Hmm... I'm not sure. I think the gap can be either before or after on.

Anonymous

If you look at sentence 3 linearly, "This is the light I turned on", of course we can't actually observe the gap directly. So it seems like it could be before or after.

Anonymous

But what if we said that the basic position of a particle in a verb-particle idiom was following the direct object, and that the rule for the particle appearing before the direct object ("particle shift") was only allowed if the direct object could bear stress?

Anonymous

00:09

This would account for *I turned on it being ungrammatical (in this sense of turn on), because an unstressed personal pronoun doesn't bear stress.

Anonymous

Neither does a gap, since we don't pronounce it at all.

Anonymous

Then, if on really does occur following the gap, that should explain why it can't be "pied-piped" with which. It doesn't precede it!

Anonymous

At least, that's one idea. :-)

Anonymous

This same rule also explains why, if you exceptionally stress a personal pronoun, it can appear finally in this construction.

Damkerng T.

I think it's a very interesting idea.

"Why did you turn on that?"

I think it works.

Anonymous

00:24

There's an ice cream truck driving outside.

Anonymous

Since it's moving relative to me, the Doppler effect is changing the pitch of its song.

Anonymous

It sounds kind of creepy.

Damkerng T.

Hehe!

Did you buy some ice cream?

Anonymous

Ah, I didn't :-)

Anonymous

There's a school across the street, so they're probably trying to get students to buy ice cream.

Damkerng T.

00:27

I hope the ice cream truck driver won't turn out to be this guy! :P

> youtube.com/watch?v=qZw5qaNre_k

Disclaimer: It's a bit scary!

1

Q: schwa in a single syllable word

In a sister site I saw the word sir written in IPA as /sər/ and not /sɜ:r/ as it was in my OALD. So I looked it up at Oxford Dictionary on-line and sure enough, they had it as /sər/. The same at MW. The same pronunciation is given for words like purr and bird where my OALD shows /ɜ:r/ I tho...

pronunciation

Ah, I think /ər/ is an odd man in most dictionaries!

It's supposed to be one IPA character, I think.

Anonymous

Well, that depends on your theory of phonology.

Anonymous

Phonetically speaking, it's certainly not [ər].

Anonymous

However, writing /ɚ/ and /ɝ/ in phonemic transcriptions is very unusual.

Damkerng T.

Hmm... I think that's true, too.

Anonymous

You can do it in "semi-phonetic" transcriptions that are intended to look like phonemic transcriptions, but contain some phonetic details.

Anonymous

00:33

But the transcriptions in the question have several characteristics that make them decidedly non-phonetic.

Anonymous

The most obvious hint is the forward slashes :-)

Anonymous

But also /r/. We don't say [r] in most dialects of English.

Anonymous

But in phonemic transcriptions, because we only have the two liquid phonemes in English, we tend to use the simplest possible symbols to represent them: /l/ and /r/

Anonymous

The idea is this: when making phonemic transcriptions, we tend to pick the simplest way to represent each sound.

Anonymous

That's why people write the vowel in red with /e/.

Anonymous

00:36

But not everyone agrees with this principle, and some of these people use /ɛ/ for the same vowel because it's closer to the actual sound, phonetically speaking.

Anonymous

So in phonemic English transcriptions, you might find people who write /ɹ/ or /ɻ/.

Damkerng T.

Partly, I guess it's because we have a key for "e" on our keyboards.

Anonymous

Sure. Simple Latin letters are considered the easiest to work with.

Anonymous

They don't always suffice, of course :-)

Damkerng T.

True!

Anonymous

00:38

The standard way of transcribing the English rhotic consonant phonemically is /r/, but it's not universal.

Anonymous

Then we have another problem.

Anonymous

That problem is theory! :-)

Damkerng T.

Hmm... what's the problem? (o?)

Anonymous

Some people would suggest that [ɚ] is the phonetic realization of the phonemic sequence /ər/.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Oops, I wasn't using italics for the use–mention distinction. I was using them for emphasis :-)

Damkerng T.

