Innovative Usage Thread

Natural languages and linguistics
Kuchigakatai
Posts: 1307
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 4:19 pm

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by Kuchigakatai »

Raphael wrote: Thu Nov 12, 2020 11:13 amBut with what meaning? Judging from Wiktionary, it seems to colloquial for a feature of the Hebrew alphabet that doesn't exist in the Latin/English alphabet.
A placeholder term is a word with no meaning you use it to stand for a thing when you can't remember the name, or just any instance of something of a certain type. Examples would be English thingamobob/watchamacallit, Salvadoran Spanish volado 'watchamacallit' (or the cutesier coso, or the pejorative babosada). They can also be used for imaginary places or people, e.g. German Hintertupfingen 'bumfuck nowhere', English so-and-so.

Since the Hebrew geresh mark (or "chupchik") is even smaller than a yod (to recall that famous quote of Jesus'), presumably this just means 'watchamacallit'.
User avatar
Linguoboy
Posts: 2453
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 10:00 am
Location: Rogers Park

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by Linguoboy »

User avatar
Raphael
Posts: 4557
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2018 6:36 am

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by Raphael »

Ah. Thank you!
User avatar
Raphael
Posts: 4557
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2018 6:36 am

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by Raphael »

Now I have to think of all the times someone told me something like, "could you give me a thing?", and I was like, "wut?"
User avatar
Linguoboy
Posts: 2453
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 10:00 am
Location: Rogers Park

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by Linguoboy »

Raphael wrote: Thu Nov 12, 2020 11:55 am Now I have to think of all the times someone told me something like, "could you give me a thing?", and I was like, "wut?"
Popular in our household: "Could you give me the thing with the thing? It's over on the thing with the stuff."

Incredibly, this actually works more often than not.
Travis B.
Posts: 6853
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:52 pm

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by Travis B. »

Linguoboy wrote: Thu Nov 12, 2020 12:44 pm
Raphael wrote: Thu Nov 12, 2020 11:55 am Now I have to think of all the times someone told me something like, "could you give me a thing?", and I was like, "wut?"
Popular in our household: "Could you give me the thing with the thing? It's over on the thing with the stuff."

Incredibly, this actually works more often than not.
What I am used to is speaking of "a thing of X", where "thing" means some unspecified but discrete quantity of something; e.g. "a thing of milk" means a gallon or half-gallon jug of milk while "a thing of soy sauce" means one of those glass bottles of soy sauce.
Yaaludinuya siima d'at yiseka wohadetafa gaare.
Ennadinut'a gaare d'ate eetatadi siiman.
T'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa.
User avatar
Linguoboy
Posts: 2453
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 10:00 am
Location: Rogers Park

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by Linguoboy »

I again heard "in lieu of" to mean "due to" instead of "in place of" (i.e. "In lieu of the pandemic...") and noticed that Wiktionary now lists this as a proscribed usage, which suggests that it's becoming rather commonplace.
Kuchigakatai
Posts: 1307
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 4:19 pm

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by Kuchigakatai »

I've been seeing "scares" as a countable plural (singular "a scare") for moments where a videogame tries to spook you.
Kuchigakatai wrote: Fri Nov 06, 2020 12:24 amThe interjection "pog", meaning "that's cool/awesome", seems to continue to gain strength though. And anyone who's paid any attention to the Among Us videogame phenomenon going on right now knows about "sus" (suspect, noun).
I've also been seeing a derived adjective "poggers".

Funny attestation, from a teacher on Twitter:
Image
"pretty poggers" - "poggers is not academic language"
User avatar
Pabappa
Posts: 1359
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2018 11:36 am
Location: the Impossible Forest
Contact:

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by Pabappa »

🤷‍♂️ "jump scare", at least, goes back to the 1990s, if not older. "sus" (with 1 s) is definitely a new thing, but i've seen the suss spelling at least a few times before, where it can stand for suspicious or stand alone ("suss out"). Funnily enough it seems that poggers is actually from the 1990s as well, just not in its original sense. i remember playing pogs when i was young but i assumed unti now that it was just a coincidence.
Kuchigakatai
Posts: 1307
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 4:19 pm

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by Kuchigakatai »

Pabappa wrote: Wed Dec 02, 2020 12:18 pmFunnily enough it seems that poggers is actually from the 1990s as well, just not in its original sense. i remember playing pogs when i was young but i assumed unti now that it was just a coincidence.
POGs™ go back to the 1930s apparently, originally the bottle caps of a drink company's Passionfruit (or Pineapple? I'm seeing disagreeing commentary) Orange Guava line. The adjective "poggers" seems to be genuinely new though, maybe formed off that colloquial suffix -ers, as in "preggers", "bonkers"?

