Linguistic Miscellany Thread

[Richard W]

Antimeridie and paene meridie?

[Raphael]

Often, you can't derive the "true meaning of words" from their etymological origin.

[WeepingElf]

The people who successfully use 12 am and 12 pm to mean 12 midnight and 12 noon respectively would kindly disagree.

I think the logic behind this is that 12:00 AM starts at midnight - it is the first minute after midnight - while 12:00 PM starts at noon - it is the first minute after noon.

[linguistcat]

The people who successfully use 12 am and 12 pm to mean 12 midnight and 12 noon respectively would kindly disagree.

I think the logic behind this is that 12:00 AM starts at midnight - it is the first minute after midnight - while 12:00 PM starts at noon - it is the first minute after noon.

Indeed.

[Space60]

I have read that using "12 AM" and "12 PM" can lead to confusion and so are best avoided. Is this really true? Do people get confused when they hear those and wonder what time is being referred to? If people consistently use "12 AM" for midnight and "12 PM" for noon there should be no confusion.

[Pabappa]

Ive said the wrong one a few times but I think thats more of a "oh I wasnt thinking clearly" type of mistake than a mistake of actually not knowing which is which. In other words, Im not actually confused, I just misspoke. Few people would go to the trouble of planning out an appointment or some other kind of event and then go there all without considering whether it was supposed to be at noon or midnight.

[KathTheDragon]

I have read that using "12 AM" and "12 PM" can lead to confusion and so are best avoided. Is this really true? Do people get confused when they hear those and wonder what time is being referred to? If people consistently use "12 AM" for midnight and "12 PM" for noon there should be no confusion.

What usually happens is people leave out the am/pm because it's contextually obvious which is meant.

[dɮ the phoneme]

Does anyone know if Japanese uranai 'fortune telling' or sarasaranai 'not at all' undergo the colloquial reduction of ranai > nnai?

[LingEarth]

I have read that using "12 AM" and "12 PM" can lead to confusion and so are best avoided. Is this really true? Do people get confused when they hear those and wonder what time is being referred to? If people consistently use "12 AM" for midnight and "12 PM" for noon there should be no confusion.

Well personally, I have to stop and remember which is which, and then I'll still wonder if the person who said/wrote it was confused and using it wrong, so IMO it's best to just say noon or midnight if other context doesn't make it clear what "12 o'clock" means.

[Space60]

Technically "12 noon" should be "12 M" (meridien). But no one says "12 M".

[Nortaneous]

If people consistently use "12 AM" for midnight and "12 PM" for noon

they don't?

[Pabappa]

we do.

[Kuchigakatai]

I have read that using "12 AM" and "12 PM" can lead to confusion and so are best avoided. Is this really true? Do people get confused when they hear those and wonder what time is being referred to? If people consistently use "12 AM" for midnight and "12 PM" for noon there should be no confusion.

Yes, it causes some confusion with quite a number of people in my experience. Often, it's because they're not confident about what they're supposed to refer to. So "12 noon" and "12 midnight" it is.

[Raphael]

Perhaps everyone should just switch to a 24 hour clock.

[Travis B.]

Perhaps everyone should just switch to a 24 hour clock.

I personally prefer 24-hour time, but have never run into anyone who has had a problem with "12 am" versus "12 pm".

[dɮ the phoneme]

Does anyone have know any articles on affix order universals? This is something I've been trying to find for a long time because I read something about it at one point and haven't been able to find any more information since. IIRC languages almost universally have aspect marking closer to the root than tense?

[Travis B.]

IIRC languages almost universally have aspect marking closer to the root than tense?

What about English, which marks past tense with affixes or ablaut but which marks aspect with auxiliaries?

[Richard W]

IIRC languages almost universally have aspect marking closer to the root than tense?

What about English, which marks past tense with affixes or ablaut but which marks aspect with auxiliaries?

In I was working, the aspect marker -ing is if anything the closest morpheme to the root. Scoring the perfect v. non-perfect, as in British English, the frequently ambiguous past participle marker attaches to the root. I don't think you can call English a counter-example.

[Raphael]

Is there any way of predicting which slang terms or constructions will become well-established long-term features of their respective languages, and which will soon go the way of most old slang? I strongly suspect that the answer is "no", but I wouldn't mind being surprised on this.

[Zju]

Is there a fusional language that expresses five features with a single morpheme? I can think of four features, but not five, e.g. 1SG.PRS.PERF

Is there any way of predicting which slang terms or constructions will become well-established long-term features of their respective languages, and which will soon go the way of most old slang? I strongly suspect that the answer is "no", but I wouldn't mind being surprised on this.

Those that fill in gaps maybe? Those that are analogical formations or backformations? Those that provide a way to say something people generally want to, but so far couldn't have? (or could have, but unwieldly)
I have heard the claim that languages develop mostly in two directions:
1) To express the same thing with less effort, ergo lenitions and whatnot.
2) To express more with the same amount of effort, ergo e.g. grammaticalisation.