[neithernownoreverheythatsclever]

i wonder if theres a grammatical rule out there that explains why “i’m a big sexy bug” sounds better than “i’m a sexy big bug”, yet “im a sexy little bug” sounds better than “i’m a little sexy bug”

[classicmeevs]

What? Sexy bugs?

[wintersoldierfell]

@seagodofmagic wrote #linguist tumblr please explain this soooo @bophtelophti?

[bophtelophti]

I’m not sure! Elementary textbooks say things like:

value/opinion (nasty, awful, worse) size (tiny, enormous) age/temperature (old, warm) shape (oblong, twisted, round) color (blue, red, fuchsia) origin (Brazilian, foreign, Northwestern) material (plastic, wooden)

…The general schema for English follows the order in the list above.

(Lobeck & Denham 2013, Navigating English Grammar, p.149)

But that doesn’t explain why big and little occupy separate positions.

Looking for relatively recent and accountable research on the subject, I find this paper by Wulff (2003), who ends up saying, rather unsatisfyingly, that adjective order is “determined by a variety of variables from different levels of linguistic analysis,” including almost all of the ones she tests in that paper and probably others still unaccounted for. However, one of the factors she tests is length, finding that longer adjectives are somewhat more likely to be closer to the noun than shorter adjectives, which might explain the asymmetry between big and little.

@midnightsidhe, do you know anything about this or have anything to add?

[midnightsidhe-blog]

I’m actually taking a break from Tumblr right now, but @bophtelophti knows how to bring me back.

So I have no evidence for this at all, and am more or less making this up, but this is what I think is going on here: “little” is, as well as normal adjective that contrasts with “big,” a free-standing diminutive marker in English, meaning that it’s essentially the equivalent of the diminutive suffix you find in a lot of languages (including English, but not so productively anymore).  It has basically the same range of functions you see with diminutive suffixes, and is not strictly about size.  Because it’s essentially a function morpheme, it naturally has to appear closer to the head noun than a more standard size adjective would do.

This isn’t really that weird -- we normally think of these as affixes, but those affixes have to come from somewhere, right, and this use of “little” is more or less exactly what you’d think they’d come from.  The fact that you see this spelled “li’l” sometimes is also kind of interesting, since it suggests that this may be undergoing some phonological reduction, which is also what you’d expect of a function morpheme.

I have no idea what the synchronic status of this thing is, whether it’s an independent morpheme homophonous with its regular-adjective parent “little” or whether there’s a more complex, pre-complete-split type relationship (I’d guess the latter? but have literally no evidence for it), but I’m reasonably sure that some sort of grammaticalisation (I hate that word but lack a better one) process is happening or has happened here.

"Sexy little” is definitely not the best phrase to use as an example for this because I am pretty sure “sexy + diminutive” is A Thing.  But note that “I’m a little red bug” is just as fine and unobjectionable as “I’m a big red bug,” and also that it has somewhat differently, if ineffably so, semantic properties from “I’m a red little bug.”  The latter sounds weird unless you make it sort of cutesy, and cutesiness is I think part of what the diminutive morpheme (particle?) is bringing.

[vistakai]

People keep saying, “what if men did what you did to ghostbusters but the other way around!!!!!” but 1) You can’t. There isn’t one major blockbuster from the past 30 years with enough girls to do that with, and 2) Don’t assume that I wouldn’t completely support an all male cheetah girls reboot

[kiragecko]

Um. All Male Josie and the Pussycats. Can you imagine?

[angel-gidget]

All-male Charlie’s Angels including the slow sexy upward pans of the camera, pointlessly open shirts, and skintight catsuits. Our heroes must pose as masseuses, belly dancers, and more to seduce female CEOs, senators, and heads of security while constantly proving their loyalty to Charlie who is voiced by Lucy Liu.

[midnightsidhe-blog]

me: la la la

my body: **stabby stabby pain**

me: AUGH

my body: hahaha i hate you lolz

me: YOU DON'T HAVE TO REMIND ME EVERY DAMN MONTH

[strawberryspoons]

Viciously destroy the idea that bullying is a normal part of growing up.

[lachesismeg]

This is so hard for me as a parent to deal with, from both sides.