00:40

nods

Oh, I see! :D

Anonymous

And likewise for [ɝ] and /ɛr/ (or /er/).

Anonymous

Now, when you say /er/, you might not actually be saying a vowel and then an approximant.

Anonymous

Try saying "Errrr".

Anonymous

Then take that recording and reverse it. Does it still sound like "Errrr" or does it sound like "rrrrE"? :-)

Damkerng T.

I suppose so! (except for the glottal stop part)

Anonymous

00:42

If it still sounds like "Errrr", odds are you're just making one sound phonetically.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Pronounce it with glottal consonants at both ends, then :-)

Damkerng T.

LOL -- I think that works too!

Anonymous

And if it's just one sound phonetically, it certainly makes sense to use a symbol like ɝ for it in phonetic transcriptions.

Anonymous

But!

Anonymous

Like I said earlier, a lot of phonologists place value on keeping phonemic transcriptions simple when possible.

Anonymous

00:43

And we don't really have a contrast between [ɛr] and [ɝ], do we?

Anonymous

So we don't really need to introduce another symbol into our phonemic transcriptions.

Anonymous

That is, unless you speak a dialect where those actually are distinct. :-)

Damkerng T.

I don't know what dialect that is!

Anonymous

Then maybe it's worth introducing a separate symbol . . .

Anonymous

Well, not mine :-)

Anonymous

00:49

@DamkerngT. I think if you look up the Mary–marry–merry you might find information about speakers who distinguish those sounds . . .

Anonymous

We're getting into "snailboat doesn't know what she's talking about anymore" territory, though :-)

Damkerng T.

Hah!

I pronounce Mary and marry the same, but not the same as merry.

Anonymous

I think I pronounce all three the same.

Damkerng T.

But really, they don't sound that different anymore when I hear them from others.

Anonymous

Sometimes I can convince myself I'm pronouncing them differently, but I'm probably wrong :-)

Damkerng T.

00:52

Remember "What's not yours?" "The pin."?

Anonymous

Was it yours?

Damkerng T.

Yes!

I watched the movie in full recently, and I found that there were so many shades of pin, ranging from definitely a "pen" to definitely a "pin".

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. I don't really know how people treat dialects where those aren't merged. I mean, the LPD gives them as /meəri mæri/ and /meri/, but I think some people insist on transcribing them differently . . .

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. They're such similar sounds to begin with! :-)

Damkerng T.

@snailboat Indeed!

Anonymous

00:57

My /meri/ is probably not the same as the /meri/ of a speaker without that merger.

Anonymous

Sometimes I wish I knew more stuff about phonetics.

Anonymous

I've always found phonetics to be very difficult . . .

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. I think that we often distinguish similar phonemes by context. Especially vowel phonemes, for which we generally have a fairly wide latitude.

Anonymous

And I think that tends to go for /i/ and /e/, too.

Anonymous

I don't think I actually have the pin–pen merger myself, but I don't think that means I can always distinguish the two without context.

Damkerng T.

01:00

nods -- Unfortunately, there was no pen in the movie, as far as I can tell. :-)

Anonymous

I think the same thing is true in Japanese, where they're clearly not merged and are often phonetically distinct. They're still similar enough that they aren't always distinguishable.

Anonymous

A-ha!

Anonymous

So if you look in dictionaries, you can find words that are attested with both, like hae 'fly' and hai 'fly'.

Anonymous

Although the standard form in Modern Japanese is the former.

Anonymous

I think that the reason you can find attestations like that is because the sounds are so similar.

Damkerng T.

01:02

They sound really similar!

Anonymous

The word いい 'good' in Eastern Japanese is ええ 'good' in Western Japanese :-)

Damkerng T.

Hah!

Anonymous

ええやん　⇔　いいじゃん

Damkerng T.

Interesting that it's Eastern vs. Western, rather than Northern vs. Southern.

