Categories
homophobia irony alert racism trump

Dude is mad [homophobic slur] and [ethnic slur] think his Trump shirt promotes hate

He mad
He mad, too

Oh, Trump fans, never change!

Ted • 20 hours ago Bernietard in Lit told me that I was promoting "hate" by wearing a Trump shirt. This dude is your quintessential SWPL faggot. Even before Trump he hated me. All because I called dramakids fags like a year ago. Aside from that and a few glares from spics, I got nods and thumbs ups from peers . My friends didn't make comment on it. They already know me as that trump supporter lol Being a vocal Trump fan hasn't damaged my life...yet. 2 • Reply•Share › Avatar Det. Snide Ted • 20 hours ago Fuck the spics. Keep up the good work.

 

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

481 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
4 years ago

Explanation of how to express the ‘future tense’ in Swedish, as requested by Verily Baroque. 🙂

In the strict sense, the Swedish language has only two tenses, namely the present and the past. All other types of time references that can be expressed by verbs have to be formed through a verb construction containing one finite verb (in the present or past tense) and one or more non-finite verbs. For example, the pluperfect is expressed by using the auxiliary verb hade followed by a verb in the supine (non-finite) form (hade jobbat = had worked). This is, of course, very similar to how you would express the pluperfect in English.

In order to express events that are to take place in the future, we have a few different options depending on what exactly is to be expressed.

The most basic ‘future tense’ construction is:

ska + verb in the infinitive
Example: ska äta = will eat

The verb ska is technically in the present tense. The longer, more formal form is skall, i.e. it’s similar to the English shall, but in context could be more accurately translated as will. Thus, this construction is used to express what will happen, or what someone will do.

Another common ‘future tense’ construction is:

kommer att + verb in the infinitive
Example: det kommer att regna = it will rain

By itself, kommer att could be most closely translated as is/are going to. This construction is used to express what is going to happen, or what someone is going to do. What exactly is the difference between what will happen and what is going to happen, one might ask. I’ll get back to my thoughts on this after I outline one more crucial way of expressing the ‘future tense’.

It is very common to express what will transpire in the future by simply using a verb in the present tense, along with some sort of expression for time (in the future).

Example: Jag åker hem imorgon. = I’m going home tomorrow.

Now we have three different ways of expressing essentially the same thing. The three sentences below are all about a girl who is starting school tomorrow:

Hon ska börja i skolan imorgon.
Hon kommer att börja i skolan imorgon.
Hon börjar i skolan imorgon.

The difference between these three options is difficult to pinpoint, and sometimes/often two or three of these will be interchangeable. The difference is in how avoidable the future event is, how much the future event can be influenced, or whether it has been decided (by someone) that the event will happen. In other words, we’re talking about various degrees of certainty that the event will indeed happen.

The third construction (verb in present tense + time expression) signals the highest level of certainty.

Example:
?Det snöar imorgon.

The sentence above would mean that it will be snowing tomorrow, but this particular construction signals a borderline impossible certainty in the statement that it will actually snow. Tomorrow’s predicted weather events are presumably not inevitable facts, which is why I put a ? in front of this example sentence.

It’s common for second language learners to latch onto one of these ‘future tense’ options (ska or kommer att) and use only that construction every time, which will come off as repetitive to a native speaker. While it’s important to vary between the different strategies, it’s also necessary to have a feel for the subtle differences in meaning, and to apply them only where permitted by the context.

Some more examples:
We’re going swimming this afternoon.
Vi åker och badar i eftermiddag.
Vi ska åka och bada i eftermiddag.
?Vi kommer att åka och bada i eftermiddag.

While all these options are grammatically correct, the last one is mildly strange. It suggests that the event is inevitable, out of the speaker’s control. It could possibly be uttered by a child who has no say in their parents’ plans for the afternoon.

There are also other, more limited ways of talking about the future. One common construction is:

tänker + verb in the infinitive
Example: Jag tänker inte gå ut idag. = I’m not going out today.

In this construction, tänker (literally the present tense of to think) signals what someone intends to do, or in this case what they intend not to do. Since it’s dependent on intent, this option cannot be used to express what will happen in a passive sense.