Like it brings up all of my issues, and I so want my kid to not have to deal with bullying.  And I have no idea how to do that.

[star-anise]

I’ll repeat something I’ve said before:

I was doing my Master’s thesis on bullying until the topic triggered me back to my own childhood so badly I dropped out of that degree program.  Let me share something I know.

We haven’t quite found anti-bullying programs that stop bullying once it’s started, but we canreduce the harm bullying does.  Just a few small changes to classroom culture, like limiting children’s opportunities to exclude each other, or spending time talking about respectful communication, has visible changes.  Yeah, there’s still a hierarchy of popularity, but kids at the bottom of the ladder go from having no friends on average to having one or two.  And that’s enough to make or break a childhood.  (Sources: one two three four five)

But here’s the other thing.

There is one major factor that mediates the link between childhood bullying and adult mental illnesses (predominantly depression, anxiety, and eating disorders).  It’s self-blame.

What really damages children isn’t precisely being bullied; it’s believing that they deserve to be bullied. If children don’t blame themselves for being victims, they are much more resilient and experience fewer long-term negative consequences. (Sources: one two three four five)

Society blames children for their victimization by bullies all the time.  It says, “There is something about you that causes people to bully you.“  Common responses to bullied kids are things like: “Don’t give them a reaction.” (They’re bullying you because you get upset.)  “They’re just jealous.” (They’re bullying you because you do well.)  “Let’s teach you some social skills.”  (They’re bullying you because you act weird.)

If we can just change that one thing, we could prevent a lot of damage.  What bullied kids desperately need at the very least is a caring community that says: You are not alone.  It’s not your fault.  What they’re doing is not okay.

[thinksquad-deactivated20190405]

Texas Town Fires Police Dept., Hires Private Citizens For Security — Guess What Happened to Crime?

The community of Sharpstown, Texas decided that they didn't need the police any longer. They made a controversial decision to fire the local police department and hire private citizens, granted no special rights that ordinary citizens do not have, to keep them safe.

That was back in 2012, and since then, Sharpstown residents say the private security company, SEAL SecuritySolutions, have done a much better job than the police used to. Crimes is down 61% in only 20 months.

James Alexander, the director of operations for SEAL Security Solutions says that, “Since we’ve been in there, an independent crime study that they’ve had done [indicates] we’ve reduced the crime by 61 percent,” according to Guns.com.

All of that and they don’t have any special rights that you or I don’t have. That means they can’t arrest for misdemeanor crimes… and why should people be arrested for them anyway? It also means that they are held accountable the same way as anyone else.

The SEAL security patrolmen don’t “receive the same protection, as we are in the private sector,” Alexander said. This, he explains, leads to constant accountability and vigilance of their employees making sure they don’t do something to get fired.

They don’t have special privileges, or lobbyist groups protecting them. If they break the law, if they murder someone, they will be treated like anyone else who committed the same crimes.

But so far, nothing like that has been a problem.

There’s the issue of savings too. The firm says they have saved taxpayers approximately $200,000 per year, even though they have more feet patrolling than back when the city employed cops.

“On a constable patrol contract, it’s either a 70/30 or an 80/20. Meaning they say they patrol your community 70 percent of the time, [while] 30 percent of the time they use for running calls out of your area or writing reports,” Alexander explained.

“The second thing that drastically reduces the crime is that we do directed patrols,” he continued.“Meaning we don’t just put an officer out there and say  ‘here, go patrol.’ We look at recent crime stats, and we work off of those crime stats. So if we have hotspots in those areas say for that month, we focus and concentrate our efforts around those hotspots.”

[satanstrousers]

I experienced magic in Central Park today

[teded]

The Language of Lying

We hear anywhere from 10 to 200 lies a day. And we’ve spent much of our history coming up with ways to detect them, from medieval torture devices to polygraphs, blood pressure and breathing monitors, voice stress analyzers, eye trackers, infrared brain scanners, and even the 400-pound electroencephalogram.

But although such tools have worked under certain circumstances, most can be fooled with enough preparation, and none are considered reliable enough to even be admissible in court. But what if the problem is not with the techniques, but the underlying assumption that lying spurs physiological changes? What if we took a more direct approach, using communications science to analyze the lies themselves?

