if you’re american and coming to australia, I’m gonna go ahead and say that you should be 100 percent way more worried about being king hit by a dude named “dane” in a bintang singlet than any fucking spiders that exist here
what does this say in english
“Good sir, if you are a resident of the United States of America and coming to visit the sunny land of Australia, allow me to inform you that you should be rather more concerned about being sucker punched by a gentleman named ‘Dane’ who is likely to be seen wearing a wifebeater with a beer company logo on it than by any of the dangerous spiders that exist on this lovely continent”.
ok so what does it say in american
“You’re more likely to get sucker punched/cold-cocked by an asshole than you are to be bitten by a spider”.
thank you
Well rattle my spoons, that don’t make a lick of sense. Wot in tarnation does this hootenanny say?
“If ya mosey on by Australia, you best be fixin’ to get to some fisticuffs more’n checkin fer spiders.”
This is a Rosetta Stone for a single language
Tag: linguistics
A very long list of linguistics YouTube channels and other free online videos about linguistics
Want to teach yourself linguistics on youtube? Looking for online courses about linguistics? Want to supplement the linguistics resources available for your linguistics class? Here’s an extensive list for you to pick from, with a few notes on style and content.
General linguistics youtube channels:
- NativLang (animated)
- Xidnaf (animated)
- The Ling Space (person talking with a bit of animation, see also their summary post)
- David J. Peterson’s conlanging youtube channel (person talking)
- Arika Okrent (whiteboard videos)
Groups of videos or short series on specific topics:
- Tom Scott’s Language Files (person talking with graphic effects)
- Artifexian’s conlanging videos
- North Caroline Language and Life project
- Common sounds in Australian Indigenous languages
- Verner’s Law and how the Germanic languages developed from Proto-Indo-European (person talking plus animation)
- How to apply for a Documenting Endangered Languages (DEL) grant
- Videos illustrating Gricean Maxims
- Cuando Muere una Lengua / When a tongue dies – Videos in Mexican Indigenous languages from the project 68 voces (68 voices)
- Christmas-themed stories told in ASL by an adorable child (ASL Nook)
Individual interesting videos:
- Do Sign Languages Have Accents?
- Sign Language Isn’t Universal
- A cute video about doing linguistic studies with children (and a puppet) from the University of Connecticut
- Structural Ambiguity (LingVids) and an example from Animaniacs
- How English Sounds to Non-English Speakers
- Prisencolinensinainciusol (fake English song)
- Is Cereal Soup? and Zipf’s Law from Vsauce
- The Dangerous Ambiguity of Prepositions
- Can You Speak Emoji? PBS Idea Channel
- World-record fast talkers (and how that works in the brain)
- Crash Course Psychology: Language
- How much information? (Veritasium)
Cross-sections of the head or vocal tract while speaking:
- Music video (Better Man Than He)
- ArticulatoryIPA: many individual short videos of specific sounds showing them produced in the vocal tract
- eNunciate: ultrasound videos of the inside of the mouth superimposed on the side of a speaker’s face
- X-ray gif and animated gif
- Beatboxer in MRI machine (plus IPA)
- Two videos of the inside of the vocal tract (note: kinda gross)
Structured series or online course, introduction to linguistics:
- Introduction to Linguistics (TrevTutor – whiteboard, Khan Academy style)
- Another intro linguistics series (DS Bigham, person talking)
- The Virtual Linguistics Campus at Marburg University (person talking)
- “Miracles of Human Language” (on Coursera from Leiden University)
Structured series or online courses on a specific topic (might be useful to follow some of the intro material first):
- Phonology (TrevTutor)
- Mathematical linguistics (TrevTutor)
- Syntax (TrevTutor)
- A syntax series following the chapter structure of a free online syntax textbook (University of Edinburgh)
- Sign Language Structure, Learning, and Change (on EdX from Georgetown University, in ASL with English subtitles and voiceover)
- Language Revival: Securing the Future of Endangered Languages (on EdX from the University of Adelaide)
Long videos (documentaries or lectures):
- The Linguistic Society of America’s youtube channel has both public lectures from prominent linguists (tend to assume some background knowledge of linguistics) and some recordings of professional development webinars, such as how to write an abstract
- The Five Minute Linguist talks: 2017 and 2018 (one long video of many short, engaging talks about linguistics)
- Steven Pinker: Linguistics as a Window to Understanding the Brain
- MIT OpenCourseware: Listening, Speaking, and Pronunciation lectures
- Introduction to Optimality Theory in Phonology (UC Berkeley)
- Rising voices/Hótȟaŋiŋpi, a documentary about revitalizing the Lakota language, in full on youtube (it’s just under an hour long)
- A classic documentary on Canadian English
- The Adventure of English (BBC documentary series)
A few linguistically-relevant TED and TEDx talks (NOT a complete list):
- Endangered languages: why it matters (Mandana Seyfeddinipur)
- Deaf children need sign language (Drisana Levitzke-Gray)
- Robots talking with Robots – How Lingodroids invent their own language (Janet Wiles)
- Four reasons to learn a new language (John McWhorter)
- Several short language-related videos from TED-Ed
- American and British Politeness (Lynne Murphy)
- Hacking Language Learning (Conor Quinn)
- The linguistic genius of babies (Patricia Kuhl)
- What makes a word “real”? (Anne Curzan)
- Redefining the dictionary (Erin McKean)
See also my linguistics videos tag for an automatically-updated list of linguistics videos, often from sporadically-updated or smaller channels.