And that’s really all there’s to it. Of course, you can also talk about time in a more complicated sense, such as what was expected to happen in the future from the point of view of some time in the past. Generally, these complex verb structures are expressed very similarly to how one would do it in English, keeping in mind the grammar I’ve discussed in this post.

Examples:
Hon tänkte köpa en ny telefon. = She was meaning to buy a new telephone.
De skulle träffas nästa onsdag. = They were going to see each other the following Wednesday.

(The word skulle is simply the past tense of ska.)

Hope that helped! 🙂

Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
4 years ago

Of course, the only Finnish sentence that all Swedes know and understand is “ei saa peittää” – a phrase found on basically all radiators, meaning roughly “Don’t cover a hot radiator with a blanket, you fucking idiot. You’ll start a fire.”

The Swedish translation says “do not cover”, but I assume that’s just the nicer, more Sweden compatible way of saying it?

Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
4 years ago

Oops, sorry for messing up the italics tags at the end of that grammar post. I ran out of editing time before I could find where it went wrong. :/

bluecat
bluecat
4 years ago

@ Bina – it’s the only fictional utopia I’ve ever thought I might actually like to live in.

@ IP that is absolutely fascinating, thank you.

It seems Swedish has what some call “aspect” – as English does – where the grammatical construction reflects not only the time of the action in the verb but also how we feel about it.

I wonder whether we got it from you, being as how English is bit of a smorgasbord of languages?

As you say, adult learners of English often latch onto one option (it’s usually “will” for the future) and over use it, which makes them sometimes come across as unduly dictatorial, especially when there are also problems with the question form and with intonation – the difference in feeling between “You will come tomorrow” and “Are you coming tomorrow?”, for instance.

Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
4 years ago

@bluecat

The only real aspectual distinction in Swedish grammar is that between the perfect and the pluperfect. Other aspectual information can be contained in specific expressions or phrasal verbs, but in general aspect isn’t commonly considered in Swedish.

I would say the progressive aspect in English is more clear and commonly used than anything we have in Swedish, other than the perfect/pluperfect distinction which of course is present in English as well.

The whole concept of aspect can be very difficult to grasp for someone who speaks only or mostly Swedish. For myself, I only started to fully understand what aspect means when coming across the particles 了 and 过 in Chinese.

Verily Baroque
Verily Baroque
4 years ago

@IP

You are amazing. Just amazing. And so is your explanation.

If I may ask additional questions:
Why is “verb in present tense + time expression” signaling the most certainty/inevitability when talking about weather but “kommer att + verb in the infinitive + time expression” signaling more inevitability when talking about a person doing something?

Is this strictly tied to the context and determined on a case-by-case basis (which is always utterly delightful in grammar) or can some kind of absolute rule be drawn from this?

And that’s really all there’s to it.

…I hope you are being sarcastic? 🙂 Your system is complex.

Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
4 years ago

@Verily Baroque

You are amazing. Just amazing. And so is your explanation.

Aww. 🙂 Thank you. So are you.

Thanks for your questions! They make me suspect I wasn’t entirely crystal clear in certain parts of my explanation and examples, so I greatly appreciate them. 🙂 I’ll try to clarify.

Out of the three main options I listed, the subtle differences I mentioned are basically universal and not tied to the specific contexts entailed by the examples I gave. Those were just meant to be typical examples to illustrate these differences. In summary:

ska + verb in the infinitive – signals determination/intent
kommer att + verb in the infinitive – signals inevitability/out of control
verb in the present tense + time expression – signals the highest level of certainty

If the third option is applied to something which is clearly within the control of the speaker, it can be taken to mean that the speaker is very determined to make sure this will happen, and nothing can stop them.

But I want to reiterate that these differences are subtle, and there are often more than one perfectly acceptable option. I think there are clear differences, but I wouldn’t call them absolute rules.

I hope you are being sarcastic?

Haha. I actually wasn’t being sarcastic. I think it seems more complex than it is, because I went into detail trying to explain these subtle differences. Basically there are three main ways of expressing ‘future tense’, and while not interchangeable they’re often all acceptable and you would very rarely be misunderstood regardless of which one you choose in any given context.