I mean, geologically, N vs. S seems more logical.

Anonymous

Eastern vs Western is the most significant linguistic divide in Japan.

Anonymous

01:04

There are, of course, plenty of different dialects in different places.

Anonymous

But if you look at Japan historically, for hundreds of years the capital was in the west.

Anonymous

And so the language spoken there was considered the standard variety.

Damkerng T.

Maybe there is a huge mountain range dividing the two sides.

Anonymous

But 150 years ago, the capital moved from Kyōto to Tōkyō, and now the variety considered standard is based on Tōkyō Japanese.

Anonymous

But of course the variety used in and surrounding Kyōto has a very long history and has had a significant influence on the Japanese language, so it's still prominent today.

Anonymous

01:07

@DamkerngT. Have you heard the terms 関西 Kansai and 関東 Kantō?

Damkerng T.

I think so!

Kansai is probably more often.

Anonymous

That's because Kantō is the more influential region, so it's considered more of a "default".

Anonymous

Kantō is where the capital is now.

Anonymous

But if you look at the Chinese characters, you can see in each word the first character represents a barrier or gateway, and the second character represents 'west' or 'east'.

Anonymous

関西 (lit. 'gate west') and 関東 (lit. 'gate east').

Damkerng T.

01:10

Ahh

Anonymous

Japan was historically divided into different regions with these gated barriers between them.

Anonymous

To cross, you needed permission, and you had to pay a toll.

Anonymous

So there was a literal barrier between East and West.

Anonymous

(Forgive my random capitalization of East and West :-)

Anonymous

The barriers weren't abolished until Nobunaga rose to power.

Anonymous

01:13

It's not surprising that there's a linguistic divide between the two.

Anonymous

That divide goes back to the earliest recorded forms of the language.

Anonymous

Today, the Korean spoken in North Korea and South Korea is becoming more and more distinct . . .

Anonymous

If things continue as they are now, they may become different languages.

Damkerng T.

@snailboat Linguistically, that's very interesting.

Anonymous

01:36

@DamkerngT. Oh, I missed it until just now!

Anonymous

Ahh!

Damkerng T.

Hehe!

Oh, I got an idea ...

"I am not really confident, but I think it's a picture of a boat."

The captionbot's opinion on my avatar!

Anonymous

Wow!

Anonymous

Maybe it's seeing my reflection. :-)

Damkerng T.

LOL

Anonymous

01:43

People say Japanese is a "contextual language" a lot. I've seen it on Japanese.SE in comments quite a few times.

Anonymous

What do you suppose they mean?

Anonymous

High- and low-context cultures

High-context culture and the contrasting low-context culture are terms presented by the anthropologist Edward T. Hall in his 1976 book Beyond Culture. It refers to a culture's tendency to use high-context messages over low-context messages in routine communication. This choice between speaking styles indicates whether a culture will cater to in-groups, an in-group being a group that has similar experiences and expectations, from which inferences are drawn. In a higher-context culture, many things are left unsaid, letting the culture explain. Words and word choice become very important in higher...

Anonymous

Do you think they're referring to this idea?

Damkerng T.

Hmm... I'm not sure, maybe it's related to wa?

Anonymous

Well, English has the. Is English a contextual language? :-)

Damkerng T.

01:45

Maybe all languages are!

Anonymous

Well, I think so.

Anonymous

But that can't be what they mean . . .

Anonymous

Japanese is a contextual language, but not so much so that you can say stuff out of nowhere and expect people to know what you're talking about. Using 小さい in the previous sentence does not automatically mean you will use that to rank them. It sounds like just a small detail more than anything else. — Blavius yesterday

Anonymous

It might have to do with being able to omit more things in Japanese than in English.

Anonymous

That's the general idea I get when I read it . . .

Damkerng T.

01:46

Hmm... that's plausible.

Anonymous

You said, "Japanese is a contextual language" (and I seem to see that written quite often). Can you give an example of a "non-contextual language"? — Brian Chandler Feb 12 at 8:35

Damkerng T.