For more documentaries and longer videos about linguistics, most of which aren’t online, see A very long list of linguistics movies, documentaries, and TV show episodes.
For more resources to learn linguistics, including linguistics podcasts, blogs, books, and other advice, check out How to teach yourself linguistics online for free.
Know of something that isn’t on one of these lists and should be? Feel free to let me know!
Read This Article!!!
I’m quoted in this Atlantic article about exclamation point inflation. Excerpt:
Much like awesome once served a greater purpose, the exclamation point has been downgraded from a shout of alarm or intensity to a symbol that indicates politeness and friendliness. As Shipley and Schwalbe put it in their guide: “Exclamation points can instantly infuse electronic communication with human warmth.” And that’s what we use them for now.
“The single exclamation mark is being used not as an intensity marker, but as a sincerity marker,” says Gretchen McCulloch, a linguist who studies online communication. “If I end an email with ‘Thanks!,’ I’m not shouting or being particularly enthusiastic; I’m just trying to convey that I’m sincerely thankful, and I’m saying it with a bit of a social smile.” […]
“It’s been totally normalized—at least in my view,” says Jonny Sun, a doctoral student at MIT who studies online communities. “I think the single exclamation point is now very acceptable.”
One could say that Sun is professionally enthusiastic. He is best known for his Twitter account, where he mixes silly jokes with bittersweet humor and earnest aphorisms. He also wrote a graphic novel based on his Twitter. And he uses a lot of exclamation points, especially when he replies to friends or fans. A single one, he says, is so expected at this point that it doesn’t really feel sincere anymore.
“I feel like it’s a stand-in and it doesn’t really connote an authentic emotion,” he says. “A single exclamation point is sort of like: Here’s me showing that I’m being nice and cordial. But two exclamation points would be authentic excitement.” […]
So where does it end? What happens if three exclamation points eventually seem like little more than a friendlier period?“
Probably it ends with switching to a different type of punctuation,” McCulloch says. If the exclamation point is working as a sincerity marker, once people tire of it, “maybe smileys will [become] more acceptable in business contexts.”
This tracks with an interesting theory Sun has about the relationship between sincerity and informal language online. On social media, writing in all caps or using no capitalization at all both feel more genuine than using proper capitalization. “I feel like sincerity, especially online is breaking down any formal affect that we’ve adopted with language,” Sun says. “Sincerity now online is lowercase, quickly typed so it’s fine if there are typos. But then typos become part of it. To me, keysmashing is the most sincere form of excitement.”
One thing that didn’t make it into the article is that we’ve gone through an exclamation mark hyperbole cycle before on the internet: remember when people used to type OMG!!!1!11!! or OMG!!!one!!eleventy!!!!
becausegoodheroesdeservekidneys:
Okay, so:
Latin has this word, sic. Or, if we want to be more diacritically accurate, sīc. That shows that the i is long, so it’s pronounced like “seek” and not like “sick.”
You might recognize this word from Latin sayings like “sic semper tyrannis” or “sic transit gloria mundi.” You might recognize it as what you put in parentheses when you want to be pass-agg about someone’s mistakes when you’re quoting them: “Then he texted me, ‘I want to touch you’re (sic) butt.’”