Monzach
Monzach
4 years ago

@Imaginary Petal

Your grammar and other language posts reminded me of a factoid I heard during my university days:

Apparently there was a poll in the 1990s among foreign exchange students at the University of Helsinki regarding their perceptions of the Finnish language. One of the questions asked was about the most beautiful sentence in Finnish, specifically the sentence which sounded the most beautiful to people. Interestingly enough, the overall winner was a phrase that’s quite common in the Finnish weather forecasts – alavilla mailla hallan vaara (danger of frost in low-lying areas). 🙂

Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
4 years ago

@Monzach

Haha, that’s an awesome sentence. I’ve often defended the Finnish language when other Swedes seem to view it as “ugly”. Something about the intonation makes it sound very soothing to me.

I recall a short TV segment from way back, where a reporter asked immigrants learning Swedish about which Swedish word is the most beautiful. I remember one thing that always stuck with me, one of them answered “Selma”, which is of course not a word-word, but a name presumably associated with the Nobel prize winning author Selma Lagerlöf.

Verily Baroque
Verily Baroque
4 years ago

@IP

Heh, that’s a very good translation for “Ei saa peittää”. The actual translation is a somewhat stern “You are not allowed to cover this” – the sentence is in passive and while the “you” in my translation is meant to be the general you and not “you over there specifically, yeah I’m talking about YOU”, it still sounds more aggressive in English than it does in Finnish. Maybe “Covering this is not allowed” would be better?

ei = not, no
saa = singular third person form for saada = to be allowed
peittää = to cover (also the same as the verb’s third person form in this case)

If you needed to add an object to that sentence, it would actually be in front of it (not common in Finnish) and in accusative (extremely common in Finnish).
Patteria ei saa peittää. = You are not allowed to cover the radiator.

Do not cover. = Älä peitä.
where
älä = don’t
peitä = the form of peittää you use with either älä or ei (this is incidentally also identical to the imperative -> Peitä! = Cover it!).

If you allow me a short extra paragraph of language geekery, then let me mention that explicit personal pronouns (except for the singular and plural third persons) are optional in most cases and the word ei (=no, not) changes cases based on who is (or actually isn’t) doing something.
Minä luen. = Luen. = I read / am reading / will read.
Minä en lue. = En lue. = I don’t read / am not reading / won’t read.
Te huomasitte minut. = Huomasitte minut. = You (plural) noticed me.
Te ette huomanneet minua. = Ette huomanneet minua. = You (plural) didn’t notice me.
Te ette huomannut minua. = Ette huomannut minua. = You (singular formal) didn’t notice me. (Skiriki mentioned the singular formal second person pronoun two pages ago, so here’s an example. This is pretty close to German’s Sie – siezen practice and I know at least Italian and French have something similar.)

The difference is that in most cases writing the singular first person pronoun (i.e. I) will make you seem egotistical since it needlessly emphasizes that it is you who is doing something. It can be insulting with other pronouns, too:
Osaatko saksaa? = Do you speak German?
Osaatko sinä saksaa? = Wait what, YOU speak German??? ::dies laughing::

… to exaggerate a bit, but I’m sure you get the point.

Monzach
Monzach
4 years ago

@Imaginary Petal

One of the lecturers whose course I took at university told us a funny story about another beautiful sentence in Finnish:

Basically, apparently the most beautiful sentence in Finnish is “Saari, saari, heinäsaaren morsian” (An island, an island, the bride of the hay island). Naturally the Swedes thought that this was a very lovely phrase and decided to translate it into Swedish. The result of which is of course: “Ö, ö, höös mö”. 😛

I apologize for making fun of your language, oh great and powerful (former) overlords in the West! :O

Verily Baroque
Verily Baroque
4 years ago

@IP

Thank you for the additional explanation! Your original explanation was excellent, by the way: I just have some baggage in the form of a previous Swedish teacher insisting that the different future tenses are rarely if ever interchangeable. Yet I swear I haven’t noticed much more than subtle differences like you mentioned in the ways native speakers use them (although, again, there no doubt are regional differences which muddies the waters a bit).

