mostly linguistics & language stuff
tae * 36 * canadian * queer * en/fr bilingual
sideblog is glittery-phonaesthemes
phonestheme: a sound that, because it appears in a number of words of similar meaning, has a recognizable semantic association.
the thing about the formal/informal you distinction is that in some languages it's about social distance, and in other languages it's about hierarchy. and in most languages it's a unique combination of the two and won't correspond 1:1 to another language
like in a language which prioritises social distance, yeah, you'd formal-you the king or your boss because you're not close personal friends, but they'd probably formal-you you back. on the other hand you could informal-you the almighty and omnipotent god(s) because of your close and intimate devotion.
but if a language prioritises hierarchy, you'd still formal-you the king and your boss, but they might use informal-you back to you instead as their class or corporate "inferior". meanwhile children would still formal-you their parents and certainly their grandparents because respect your elders™, even if it's a close and loving relationship
some language classes and conlang presentations in particular will just be like in/formal you distinction exists. and then not actually delve into what that means.
en dis waarom mense wat die Heerser van die Ringe probeer herskep, deur met oorlog te begin, dit altyd verkeerd kry. mens moet met die liefde begin, anders is dit niks nie: net nog 'n leë geskiedenisverslag
may i bring up the tricky&fun "distant adult family member a generation or more senior to you" case because im living with my great aunt now and i am dying
"God? -> yes -> Tu (believe it or not)" made me laugh. because yes! and English did that too! (see old hymns that use Thou for God, because yes, thou was informal. we/they talked about God as a Beloved Family Member and I'm not even sure I believe anymore but I STILL HAVE FEELS about that)
(side note, I find it very funny that English swung so hard towards formality that we lost our informal pronoun, and now we're swinging so hard to informality that a lot of us don't use Mr/Ms/etc anymore, we call our bosses by their first names, etc.)
language learning is easy you just learn words... and then you keep learning more words... and even more words... and then maybe in 10 years you'll be somewhere
Sticking this up as a compilation (ever expanding) of all the material I've read and would recommend you read to get a handle on the criticisms of the linguistic ideas of Chomsky. This isn't just intended to be a criticism of Chomsky personally, but also the manner of linguistics that he engendered (basically anyone that uncritically cites Chomsky as a source on the nature of language). I have ordered these by date of publication in an effort to get across how long this has been around for.
I've tried to find publically accessible links where possible, but unfortunately not everything is so available even though it should be, so I've linked in some cases to JSTOR or similar (you might be able to get a copy if you e.g. request through researchgate but that might be it if you can't get Sci-Hub to work). Also, I've not directly linked to any PDF files, so for some of these you might have to do a little crawling through a long list of publications to find them, though that should be easier given these things are usually ordered by year, a piece of information I've given you.
I do expect to be adding to this post, so expect regular updates, as well as it being pinned on my blog.
What Did John Keep the Car That was In? (1972) - in merely six pages Dwight Bolinger Destroys Chomsky's Argument (in the New Yorker) with Facts and Logic (specifically making an early point that polar question inversion doesn't make the point Chomskyans want you to think it makes).
Cognitive versus Generative Linguistics: how commitments influence results (1990) - George Lakoff (the metaphor guy), gives his take on how the baseline assumptions of the generative model influence the results that emerge from its research.
Concerning the generative paradigm (1994) - Esa Itkonen's comprehensive criticism, including a criticism of e.g. generativism's conception of what 'Language' is, as well as the more specific points about acquisition, UG etc.
Grammaticality as evidence and as prediction in a Galilean linguistics (2009) - Nick Riemer makes a specific criticism of the notion of grammaticality in the context of Chomskyan argumentation. Follow-up after Chomskyan complaining is On not having read Itkonen: empiricism and intuitions in the generative data debate (2009), continuing the point.
The Incoherence of Chomsky's 'Biolinguistic' Ontology (2009) - Paul Postal gives his take on Chomsky's claims to being based in biology (note Postal is problematic in many ways, especially politically; I think on this one he has the right points, but I thought it worth noting).
Why Chomsky doesn’t count as a gifted linguist (2010) - a post from Dominik Lukeš that makes the point explicit, and provides alternative suggestions of actually good linguists who have had a positive impact on the field
Pullum sobre Chomsky en la UCL (2011) - Geoffrey K Pullum reports (in English, contra the title) on a talk given by Chomsky and outlines the major flaws in his rhetorical argumentation (and I mean rhetorical, there's not much in the way of actual argumentation, as you'll see)
What Chomsky doesn't get about child language (2012) - child development academic Dorothy Bishop lays out the problems with Chomsky's perspective on acquisition and how it has been superseded by pretty much all of the research by actual acquisition specialists in the decades since.