LOL

Anonymous

2

A: Is the verb necessary for this sentence to make sense?

Japanese is a contextual language. Many elements of a sentence are omitted if they should be clear or are irrelevant. Verbs, although technically the only thing required grammatically, sometimes are omitted as well if it's obvious what it should be. This is especially true if they are short and h...

Anonymous

A-ha, Blavius already elaborated elsewhere. :-)

Anonymous

So I don't have to ask.

Damkerng T.

01:48

English can omit a lot of words, too.

Anonymous

I think English is a contextual language.

Damkerng T.

nods

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Yeah? I suppose :-) Sometimes, anyway.

Anonymous

(My attempt to omit a lot of words!)

Damkerng T.

:-)

Anonymous

01:49

I'm told we're supposed to omit needless words.

Anonymous

So now if I can just figure out which words are needless, I'll be set!

Damkerng T.

Now I really wonder, what's a good example of a non-contextual language?

Anonymous

C? :-)

Damkerng T.

Haha!

Anonymous

Well, maybe almost C: eli.thegreenplace.net/2007/11/24/…

CowperKettle

01:58

Good morning!

Damkerng T.

Morning!

CowperKettle

> A high-context joke from a high-context culture will not translate well to someone of a different culture, even another high-context culture. Humor is very contextual, as a joke may not be considered very funny if it seems like it is over-explained using only low-context messages.

American jokes based on spelling and other linguistic mismatches are often called kindergarten-level in Russia. When you only know Russian, you cannot understand what fun there could be in such type of humor.

tchrist

03:34

@snailboat I do, too, but I believe those who split them have the vowel of met in merry, of Matt in marry, and of mate in Mary. Mine are all like the the last pair.

I'm pretty sure you and I have the same accent, or close enough that virtually no one but a deep expert would find any differences..

skill patrol

but in cyber-virtuality nobody wil ever know for sure @tchrist ;)

Man_From_India

03:52

@snailboat thanks, it's been very helpful :-) and I'm eagerly waiting for your meta post about corpus.

johnchae

10:17

Hello

skill patrol

hi

johnchae

Hey @skillpatrol

skill patrol

@johnchae just book mark it and come back in a couple hours :)

johnchae

Oh, I didn't notice till now, I already had it bookmarked

^^!

skill patrol

in English Language & Usage, 26 mins ago, by johnchae

Can you give me your thoughts on this: http://vocaroo.com/i/s1jQ07OPN7UZ?

in English Language & Usage, 22 hours ago, by johnchae

http://vocaroo.com/i/s0Wbq9Yw4fIe

johnchae

10:22

Thank you

skill patrol

there you're set :)

English Pronunciation - voiced & voiceless English sounds (part 1 of 3)

►

johnchae

Thank you @skillpatrol

I'll have it bookmarked

skill patrol

just look around youtube see what you like

johnchae

I'll be off for a while, see you later @skillpatrol

Thank you so much for your time and your help

skill patrol

cya later

johnchae

10:28

You've been kind to me a lot

Cya

^^

Damkerng T.

12:15

1

Q: Are nominalized verbs to nouns (Un)countable?

This case always gets my head dizzy everytime I want to write sentence in english, and each of articles I read on the internet didn't discuss this part. movement reaction refusal And especially those which are in the state of gerund. Running (I do some runnings? Or some running?) I cou...

nouns deverbal nominalization

I doubt if this question will ever get a good answer.

My feeling is it's likely that it will get some sort of baby rules, or else it will get some not-quite-there-yet thoughts.

in English Language & Usage, 24 mins ago, by johnchae

So I'm not sure 100% if I can rely on it to correct my accent myself

You know, neither of the voice inputs on iOS and Android can recognize my casual speech 100% both in English and my first language. So, I wouldn't worry too much if it can't recognize what I said casually.

And the misrecognition can happen even when I'm careful with my pronunciation, again, in second and first languages, though it's rather rare.