I admit one of the reasons I wished for this specific subject was to get a native speaker’s perspective on how much the use of the different future tenses overlaps and how much I should avoid talking about the future with Swedes. 🙂 You have no idea how grateful I am for your patience in explaining it.

guest
guest
4 years ago

Maybe because Selma (my great-grandmother’s name) sounds like salaam.

Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
4 years ago

@VB

When working with language teachers, I’ve noticed it’s a common problem that teachers come to a conclusion about how grammar works, and then they confirm that view to themselves by coming up with a few examples which fit with their conclusion. There are often examples to be found which would contradict their conclusions, but why keep looking when you’ve already reached your conclusion. I always err on the side of ‘language is complex’, and refrain from stating any hard rules unless I can be absolutely certain.

Also, thanks for your Finnish grammar lesson. 🙂 I’ll try to read it more carefully later, when I have more time.

@Monzach

Classic! :p

Skiriki
Skiriki
4 years ago

IP:

The Swedish translation says “do not cover”, but I assume that’s just the nicer, more Sweden compatible way of saying it?

Well, there’s no good way to make warnings pretty and not-dire not-doom-is-coming-your-way in Finnish… so. 😀

(I slightly kid, but it is often something that requires more words and we know how long Finnish words can grow, so this blunt approach is usually the best.)

I mean, we don’t even have “please” in Finnish! “Kiitos” is not a suitable substitute for that! Usually, when we’d say something like “please hand over that thingamagic”, we use our conditional form instead; this is the polite form for us.

“Voisitko antaa tuon hilavitkuttimen minulle?”
“Would you hand over that thingamagic to me?”

Because otherwise, you’re going to sound really smarmy (like 50% Shrekeli smary) if you deploy “kiitos” nillywilly like it doesn’t mean a thing; if we really need to work on “please” substitute, we’ve been going down this route:

“Olisitko ystävällinen ja antaisit tuon hilavitkuttimen minulle?”
“Would you please be kind and hand over that thingamagic to me?”

Of course, these days, Finglish (Finnish + English) to rescue! “Pliis” (a Finglish form of spoken “please”, obv) is something you can heard tucked after or before conditional-form request.

“Pliis antaisitko tuon hilavitkuttimen minulle?”
“Antaisitko tuon hilavitkuttimen minulle pliis?”

And the first Swedish word after obvious ones (ja, nej, tack, 1-10) is “omskakas”. “Shake”, often seen in juice and milk boxes.

Which IMHO is an inherently funny word, just like “masticate” is an inherently funny word in English.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
4 years ago

@ imaginary petal et al

That has all been fascinating; thank you!

It’s actually helped me with my English too. It’s funny, when you learn a foreign language teachers launch into stuff about participles and perfect/imperfect, but no one has ever first explained what that means in your original language (which presumably you pick up intuitively by mimicry). I still don’t really know what all those phrases mean, but your teaching has helped me at least start.

Is this something you do professionally? You’re very good at it. And I tell you, when I finally get my time machine working necessitating language to cope with ontological paradoxes and events which may or may not have happened once/yet, you are going to be my go-to guy (or whichever appellation you prefer) for working out the new syntax.

(First trip will be to save that apatosaurus so it doesn’t get discovered as a fossil and knock brontosaurus of its rightful perch)

Leda Atomica
Leda Atomica
4 years ago

I just have to say I’m enjoying this merry meeting very much! I took a call from BF Atomica, fell asleep and only now got to catch up with this.

I’ll add a Turku reinforcement on my behalf, and any Mammotheers will be offered beverages of choice and have a free access to my cupboards and fridge. Just remember that around these regions saying ‘no’ means yes, but not in the creepy Roosh way, only when offered things to eat or drink. So you will leave the establishment well nourished whether you like it or not!

Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
4 years ago

@Skiriki

Hah, Finglish! My cat’s name is Fingie, and now I’m feeling highly compelled to refer to his meowing as Finglish.

I have to say the word “omskakas” seems rare to me. It’s funny how some words and phrases can be overused in certain contexts, making them seem way more common than they really are in the language.