Incidentally, I once saw an interview with the Mexican businessman who popularized "tazos" (as they're known in Latin America, Eastern Europe and the Arab world) from the mid-1990s onward, in which he said his company started including them in chips products and such after seeing the accumulating upsurge in popularity that was going on for pogs™ in the early 1990s in the US.
User avatar
Linguoboy
Posts: 2453
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 10:00 am
Location: Rogers Park

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by Linguoboy »

Pabappa wrote: Wed Dec 02, 2020 12:18 pm 🤷‍♂️ "jump scare", at least, goes back to the 1990s, if not older.
Countable scare itself is attested as early as 1548. It's commonplace in expressions like "That gave me a real bad scare." The OED's first citation for "jump scare" is 1986. There's also the expression "cat scare" for that particular trope where a jump scare is caused by something which turns out just to be a cat (or something equally harmless).
Kuchigakatai
Posts: 1307
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 4:19 pm

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by Kuchigakatai »

Oh great, well, then it isn't new at all! I guess that, funnily, so far in the spaces I move around, its usage for videogame scenes/moments is the only one I've come across of it...
User avatar
Linguoboy
Posts: 2453
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 10:00 am
Location: Rogers Park

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by Linguoboy »

The owner of Four Seasons Total Landscaping wrote:We’re a Wikipedia now!
axolotl
Posts: 41
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 6:35 pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah, USA

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by axolotl »

Linguoboy wrote: Wed Dec 02, 2020 9:33 am I again heard "in lieu of" to mean "due to" instead of "in place of" (i.e. "In lieu of the pandemic...") and noticed that Wiktionary now lists this as a proscribed usage, which suggests that it's becoming rather commonplace.
Malapropism, maybe? They might be going for "in light of."
[ð̞͡ˠʟ] best sound
Kuchigakatai
Posts: 1307
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 4:19 pm

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by Kuchigakatai »

I've been noticing "be/get copyrighted" with the meaning "struck down due to copyright claims". As in, "that YouTube video got copyrighted."

I feel it has a similar connotation to "to be disappeared"...
User avatar
dɮ the phoneme
Posts: 359
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 2:53 am
Location: On either side of the tongue, below the alveolar ridge
Contact:

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by dɮ the phoneme »

Just heard this very strange sentence in a youtube video. For context, this was a scripted video, not natural speech. The narrator was discussing this "iceberg" meme format, and said the following: "It's this image full of different hoaxes, theories, secrets, trivia, anything of the sort for a certain series, with the deeper you going being a bit more obscure, not known, or just a bit plain weird."

This video is from the broader sphere of gaming youtube, and based on my experience, this sort of... just, vaguely odd sentence construction seems to be pretty common in that arena. Like, this definitely tracks as ungrammatical for me, but there seems to be a whole group of people that just (in a non-precise, qualitative sense) consistently talk this way, at least in their youtube videos. I'm not sure if I can give a good overall description, rather than just vaguely gesturing at what I mean from this example, but... this is something I've been noticing for years.
Ye knowe eek that, in forme of speche is chaunge
With-inne a thousand yeer, and wordes tho
That hadden pris, now wonder nyce and straunge
Us thinketh hem; and yet they spake hem so,
And spedde as wel in love as men now do.

(formerly Max1461)
User avatar
KathTheDragon
Posts: 783
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 3:57 am
Location: Disunited Kingdom

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by KathTheDragon »

Why did you highlight "just a bit plain weird" too? There's nothing off with that, is there?
Travis B.
Posts: 6853
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:52 pm

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by Travis B. »

KathTheDragon wrote: Sun Jan 03, 2021 3:37 pm Why did you highlight "just a bit plain weird" too? There's nothing off with that, is there?
The form I'm used to is "just a plain bit weird" myself.
Yaaludinuya siima d'at yiseka wohadetafa gaare.
Ennadinut'a gaare d'ate eetatadi siiman.
T'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa.
Estav
Posts: 196
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2018 10:22 am

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by Estav »

Travis B. wrote: Sun Jan 03, 2021 3:45 pm
KathTheDragon wrote: Sun Jan 03, 2021 3:37 pm Why did you highlight "just a bit plain weird" too? There's nothing off with that, is there?
The form I'm used to is "just a plain bit weird" myself.
And I feel like the most natural order for me might be "a bit just plain weird"... but I think sounds a little odd to use "a bit" and "just plain" together in any order.
Kuchigakatai
Posts: 1307
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 4:19 pm

Re: Innovative Usage Thread

Post by Kuchigakatai »

dɮ the phoneme wrote: Sun Jan 03, 2021 3:05 pm"It's this image full of different hoaxes, theories, secrets, trivia, anything of the sort for a certain series, with the deeper you going being a bit more obscure, not known, or just a bit plain weird."
Was it a non-rhotic accent? Even if rhotic, maybe it was a badly pronounced "with the deeper you're going", which is a slight bit more acceptable.

I often see weird grammar in Spanish in very informal writing on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, and I often wonder if that is how they actually speak, or whether some of the weirdness comes from typos + cellphones' autocorrection...
Post Reply