Jump to content

Welcome to our site

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

cannibithobbal

Members
  • Content count

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

cannibithobbal last won the day on August 4

cannibithobbal had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. cannibithobbal

    Women Listeners

    Oh, that would be very interesting, and also a great thing worth doing just in general! Even just getting more women on for interviews if not helping host would be great, I really enjoyed the interviews you had early on, even if they were topics I honestly never thought I cared about, I found them really educational and interesting. But showing everyone out there that us ladies can be edutaining as well would definitely be great.
  2. cannibithobbal

    The Macabre Series

    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.
  3. cannibithobbal

    Episode 18: The Gumption of the Bertha Benz

    Just a quick very late feedback: in German, "pf" is a voiceless labiodental affricate (an affricate being the same kind of sound as English ch, which is t and sh together), and "pf" is a single sound that has both a p and f sound in it. There are some sound samples on wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_labiodental_affricate?wprov=sfla1 sorry if you already figured this out in a later episode, I am still listening through them in order lol
  4. cannibithobbal

    Women Listeners

    I would like to chime in and say it wasn't until it got mentioned in some videos and the podcasts that I found out these channels have mostly male viewers, which astonishes me because I find the content not remotely aimed at men over women... I mean, women like entertaining educational content too, right ???? I know I do. And so many topics are covered that I don't see how it wouldn't appeal to all types of people at some point. If it really is just youtube's algorithm discriminating, then shame on you, youtube. I don't know if podcasts have an algorithm for recommendations too (this is my first ever podcast), but if they do I hope it is less silly and draws in more people. If anything I am surprised more women don't watch/listen to both the youtube channel and the podcast just on account of the fact that the comments and scripts are never skewed toward just a male audience, like they don't sit there and talk about dudecentric topics, they often make humorously legit jabs at sexist (and racist, etc) people in history, lots of really interesting women are covered as topics.... I could go on but yeah, I like that the content is very not gender biased, it really is for everyone. I often recommend the channel to all kinds of people. I would like to add that, different apparently from many other women who have commented here, I drive around to different places all day for work so I started putting on the videos and just listening to them while driving (and also when I'm at home with nothing to do, or when I'm cooking or whatever, youtube is handy for that), and getting to learn instead of just being bored on the road is great, and now switching to the podcast while driving has been extra great because I don't have to listen to the annoying youtube ads XD
  5. 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.
×