@Alan

Thanks! I’ve worked professionally with adult second language learners for a few years in the past, but now I do it as a volunteer. I don’t have the relevant education in order to teach as a career, but we don’t have enough teachers so it’s possible to find work sometimes anyway.

I agree with what you say about launching into details of grammar. This strategy can work with college educated people who have already spent time thinking about how their language works, and are aware of the terminology of grammar. However, it is utterly pointless trying to discuss reflexive pronouns with, let’s say, a 50 year old Afghan woman who has never been able to read even in her native language.

For most people it’s sufficient to learn grammar terms as ‘headlines’ for a topic, for example understanding that ‘tense’ means we’re talking about time, or that ‘verbs’ means we’re talking about things we do or things that happen. Frankly, the average person probably couldn’t tell you what a participle actually is, so why should second language learners be bothered with it? What’s important is knowing how to use the language – not knowing how to talk about language.

Skiriki
Skiriki
4 years ago

@IP: Yeah, but if you drink juice or surmjölk or stuff like that, you’re so gonna see it everywhere and therefore it totally leaps to my mind. 😀

“Omskakas”.

Tee hee hee hee.

(Sleep deprived funnies are the best funnies.)

EJ (The Other One)
4 years ago

This is awesome. My young lady and I have been language-geeking over this thread whilst on the bus.

A. Noyd
A. Noyd
4 years ago

Technically, tense indicates an event or state’s location in time or “when” something happens (past, present, future) whereas aspect indicates behavior at that time or “how” something happens (continuously, periodically, completely, etc). Modality indicates things like likelihood (or necessity, appropriateness, etc). But most people don’t bother to get specific with the categories if the language in question doesn’t have clear lines of separation built in. (English and Swedish don’t. Chinese and Japanese do.)

And even if you manage to iron things out, you can still have different rules for stative and dynamic verbs throwing fuckery into everything.

Arctic Ape
Arctic Ape
4 years ago

bluecat:

The only bit of Finnish I know is kuusi palaa, which I managed to get a found poem from the various translations of. I get the impression a lot of tacit contextual understanding must be needed – but that’s a position based on pure ignorance.

For what it’s worth, when I started learning English, I thought some multiple-meaning words like “match” were curious, while taking for granted that my native Finnish had its own multiple-meaning words.

Leda Atomica
Leda Atomica
4 years ago

Translating Finnish idioms into English is also always fun. My friend’s Scottish boyfriend had no idea what my friend meant when she said she was running around with her hair in a pipe. Tukka putkella = Your hair in the form of a pipe (behind your head) rather than relaxed, used as an expression when someone is doing stuff very fast.

Omskakas 😀

kupo
kupo
4 years ago

What’s important is knowing how to use the language – not knowing how to talk about language.

I agree with you to a point. I took Japanese for a few years through an immersion class and it started to get difficult in the more advanced classes when we couldn’t talk about grammar. We had to find outside texts to learn more about the grammar rules for some of it to make sense.

Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
4 years ago

@kupo

You can talk about grammar without talking about grammar, if that makes sense.

Verily Baroque
Verily Baroque
4 years ago

Translating Finnish idioms into English is also always fun.

Translating idioms from one language to another rarely ends well 🙂

I have a funny story of a Finnish-speaking Indian friend who showed a slide show he had done to his colleague and asked whether it would do for the presentation they were preparing for. The entire reply he received by email was “toimii kuin junan vessa” = works like the train’s toilet.

According to him, his reaction was essentially utter confusion.

And honestly, if you actually stop and think about it from a foreigner’s perspective, it’s not instantly obvious that the colleague meant that the slideshow was great.

Arctic Ape
Arctic Ape
4 years ago

It’s funny how some words and phrases can be overused in certain contexts, making them seem way more common than they really are in the language.

Many kids like me who grew up in Helsinki area (officially bilingual, Finnish strongly dominant in social life) first knew Swedish as the Language Of Alternative Public Instructions And Food Product Labels.

Later on we were actually taught Swedish (as a non-optional subject) in school, and most made at best a half-hearted effort of learning it (compared to English), only to forget most of it afterwards.