On the logical necessity of a cultural and cognitive connection for the origin of all aspects of linguistic structure (2015) - Randy LaPolla points out how odd it is to claim that Language isn't influenced by extralinguistic factors.
What exactly is UG and has anyone seen it? (2015) - Ewa Dąbrowska's title says it all with this one, arguing that part of the problem with UG as a hypothesis is that it is so vague that none of its proponents seem to actually agree on what it is, as well as debunking the key (so-called) arguments in favour.
The description-comparison approach and the audacious Chomskyan approach (or: how to frame better) (2023) - not technically anti-Chomskyan per se, but rather Haspelmath trying to frame/put a name to the overall camp that he (and many others such as myself) reside in.
Unfortunately the forms given in that last xkcd are incorrect. Gretchen McCulloch is a linguist, but not a historical one.
The Proto-Indo-European form is *h₂r̥tḱós. This was formerly reconstructed as *r̥ḱþós (and occasionally given in the form she quotes, including in the American Heritage Dictionary of Indo-European Roots, which is likely what she consulted here, although that book is a pretty crap source, drawing its data from Pokorny's dictionary which was published 41 years earlier, and which was outdated almost immediately due to not considering the new data from the decipherment of Hittite, which dramatically improved our reconstructions) to the point that pretty much nobody active in Indo-European linguistics would defend the earlier reconstruction.
The correct Proto-Indo-European form would likely give Proto-Germanic *urhsaz (although the outcome of word-medial *-tḱ- is not entirely certain), which would give Old English *orx which would give Modern English *orx (pronounced identically to the plural of "orc").
The form she gives would give Proto-Germanic *urhtaz, giving Old English *orht, giving Modern English *rought (compare wrought < Old English ge-worht < Proto-Germanic *wurhtaz).
There is no way to get anything like "arth" in English from any reconstruction of this word by regular sound changes.
The 2026 LingComm Grants awarded seven $300 (USD) grants, thanks to Lingthusiasm patrons, as well as Lukas Graf, Sarah Kelen, Daniel Currie Hall, enchantedsleeper, Rob Monarch, and Kirby Conrod and friends. Each grant winner was connected to a relevant lingcomm expert for advice and support. The 2026 LingComm Grants received 111 applications.
Tundealao Toyi Joshua, Tone Deaf AI: Visualizing the “Digital Divide” in African Languages
Garima Sukhwal, Menu Linguistics
Ngoungouo Yiagnigni Abass, The Sound Detectives
Cooper Bedin, Drag video essays on language and pop culture
Sabela Morais Martínez, Hugo Parra, Sabela Treinta Lomba, Marco Bravo Rodríguez, Samuel Fentanes Barrozo, Lucía Vieitez Portas, Dálle á lingua. Conversas sobre lingua na taberna
Nastasja Deretić, Lingvistasja – Linguistic Emancipation
Kirby Conrod LGBTQ+ LingComm Grant
Suvarna P, Gender and Sex In Malayalam Podcast
Commendations
Melissa Schuring, Expedition Youth language
Baqau Hassan Omotayo, CivicLingua Lab
Martina Guzzetti, Mind the Gap: A Zine for Decoding the Language of Your Body
Lacey Wade, Phil Duncan, Jeff Holliday, Utako Minai, Steve Politzer-Ahles, Adam An, Bayleigh Baldwin, Lillianna Lamagna, Language Exploration at the Library
For more on the 2026 grants, the winners from previous years, and other lingcomm resources, check out the LingComm website.
It's always so interesting reading through the LingComm Grant applications and seeing what topics and formats people are excited about communicating at the moment. Congrats to all the winners and honourable mentions, and thank you to all the applicants for trusting us with your dreams.
Can everyone who makes video content do a Deaf bitch a favor? Watch your shit with the captions on and the sound off, and then do another round of editing to fix things including but not limited to:
Captions cover the spot on the screen you put the information I need
The dialogue is captioned but not the song you have playing that the dialogue is responding to
You only captioned the person on the screen, not the person off screen who is also talking
No captioning of critical sound effects (alarms, bells, dogs barking, etc)
Speakers are not labelled at moments where it is not clear on the screen who is talking.
Captions cover the spot on the screen that you put the information I need!
Other d/Deaf people welcome to add.
This post brought to you by the fifth video tutorial I could not follow because the bad, auto-generated captions covered what I was trying to watch today.
l i n g s t u f f @phonaesthemes - Tumblr Blog | Tumgag
janainaart
jacobvanloon
germansingergirl
2087
origamiaround
theartofmadeline
