34,899 reputation
259135
bio website paleografie.tk
location Amsterdam, Netherlands
age
visits member for 3 years, 4 months
seen 5 hours ago

11h
revised Ataraxis or/and ataraxia, a quandary. A question over their existence and usage?
added 17 characters in body
11h
comment “He didn't know where New Jersey was”
@JohnLawler: It is inscribed in most of us. I don't see how this is about conversational implicature in any way; it's just basic semantics. Of course there are constraints, and the well studied phenomenon we're talking about is one. Evidence is provided by the fast that so many people are surprised by the possibility of the past tense in such cases when they think about it. But I see this discussion going into no-man's land, and it's bed time for me. Much of language cannot easily be described by simple, black-or-white rules à la physics, it's fuzzy science (and not even always science).
11h
comment How to: Ask an exclusive or question
"Shall I leave the door open, or shall I close it?" — What you do then is ask two questions, to which yes or no would be an invalid answer. Outside questions, you can often use either x or y.
11h
comment “He didn't know where New Jersey was”
@JohnLawler: The external rule is that, under relevant circumstances, one normally does not use a past tense to describe something that is also about the present. The violation of this rule is what makes it somewhat surprising to everyone.
12h
comment “He didn't know where New Jersey was”
@JohnLawler: I don't see why not? If there are several possible options that are as of yet hard to predict, and one of those (the past tense) is surprising and contradicts an external rule, it makes sense to use a name for the phenomenon—especially if the surprising option often seems preferable.
12h
revised Ataraxis or/and ataraxia, a quandary. A question over their existence and usage?
added 31 characters in body
12h
answered Ataraxis or/and ataraxia, a quandary. A question over their existence and usage?
Apr
13
comment What does it mean “reject it who will”?
@ivanhoescott: I don't think that is possible: the though reading would at the very least require a main clause; and, more importantly, that would not be a valid translation of the French, it would mean something else.
Apr
13
comment What does it mean “reject it who will”?
@Robusto: Yeah that's what I meant by "you can reject it if you want to, but you'd be crazy if you did".
Apr
13
answered What does it mean “reject it who will”?
Apr
12
comment What is an English noun for whom you have a conversation with?
@jlovegren: But it doesn't mean interlocutor in that quotation, or am I mistaken? It rather means something like "person you are familiar or well acquainted with", not "interlocutor in a particular conversation".
Apr
12
comment What is an English noun for whom you have a conversation with?
@jlovegren: Hmm why conversant? That does not mean interlocutor to me?
Apr
9
comment Criticizing someone of lower income who buys/lives like someone of higher income?
A money snob?
Apr
8
comment Inversion after “than”/“as”
I am inclined to say B is more "traditional", but A is also possible. C is wrong. Good question.
Apr
6
comment Do other suffixes exist for locative and directional 'adverbs'? eg here hither hence
I believe this th- is from Proto-Indo-European *to-, a pronominal stem, and h- from a Proto-Indo-European pronominal stem so-. And I believe wh- is from a Proto-Indo-European interrogative stem somewhat like *k(h)ʷ-. Cf. he, her, they, then, when, who, which.
Apr
3
comment “Baby is creeping” vs. “baby is crawling” in AmE
@JohnLawler: Arg you shouldn't use *caveant around me, you know it short-circuits my brains, all of them!
Apr
3
comment What would be a word for describing a tendency to take the literal meaning of words above the accepted meaning?
@AbraCadaver: As a pedant, I must again protest: homos does not mean "man". It means "same, equal". archimedes.fas.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/…
Apr
3
comment What would be a word for describing a tendency to take the literal meaning of words above the accepted meaning?
@AbraCadaver: That is not correct, I'm afraid. As a pedant, I must point out that homos means "equal", homophobia meaning "fear of one's equal(s)".
Mar
31
comment Use of “nay” as an adverb
As to determiners, I think treating them as a group of adjectives is better than any other solution, if you define adjectives as "words that typically modify a noun and typically do occur without a noun for them to modify". They are also formally much like adjectives in many languages, and also in some syntactic ways other than the above. Then again, it's all just terminology. I'm sure neither of us claims there is any ultimate truth in terms. Different terminologies have different merits, usually.
Mar
31
comment Use of “nay” as an adverb
I understand your argument about adverbs being rather...broad, and that "modifying a verb" can be a bit vague. But you're not being fair when you say that words like frankly could just as well be classified as nouns as as adverbs. For one thing, there are the formal characteristics. Disjuncts like this one are in many languages formally like adverbs, with -ly or -ter or -ôs or whichever suffix is used to mark adverbs in a language. Secondly, such words were originally and typically used with finite verbs in the first person, modifying them as in "frankly I think...".