English Language & Usage: Multi-Layered Discourse Room

TIPS

05:42

Færd

14:36

What does it mean to call somebody on something? from COCA:

> GUTFELD# All right. Women getting along well is the longest running lie in the history of the world that women are consensus builders -- baloney. PERINO# In the workplace? GUTFELD# Let me finish, please? TANTAROS# Wait, that's two different things, though. I'll call you on that. Getting along and getting to a solution are two different things.

.

> CAMERON# ... And out of the 200,000 plus federal inmates about half of them are nonviolent drug offenders. O'REILLY# Ok. You are using the word " nonviolent " which I don't buy for a minute. I have to call you on it.

tchrist

It’s the same as calling someone out on something, although it has the added association with poker.

That is, it's a way of exposing someone in some way, perhaps because they're trying to pull a hoax over on you.

Færd

I guess I don't know waht calling someone out on something means.

@tchrist Ah, getting closer. Thanks.

tchrist

It's demanding that they make an accounting of themselves, their actions, or their views.

Færd

Can you think of a synonymous word or phrase?

tchrist

tries

In your two citations, it’s like saying I don't believe you.

Færd

14:46

Gotcha maybe?

tchrist

oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/english/…

Sense 3 is the operative one here.

> Draw critical attention to someone’s unacceptable actions or behaviour

Færd

That's right. I tried a couple dictionaries but not that one.

tchrist

Always start with Oxford.

:)

Færd

Good tip.

tchrist

This is an interesting example of getting different results by switching the order: to call Bobby out is rather different from to call out "Bobby".

Færd

14:52

True, practically. But technically they're equivalents, right?

tchrist

I don't know.

Færd

My modest teacher.

tchrist

While it is human nature to desire to present one's vague suspicions with absolute conviction and certainty, even to oneself, it is folly to do so.

Færd

Very true.

tchrist

James Taylor - You've Got A Friend

►

> You just call out my name,
and you know wherever I am
I'll come running to see you again.

Calling out someone's name isn't like calling someone out on something. :)

Cerberus

14:58

@Færd I wouldn't say so: there is one idiomatic meaning of to call out x that is impossible with to call x out.

Although other senses of call out work with either construction.

Færd

So this is an exception to the rule that you can put the object after or in between a phrasal verb freely.

tchrist

Right: they are not all separable.

You can check someone out if you're interested in them, but you can only check out of a hotel to leave.

You can drop a candy wrapper out the window of your call, but you can only drop out of school.

You can get your pen back from whoever had it, but you can only get back from your vacation.

You can pass all the candy out that you want but you can only pass out in exhaustion when done.

Færd

I guess to check out of a hotel is a prepositional verb, versus phrasal.

tchrist

You can throw the ball up in the air, but you can only throw up vomit.

Færd

Neat example.

tchrist

15:06

0

Q: Correct punctuation with two nouns?

There's an old play on words that goes like so: Grammar: The difference between helping your uncle Jack off a horse, and helping your uncle jack off a horse. I've been told that it should instead be: Grammar: The difference between helping your uncle, Jack, off a horse and helping your...

Cerberus

@tchrist In all of these cases, you're dealing with words that already have different meanings without the particle/preposition.

Mostly transitive v. intransitive.

Færd

Even the last one?

tchrist

3 mins ago, by tchrist

You can throw the ball up in the air, but you can only throw up vomit.

Cerberus

@Færd Yes.

tchrist

Those are both transitive.

Færd

15:09

@tchrist :)). That's why you don't want to forget to capitalize what you should.

Cerberus

@tchrist Yes.

In that case, throw up "expel vomit" is a fixed expression, so that's probably the cause here.

Færd

How does it differ from call out (in the sense of drawing critical attention)?

Cerberus

How do you mean?

Færd

One can perceive all inseparable phrasal verbs as fixed expressions.

Cerberus

There is something special about that construction with a quotation.

@Færd Yes, but throw up is somewhat different.

Færd

15:12

How so?

Cerberus

When you say She threw up in the morning., everyone knows it is about vomit.

