Jump to content

Welcome to our site

Take a moment to join us, minds are waiting for you.


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 03/10/2019 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    Yes, that is on the docket. 🙂
  2. 1 point
    Like it when we ramble about random things? This episode's for you!
  3. 1 point
    Here you go https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJfgwMmCIP8 and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLlVZHiJnwc
  4. 1 point
    Please be soon.... This is my favorite podcast, and that's saying a lot because I listen to a lot of podcasts...
  5. 1 point
  6. 1 point
  7. 1 point
    I listened so I could honestly check the poll that "I am female and I listen to Brain Food." I was rewarded by learning cool things and, equally important, bird mask doctor meme ready to fight the ghosts in my blood. Top stuff!
  8. 1 point
    I also have a comment related to the children vs adults learning language faster. I will begin by saying that I have a linguistics degree though I have not specifically read up on studies looking at speed (in years or hours, anyway) of learning, so I am curious also about this topic. If you have mentioned in a later podcast I will get to it, but can you possibly share some links to the studies you found? I am curious also whether those studies are looking more at classroom based learnjng, full immersion learning, or just conparing first language vs second language acquisition. Related, however, there is some feedback I do have experience with. So, related more to your discussion about needing to learn a first language before a certain age to avoid other mental deficiencies, there is a critical period of language learning (different scientists will differ on what ages they say that is, though it is more of a sloping chart than an immediate drop off anyway, so it depends more how you classify it, I have seen age 5 being the cutoff and in school I was also taught age 12, so yeah, varied), and like I said, this is related to the brain needing a language thing, BUT it goes even further than that, and it ties into why it is important to teach languages to children rather than adults no matter the difference in time it may take to teach them. Chiefly, any language learned during that critical period can be learned to native fluency, and can be learned much more easily than any language learned later, especially as an adult. This is why when a family with kids moves overseas, even if the whole family is fully immersed, the kids will learn the language better and much more easily than the adults, generally. This is a major reason why you will often see immigrants getting their kids or grandkids to communicate with people and stores and the doctor's office and such. In addition to that, for every language learned during that critical period, it becomes easier to learn more languages after that period. So for example someone who grows up bilingual will find it much easier to become trilingual and beyond than someone who grew up monolingual. That said, kids who are learning more than one language growing up will often learn each individual language to full fluency a bit slower, and will often have gaps where they fill in with the other language until the learn both languages fully, but as long as they stick with all the languages they are learning they will not only learn all the languages in question as well as any other average native speaker but it will also help them in other areas, especially math and science. Anyway, thought that was worth feedback, always love when you talk about linguistics, please do more.
  9. 1 point
    I have just recently found the podcast and been listening through all the episodes in order, so this is obviously a super belated comment/feedback, but this is the first episode where I got just extra excited since I am a linguist, and I had to chime in. First and foremost, as both a linguist and as a hobby writer, the dumb prescriptive rules that have nothing to do with English are a massively huge pet peeve, so I was super excited about the split infinitive debunking (the video version should be shown in very English classroom, honestly). Like, the fact that it was, as you said, based on Latin, which is absolute hog bollocks since to find a common ancestor language for English and Latin you have to go back to a speculative language like Proto Indo European, and to say the rules of one apply to the other is basically the same as saying "well, they do it this way in tennis so obviously it should be this way in football", just ridiculous, but anyway, I did want to add that, if I am remembering the details correctly, it was mainly popularized by just one singular guy who wrote one book which also popularized several other grammatical fallacies (I think it might have had the "no prepositions at the end of a sentence" one ?? which is also sort of Latin based, but I could be remembering wrong, it's been a few years since we learned this in class), which is just even more ridiculous, like one dude writing it down somehow trumped actual logic and examples from speech... ludicrous. But anyway, great stuff, you should debubk the prepositions one next lol Also, genuine thank you for also