It’s been a hectic couple of weeks, friends, and things are only going to speed up, because I’m currently sitting in the San Diego airport, waiting to jet off to the Big Apple for the CUNY conference on sentence processing, the psycholinguistic event of the year.
The bad news is that that means there probably won’t be a new post this week (unless you generously count this one). But the good news is that I’ve got a couple of updates from the week that was.
First, the grammar myths article from last weekend got picked up by Visual Thesaurus (subscription-based). The content’s the same as it was here, but the layout’s a little better and it has a nice little picture of my head so that you know that despite being a grad student, I can still pretend to look presentable.
Second, I was interviewed for a piece on redundancy in language by Colleen Ross of the CBC. There’s an audio version of it as well as a text version. They’re more or less the same — although there are small differences — and personally I prefer the audio version. But perhaps that’s just because is no comment section on the audio version, meaning that the bottom half of the page isn’t filled with amateur peevelogists saying that “issues” is a grave plague upon the language.
Lastly, I’m presenting a poster at CUNY on my recent research into uncertainty during reading. We found evidence that readers maintain uncertainty about word order in the parts of a sentence they have already read. For instance, when reading The journalist that the fact surprised …, readers also think that perhaps they read The fact that the journalist surprised (someone) …. (The former is a relative clause, the latter a complement clause.) I intend to go into more depth on this once I get back, but in the meantime, you can check out the poster here and see what the heck it is that a psycholinguist does.



8 comments
Comments feed for this article
March 13, 2012 at 3:28 pm
John Cowan
“Issues”?! I don’t even know yous!
March 14, 2012 at 6:11 pm
Spectre-7
I couldn’t even imagine what problem someone might have with “issues”, so I clicked on over and had a look at the comments. Gah. Now I need to find some industrial grade whiskey to wash all the excess stupid out of my brain.
March 15, 2012 at 9:09 am
Daniel
I just took a look at the comments, and was impressed and amazed by the depth of the stupidity. One person even went so far as to criticize French speakers for saying “moi-je”. Yes, what a wonderful point, because as we all know, every language works exactly the same…
March 17, 2012 at 7:28 am
Warsaw Will
Imagine the Offspring had called their song “She’s got problems”; it could have been about anything: money problems, work problems etc. But by calling it “She’s got issues”, we know pretty well what to expect. I would have thought that this usage has quite a specific meaning, something its detractors don’t seem to get.
March 18, 2012 at 9:17 pm
Lindsey
I have a question: what does “The coach smiled at the player who was tossed the Frisbee” mean? I thought I had misheard the phrase in the audio version, but then I read the text. Why isn’t it “The coach smiled at the player who was tossing the Frisbee”?
March 18, 2012 at 9:20 pm
Lindsey
OH. I had to Google it. Even after adding the “who was,” I was confused.
(Apparently we mean, “The coach smiled at the player who was thrown the Frisbee.)
Interesting how that is so confusing though… why?
March 30, 2012 at 2:26 am
teresapelka
I agree on prescriptivism; it can’t take one anywhere sensible. I’m working on my grammar project (a generative ambition); would be grateful for comments,
http://travelingrammar.com
T
April 10, 2012 at 9:52 am
Gabe
WW: That’s a terrific example, and I think you’re right that “issues” has a clear meaning that is more specific than “problems” or other seeming synonyms. The trouble is that the anti-neologism brigade tends not to be interested in the specific nature of what they view as a blight on the language. Once it’s established to be a blight (because they don’t use it themselves) there’s no need to learn the specifics of this blight; it could infect their own perfect language.