Zompist Bboard Again

Raphael wrote: ↑Sat Oct 29, 2022 7:05 am I came across a text from the Chicago Sun-Times that calls a place with 21000 inhabitants (three zeroes at the end for a total of 5 figures) a "village". Is that standard English usage?

The largest "village" in the State of Illinois has over 78,000 inhabitants. The smallest "city" has fewer than 200.

Spent Thanksgiving with a bunch of Colombians, so I learned that Columbians call white people monos (monkeys) instead of gringos.

zompist wrote: ↑Fri Nov 25, 2022 1:28 am Spent Thanksgiving with a bunch of Colombians, so I learned that Columbians call white people monos (monkeys) instead of gringos.

monkeys are awesome though so i'd take it as a compliment.

As a species, we're monkey-adjacent.

Rounin Ryuuji wrote: ↑Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:57 am As a species, we're monkey-adjacent.

Cladistically, we are monkeys or monkey isn't a clade. That doesn't mean "monkey" couldn't have its own meaning in common usage, but I'd say all apes are tailless monkeys and that includes us.

linguistcat wrote: ↑Fri Nov 25, 2022 11:54 am

Rounin Ryuuji wrote: ↑Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:57 am As a species, we're monkey-adjacent.

Cladistically, we are monkeys or monkey isn't a clade. That doesn't mean "monkey" couldn't have its own meaning in common usage, but I'd say all apes are tailless monkeys and that includes us.

Humans are monkeys in the way that humans are reptiles. (I almost wrote "reptilians" - lol.)

Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri Nov 25, 2022 12:04 pm

linguistcat wrote: ↑Fri Nov 25, 2022 11:54 am

Rounin Ryuuji wrote: ↑Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:57 am As a species, we're monkey-adjacent.

Cladistically, we are monkeys or monkey isn't a clade. That doesn't mean "monkey" couldn't have its own meaning in common usage, but I'd say all apes are tailless monkeys and that includes us.

Humans are monkeys in the way that humans are reptiles. (I almost wrote "reptilians" - lol.)

Not really — the most recent common ancestor of all reptiles is not an ancestor of humans (but it is an ancestor of birds), but the most recent common ancestor of all monkeys is an ancestor of humans.

zyxw59 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 25, 2022 12:30 pm

Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri Nov 25, 2022 12:04 pm

linguistcat wrote: ↑Fri Nov 25, 2022 11:54 am

Cladistically, we are monkeys or monkey isn't a clade. That doesn't mean "monkey" couldn't have its own meaning in common usage, but I'd say all apes are tailless monkeys and that includes us.

Humans are monkeys in the way that humans are reptiles. (I almost wrote "reptilians" - lol.)

Not really — the most recent common ancestor of all reptiles is not an ancestor of humans (but it is an ancestor of birds), but the most recent common ancestor of all monkeys is an ancestor of humans.

Non-mammal synapsids, like Dimetrodon, used to be regarded as reptiles (specifically "mammal-like reptiles"). I think that usage is deprecated now, but under it humans would be reptiles cladistically speaking.

anteallach wrote: ↑Sat Nov 26, 2022 6:03 am Non-mammal synapsids, like Dimetrodon, used to be regarded as reptiles (specifically "mammal-like reptiles"). I think that usage is deprecated now, but under it humans would be reptiles cladistically speaking.

However, Dimetrodon (c. 280 Mya) is more closely related to the earliest known Squamate (c. 110 Mya) than to modern mammals, for the amniotes seem to have splt c. 320 Mya.

But how does that compare to Luca?

FlamyobatRudki wrote: ↑Sun Nov 27, 2022 12:49 pm But how does that compare to Luca?

LUCA was way earlier, about 3,800 to 4,000 Mya.

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Mon Nov 28, 2022 4:49 am

FlamyobatRudki wrote: ↑Sun Nov 27, 2022 12:49 pm But how does that compare to Luca?

LUCA was way earlier, about 3,800 to 4,000 Mya.

Ah so then we are really closely related to those reptiles.
see it's all a question of knowing ones bearing.

I'm not sure if this is truly innovative or just a regional difference I was previously unaware of, but: "Because of this flexibility it was slightly unusual from other tower blocks of a similar vintage."

Speaking against this being a regionalism, the other examples I found online don't seem to be specific to any particular area:

"Slightly unusual from other essays."
"Unusual from other Delhi cafes."
{The Red Sox are not that unusual from other major league teams..."

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 22, 2022 8:53 pm I'm not sure if this is truly innovative or just a regional difference I was previously unaware of, but: "Because of this flexibility it was slightly unusual from other tower blocks of a similar vintage."

Speaking against this being a regionalism, the other examples I found online don't seem to be specific to any particular area:

"Slightly unusual from other essays."
"Unusual from other Delhi cafes."
{The Red Sox are not that unusual from other major league teams..."

What would you usually say by the way? In my L2 idiolect I think I say "unusual compared to", but maybe there's another way.

Kuchigakatai wrote: ↑Fri Dec 23, 2022 12:18 am What would you usually say by the way? In my L2 idiolect I think I say "unusual compared to", but maybe there's another way.

That's acceptable, as would be "unusual compared with". I would probably rephrase "?unusual from other Xs" as "unusual for a/an X", or "unusual among Xs", although they have less contrastive force.

Slightly unusual for an essay
Unusual among Delhi cafes

For some sentences, using only the article works. I think here it's the comparative construction that makes it possible:
The Red Sox are not that unusual a major league team

I am with Kuchigakatai and quinterbeck here.

Recently read a book by Lisa Tomlinson that said (roughly) "In the 1920s Black music was very underground, very benign." It took me a while to understand what they were trying to say, until I realized they have extrapolated "benign" form its oncological use to mean "unobtrusive or under control, not likely to assert itself" in other contexts. In this way, what was originally a positive connotation ("benign growths") has become a negative one ("benign/suppressed musical traditions"). I think Tomlinson is Caribbean, and I wonder if maybe this extension is normal in Caribbean English.

While writing my book i struck upon "Continued Life" as meaning life which had continued as before major change to it. It felt better than "Continued Existence" at least.

https://i.redd.it/ytbkqo0ht8j81.jpg

There is definitely something to be said about the use of -cel, -pilled, going [noun] mode, and -core. And the suffix -maxx.

An interesting malapropism in a YouTube video description -

"I do not own this song, nor the image. I am fully complacent with any requests made to remove this video..."