helping to dispel the myth that linguists are going to judge you on your language. The number of times I have said I'm a linguist and had people make some joke about "oh, I better talk good then" or something, I just.... no. lol Any good linguist worth their salt is not going to judge you or tell you how to talk unless their specific job is teaching a language or speech therapy or something where they are helping someone with a speech impediment or with pronouncing something like a native speaker (and even that should not be judgemental.... unless they're just rubbish). In my experience it is generally English teachers and people who were taught "formal grammar rules" that become the infamous grammar nazis who will say you use English (or any other language for that matter) wrong. In fact, in my very first introductory course at University, one of the first lessons was about the difference between descriptive grammar (just describing how language is actually being used) and prescriptive grammar (telling people how to use language), and how linguists only do the former. So yeah, like I said, unless they're just rubbish linguists or terrible human beings they better not be judging your language use. Analyzing though, absolutely. Just, only in the kindest and curiosest of ways lol Also, last linguist comment I swear, but you mentioned that as soon as a word is used, it IS a word (no take backsies, amirite?), and that's 100% true. Also true and related to this is that if a native speaker uses a grammatical form, it is grammatical, even if it's weird, though sometimes grammar can be contextual based but that's a whole other fun topic. This is because every native speaker of a language has an innate sense of things that are truly ungrammatical and not possible in their language. Anyway, I am just rambling now, this was really just a review/feedback input a year late (dropped it here since I knew it was probably going to get too long for the review format) but bottom line is I enjoyed your discussion on the topic, hope you do more linguistic facts in future, and keep up the non linguistic facts too obviously, I just love all of it. Also, unrelated, love the Seattle and Washington references, and also First Contact. Such a great movie.
  10. 1 point
    Can`t find the first episode about Roosevelt so responding here. The way Roosevelt explained his name is correct. It is a Dutch word which is pronounced that way. currently we would write it as being the word. Rozenveld, meaning field of roses. So properly if you go back in his families history they will have worked in a field of roses or lived near/in one. That is the most common way the surnames in the Netherlands were constructed. Related to your job or place you lived when the surnames became mandatory.
  11. 1 point
    Worse animal than the male duck when it comes to mating?
  12. 1 point
    Always nice to hear. Thanks! 🙂
  13. 1 point
    Yep, Fact Fiend:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaR-e8ComPih10DqPi3sdWg
  14. 1 point
    Hi, that'll be Karl Smallwood. He hosts a YouTube show called fact fiend.
  15. 1 point
    Naval mines look like spheres with projections surrounding it. We see them in war photos, cartoons, and minesweeper, but why do they look so funky and what do the parts do?
  16. 1 point
    I add and use keyboards for both Kana and Romaji for the Japanese language with a predictive feature. If I type kaimono (shopping) on my keyboard this hiragana will appear かいもの (ka-i-mo-no) then a predictive kanji for kaimono (shopping) 買い物 will appear and I have to tap or click it.
  17. 1 point
    Also weighing in - I’m a 27 year old female graduate student and I live listening! I found the podcast through your YouTube channel and it is honestly the first podcast I’ve gotten into and I’ve really been enjoying it. I listen to it at night to unwind after studying, on long drives and on planes. I feel like I enjoy your podcast for the same reasons most people have been saying, I just happen to be female (woo!) I really enjoy the interesting history - I think you explained the events leading to WWI the best I’ve heard. I DO love the macabre - what can I say, the gruesome is fascinating. I enjoy the casual banter and the tangents. I really enjoy the awkward transitions and when you congratulate yourselves on things like a good transition or a good sponsorship or complain about how much it costs to host. It’s enjoyable and so refreshingly transparent. It makes me feel like I’m listening to a friend’s podcast and I connect even more. Please continue to do slightly awkward and clumsy transitions between topics, I LOVE THEM. Finally : Simon, PLEASE ROAST MY REVIEW! (It’s on iTunes, shadowfax1300) It’s absolutely hilarious when you accidentally roast 5star reviews. I don’t know how others feel, but I love it.
  18. 1 point
    I’ve never been married and I have no kids. I’m a huge fan of trivia and tend to listen to all of your YouTube videos rather than watch them. I have a hard time finding good educational ones usually because of their voices and/or music selections I’ve noticed that I have to watch 4-5 videos before I receive recommendations. Yours is also the only educational podcast I listen to. The rest are pop culture and TV.
