Some linguistics for non-linguists

[Twisted Brick]

"Seeing" a movie implies going out to see a movie. I don't think it's proper to say you're seeing a movie if you're at home. You watch movies at home but you can watch or see a movie at the theater.

+1

It also depends on the tense. In past tense, one does not remark that he "watched a movie once where...."

Rather, one would say "I saw a movie once... where the jailed princess offers her young rescuer a special reward for affecting her release" (Kingsman: The Secret Service)

[jonnys_spirit]

Went to the movies or go to the movies might insinuate actually going to a theater and then watching a movie along with other movie theater activities like $25 popcorn, hot dog, and a maybe a soda.

Watching would most likely imply watching a TV and seeing could be @ home or elsewhere.

"Have you seen the new LOTR" - Could be inferring @ home, in a theater, or elsewhere - Seeing is slightly more passive.
"Tonight I'm watching Star Wars" - Feels like it refers to watching a TV set - Watching is slightly more active.

All that being said "I'll be taking in the cult classic Rocky Horror Picture Show this coming halloween lockdown status not pending"

Cheers!
-jonny

[The Baker]

See? It's not just an American thing...

At least, still we can see of there. Okay, that's the way the languages is changing

But if an Australian does he means her, er, snatch/ external sexual equipment...!

Haha, in Russian, we'd say she's pizdataya, formally literally — ehm,,, cuntable!

My Polish workmate, who spoke German too, said (and this was sixty years ago so I may be wrong) to a Russian, Can I have a match?
I think the German is streiholz, but he maybe used Polish.
Anyway if I remember right he said (dunno the spelling) schpitzke.
And nearly got thumped; it seems that is a very rude word in Russian.

Now this was the time of the second world war; and he got a VERY nice offer from a German girl.
And he said, 'Do you think I want to die?'
Because if the Nazis found out, that was very likely.

Geoff

[VLAGAVULVIN]

Seabass + Geoff + Twisted Brick + Jonny :: thank y'all for your detailed comments. Helped a lot to compare see/watch movies connotations with those in Russian and to figure out they are rather similar

My Polish workmate, who spoke German too, said (and this was sixty years ago so I may be wrong) to a Russian, Can I have a match?
I think the German is streiholz, but he maybe used Polish.
Anyway if I remember right he said (dunno the spelling) schpitzke.
And nearly got thumped; it seems that is a very rude word in Russian.

Memory holds a lot of lingvostuff for decades

Can I have a match? (literally, give me a match) = дай мне спичку (speechkuh) in Russian. The funny moment is speechka (a match, ein Streiholz) in Russian sounds like peechka (cunt) for Southern Slavs. So, дай мне спичку is too close to “gimme a (s)cunt”, lol. There’s also pizcka [‘peechka] in the Western Slavic Polish with the same meaning as amongst the southslavs.

A more frequent Polish pizda (cunt) is absolutely the same in Russian. But both in PL and RU have to do more with vulva than vagina. Maybe, Polish pizcka (vulgar slang) and definitely pochwa (medical term) stand for vagina more due to close werbs with meaning like “to stuff with”… and “scabbard”.

Polish zapałka (a match) is “guessable” for Russians, too. Cause it is concerned to the “fire-starting” verb which is common.

[The Baker]

Vlag,
My mate used to curse, with great emphasis, in possibly a mix of languages, starting with
(phonetically and maybe not right)
koorva pizda poorka mizeria blach bastardska...

and he used to quote a poem, a lament of a German woman married to a soldier in the second world war
(and remember he was a Pole in Germany in that wartime);
(again, phonetically and maybe with errors)

Alles voreebe, alles vorei,
Mein mann ist in Russland, mein bedd ist vorbei

Interesting what you remember. I wish I could speak more than one language fluently.

Geoff

[VLAGAVULVIN]

koorva pizda poorka mizeria blach bastardska...

Haha, looks you are fluent more than in one language
In fact, the entire strata of Slavic tongues ​​are easier to get than it is customary to think.

Alles voreebe, alles vorei,
Mein mann ist in Russland, mein bedd ist vorbei

Everything is in the past, everything is in the future. My man is in Russia, I have no sex (more or less, no expert in German).

[The Baker]

Vlag said, 'Haha, looks you are fluent more than in one language"

No, a good memory for trivia, not so good for other things.

I passed second year Japanese at university level and third year French, but truly they were not high level courses.
I had left school at age 14 to go to work as the family didn't have much money, later completed a baker's apprenticeship,
and later still worked in insurance and completed around 30 related 3 hour examinations.
Then completed the Arts degree at age 60.