On a psychological level, we lie partly to paint a better picture of ourselves, connecting our fantasies to the person we wish we were rather than the person we are. But while our brain is busy dreaming, it’s letting plenty of signals slip by. Our conscious mind only controls about 5% of our cognitive function, including communication, while the other 95% occurs beyond our awareness. And according to the literature on “reality monitoring,” stories based on imagined experiences are qualitatively different from those based on real experiences. This suggests that creating a false story about a personal topic takes work and results in a different pattern of language use. A technology known as linguistic text analysis has helped to identify four such common patterns in the subconscious language of deception.

First, liars reference themselves less when making deceptive statements. They write or talk more about others, often using the third person to distance and disassociate themselves from their lie. Which sounds more false: “Absolutely no party took place at this house,” or “I didn’t host a party here”?

Second, liars tend to be more negative, because, on a subconscious level they feel guilty about lying. For example, a liar might say something like, “Sorry, my stupid phone battery died. I hate that thing.”

Third, liars typically explain events in simple terms, since our brains struggle to build a complex lie. Judgment and evaluation are complex things for our brain to compute. 

And finally, even though liars keep descriptions simple, they tend to use longer and more convoluted sentence structure, inserting unnecessary words and irrelevant but factual-sounding details in order to pad the lie. 

So how can you apply these lie-spotting techniques to your life? The lies we encounter on a daily basis vary in seriousness, and may even be harmless. But it’s still worthwhile to be aware of tell-tale clues like minimal self-references, negative language, simple explanations, and convoluted phrasing. It just might help you avoid an overvalued stock, an ineffective product… or even a terrible relationship.

From the TED-Ed Lesson The language of lying - Noah Zandan

Animation by The Moving Company Animation Studio

[bayocake-deactivated20160731]

It’s not just men who think they are entitled to sex or a woman’s body. 

[mimisavagee]

Consent is needed every time, no matter what the relationship is

[thechronicleofshe]

shes terrifying, 

[tuxedomask3]

What the actual fuck?

[wicked-yarn]

Wow she’s scary.

[evilguacamole]

You’re no feminist if this doesn’t bother you, that you don’t see the rape vibes here. Women can and do rape men. They use force, they use words, they can manipulate- just like men do. And it is just as wrong.

[imperi]

This is as terrifying to read written by a woman as it would be written by a man.

[eventidetempleguardian]

Totoro GIF - Find & Share on GIPHY

Discover & Share this Totoro GIF with everyone you know. GIPHY is how you search, share, discover, and create GIFs.

[midnightsidhe-blog]

So I’m reading this book where the heroine was cautioned in the opening pages of the story not to show her intelligence too much lest it put off the menfolk (gag) but now she’s flirting with the hero and thinking how great it is to be able to show off her intelligence.

I applaud this sentiment!  I applaud it wholeheartedly! but

so far by “intelligence,” all that has been meant is “able to quote Kipling, Thoreau, or Chaucer.”

Being able to quote the Established Canon does not make you intelligent.  It makes you well-read or well-educated, by a very specific definition of well-educated/well-read, and in possession of the kind of memory that recalls quotes easily.  That is not the same thing at all.

You don’t need to have read a Certain Canon of Books to be intelligent; you can, in fact, be illiterate and still be considerably more intelligent that someone who had a first-class education from which they primarily learned who to parrot and how to “sound” smart.  

And like, okay, this is arguably a petty point, except... well... it isn’t, actually.   Anyone who has spent time around undergraduates who have been exposed to like Kant or JS Mill for the first time and are self-importantly and rather superficially pontificating with puffy chests over it knows that it isn’t. This equation of intelligence with being well-educated is a very elitist idea, with potential intersections with classism, racism, sexism, and ableism.  

I get really, really tired of encountering this in fiction.  Showing me that a character is educated, or bookish, or nerdy/geeky, gets used as evidence that a character is Smart.  This is especially true of romance heroines, for some reason.  Quit telling me she’s so smart because she likes to read! and she’s got Bluestocking Tendencies! and her father saw to it that she was educated! and look, she’s quoting Thoreau!  Look, it’s fine and great if she’s those things, but I’m not going to buy her as a Particularly Intelligent Person unless you actually show me that she’s intelligent.