So I think that's why is was fossilised, ossified, or petrified in a way.

Færd

Allow me to call you on that.

Cerberus

By telephone?

Færd

In the above sentence and its context, every native speaker understands that it means I don't buy that, no?

tchrist

aye

Cerberus

15:16

Only in a specific context.

Besides, that can't even be phrasal.

Færd

... to call you out on that.

The requirement of context is weaker in throw up, but only slightly.

If any.

Cerberus

> He threw up.

I don't think there is much context needed.

> He called out.

@Færd On that is a serious bit of context.

M. Haster

15:32

@terdon whats the difference between "I believe it is essential for our continued understanding of how the developing brain is both crucial and malleable" and "I believe it is essential for our continued understanding of how crucial, and malleable, our developmental brain" sounds equally correct?

Færd

@Cerberus I see the on part as a required part of the verb, unless people would use the verb in that sense without the on part.

Cerberus

@M.Haster Yes, except that the second sentence lacks an is.

@Færd But then you're comparing very different constructions.

Call x out on y has two different particles/prepositions.

And two different objects.

Færd

You said the object (vomit) doesn't go in between throw up because it's a fixed expression. I said the object doesn't split call out (on) and it's not that different than throw up. You said it was because of the context (on), and I said no, that's not context.

Ooh I'm too confused to continue.

Pardon me.

@Cerberus Apparently you can split call out on:

oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/english/… (The third definition)

I was laboring under a misapprehension.

TIPS

Fun fact: we're hitting memory ceilings on the Stack Exchange network due to the insane interest in Pokemon. https://t.co/cVr0NXDoKL

Tweeted by Nick_Craver on July 15, 2016 at 12:48 PM

SmokeDetector

15:52

[ SmokeDetector ] Few unique characters in body, repeating characters in body, repeating characters in title, title has only one unique char: aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa by Lee on english.stackexchange.com …

Cerberus

@Færd I don't understand: when you say I will call you out on that, the word you is between call and out. So call out can be split.

Phonics The Hedgehog

@Cerberus @Færd Hey

How's it going guys

Færd

@Cerberus I hadn't realize it until then, and admitted it right after.

So I should shift my argument to focus on call out (in the sense of shout) and continue. But I have to go now.

@PhonicsTheHedgehog Hey! Have a good one.

Phonics The Hedgehog

@Færd You too m8

M. Haster

16:15

so would anyone like to proofread my cover letter?

pretty please?

Cerberus

@Færd Oh, OK.

@Færd I actually forgot what you initial position was.

Or perhaps I never saw it.

Adios.

@PhonicsTheHedgehog Yo.

Phonics The Hedgehog

@Cerberus I heard that the word "okay" has African language origin. What do you think?

@M.Haster What is it about?

Cerberus

It seems there are several possible etymologies...

OK

"OK" (/oʊkeɪ/; also spelled "okay", "ok") denotes approval, acceptance, agreement, assent, or acknowledgment. "OK", as an adjective, can also express acknowledgment without approval. "OK" has frequently turned up as a loanword in many other languages. As an adjective, "OK" means "adequate", "acceptable" ("this is OK to send out"), "mediocre" often in contrast to "good" ("the food was OK"); it also functions as an adverb in this sense. As an interjection, it can denote compliance ("OK, I will do that"), or agreement ("OK, that is fine"). As a verb and noun it means "assent" ("the boss OKed t...

TIPS

@PhonicsTheHedgehog I think it's Roman.

Phonics The Hedgehog

Interesting! I suppose that is inevitable with such a simple word like "ok."

@TIPS Really?

I must look into this

M. Haster

16:25

@PhonicsTheHedgehog its a cover letter for a research manager position..in developmental psychology

Phonics The Hedgehog

@M.Haster Sounds fascinating. I could read it for you, but I'd imagine that others chatters in this room is more capable. I'll give it a go.

TIPS

17:16

theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/15/…

Bloody hell

Mitch

@Cerberus bonified

Cerberus

@Mitch Bona fide?

Mitch

Yes, in bone.

Cerberus

In bonis?