(Uh oh, hopefully I’m not further derailing this into Finnish language education politics!)

Leda Atomica
Leda Atomica
4 years ago

The entire reply he received by email was “toimii kuin junan vessa” = works like the train’s toilet.

I have to admit I was a bit confused too when I heard that for the first time, with all of our complaints about VR (=Finnish public railroad system)! As a child I also never understood: “Aika aikaansa kutakin, sanoi pässi kun päätä leikattiin” (“There’s a time for everything, said the goat while their head was being chopped”). I now understand the meaning but it did take me a while. I realise I may be in a minority with this but it was a personal hangup.

I’d also be interested in how regional some expressions are, because when I said to my friend from Kemi “Nonni sanos vares ku nokka katkes” I think she took the longest pause we’ve ever had in a conversation.

ETA: Someone better and less vodka’d than me translate the vares thing. 😀

opposablethumbs
opposablethumbs
4 years ago

You can talk about grammar without talking about grammar

(Imaginary Petal)
That made me kind of want to say that the first rule of grammar is you don’t talk about grammar, but then I thought that would make it look as if I don’t like grammar so I decided not to say it.
I haven’t actually seen Fight Club. But I do like grammar.

Skiriki
Skiriki
4 years ago

Verily Baroque:

Translating idioms from one language to another rarely ends well 🙂

I remember this one doc about Finnish army’s fighter plane acquisitions, and how one of the reasons (there were others, more important ones, but this surely contributed) why Sweden did not manage to sell their fighter planes to us.

Their presenter did not speak Finnish too well, and whoever had written the spiel for it (possibly the presenter himself?) didn’t quite grasp some mismatches in language use.

“Flies softly like a cat’s paw.” — “Lentää pehmeästi kuin kissantassu.”

Ummm. Yeah. Cats are known for that quality. Right.

There were other mistakes as well, but that stuck to my mind.

Leda Atomica
Leda Atomica
4 years ago

I’d take the cat’s paw reference as ‘flies smoothly’, because precision and swiftness. 😉

Dalillama
Dalillama
4 years ago

@Alan Robertshaw

It’s actually helped me with my English too. It’s funny, when you learn a foreign language teachers launch into stuff about participles and perfect/imperfect, but no one has ever first explained what that means in your original language (which presumably you pick up intuitively by mimicry).

At least some places actually do; I am given to understand from acquaintences who went to them that French instructors actually do go over those things, even in schools in France.
@Verily Baroque

And honestly, if you actually stop and think about it from a foreigner’s perspective, it’s not instantly obvious that the colleague meant that the slideshow was great..

See, I, an American, would have assumed the opposite. I guess it depends on what the local trains are like.
@Arctic Ape

(Uh oh, hopefully I’m not further derailing this into Finnish language education politics!)

Language politics can be as complex as languages themselves, and even as interesting. Also, often a lot bloodier.

Skiriki
Skiriki
4 years ago

Leda Atomica:

I’d take the cat’s paw reference as ‘flies smoothly’, because precision and swiftness. 😉

Or “feather-light flight”. Yes, the intention was to convey smoothness and ease of control, but it came across as completely wrong simile, since there are better points of comparison already involving flight. 😀

Arrows, hawks, etc.

Cat, despite landing on four legs most of the time, still lack that aerodynamic property associated with planes. 😀

Dalilama:

See, I, an American, would have assumed the opposite. I guess it depends on what the local trains are like.

In the past, from where that saying originates, the train toilets were sort of idiot-proof — they just dumped everything right on the rails once you finished your business. No fuss, no muss, it just works.

In modern trains, it is collected (as it bloody should!) and this introduces complications. Such as that time when I had four hour travel so close to a malfunctioning train toilet…

Yet, the saying lives in its positive sense.

Leda Atomica
Leda Atomica
4 years ago

RE: Language politics (sorry sorry sorry). The other day a finnish guy was making the argument that Estonia abandoned Russian as an official language once they were outside the Iron Curtain, so Finns should have abandoned Swedish once we were out of their rule. To which I said that then we were under russian rule so we should have russian as a second language or only Finnish. And that it was a massive benefit to Finland to have Nordic connections so therefor we kept speaking Swedish.