It means, “thus,” which sounds pretty hoity-toity in this modren era, so maybe think of it as meaning “in this way,” or “just like that.” As in, “just like that, to all tyrants, forever,” an allegedly cool thing to say after shooting a President and leaping off a balcony and shattering your leg. “Everyone should do it this way.”
Anyway, Classical Latin somewhat lacked an affirmative particle, though you might see the word ita, a synonym of sic, used in that way. By Medieval Times, however, sic was holding down this role. Which is to say, it came to mean yes.
Ego: Num edisti totam pitam?
Tu, pudendus: Sic.
Me: Did you eat all the pizza?
You, shameful: That’s the way it is./Yes.
This was pretty well established by the time Latin evolved into its various bastard children, the Romance languages, and you can see this by the words for yes in these languages.
In Spanish, Italian, Asturian, Catalan, Corsican, Galician, Friulian, and others, you say si for yes. In Portugese, you say sim. In French, you say si to mean yes when you’re contradicting a negative assertion (”You don’t like donkey sausage like all of us, the inhabitants of France, eat all the time?” “Yes, I do!”). In Romanian, you say da, but that’s because they’re on some Slavic shit. P.S. there are possibly more Romance languages than you’re aware of.
But:
There was still influence in some areas by the conquered Gaulish tribes on the language of their conquerors. We don’t really have anything of Gaulish language left, but we can reverse engineer some things from their descendants. You see, the Celts that we think of now as the people of the British Isles were Gaulish, originally (in the sense that anyone’s originally from anywhere, I guess) from central and western Europe. So we can look at, for example, Old Irish, where they said tó to mean yes, or Welsh, where they say do to mean yes or indeed, and we can see that they derive from the Proto-Indo-European (the big mother language at whose teat very many languages both modern and ancient did suckle) word *tod, meaning “this” or “that.” (The asterisk indicates that this is a reconstructed word and we don’t know exactly what it would have been but we have a pretty damn good idea.)
So if you were fucking Ambiorix or whoever and Quintus Titurius Sabinus was like, “Yo, did you eat all the pizza?” you would do that Drake smile and point thing under your big beefy Gaulish mustache and say, “This.” Then you would have him surrounded and killed.
Apparently Latin(ish) speakers in the area thought this was a very dope way of expressing themselves. “Why should I say ‘in that way’ like those idiots in Italy and Spain when I could say ‘this’ like all these cool mustache boys in Gaul?” So they started copying the expression, but in their own language. (That’s called a calque, by the way. When you borrow an expression from another language but translate it into your own. If you care about that kind of shit.)
The Latin word for “this” is “hoc,” so a bunch of people started saying “hoc” to mean yes. In the southern parts of what was once Gaul, “hoc” makes the relatively minor adjustment to òc, while in the more northerly areas they think, “Hmm, just saying ‘this’ isn’t cool enough. What if we said ‘this that’ to mean ‘yes.’” (This is not exactly what happened but it is basically what happened, please just fucking roll with it, this shit is long enough already.)
So they combined hoc with ille, which means “that” (but also comes to just mean “he”: compare Spanish el, Italian il, French le, and so on) to make o-il, which becomes oïl. This difference between the north and south (i.e. saying oc or oil) comes to be so emblematic of the differences between the two languages/dialects that the languages from the north are called langues d’oil and the ones from the south are called langues d’oc. In fact, the latter language is now officially called “Occitan,” which is a made-up word (to a slightly greater degree than that to which all words are made-up words) that basically means “Oc-ish.” They speak Occitan in southern France and Catalonia and Monaco and some other places.
The oil languages include a pretty beefy number of languages and dialects with some pretty amazing names like Walloon, and also one with a much more basic name: French. Perhaps you’ve heard of it, n’est-ce pas?
Yeah, eventually Francophones drop the -l from oil and start saying it as oui. If you’ve ever wondered why French yes is different from other Romance yeses, well, now you know.