By the way, welcome to the room @johnchae!

johnchae

Hey @DamkerngT., thank you

Damkerng T.

:-)

johnchae

I've been busy chatting/reading msgs in another room so didn't pay so much attention to this room, pardon me if I've responded you not quickly

Damkerng T.

No worry. It's the same for everyone. :D

johnchae

And, if you have some free time, can you have a listen to my recording above and give me your opinions on it?

Damkerng T.

12:27

I listened to the first 20 seconds of the first clip. Not bad. :-)

johnchae

Keep listening :p

Damkerng T.

I can understand what you were saying perfectly. There are some obvious deviations from a typical accent or the standard pronunciation, but not many and not by much, and they don't ruin the intelligibility.

I'm not a native speaker of English, in any case.

johnchae

Actually @DamkerngT.

Damkerng T.

Yes?

johnchae

Now that I've listened to it again, I find it a bit hard to understand

I mean, I just don't know, I think I can make the same speech much better than that

Damkerng T.

12:30

Oh, sure. But like they say, better is the enemy of good.

johnchae

but when I make a recording, like, I'd lose control and my accent, my voice don't follow what I want them to be

Damkerng T.

Considering that you did it spontaneously, I think it's very good. And I'm sure that it will become even better over time.

johnchae

When I first listened to it, I though it was decent and I was like: "Let's get it uploaded and post away, cause I gave it my best shot"

But then, after reading some comments about it

and after listening to it some more times

I think that I could have done better

Like I totally dropped the "d" sound of the "and" word

Damkerng T.

Oh, that's quite normal. :D

johnchae

even though, I've practiced this many times

and normally, I wouldn't make such a mistake with this word

Damkerng T.

12:37

I wouldn't call it a mistake. In any case, people don't normally hear the "d" in and unless it's at the end of an utterance or the next word begins with a vowel.

The "d" that seems to be missing to me is the one in "bored".

(There is a "bored" near the end of your first clip.)

johnchae

Yeah @DamkerngT., some people said the same thing with my "bored". I totally left the d out

Damkerng T.

BTW, I'm not sure if this is true, but I think it is. I think they did something to their recognition engines, both iOS and Android, to handle non-native speakers' speech input better last year or the year before that.

@johnchae Yes, that one is more important than the one in "and".

johnchae

I guess I focused too much on the "r" sound with that word

Damkerng T.

Probably. :D

johnchae

Yes @DamkerngT., so I suppose I shouldn't put 100% trust on Google Now when it comes to double-checking pronunciation?

Damkerng T.

12:44

I wouldn't.

I think it's better to think of it as a way to input something on your phone. :-)

Or your tablets. :D

johnchae

Ok @DamkerngT.

Thank you so much @DamkerngT.

Damkerng T.

I'm certain that I can intentionally mispronounce something to get that something correctly using a voice input in my first language. -- And vice versa.

You're welcome!

johnchae

I'm off for an hour, bbl

Damkerng T.

See you! o/

johnchae

Cya

PhMgBr

14:11

I don't know the meaning of updoots, please help ell.stackexchange.com/questions/87477/… — Cary Bondoc 14 hours ago

Haha

Damkerng T.

He could use that post (I can't remember if it's chat message or an answer) you posted here. It covered almost all variants of "upvotes".

PhMgBr

How can it be an answer here?

Damkerng T.

It introduces most well-known variants.

PhMgBr

"well-known"? :P

Damkerng T.

:D

PhMgBr

14:17

Jul 11 '15 at 13:03, by M.A.Ramezani

> Variations of upvote: (Written by The Stryker Lord, edited by M.A.) Upboat, upcoat, upgoat, uploot, upmote, up-oat, uproad, uptote, upvote.

Oh, so "updoot" must be uncommon.

Damkerng T.

Ah, I think that's the one.

PhMgBr

NO CORPUS ENTRIES FOUND

Damkerng T.