  19. 1 point
    A thing I'm wondering about if the whole women don't watch edutaining youtube videos isn't a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy: I am subscribed to a number of educational youtube channels, but I never get recommendations for other educational content, just older videos from channels I am already subscribed to. Another thing I will note is that podcasts are for when I'm travelling/working (I do mindless physical work) and youtube videos are for when I can sit and watch stuff.
  20. 1 point
    I would really love to see a video on where the phrase “it’s not rocket science” original came from.
  21. 1 point
    The part about unnecessary letters reminded me about a YouTube video named 'What if English were phonetically consistent'. If you like language quirks/kwirks/kwerks/kvurks, this may be both fun and interesting. https://youtu.be/A8zWWp0akUU
  22. 1 point
    I found this episode really interesting! I actually have a few interesting facts that I want to add too! I did a report on Theatrical Gas Lighting in college, and this reminded me of it. In the Neoclassical Era in French Theatre, nobles would actually be seated on the stage, to showcase their wealth. Theatre, in general, was also very "flat". Sets were often flats (think walls), that were painted to look like the given scenes. There wasn't much depth, and the theatre was about the spectacle and being seen as an audience member, as opposed to actually seeing a performance. The advent of gas lighting (introduced in 1817 at the Lyceum, Covent Garden, and Drury Lane Theaters in London) created a marked change in the theatre dynamic. Lighting was brighter, controllable, and could produce colors with colored cellophane or the famous "limelight", the former being the predecessor to modern-day cyc lights, which create their colors with colored "gels". This advancement in lighting allowed for the onset of the naturalism/realism movements in theatrical styles; because the actors could actually be seen, their choreography became more realistic, and costumes, makeup, and sets became more detailed. With this gas lighting, a divide developed between the audience and the performance. The gaslights likely made the theaters very warm and posed a fire hazard. As a result, the lights in the audience would be dimmed when the lights on-stage were on, thus leading to the modern practice of dimming the house when the show begins. As one could guess, the audience members could no longer see each other in the darkness, and they instead focused on the performances. This point likely marks the shift from an active audience to the passive audience of modern theatre. I have also included a few graphics of how this gaslighting work. They can be found in Walter Grafton's Handbook of Practical Gas-Fitting and Lloyd's Practical Guide to Scene Painting and Painting in Distemper (respectively). Sources Include: Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, The. "Limelight." Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 14 Feb. 2012. Web. 25 Feb. 2017. Emeljanow, Victor. "Erasing the Spectator: Observations on Nineteenth Century Lighting." Theatre History Studies 18 (1998): 107-16. ProQuest. Web. 25 Feb. 2017. Essig, Linda. "A Primer for the History of STAGE LIGHTING." TD & T - Theatre Design & Technology Spring 2016: 10,20,22-23. ProQuest. Web. 25 Feb. 2017 . Grafton, Walter. "Chapter XI: Theatres and Public Places of Entertainment." Handbook of Practical Gas-fitting: A Treatise on the Distribution of Gas in Service Pipes, the Use of Coal Gas, and the Best Means of Economizing Gas from Main to Burner: For the Use of Students, Plumbers, Gas-fitters, and Gas Managers. London: B.T. Batsford, 1907. 141-54. Print. Lloyds, F. "Hints on Effects." Practical Guide to Scene Painting and Painting in Distemper. London: George Rowny, 1875. 74-87. Print. McCullough, Jack W. "The Theatre as seen through Late Nineteenth Century Technical Periodicals." Performing Arts Resources 14 (1989): 13-58. ProQuest. Web. 25 Feb. 2017. Pearl, Sharrona. "Building Beauty: Physiognomy on the Gas-Lit Stage." Endeavour 30.3 (2006): 84-89. JSTOR [JSTOR]. Web. 25 Feb. 2017. Rees, Terence A. L. Theatre Lighting in the Age of Gas. Cambridge: Entertainment Technology, 2004. Print. Wild, Larry. "A Brief Outline of the History of Stage Lighting." A Brief History of Stage Lighting. Northern State University, 14 Sept. 2015. Web. 25 Feb. 2017.
  23. 1 point
    I'm still thinking about a guy dressed like Abe Lincoln smashing up chairs in a modern theatre... My girlfriend will ask me what I'm laughing about, I still have to tell her its "the Lincoln thing again"
  24. 0 points
    One month later..... Still nothing.....😭