Reading roundup and year-end book meme
Clearing the decks, the last reading roundup of 2019 and the years' book meme:
40. Ben Aaronovitch, The October Man -- This was cute and fun but also drove home the point that, much as I love this world and the magic, I'm mostly here for the characters around Peter. Because I had this book sitting on my Kindle for weeks before I opened it, and ( Read more... )
40. Ben Aaronovitch, The October Man -- This was cute and fun but also drove home the point that, much as I love this world and the magic, I'm mostly here for the characters around Peter. Because I had this book sitting on my Kindle for weeks before I opened it, and ( Read more... )
They haven't seen some of my posts in discussions, not only on LJ, but okay... XD
while I don't think there's any one "correct" use of emoji, I do feel like you'd be able to tell if someone was using emoji "wrong" :P
Yup, I agree. The views on language rules tend to petrify with time, though (even if the language itself keeps changing), so that's partially why they said "in a hundred years", I think - by this time there might be written rules for emojis, who knows... Spelling rules are not really so old either. And writing the rules down (and making everyone keep to them) slows changes in the language too, to the point it seems like it's set in stone to those less familiar with old texts. (And then there are also those who learned some about historical changes and are like "Wheee, that means I can wrtee whiheever Iwant evvery one steel nowz ane wai waht Imeen shhutup gramannazhi perkriptonist!!!!!!!")
but I do feel like XP has fallen out of use.
I mean, my point stays even if no one uses it anymore... :D
found that teenage girls adopted new slang first and spread it to other teenage girls, and its use among teenage boys lagged by quite a lot.
In this case, I need that study prove me it was really the "boys are linguistically slower in general" thing, and not "girls have more contact with other girls than with boys" combined with "m'not gonna speak Girlese, bro! ...okay, maybe I do, reluctantly" thing. They would also need to watch really carefully who came up with new slang and modified it, not just who adopted it.
I mean, I'm familiar with the "women tend to have more of the linguistic wiring on the neurological level" fact/widespread claim, but I always felt it's overhyped when compared to the real world outcome, just like reportedly smaller female brains that make no real difference in life. :) Oh, and that one with "women see colors better", worth as much, so not really much (even if on some quantitative level true).
With the internet, IIRC, McCulloch posits that one's "generation" when it comes to language use is not necessarily one's age-mates but one's peer group when it comes to WHERE they first interacted on the internet. Some of which does correlate with age, but not entirely. Which makes sense, since a lot of my LJ cohort are people a dozen years younger than me. And of the people who "grew up" on LJ, I can't tell if someone's in their 30s or their 50s, so that checks out to me.
If I'm getting correctly what you mean, one shares the language with their social circle, and circles come as generations? Then yes, that makes more sense (as a teenager, in some aspects my slang was outdated literally by one or even two real-life generations, because books I read had stronger effect on me than my classmates, so I called math "matma" while everyone else said "majma", which I was aware of, just didn't care because mine somehow felt better to me). And we LJers talk about Tumblr as "this new thing over there" even if we have our own tumblrs, while for Instagramers Tumblr is probably so last decade (what even is LJ? ah, yeah, heard it's winch operated or something...)
I do think in order to be successful you have to know and trust the person you're talking to.
True!
Reply
I think you and I are Spiders Georg outliers and should not factor in to things like this ;P
by this time there might be written rules for emojis, who knows...
If they really are gestures, as this book posits, that's less likely, but I suppose some gestures do become "petrified" to the point that you could be doing them wrong. Although even with something like a handshake, people do them in various different ways, from hand-over-hand power clasp to "dead fish"
In this case, I need that study prove me it was really the "boys are linguistically slower in general" thing,
I hesitate to keep going from memory (the book had a couple of paragraphs on the specific study and also academic references, which I didn't check) but I don't think that the argument was that boys are linguistically "slower", just that girls tended to pick up and spread slang more. Which matches my own anecdata experience, but that's neither here nor there. (It wasn't a neurological claim, but a social one -- I think linked to girls having more wide-ranging social ties? But I might be mixing it up with a different study; it's been a while.)
one shares the language with their social circle, and circles come as generations?
Online specifically, one shares language conventions with other users of the platform where one first learned to Internet, was the claim. Which makes sense to me as a claim.
Like, there are people on LJ who still sign their comments, or use the > >> >>> convention instead of HTML to call out the parts they're replying to, and so on. And you can spot the Tumblr natives by their wall o' tags commentary on LJ (or AO3)
And per the book, it extends to other conventions like how you write your smilies, how you spell LOL (caps or no caps), etc.
(what even is LJ? ah, yeah, heard it's winch operated or something...)
HAHAHA
Reply
Leave a comment