:D

skill patrol

14:49

@DamkerngT. also said as "If you never miss a plane, you're spending too much time at the airport."

Damkerng T.

Nice!

skill patrol

This is why I suggested he work on speed.

Damkerng T.

15:58

Wow, Google voice input keeps converting my "the temptation of an affair" to "The Temptation Of An Affair"!

PhMgBr

That's because of your voice.

Damkerng T.

LOL

PhMgBr

16:35

Damkerng T.

16:55

Oh, no! The second earthquake in Japan is worse that the first one yesterday!

Google 1, Microsoft 0

PhMgBr

17:12

Heh, toothbrush?

Damkerng T.

:D

lekon chekon

17:32

hey

I need help. @DamkerngT.

PhMgBr

hay

lekon chekon

He @PhMgBr

hey*

My friend is writing something, he asked me whether a sentence he had constructed could be improved.

"All these questions seemed to weigh down on his brain, as his eyesight began to blur-he closed his eyes."

PhMgBr

@lekonchekon The as doesn't work very well there.

lekon chekon

How would you construct it?

:p

PhMgBr

Hmm

Damkerng T.

17:36

You tried to put three clauses into one single sentence using only one conjunction. @lekonchekon

lekon chekon

I didn't, but okay.

He wants to know what could be done to improve the sentence. :p

Damkerng T.

Ah, right. Sorry about that.

lekon chekon

And since the main site doesn't allow proofreading, i thought coming here would be a better idea.

Damkerng T.

Three parts, one linker. See, it's an easy math problem. :-)

Original: A, as B -- C.

Possibility a): A. B. C.

Possibility b): A as B. C.

Possibility c): A. As B, C.

and so on.

lekon chekon

As all these questions seemed to weigh down on his brain, his eyesight began to blur- he closed his eyes.

?

btw, is the original sentence correct at least?

Damkerng T.

17:41

Hmm... I think the three clauses are okay.

lekon chekon

are we talking about the original sentence?
Or the one i wrote there?

in my last text

Damkerng T.

Getting rid of seemed to could be a small improvement. (Don't forget to fix the tense accordingly.)

@lekonchekon The three clauses remained the same both in his and yours, I think.

lekon chekon

how would A as B. C. go?

Damkerng T.

It's fine, imo.

lekon chekon

Okay.
I have a few other questions.
And this time, i'm not talking about my friend.
So, you know they're going to weird. x3

Should i fire away?

Damkerng T.

17:47

You can sure do that. :-)

But answers are not guaranteed. :D

lekon chekon

Okay.
I suppose, i could live with that. :3

I've posted a lot of questions concerning things like this.
Anyway.

Suppose someone's sent me a text, a really funny one.
So, could i say.

"I almost died of laughter reading your text."

would that be right?

Damkerng T.

Probably. You just made "laughter" sound like a plague to me.

lekon chekon

okay.
Let's rephrase that.

"I was laughing/ laughed reading your text."

PhMgBr

Sorry, I was eating dinner.

I think a bunch of conjunctions will make it better @Lekon.

Damkerng T.

I would say this instead, "I almost laughed myself to death reading your text."

PhMgBr

17:55

> #Golden rule 1: Never hesitate to use "and".

lekon chekon

okay.
How about this.

I was talking over the phone while making coffee for me.

and

I was talking over the phone (,) making coffee for me. (i don't know whether we use commas constructing sentence of this sort)

I actually am curious about dropping conjunctions, and prepostions.

prepositions. *

I stood there, listening to him speak stuff i didn't even want to hear.

I stood there, and listened to him speak stuff i didn't even want to hear.
But, i'm more curious about constructions like the former one.

PhMgBr

@lekonchekon For myself.

"I'm making coffee for me." is weird.

lekon chekon

yeah. :p

But i've heard natives use ME in informal conversation though. :p

conversations*

Damkerng T.

@lekonchekon They wouldn't use any comma at all in their conversations, I suppose. :D

lekon chekon

that's true.
But could you tell me what difference it makes when you use the comma and when you don't?