Mitch

@tchrist you can tune in to a radio program but you can't tuna fish

@Cerberus yea , that'd be good

Is there a cognate of 'bonum' in Porto-Germanic? These words can't all pop out of thin air, can they?

Cerberus

17:24

In Porto-Germanic, no doubt. It's so very mobile and flexible.

In Proto-Germanic, I can't think of anything.

Good question.

Mitch

Or a 'gut' cognate in Latin

TIPS

Cerberus

Hmm.

I can't think of anything either.

Mitch

@TIPS sounds Hawaiian

TIPS

Mitch

17:27

@Cerberus really elementary vocab (like pronouns) should have lots of ancient cognates. But ... Maybe I'm just picking on bonus/gut/whatever the Slavs use

Khorosho?

Cerberus

@Mitch Yes, but sometimes a new word appears in a branch that pushes out an old, very common word.

Phonics The Hedgehog

@TIPS I really gotta follow this guy

Cerberus

@Mitch It seems the ultimate etymology of good beyond Proto-Germanic is uncertain.

It may be related to gather/together, which have cognates only in Germanic and Slavic.

The latter is speculated to be a substrate word.

SmokeDetector

[ SmokeDetector ] URL in title: www.facebook.com/Trump-vs-hellry-866900176755153/?sk=app_190322544333196&app_‌data=visitor_mode by Epic_woof on english.stackexchange.com …

Cerberus

@Mitch The etymology of bonus beyond Proto-Italic is disputed.

Several Proto-Indo-European roots have been proposed.

SmokeDetector

17:45

[ SmokeDetector ] Blacklisted user: Proper expression about 'underground floors' by Epic_woof on english.stackexchange.com …

Tonepoet

18:29

@PhonicsTheHedgehog We have an existing question regarding the manner if that would be of any interest: english.stackexchange.com/questions/17/…

Phonics The Hedgehog

@Tonepoet Interesting! Thank you!

Co Koder

hi guys

is this grammatically correct?

Thank you very much for doing this given the fact it was a busy time for you.

Cerberus

18:49

@CoKoder Looks OK to me, except that you need a comma before given.

Co Koder

@Cerberus thanks, do you have a suggestion to make it sound even better?

Phonics The Hedgehog

19:03

@CoKoder Perhaps change "it was a busy time for you" to "that you were busy." But that's just a style difference, IMO. Your sentence is fine.

Mitch

19:34

@Cerberus Oh, I know. It seems that the simple adjectives all seem entirely different between the major groups (gross/klein (GE), magnum/parvus (RO), mór/beag (CE), bolshi/malenki (SL), bozorg/kook (IR)). No easily accessible, easily perusable way to do research except on each one.

@Cerberus at some point there's no evidence to be had (writing or reconstruction) so it is hardly different from aliens making stuff up.

The only reference online I know of that has PIE roots is AHD, but that is avery slow connection (on the internet).

Phonics The Hedgehog

@Mitch Hello!

skill patrol

19:56

Something must have happened for this to hit the number one spot in the US. I wonder what... https://t.co/zKxqqLeG5T

Tweeted by OxfordWords on July 15, 2016 at 2:33 PM

Phonics The Hedgehog

@skillpatrol "Where were you when Pokemon beat racism?"

Tonepoet

I'm only surprised that it did not happen sooner.

Actually, that's a lie. I'm also surprised that Pikachu is not on the list.

Cerberus

20:46

@Mitch Wow, you managed to look all of those up?

I believe Russian also has mensye, as in the Mensyeviks.

Which may be related to minus.

It should also be noted that small is a rather changeable word in many Indo-European languages.

Consider how small has steamed ahead in English relatively recently.

And consider that the Latin paradigm of parvus is suppletive: parvus, minor, minimus.

Latin has grandis, which is related to Germanic great/groot/groß.

It was probably common in Vulgar Latin, since French and Italian and Spanish ended up picking it.

skill patrol

If you're going to talk about Latin please go to the Latin room :P

Cerberus

Hah!

skill patrol

:D

Cerberus

Now for once you aren't wrong.