I don’t mean to pick on romance here, because all fiction writers across genres are guilty of this, and also because I can, even off the top of my head, name romance authors who do it right.  One of the things I really liked about Eva Leigh’s Temptations of a Wallflower (which I just finished and had very mixed feelings about) was that her heroine, Lady Sarah, was very clearly demonstrated to be smart.  Charlotte from Lady of Sin is one of my favourite heroines (from, not coincidentally, one of my favourite books) because Madeline Hunter did an excellent job demonstrating that she’s frighteningly intelligent.  Ditto Courtney Milan’s heroines.  Convincingly writing an intelligent character can be done -- but you have to make the effort to do it.  Don’t show me a character quoting Thoreau or mention that they can decline Latin verbs and expect me to accept this as evidence that they’re Intelligent.  Show me how their mind works.

[midnightsidhe-blog]

non-stop, yorktown

yorktown: talk about a time you struggled but came out on top

The best answer I have for this is probably my dissertation, although I’m annoyed at how boring that is.  I had a really rough time in grad school for psychological reasons, and there were multiple times I was sure I wasn’t going to make it through.  I also changed sub-disciplines once and advisers twice, and at one point I stopped working on it for an entire month because I just got so depressed I couldn’t work.  My final adviser refused to meet with me while I was working on it or to give me comments on the chapter drafts I kept sending him, although he was very good at responding quickly and helpfully when I had specific questions on very specific problems.

Then, finally, when I told my adviser that I had sent him drafts of every contentful chapter I intended to write (not introduction or conclusion) and couldn’t do anything else without meeting him, he finally met with me, told me that I was doing fine, told me that he’d concluded that since I knew what I was doing, the best thing he could do for me was get out of my way so I could finish (???? this logic????), and then added ‘I told you were doing fine.  I… guess I could have told you again.’

So then I successfully defended my dissertation in what was the smoothest defence I have ever witnessed, the highlights of which were that I drank too much water beforehand and that one of the other students tried to show off by asking a really stupid question and had something like three or four faculty members jump all over him (before one of them said they should let me explain it since I’d already said it).  I had no real substantive complaints and basically no revisions to make.  In the end I had it all ready for submission, down to printing and binding, a day in advance.

That’s probably my best answer.  Most of my struggles in life have been against my own psychology, and I don’t think I tend to win.  (Or… I guess by definition, I always win, but not the right me.)

non-stop: talk about something you’re talented at, or even just something you can do very quickly and efficiently

Probably I could legitimately claim that my chief talent is being able to do everything quickly and efficiently, but that would be boring, so I won’t.

I guess I think of my chief talent as being the ability to focus simultaneously on both forests and trees.  Is that too abstract to be interesting, though?

Here’s a less-abstract one just in case: I am very good at reading voices.  This is frequently useful, although it’s also sometimes frustrating because people who are not @eventidetempleguardian tend to undervalue what you can learn from someone’s voice, which means that sometimes you end up with all this information and you can’t pass it on.

[frmatthewlc]

We need to realize that many “romance” novels are verbal pornography so need to be avoided. I remember talking to a woman who had been previously addicted who old me this about a decade ago… and things have only gotten worse since then. This has now gotten to an epidemic affecting 70% of US adult women so we need to clean it up.

[respectingromance]

Women get addicted to romance books in the same way that men get addicted to photographs and videos. In 2011, one psychologist reported that she was “seeing more and more women who are clinically addicted to romantic books.”

Like other addictions, “pornmance” novels mess with women’s brains and wreak havoc in their lives. According to therapists, these books can cause women to become dissatisfied with their marriages, to become “dangerously unbalanced,” and according to a pornography addiction counselor, to have affairs.

Is it mere coincidence that nearly 70 percent of divorces in the United States are initiated by women?

[midnightsidhe-blog]

“to become dissatisfied with their marriages”

Read: ‘to realise that they aren’t happy in their marriages, possibly never have been, and that yes, they do deserve more from life.’