Damkerng T.

18:09

I think it helps a bit if we think of spoken English and written English as two different languages.

We only write spoken English in creating writing.

And in transcriptions (i.e., when we transcribe speech in audio/video clips), it's obvious that the use of punctuation is not very consistent.

One transcriber may use a comma here. Another transcriber may use a comma there.

Yet another transcriber may not use any comma at all.

Also, people do not always speak in "sentences".

lekon chekon

Say, could we leave out conjunctions and prepositions when constructing sentences like, "I was watching television, talking to him over the phone."

Here, I was doing two things at the same time.
So, would it be okay if i phrase it the way i did over there?

yes, i understand. :)

Damkerng T.

@lekonchekon It looks like it's not a very good sentence, assuming that I guess the prosody pattern right according to the punctuation clues.

lekon chekon

I understand, and i actually wouldn't construct a sentence like that myself.
But i'm curious about the grammatical aspect of it.

would it be grammatically correct?

Damkerng T.

That's where things break down, I suppose.

What's "grammatically correct"?

Does "grammar" cover spoken languages?

lekon chekon

I'd say yes.

Although, i hate how people use double negatives

Damkerng T.

18:15

Do spoken English and written English have the same grammar?

lekon chekon

nope.

Damkerng T.

See? :-)

lekon chekon

okay.
Let's put it this way.

Would it be correct, in modern spoken English?

Damkerng T.

It's hard to judge because, for one thing, you give me a string, not an utterance.

But I can't imagine someone saying "I was watching television, talking to him over the phone", and it makes me feel right.

But that doesn't mean it's impossible.

lekon chekon

I see.

Damkerng T.

18:19

> Cath: "What were you doing when I was trying to contact you this afternoon? Were you with J.T.?"
> Tess: "I was watching TV, talking to him over the phone--"
> Cath: "I see. Do you know where Vincent is?"

lekon chekon

Ah!

How about this.

"I had dinner watching tv yesterday."

this one is undoubtedly grammatically correct, both written wise, and spoken wise, right?

Damkerng T.

Hmm... sounds like an unlikely thing a native speaker would say, I think. But to be sure, you should double-check it with someone else.

lekon chekon

Okay. :)
Thanks for all your help. :)
I'll post similar questions on the main site later tonight, i hope. :p

Damkerng T.

:D

lekon chekon

I'm going to take off now. :)
And thanks. :)

Damkerng T.

18:22

No problem.

o/

Damkerng T.

20:18

I wonder if Sold a cow for magic beans is really an idiom or a proverb.

Anonymous

Well, at a minimum we can say it's a story people are likely to be familiar with, so you can expect this sort of allusion to be understood.

Anonymous

You could probably get away with calling it an idiom or a proverb, though :-)

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. I don't buy the dichotomy between spoken and written language. There are things we tend to say more than write and vice versa, but we can write anything we say and say anything we write.

Anonymous

For some languages, the written form really is distant and distinct from the spoken form, but I think for English the two are close enough that we can only talk about tendencies. It's often more useful to talk about formality in English.

Anonymous

So I'm reluctant to admit any grammatical distinctions between spoken and written English.

Anonymous

20:35

But! There are still distinctions to be made, if perhaps not grammatical distinctions…

Anonymous

For example, punctuation versus prosody. Contractions we say but rarely write.

Anonymous

There are a few grammatical constructions we rarely write, but we still can write them.

Anonymous

Though sometimes it's unclear how to write them because we don't have well established conventions.

Anonymous

That's also true for spelling contractions we don't normally write down, and for spelling nonstandard words.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. But many people agree with your point that written and spoken language are essentially different, and that sometimes we write down "spoken English".

Anonymous

20:45

@DamkerngT. Our own ssb on Japanese.SE is in Kumamoto! He seems to be okay though :-)

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Maybe people don't always use reflexives: I'm making some coffee for you and I'm making some for me/myself.

Transcript for