We'll try to keep some English in.

skill patrol

You know what I was referring to, right ;-)

Cerberus

20:52

Sure.

But I had to react!

skill patrol

good, good

Cerberus

nods thrice

skill patrol

Do you have three tails also?

Cerberus

I don't think so.

Do I?

skill patrol

dunno

Cerberus

21:01

Hmm.

Shafizadeh

21:53

Which one of my images is better? this or this

skill patrol

22:06

english.stackexchange.com/users/148556/shafizadeh?tab=profile

I don't like the pose in the other one.

Cerberus

I vote for the first one too.

Although the second one is also fine.

Shafizadeh

thx :-)

skill patrol

np

Mitch

22:32

Blah

Mitch

22:45

@Cerberus only a couple (russian and iranian small).

Cerberus

The rest you knew?

Mitch

@Cerberus isn't that 'white'? Oh, white = biela. yes, menshivek = small

@Cerberus if by 'know' you mean vaguely maybe heard of and guessed, confirmed by google translate, then yes.

@Cerberus I think 'changeable' is what all of these are then, because as you note, Romance has many different ones for big/little as does English. This calls for a systematic study of all these words and all these language groups. Where there are suppletives there are remnants lying around.

some words stay around forever like 'right' and 'full' but some change with the wind like 'left' and 'empty'

@Cerberus I actually thought of major/minor first. I wonder what the original non-comparative used to be? like what the 'good' slot would have been for the pattern that led to better/best

@Cerberus what I think is surprising is that numbers seem to stick around. in pre-literate societies, who really cares much beyond 5.

Cerberus

23:02

@Mitch Well done.

@Mitch All true.

I think less has changed in languages other than English.

Phonics The Hedgehog

How would you two pronounce the word "Frabjous"? I'm tempted to pronounce j like i.

Cerberus

@Mitch In which language? In Germanic, it may have been bonus, who knows?

Greek better is beltiôn.

Where -iôn is a common comparative suffix.

Probably related to Latin comparative -ior.

@Mitch Ah, perhaps because it would be extremely inconvenient to confuse numbers?

Whereas words like good and bad lead themselves to euphemism and pejorative.

Cf. nice.

And the Dutch aequivalent leuk.

Mitch

@PhonicsTheHedgehog I pronounce the 'j' as a voiced palatal fricative, like the j in just deserts

Phonics The Hedgehog

@Mitch I see. I can't roll it off the tongue well, though. XD

Mitch

@Cerberus maybe its that all those 'small' adjectives are similarly semantically easily ... mixed up. size: big, tall, wide, deep, small shallow argh.. there are so many but I can't just list them off

happy sad fat thin old young

@Cerberus right at least for english.

@PhonicsTheHedgehog it's a weird combination for world languages, but is doable in English even if entirely uncommon.

can't think of a real word with it.

@Cerberus what did that used to be then in Dutch? similar provenance chain?

Cerberus

23:17

@Mitch Mm I suppose there are semantic clusters.

@Mitch I think it originally meant luke(warm).

Then it went from bad to good—something like that.

First lukewarm.

Then calm (for people).

Then at some point stupid.

Mitch

@Cerberus "So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth."

Cerberus

But also dry (as in humour).

Mitch

I always thought that was Jesus

Cerberus

And then funny, nice, cute.

@Mitch Hmm I think the reason why we don't like to drink lukewarm water is that it is a perfect breeding place for germs.

Cold is fine.

If it has (just) been boiled, that's fine too.

But water from some lukewarm pool in the forest? I don't think so.

Mitch

I don't know. swimming in luke warm water is just fine.

and iced drinks is totally new

Cerberus

23:24

Yeah, because hypothermia is worse than the chance that you get infected from swimming. If you don't swallow any water.

@Mitch Just naturally cold is cold enough.

Mitch

@Cerberus haha brazil. urp

Cerberus

Brazil?

Brazen?

Basil?

Phonics The Hedgehog

Basilica?

Mitch

23:49

Pesto?

Brazil, because of the unclean water the water sports olympic athletes may have to swim through.

Transcript for

English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…