Geoff

[MichiganCornhusker]

[Twisted Brick]

That right there is good shit...!

[Yonder]

No denying, he knows his shit!

[Saltbush Bill]

A shit hot explanation of how shit works.

[Corsaire]

A bit like kurwa

I can imagine you heard that a lot, Geoff. Or maybe it's more prevalent now?

[VLAGAVULVIN]

Then completed the Arts degree at age 60.

What a cool shit!..

And what kind of arts do you practice?

A bit like kurwa

Rather full complete curvimeter )))

[The Baker]

Then completed the Arts degree at age 60.

What a cool shit!..

And what kind of arts do you practice?

A bit like kurwa

Rather full complete curvimeter )))

Bachelor of Arts, a university degree in humanities.
It included some languages-and-culture; some politics; some anthropology; stuff like that.
And I don't practise anything, I retired as a bread baker in my own business....
But it was interesting...

Geoff

[VLAGAVULVIN]

But it was interesting...

Anthropology + langs + some ethno aspects = are interesting

So, you were studying on your own impulse. Just for interest. Was it free?

[The Baker]

But it was interesting...

Anthropology + langs + some ethno aspects = are interesting

So, you were studying on your own impulse. Just for interest. Was it free?

I had always been keen to gain some qualifications but had to go to work when I left school at the minimum age of 14, to earn money for the family.
So just for interest, yes.
Not free.

Geoff

[VLAGAVULVIN]

Not free.

In RU, the gov't may pay for the young people's [first] higher education if they got A+ here and there at their secondary school. The second varsity degree getting is never free of charge. Say, I was graduated in some chemitech machinery automation. If and all of a sudden, I'd arrive at a decision to become a doctor, I should pay for all my next educational years. And after all, starting from some definite age, any 1st-in-your-life varsity is for money, too.

Own bakery, man... a useful and interesting business, important for all those nearbyers, right?

[VLAGAVULVIN]

Hey ole Confeds, was this vid's accent just showing off or could have to do with? Abt. 150 yrs. ago, lol...



Have listened to him twice. To get any sense in a topic that I was always quite familiar with.

[VLAGAVULVIN]

Have found a native speaking guy with the accent close to same as above. Or not?..



It breaks me the combo that a cowboy speaking the lang of great grandpa confederates* describes the pop-sci thangs like that

* just imho

[Birrofilo]

"Jane's house, that we visited yesterday, is in terrible state" — what's wrong/odd in this expression from your own point of view?

I don't know what's wrong but I can say that Jane has more than one house, right?

[VLAGAVULVIN]

I don't know what's wrong but I can say that Jane has more than one house, right?

I'm not sure as my own command of English is rather poor

Well, how would you express it then? To make that house "her only home"?

[jonnys_spirit]

This doesn’t infer whether it’s her only house and it doesn’t not infer it either.

[contrahead]

It breaks me the combo that a cowboy speaking the lang of great grandpa confederates* describes the pop-sci thangs like that

* just imho

Maybe you could explain what you mean by “confederates*”, since you've used the term a couple of times now.

I can understand the mistaken perception that all cowboys must be rural simpletons and redneck hicks, because that is usually the only way they have been portrayed by the entertainment media, for about a century now. Fat bottomed financiers and film directors have always produced western films to appeal to naive, urban city-slicker audiences. Not one TV or movie actor out of 50, is or ever was initially familiar with livestock or the rigors of true ranching. Anybody can wear a cowboy hat.

Louis L'Amour was an American author who wrote more than 100 cowboy westerns, printed about 300,000,000 paperbacks (translated into some 20 languages) and who witnessed 45 of his novels or short stories being turned into feature films or TV movies. Occasionally the protagonist in his stories coveted books on philosophy. L'Amour was a voracious reader and collector of rare books. He had a personal library of some 17,000 books, periodicals, maps, pioneer diaries and such. Like Dr. Jackson Crawford (linguist in the video above), L'Amour usually wore a cowboy hat. L'Amour possessed an Honorary PhD.

This following: is a small (456 kb) .pdf file, that is an attempt by a scholar to list some of the many books mentioned in various L'Amour novels.
https://oaktrust.library.tamu.edu/bitst ... sequence=1

[The Baker]

Great books by Louis L'Amore, I've got lots of them and re-read them from time to time.

Geoff

[Birrofilo]

This doesn’t infer whether it’s her only house and it doesn’t not infer it either.