However, in modern day I’m not sure if it’s such an important thing for a native Finn to speak Swedish, outside of the fact that our Swedish-speaking population live among us and we *will* need it in certain jobs, such as customer service or perhaps hospital staff etc. The attitude towards learning Swedish is understandably non-enthusiastic, but we do have everyday situations here in which we wish we could speak decent Swedish.

Also, I’m all about learning languages. Next mandatory ones: Sami and sign language. 😉

guy
guy
4 years ago

Personally I think it would be rather convenient if there was a designated language everyone in the world learned so we could all communicate easily. And I think it should be American English because I’m selfish.

Skiriki
Skiriki
4 years ago

Personally I think it would be rather convenient if there was a designated language everyone in the world learned so we could all communicate easily. And I think it should be American English because I’m selfish.

Convenient, for sure, but it would deprive us from insights gleaned from other languages and modes of thinking.

Differences do make us stronger. Understanding differences? Even stronger.

…besides, we are kinda communicating right now, in various versions of English. 😉 It just happens that some of us understand English + extra. 😉

Leda Atomica
Leda Atomica
4 years ago

I think languages are a richness. Because expression, no matter how much we would protest it, is always at its most powerful in the language we use. Be it spoken language or otherwise, I think we communicate different when we use different tools for communication. Some even said that bilingual people have more than one expressed persona.

And variation like that means variation of the ways we express humanity.

That said, american English is kind of the new lingua franca because so many of us hear it so much. It’s nice to be able to communicate with people that have completely new and different things to say because of the place they have lived in. I mean, BF Atomica is Belgian and I’ll be using English with him until I learn acceptable Dutch.

Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
4 years ago

@opposablethumbs

I heard someone make a Fight Club joke the other day and it made me laugh. It wen’t something like:

Just got home from my first night at fight club – loved it! Showed up a little bit late and missed the guy explaining the rules, but I strongly recommend it to anyone who might be interested!

Verily Baroque
Verily Baroque
4 years ago

@guy

Personally I think it would be rather convenient if there was a designated language everyone in the world learned so we could all communicate easily.

Have you heard of Esperanto? If not, you know why it failed. 😉

And I think it should be American English because I’m selfish.

I guess I should explain to you how insensitive that comment was but it’s past-midnight o’clock here and I’m currently not up to writing an essay. Can we agree that you’ll google “cultural imperialism” and ask me again in ten hours if you are unsure of why I’m side-eyeing you?

Nothing personal against you, though: I know you are trying to joke. It’s just not really all that well-chosen a joke for an American to make.

@Skiriki, Leda

Agreeing with you that with their own quirks etc. knowing several languages can give one such insights that would be challenging to achieve otherwise. How useful such insight would be outside communication with that specific culture, on the other hand, is a separate question (as is whether learning foreign languages even needs to be useful).

Skiriki
Skiriki
4 years ago

Leda Atomica:

Some even said that bilingual people have more than one expressed persona.

Confirmed, I’m much more talkative and open in English than I am in Finnish. Also, I can think in English, I don’t need to translate back and forth. I can analyze my feelings and distressing/anxious things more accurately in English, mostly by being able to give them room I cannot while I think in Finnish.

Being bilingual may delay onset of Alzheimer’s, too!

Verily Baroque:

How useful such insight would be outside communication with that specific culture, on the other hand, is a separate question (as is whether learning foreign languages even needs to be useful).

Example: When I was in uni in 2000, I picked up Japanese as my fifth language. (I’ve forgotten almost all of my French and never studied it in our highschool-version; I can read and understand spoken Swedish, but writing my own stuff is no-go.)

Our teacher, who was a Finn and had lived in Japan for couple of decades, on-and-off-again, also made sure that we understood a lot of stuff besides simple grammar and vocabulary; she gave us a language-related crash course to Japanese culture, including gender differences in language use.

When she explained how haiku works, it all of the sudden clicked in my head, and finally made sense and suddenly I just felt “wow, that is so freakin’ brilliant, and I can totally use that outside Japanese language too”.

