Made a little cheat sheet for natural classes. The image below is a screen cap of the PDF, .org and .tex sources here: gist.github.com/cadadr/86abf58

Couldn't upload the PDF to the gist, but to generate from .tex, use

latexmk -f -silent -bibtex-cond -xelatex NaturalClasses.tex

New R-ATICS conference scheduled for November this year!!! wp.unil.ch/r-atics7/

This is a conference on rhotics, one of the most complex segment classes of human language with regards to its variation, both phonologically and sociolinguistically.

I really wanted to study /r/ in Turkish sociolinguistically for my MA thesis but bc of scope issues we went with the stress study (which I do love), but if I did /r/ I could've participated in this 😔

Great talk by Steffen Höder: A Constructionist View on Multilingual Words: Language as an Inflectional Category?

youtube.com/watch?v=1ue17mGQXZ

A fresh new article with a nice abstract: glossa-journal.org/article/10.

Moulton, K., Han, C., Block, T., Gendron, H., & Nederveen, S. (2020). Singular they in context. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 5(1), 122. doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1012

phoible.org/ "is a repository of cross-linguistic phonological inventory data, which have been extracted from source documents and tertiary databases and compiled into a single searchable convenience sample. Release 2.0 from 2019 includes 3020 inventories that contain 3183 segment types found in 2186 distinct languages."

revised ³ re

Mid 20s guy from .

Doing an MA in . Research interests: Sociolinguistics, (socio)phonology/phonetics, usage based linguistics. Also interested in some metascientific topics like and .

I love and enjoy in order to itch my own scratch, particularly in .

This is a general personal account, so it's eveything goes. That may include rants on , and less frequently, on .

question

Why do we study grammar? Why come up with syntactic theories?

(1) Do we want to come up with a model that can produce and/or licence all that can be said?

(2) Or are we trying to produce a theory that helps us analyse language, Language, and speech?

This is something I think about a lot these days. Feels like (1) is what e.g. Chomksyan grammars try to do, whereas (2) is more correct of usage based grammars. Thus I find myself drawn towards the latter & (2).

Open access book I just found, explaining and comparing various major grammatical theories in : langsci-press.org/catalog/book

Downloaded and added to my reading list. Only read the description but sounds like a nice resource.

LinguistList is raising funds. They're only a third of their humble goal so far. Help them out at funddrive.linguistlist.org/don

More info: linguistlist.org/funddrive

Boosts welcome.

curiosity / conundrum of mine: what to make of conlangs? Should they be "first class citizens" in grammatical analysis or in the making of a grammar theory?

I haven't yet looked up scholarship in this area but I'd expect to have encountered a mention of them in my studies so far.

New book Python for Linguists by Mike Hammond cambridge.org/us/academic/subj

From a look at the ToC, it seems that this is with total beginners in mind. A beginner with some experience may benefit from ch. 11 "Functional programming" and maybe from the appendix A for NLTK, but it appears that using a book that teaches something more tangible along with Python, like statistics, would be a better way to go.

re

Mid 20s guy from .

Doing an MA in . Wannabe researcher. Currently interested in language variation and construction grammar.

I've a long standing interest in and . Never really became a professional thing, but who knows...

This is a general personal account, so it's eveything goes. That may include rants on , and less frequently, on .

Watch this lecture by James Paul Gee titled "From Grammar to Society". It's about the interface between language as a semiotic system and language as a proxy to societal structure. The first ten minutes or so is exceptionally good.

youtube.com/watch?v=LKiaYBVAEU

archives for : gkayaalp.com/blog/20200319_lin

This is a list and tabular comparison of available preprint archives useful for linguits.

rando: so what do you study?
me: .
rando: what is it about? english?
me: no, more than particular languages, we try to figure out how language itself works, like in the brain, and society...
rando: 😕 😐 hmm 😒
me: ... and we collaborate with *medicine*, y'know, help figure out how to fix speech impairments...
rando: 💡 😮 woow 😮 💡
me: ...and we also cross paths with computer science, artificial intelligence, y'know, siri and stuff...
rando: 😲 😯 huh

that's how I sell linguistics

: is to what string theory is to . But one is mainstream and the other is controversial at best.

Show older
Mastodon @ SDF

"I appreciate SDF but it's a general-purpose server and the name doesn't make it obvious that it's about art." - Eugen Rochko