I guess what I’m getting at is that when you reblog a post you like and tag it with “this,” or affirm a thing a friend said by nodding and saying “Yeah, that”: you’re not new
This is really great and I want you all to know that I tried so hard to not chime in with this, but ‘do’ in Welsh does not simply mean ‘yes’ or ‘indeed’. Welsh has a shit tonne of different ways of saying yes, because they’re all tense based, so like
Oes – yes it is/there are
Ydw – yes I am
Oedd – yes he/she/it was
and so on. So ‘do’ (long ‘o’, like in ‘door’) means ‘yes _ did’. Any person. Plus, I’ve never heard of it being used for ‘indeed’ – for that we use ‘yn wir’ (in truth). However, different dialects do of course exist and I fully accept that it’s entirely possible that the people of Very West Wales are running around using ‘do’ to mean indeed because I mean look at them.
Thank you! I was really hoping you would see this and comment, because I wanted to say exactly this when I saw this post yesterday, but thought it would be better coming from someone rather more fluent than myself

A phonology joke from brynguist on twitter:
me: smongoose. snarwhal.
phonologist: okayyy but–
me: sclemur. strhinocerous.
phonologist: but that’s not–
me: stracoon. sclamprey.
phonologist: oKAY BUT that’s not what maximal onset principle means
me: … schwombatBecause I’m into explaining the joke, for reference, the maximal onset principle actually refers to a thing you do when you’re breaking up a word into syllables. First, you figure out the centres (nuclei) of all the syllables, which generally correspond to the vowels. Then, you look at the remaining consonants and put them in the onset of the existing syllables where possible (the maximize the onset principle). Then any consonants that can’t be onsets get associated with the vowel that comes before them (they become part of the rime/rhyme of the previous syllable).
Thus, lamprey has two syllables because it has two vowels, one for each nucleus, and they’re divided as lam.prey rather than lamp.rey or lampr.ey because pr- is a good onset for English (there are English words that begin with pr-, like prey), even though -mp is also a perfectly good coda for English (we have words like lamp). It’s also not la.mprey (even though that would be a more maximal onset) because English doesn’t have any words that begin with mpr- (i.e. mpr- is not a licit onset in English). Other languages have different maximum onsets, but they all follow the maximal onset principle for their own syllable constraints.
The maximal onset principle gets treated in intro linguistics classes as if it’s an arbitrary procedure that you need to follow, but it’s really a descriptive generalization of a thing that languages do: we say mon.goose not mong.oose, le.mur not lem.ur, rhi.no.ce.rous not rhin.oc.er.ous, ra.coon not rac.oon, lam.prey not lamp.rey, and wom.bat not womb.at. We notice this in things like the pronunciation of “c” – it’s like /s/ in rhinocerous and like /k/ in raccoon because “c” is affected by the vowel that comes after it, the vowel that’s in the same syllable as long as we maximize the onset.
The joke here is, what if the maximal onset principle actually meant that all English words must have the maximal onset for English? (Rather than just the maximal onset for the consonants they already have.) The juxtaposition with the animals is, frankly, inspired. schwombat.

Wait, so… does -copter come *from* helicopter?
Yep! This is called rebracketing. Another famous example would be “-burger”: the original food item is named after the German city, [Hamburg]+[er], but got semantically reinterpreted as [ham]+[burger]. Now it’s used as a suffix indicating a type of sandwich.
Today while reading an article in Spanish I encountered the word burguesa and I didn’t know what it meant but my first thought was that it sounded like the word hamburguesa which made me laugh. I learned that it meant bourgeois and I started thinking about it how hamburguesa (or hamburger) was borrowed from German and named after the city of Hamburg, and then I did a little bit of research and found out that the German suffix –burg and the French word bourgeois both came from Proto-Germanic *burgz.
So it turns out that the words actually are related, and while I didn’t make much progress in writing the Spanish paper I was supposed to be working on, I learned something new and ended up inadvertently studying for my Historical Linguistics final in the process, so it all worked out in the end.
It’s true. A “burg” is a city, and the term “burger” (or bourger or whatever), which is where “bourgeoisie” comes from, originally meant a city-dweller, referring especially to merchants and shopkeepers. Eventually the merchant class started rising in prominence with the development of capitalism and became the wealth-generating class that we know them as today.
The connection to the food hamburger simply comes from the fact that burg means city and Hamburg is a city – the city of ham, basically. So it’s really part coincidence and part etymology.

This is the English word I want to get tattooed on my wrist. It means “to keep breathing even though the water rises all around you.” English is such a mystical exotic language. They can fit so much meaning into so small a word.
Well he’s not wrong