‘ to become “dangerously unbalanced” ‘

Yeah, you know, discovering that you’re stuck in a bad dream when everyone else is insisting that you’re having a great time and everything is great will do that to you.  Oh, hey, we even have a word for that: gaslighting!

‘ to have affairs’

You know who has affairs?  Unhappy people, that’s who.  Also narcissistic assholes, true.  But also very ordinary people who happen to be really unhappy.

‘ Is it mere coincidence that nearly 70 percent of divorces in the United States are initiated by women? ‘

Is it mere coincidence that more and more women are saying that they’re not sure they want to be married, or even that they definitively don’t want to be married?

[midnightsidhe-blog]

alexander hamilton, right hand man, it's quiet uptown

alexander hamilton: what are some things you want more people to know about you?

I have very extreme personal space requirements, both in a sort of energy/psychological sense (I need a lot of time alone) and in the strictly physical sense. I sort of silently suffer through a lot of unwanted physical contact that comes with existing in society because there’s no polite way to get out of it.

It operates on a sort of rescue-cat logic.  You know those cats who only allow like two people to pet them, but are very happy to be petted by those two people?  It’s not so much that I hate being touched as it is that I hate being touched by most people.  I don’t mind being touched by very good friends, and I am downright eager to be touched by Extremely Hot Dudes.  I am not eager to be touched by only-moderately-attractive people and this makes life awkward.

The most aggravating part of this, though, is that every now and then I try to explain this to people, and I get this barrage of ‘OH NO BUT I TOUCH YOU IS THAT NOT OKAY’ and then I feel bad and find myself telling them that no, no, no, it’s totally fine for them to touch me, only in a lot of those cases it totally isn’t, and then I’m stuck getting hugged by people whom I don’t want to be touched by but have nevertheless given touching permission to, and then I end up wishing I hadn’t tried to enforce a boundary at all.

(In general the rule is, if I have touched you of my own volition, then it is fine to assume that it is probably okay for you to touch me occasionally too.)

right hand man: who do you look up to most?

Hmm, this changes a lot, but at the moment probably Edward Snowden.

it’s quiet uptown: where do you like to go to think or brood?

I don’t have a very interesting answer to this, unfortunately.  Just my apartment.

[midnightsidhe-blog]

A. Ham; A. Burr, Sir

alexander hamilton: what are some things you want more people to know about you?

By nature, I am neither a sweet-tempered person nor a particularly nice or good one.  I just had it beaten into me very early and very thoroughly that I had to be maximally non-threatening at all times.  In fact I hate this and am really tired of it.  Protecting people from yourself takes a lot of energy and has basically no benefits.  In particular, it’s always the wrong people who decide they want you.

Not unrelatedly, attempting to compliment me using the words “librarian” or “adorable” is a really fast way to ensure that you will never get in my pants.

aaron burr, sir: when was the last time you met someone who changed your life?

So I guess the most technically accurate answer to this question is probably seven months ago, when I met my boss, who has ensured that I have a primary job for at least a couple of years.  But this isn’t really a very satisfying answer, because it mostly meant that I swapped one job for another with fairly minimal changes.

Instead I would rather say “not quite three years ago,” because that’s when I met my voice teacher.  When I first met him, I had had previous vocal training, and I was technically able to sing things, but I would try to do it in this weird internal way, like I was hoping that no one could hear me.  Now I have about five hundred percent more voice than I used to, and I sound like a different person entirely, and I think it’s also changed me in ways that are less obvious and harder to describe.