In the English which is taught by my grammar book, "that" as a relative pronoun always has a restrictive value.

Jane's house, that we visited yesterday, is in terrible state
Jane's house, which we visited yesterday, is in terrible state

If you use that, you are always implaying that the house which is in (a) terrible state is the one which you visited yesterday, and not another house of hers. Among her houses, the one which is in a terrible state is the one which you visited yesterday. The one which you visited, let's say, today is in good order.

If you use which, this can also be a "non restrictive" relative pronoun, you are simply saying that the house of Jane is in a terrible state, and incidentally you are also saying that you visited it yesterday.

"I found the key that you lost yesterday" is restrictive, you have several keys, I found specifically the one that you lost yesterday.

Which can be both restrictive and non-restrictive. You can say "The distilling book that you bought is good" or "The distilling book which you bought is good".
But if you use "that" the meaning is always restrictive. You can say "He never writes to his wife, who lives in Italy" but you don't say "He never writes to his wife, that lives in Italy" unless the guy who never writes has more than one wife.

These sentences are supposed to have different meanings:

I had a beer at the pub, which I like;
I had a beer at the pub, that I like;
I had a beer, that I like, at the pub;
I had a beer, which I like, at the pub;

[VLAGAVULVIN]

Maybe you could explain what you mean by “confederates*”, since you've used the term a couple of times now.

I could, could I... but first off, nothing offensive. Seriously. No lgbt or color minority or donaldjoes or vegans or cowboys should feel hurt after my imho's here on the forum. And I hope they don't feel bad and offended by me, time after time.

Okay, as for the confeds. That hwich, hwether, hweel feature and a certain degree of vowels reduction and the definite "flat" intra-phrase accentuation (quite different from the present-day General American)... that all doesn't piss me off. Hwat's more, I like it. But for the time being it's quite rare and even old fashioned thing, innit? In my comprehension, it is linked to some very local Scotland or the deep US South and West or even London (UK) but... dated by the Shakespeare's epoch. I understand all of his talks as I have a proper base of knowledge. Besides, his narrations are way more clear than the explanations of former Soviet academicians on that matter. So that guy, Dr. Crawford, being definitely well educated, he just doesn't care about his "sound features" and that's cool. That, multiplied by his cowboy outfit, looks and sounds rather organic. But still he breaks the combo by what he's sayin, right. I was looking for some guys which could inspire that Russian fella from the previous vid. And looks I have found one

Look, if I were wearing the cowboy hat in my country, I would be looking like a saddled cow. And, you might know this guy, too... the Count, whose books have been translated into many languages, which have been filmed a hundred times, and who dressed in this way:



Looks like he was just a bit showing off. There's so fine line between all those matters, tastes, personal humble opinions...

Thanks for the links from your entry

[VLAGAVULVIN]

"I found the key that you lost yesterday" is restrictive, you have several keys, I found specifically the one that you lost yesterday.

How can you explain the difference (if any) for the following: "I found the key which you lost yesterday"? Imo, you have still found that key which was lost yesterday by the same person... or that person was happy to lose more than 1 key at once? So you got only one of them... but then I would say smth. like: "I found a key which you lost yesterday" = one of the keys.

I had a beer, that I like, at the pub;

I.e. you had the only kind of beer that you like at all (the rest sorts of beer suck, wherever bought)... right?

So, a beer was to mean one portion (one glass, one pint etc.).

[contrahead]

I could, could I... but first off, nothing offensive. Seriously. No lgbt or color minority or donaldjoes or vegans or cowboys should feel hurt after my imho's here on the forum. And I hope they don't feel bad and offended by me, time after time.

Okay, as for the confeds. That hwich, hwether, hweel feature and a certain degree of vowels reduction and the definite "flat" intra-phrase accentuation (quite different from the present-day General American)... that all doesn't piss me off. Hwat's more, I like it. But for the time being it's quite rare and even old fashioned thing, innit? In my comprehension, it is linked to some very local Scotland or the deep US South and West or even London (UK) but... dated by the Shakespeare's epoch. I understand all of his talks as I have a proper base of knowledge. Besides, his narrations are way more clear than the explanations of former Soviet academicians on that matter. So that guy, Dr. Crawford, being definitely well educated, he just doesn't care about his "sound features" and that's cool. That, multiplied by his cowboy outfit, looks and sounds rather organic. But still he breaks the combo by what he's sayin, right. I was looking for some guys which could inspire that Russian fella from the previous vid. And looks I have found one

Look, if I were wearing the cowboy hat in my country, I would be looking like a saddled cow. And, you might know [this guy].

