Ban linguistics

in reality, all of this has been a total load of old bollocks
Positive Passion
Posts: 1345
Joined: 05 Jul 2017, 23:05

Re: Ban linguistics

Postby Positive Passion » 13 Sep 2020, 21:13

Charlie O. wrote:
kath wrote:
Charlie O. wrote:I sometimes wonder what makes one word "slang" and another word not.


this is the kinda thing i could talk about for hours. mwhaha (everybody calm down. i won't. saints game coming.)

but my quick shot answer would be: slang is basically what people come up with to make lingo their own. different from their parents. their teachers. the machine. i think of it as riffin, really.

... which means it changes the fastest of all.

who decides what language is "acceptable" and whatnot is a long topic indeed.

But a lot of slang words eventually become long term common language, do they not?

I mean, "fink" has been around for (checks link in earlier post) well over a century, now. It seems to me that it's ready to graduate to real word-dom.


There is a question as to how widely it is used, and a question relating to its Americanism (compare to the Australian "bonza" or "dinkum", but to your general point I concur. And agree.

User avatar
kath
Groovy Queen of the Cosmos
Posts: 38715
Joined: 22 Feb 2006, 15:20
Location: new orleans via bama via new orleans

Re: Ban linguistics

Postby kath » 13 Sep 2020, 21:15

Charlie O. wrote:
kath wrote:
Charlie O. wrote:I sometimes wonder what makes one word "slang" and another word not.


this is the kinda thing i could talk about for hours. mwhaha (everybody calm down. i won't. saints game coming.)

but my quick shot answer would be: slang is basically what people come up with to make lingo their own. different from their parents. their teachers. the machine. i think of it as riffin, really.

... which means it changes the fastest of all.

who decides what language is "acceptable" and whatnot is a long topic indeed.

But a lot of slang words eventually become long term common language, do they not?

I mean, "fink" has been around for (checks link in earlier post) well over a century, now. It seems to me that it's ready to graduate to real word-dom.


they dewww, indeeed.

then dictionaries start accepting them, they become acceptable... and in the blink of an eye (in linguistic terms) a whole new wave of slang on the street appears.

no matter what gets accepted, the way slang works is pretty clear. you don't use the same slang yer parents used. my son doesn't use the same slang i used. it's lightning fast.

so what starts out as slang can become accceptable and stick as that. then it becomes no longer slang.

okay, i don't have the time right now, but i really will come back to this later (if the thread doesn't die out slowly like my poor, forlorn ancient irregular verb forms. the ones i am smitten with. stricken by. the ones i have striven to remember. sniff.)

User avatar
Sam Stone
Posts: 2145
Joined: 25 Aug 2016, 17:12

Re: Ban linguistics

Postby Sam Stone » 13 Sep 2020, 21:22

FWIW, fink first appeared in 1894 and was used to describe an informer.


Apparently comes from the German word ‘finch’ meaning filth, manure or a grimy person but that’s more a question of etymology - a topic worthy of a thread on its own

User avatar
kath
Groovy Queen of the Cosmos
Posts: 38715
Joined: 22 Feb 2006, 15:20
Location: new orleans via bama via new orleans

Re: Ban linguistics

Postby kath » 14 Sep 2020, 08:47

Sam Stone wrote:FWIW, fink first appeared in 1894 and was used to describe an informer.


Apparently comes from the German word ‘finch’ meaning filth, manure or a grimy person but that’s more a question of etymology - a topic worthy of a thread on its own


not that i aint a tad hungover (GEAUX SAINTS, she screams, as she sits here, wearin two pairs of sunglasses, wrapped in bubble wrap)...

lookie there. one of those words that stuck in english, and it's germanic (she scrolls back up to what she said about old english)...

User avatar
Sam Stone
Posts: 2145
Joined: 25 Aug 2016, 17:12

Re: Ban linguistics

Postby Sam Stone » 14 Sep 2020, 08:53

Oddly enough, there was a letter in this morning's Times about linguistics which made reference to
the word "Ghoti" - pronounced fish by using these sounds:

gh, pronounced /f/ as in enough /ɪˈnʌf/ or tough /tʌf/;
o, pronounced /ɪ/ as in women /ˈwɪmɪn/;
ti, pronounced /ʃ/ as in nation /ˈneɪʃən/ or motion /ˈmoʊʃən/.

Wikipedia explains


The expected pronunciation in English would sound like "goaty" /ˈɡoʊti/.

The key to the phenomenon is that the pronunciations of the constructed word's three parts are inconsistent with how they would ordinarily be pronounced in those placements. To illustrate: gh can only resemble f when following the letters ou or au at the end of certain morphemes ("tough", "cough", "laugh"), while ti would only resemble sh when followed by a vowel sound ("mention", "martian", "patient", "spatial"). [1]



The origination of the word is often attributed to George Bernard Shaw although others (e.g. James Joyce) are also sometimes credited.

User avatar
kath
Groovy Queen of the Cosmos
Posts: 38715
Joined: 22 Feb 2006, 15:20
Location: new orleans via bama via new orleans

Re: Ban linguistics

Postby kath » 14 Sep 2020, 09:08

Sam Stone wrote:Oddly enough, there was a letter in this morning's Times about linguistics which made reference to
the word "Ghoti" - pronounced fish by using these sounds:

gh, pronounced /f/ as in enough /ɪˈnʌf/ or tough /tʌf/;
o, pronounced /ɪ/ as in women /ˈwɪmɪn/;
ti, pronounced /ʃ/ as in nation /ˈneɪʃən/ or motion /ˈmoʊʃən/.

Wikipedia explains


The expected pronunciation in English would sound like "goaty" /ˈɡoʊti/.

The key to the phenomenon is that the pronunciations of the constructed word's three parts are inconsistent with how they would ordinarily be pronounced in those placements. To illustrate: gh can only resemble f when following the letters ou or au at the end of certain morphemes ("tough", "cough", "laugh"), while ti would only resemble sh when followed by a vowel sound ("mention", "martian", "patient", "spatial"). [1]



The origination of the word is often attributed to George Bernard Shaw although others (e.g. James Joyce) are also sometimes credited.


you do realize they used to call chris squire of yes "ghoti", right? the fish...

User avatar
Sam Stone
Posts: 2145
Joined: 25 Aug 2016, 17:12

Re: Ban linguistics

Postby Sam Stone » 14 Sep 2020, 09:27

kath wrote:
you do realize they used to call chris squire of yes "ghoti", right? the fish...



No, never knew that (not a big Yes fan - keep it quiet or C will have me silenced!).

What was the reason behind it?

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 28801
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: Ban linguistics

Postby toomanyhatz » 14 Sep 2020, 09:46

Bat bait bet beat beet bit bite bot boat bout but butt is the most productive I can come up with.
Jimbo wrote:I need you to back up this claim.


1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017* 2018 2020? 2021?