[midnightsidhe-blog]

hamilton songs ask meme

alexander hamilton: what are some things you want more people to know about you?

aaron burr, sir: when was the last time you met someone who changed your life?

my shot: talk about something you're determined to accomplish before you die.

the story of tonight: talk about some of the best times you've had with friends.

the schuyler sisters: do you have any siblings? if so, what are they like?

farmer refuted: do you ever send letters in the mail?

you'll be back: when was the last time you were dumped?

right hand man: who do you look up to most?

a winter's ball: what was the last party you went to like?

helpless: when was the last time you had a crush that really hit you hard?

satisfied: what has been the hardest decision you've ever had to make?

the story of tonight reprise: do you have any friends who are married?

wait for it: what's something you're really longing for?

stay alive: have you ever had any near-death experiences?

ten duel commandments: have you ever been in a physical fight with anyone?

meet me inside: talk about a time you got in big trouble with an authority figure

that would be enough: do you prefer an eventful or a peaceful life?

guns and ships: who is your greatest partner in crime?

history has its eyes on you: talk about the best teacher you've ever had

yorktown: talk about a time you struggled but came out on top

what comes next?: are you anxious about the future?

dear theodosia: what's one nice thing you wish you could say to someone right now?

non-stop: talk about something you're talented at, or even just something you can do very quickly and efficiently

what'd i miss: do you suffer from fomo (fear of missing out)?

cabinet battle #1: do you enjoy debating or arguing with people?

take a break: if you could run anywhere for a getaway, where would you go and who would you take with you?

say no to this: what's your biggest guilty pleasure?

the room where it happens: talk about a group you would love to be a part of, whether it's an official group or a group of people

schuyler defeated: how do you feel about changing yourself and your image in order to succeed?

cabinet battle #2: are you a person that helps yourself, or others first?

washington on your side: who is the most important or influential person you've ever been friends with?

one last time: do you have a hard time quitting things or saying goodbye?

i know him: do you enjoy talking smack?

the adams administration: talk about a time you've clashed with authority

we know: do you enjoy gossip?

hurricane: what's the hardest thing you've ever managed to make it through in life?

the reynolds pamphlet: do you prefer keeping secrets, or being an open book?

burn: talk about a time you've felt betrayed

blow us all away: can you hold yourself back when you hear people speaking badly about someone you like/love?

stay alive reprise: have you ever lost anyone?

it's quiet uptown: where do you like to go to think or brood?

the election of 1800: do you think it's important to vote?

your obedient servant: how do you feel about passive-aggression?

best of wives and best of women: do you prefer sleeping alone or with someone else?

the world was wide enough: talk about a time you had to make a decision and ultimately made the wrong one

who lives, who dies, who tells your story: how do you want to be remembered when you're gone?

[stunningpicture]

So proud of my mother for doing her own research after I sent her that meme. A sign she hung in her car window.

[jettestblack-deactivated2017080]

Stay woke

[pual1010-deactivated20150723]

Is this true?

[mallninjacode-deactivated201812]

Not only is it true, it gets worse. The Susan G Komen For The Cure Foundation has actually successfully sued “competing” charities, because (paraphrasing) their “message or branding was infringing.”

You read that correctly: they took money that people had donated to cure cancer, and hired attorneys with it, to sue ANOTHER group of people trying to find a cure for cancer, who, in turn, had to us their donated money to hire their own legal counsel to defend themselves.

[redbloodedamerica]

[spacemohawks]

Yeah signal boost because not enough people know about this and seriously FUCK SUSAN G. KOMEN THEY ARE THE ACTUAL WORST

[beanmom]

Some links…

http://thinkbeforeyoupink.org/

http://www.somethingawful.com/feature-articles/for-the-cure/

http://thestir.cafemom.com/in_the_news/132728/susan_g_komen_foundation_has

(reblogged in honor of my mother, who died of breast cancer, 11/13/97)

[hello-missvixy-deactivated20160]

Reblog every time I see it. Roughly once a month.

[blockmind]

Also please never forget the pink fracking drill bit

that’s right fracking you know, a process using chemicals known to cause cancer that leech into the water supply

http://www.triplepundit.com/2014/10/baker-hughes-fights-breast-cancer-pink-fracking-drill-bits/

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/cancer/pink-drill-bits-bring-complaints-komen-tie-fracking-n223166

[alexithymia42]

It’s that time of year again, please remember Komen is the actual worst

[sofia-ciel]

Komen For The Cure is pretty much awful.

[paintedrocket-deactivated202011]

Reblogging because a family friend’s wife died of breast cancer

[medeasdragons]

the smarter the fool, the longer the explanation

source: me, in that I just came up with this in conversation and wanted to write it down somewhere because I was so impressed with myself (via medeasdragons)