It would be extremely difficult if not impossible for you to offend me. Living on the opposite side of the planet as it were, you have neither the shared cultural heritage nor any knowledge of my particular background to begin with. Only a familiar acquaintance or close family member could offend me, if such a thing were possible even then.

When I asked you to define “confederates”, it was to evaluate your understanding of what interpretations the term could imply. Given your response I will assume that your understanding of those possible implications is fairly limited. Please, don't you become offended now. I have the upmost respect for someone that can converse well in what is presumably his second language, when I myself have a hard enough time expressing myself in my only language.

To most of us in the west, the term “confederate” is predominately associated with the American Civil War. A confederate was someone who defended the sovereignty of independent states, against the growing appeal of an overpowering, centralized federal government. “History is written by the victors” though, as the saying goes. And so today's under-educated, Internet gullible young generations, overpoweringly match negative connotations with the confederate's stance. To them a confederate might be more repugnant than a Nazi, because affiliation to slavery is the only association made. Perpetual repetition and present day bombardment by the term “racism” has caused the general populous to remain misinformed about or indifferent to the larger anti-federalist aspect of the confederate's motivation.

Before I get into trouble or get accused of discussing politics on this forum, let me respond to your observations of accents. Your observations of “vowel reductions / hwich, hwether, hweel”, go right over the top of my head. I don't see or make these distinctions because it sounds like very natural speech to me. Alternatively, Yankee, Aussie, Irish and Cockney accents are very obvious or unnatural to me. You are correct though in associating Scots-Irish and old English accents with the US South because that area was predominately colonized and populated by those people. You are incorrect however in assuming that such an accent is old fashioned or by any means rare. It's probable that your perception has been restricted or tainted by the type of mass media from the west that you've been exposed to. By and large southerner accents don't get much exposure over mass media. The only present-day example I can readily think of might be the obnoxious “Moonshiners” TV show. There the TV producers have traveled into the most remote backwoods of the South to find the most unsophisticated “hillbillies” they can locate. The poor speech of these toothless simpleton's is a bigger draw or unconscious appeal to the TV audience than is the pretense of making illegal moonshine.

Yes I realize that Leo Tolstoystoy is greatly respected in the literary world. I once held a copy of War and Peace in my hand but cringed at its thickness.

[Birrofilo]

@VLAGAVULVIN

Don't overthink. The English language is very primitive and direct, like the people someone might say, not myself

This stuff is linguistically relevant to an Italian, such as yours truly, because this relative pronoun ambiguity is not resolved in Italian, unless you spend words and breath to dissipate it. Most times there would be no ambiguity: Lo studente che hai ascoltato ieri è molto preparato is obviously the student whom/that you listened to yesterday is well knowledgeable.

But if I say La fede in Dio, che mi hai insegnato, non ha senso, this could either be The faith in God, which you tought me, makes no sense, and The faith in God, that you tought me, makes no sense, with two different meanings, an ambiguity that you can avoid in English, but not in Italian.

In English they have this which/that (or who/that) which makes for a much clearer expression of thoughts.

A bit like in German they have können, dürfen, müssen, sollen while in Italian we have only potere and dovere and this creates ambiguities that don't exist in German. Or in English they have must, may, ought, shall, should etc.

Which refers to key. The restrictive meaning of the relative pronoun is always referred to the noun to which the relative pronoun points.

Regarding the "confederate" pronunciation, I actually find the person in the video having a clear, although somehow fast, pronunciation and generally very understandable and not without elegance.
On the other hand, to me an "American" pronunciation would be a mix of podado (potato) tomado (tomato) stuff with a pronounced, and totally unnecessary shall I say, nasalization of every nasalizeable sound

The Brits would generally be more understandable if they just didn't have this habit of uttering long "uuuuhhhhhhhmmmmm" between one word and the other, people should be taught in school that "uuuuuhhhhhh" is not a word and your interlocutor is normally not interested in counting your fillings

[HDNB]

<snip>
an "American" pronunciation would be a mix of podado (potato) tomado (tomato) stuff with a pronounced, and totally unnecessary shall I say, nasalization of every nasalizeable sound
<snip>

i just realized why the letter "t" is disappearing in north american english. I assumed it was the millennial and younger gen that had modified the t to d through laziness or being cool or something...but now that you mention it , there has been a gradual slide for a long time.

don't know why it bugs me when young women explain how impordant their buddons are....but i can now take solace in the fact it's not them, it's been heading there for while.