The story she told was how she was in Kyoto with a friend of hers, and he was suddenly struck by inspiration; he wanted to write a haiku for this very specific moment in time. Translated, it began “Today in Kyoto…”

But.

Instead of using the usual kanji for “Kyo” in Kyoto, her friend used kanji for “today” which is also “kyo”, combining Kyoto and today into one word, creating something ambiguous and fantastic in that moment he wanted to remember in form of haiku. It probably isn’t an original idea, but the explanation, along with the story that went with it, suddenly just opened fresh new ideas in my mind.

And that’s the power of other languages. On that principle alone, I can heartily recommend learning completely different language from your native one, because you might be surprised how it can change you.

Skiriki
Skiriki
4 years ago

Slightly back to topic: Bad news for Trump — Antonin Scalia has popped his clogs.

Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

Is there a limit to how many embedded links can be present? I have a bunch of named troll strategies (16 as of now) that link to FS’s comments. This is pretty fun and I have been needed to turn patterns of social conflict into things analogous to martial arts “forms”.

Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
4 years ago

Wow, Scalia! Does anybody know what happens now? Does Obama appoint someone?

opposablethumbs
opposablethumbs
4 years ago

Showed up a little bit late and missed the guy explaining the rules, but I strongly recommend it to anyone who might be interested!

Imaginary Petal, I love it. Thank you!

weirwoodtreehugger
4 years ago

Brony, SJC (is that an acceptable shortening?)

I think if there are too many links in a post it’ll go to moderation. David would approve it, I’m sure, but how long it would take I couldn’t say. Maybe break it down into 3 or 4 posts?

Skiriki
Skiriki
4 years ago

IP: Yes, but…

https://twitter.com/JohnFugelsang/status/698635130865369088

GOP has already reared and said they’ll block anyone President Obama is trying to appoint.

jy3, Social Justice Beguiler
jy3, Social Justice Beguiler
4 years ago
Reply to  Skiriki

@Skiriki

Just checked my prediction market. They haven’t officially closed it, but no one’s selling and the last one went for 99%.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
4 years ago

A really good book on the intricacies of Supreme Court Justice selection is “The Renquist Choice” by John Dean. It focuses on the Nixon years obviously but it gives some real good background on the process generally.

weirwoodtreehugger
4 years ago

Confession.

This Scalia thing is really bringing out the worst in me. I know it’s wrong to be happy that someone died, but I kind of am. He was truly a terrible person and the right wing majority on the Supreme Court has done so much harm to my country. Harm that will take decades to undo. The only way to stop the 5 horrible – 4 not horrible configuration was for one to die because there was no chance of any of them except maybe Kennedy retiring while a Dem is in the White House.

So yeah, this is really testing my morals.

I don’t even know.

David, sorry if this violating the comment policy. I’ll understand if you delete it. I just had to get it off my chest.

Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

1) “Microaggression via Criticism”: Troll criticizes you without an actual reason other than a dominance display. There is nothing wrong with your position/claim, but they criticize something anyway. This is meant to keep people compliant and unconfident, or to simply associate a sense of worthlessness with your position.
Example. Paradoxical Intentions’s point about in-group political language differences was perfectly fine. Instead of offering extra information (that was actually obvious), it was formed into a criticism.

2) “Reflected Social Momentum”: Troll takes beliefs, thoughts, actions, communications or words socially advantageous or important to you and tries to preemptively direct or redirect it back at you by using it on you. This is meant to render strategically threatening things harmless by forcing you to defend yourself from your potential attack. It also redirects audience perceptual filters for that phenomena.
Example.
By accusing Imaginary Petal of sexism Fifth Sibylline attempts to make them defend against and accusation that FS could or would have to defend against.

3) “Vague irrational bragging”: Troll non-specifically references something substantive elsewhere to attempt an irrational increased reputation in another place (irrational due to irrelevance and/or lack of substance in the relevant issue). May be pre-planned.
Example. Fifth Sibylline’s first post cited religious information, and was the only thing they actually linked prior to this claim that they have supported something substantively.