Once upon a time it was claimed that rugby was a game for hooligans, played by gentlemen. Inappropriate behaviour was confined to the signing of lewd songs such as this:Four and twenty virgins came down from Inverness,
And when the ball was over there were four and twenty less…
The composer of this ditty was clearly not a linguist. Four and twenty less? Four and twenty fewer!Can anyone think of a place name that rhymes with fewer?
Canny Linguist has a very low opinion of Noam Chomsky, considered by many to be a linguistic genius. In the late 1950s, Chomsky developed his innateness hypothesis which promulgated the concept of a genetic disposition to acquire language. This innate ability is widely referred to as the Language Acquisition Device. However, students of classical Greek philosophy will recognise that Chomskian theory is, in fact, based on work by Socrates who, through a series of experiments, demonstrated how a young slave was able to solve a geometric problem despite not ever having been taught geometry. Taking the credit for someone else’s research is not new, but CL’s real issue with Chomsky is the latter’s abhorrent political views. Or, rather, the way that Chomsky seeks to intellectualise every issue, and belittle and vilify anyone who dares to hold a contrary position.Which leads us on to Steven Pinker, another renowned linguist. Pinker has won considerable praise for his numerous books on language, written in a style accessible to linguists, students and the general public. In his latest book ‘The Better Angels of Our Nature’ he argues that, contrary to popular belief, society has become less violent over time. Statistics are used to support his theory; for example 150,000 Iraqi deaths compared to 2 million in Vietnam. Atrocities such as the Nazi Holocaust are merely statistical blips. Well, that’s all right then.When interviewed by Tony Allen-Mills for the Sunday Times, Pinker explained that the reason we mere mortals are prone to challenge his book’s rather startling conclusion is simply because we do not understand the facts of the matter. He is a very clever man, don’t you know, and, unlike us, he has studied this subject in great detail.Pinker is, of course, entitled to his opinion but once academics start claiming that non-academics cannot possibly understand the argument, it is a sign that perhaps it is they who do not understand. Not every question can be answered by mere statistical analysis.Watching the current BBC series on Language with Stephen Fry, it is impossible to escape the conclusion that he, too, has become consumed by hubris as he pontificates in an insufferably pompous and patronising manner. CL wonders whether there is something about the study of linguistics in particular which makes people say stupid things. If so, will that be a valid excuse if his next English essay fails to meet the mark?!
Disgraced journalist Johann Hari, who has now apologised for his acts of plagiarism - and finally admitted the wanton alteration of his opponents’ Wikipedia entries - is taking a leave of absence from The Independent newspaper in order to enrol on a journalism training course. Hopefully not the same one attended by Andy Coulson.As he left the paper, a contrite Hari said: “It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.” (Are you sure about this? Ed.)
This is a newer version of something that's been around for quite some time. If you can read it, you have a strong mind.7H15 M355463 53RV35 70 PR0V3 H0W 0UR M1ND5 C4N D0 4M4Z1N6 7H1N65! 1MPR3551V3 7H1N65!1N 7H3 B361NN1NG 17 W45 H4RD BU7 N0W, 0N 7H15 L1N3 Y0UR M1ND 15 R34D1N6 17 4U70M471C411Y W17H 0UT 3V3N 7H1NK1N6 4B0U7 17, B3 PR0UD! 0N1Y C3R741N P30PL3 C4N R34D 7H15. R3 P057 1F U C4N.
Once upon a time, wicked meant evil. Nowadays it means that something is really cool, and cool is the word commonly used to describe something previously considered to be hot. It is a simple fact of life that language is constantly evolving with words acquiring new meanings all the time. Nowhere is this more readily apparent than in the world of politics.As a helpful guide to linguists, below is a list of common phrases used by politicians with a translation using modern terminology. Please feel free to add your own examples.“Good morning, I am a Liberal Democrat” means “Good morning, I am a pathological liar”“Trust me” means “Run for the hills”“We have no plans to….” means “We have every intention of…”“We will give power back to the people” means “We will transfer power from Whitehall civil servants to unelected Town Hall officers”“We’re all in this together” means “You’re all in this together”“It’s time to stop playing politics” means “My opponent is right” “We will have a full and thorough public consultation” means “We will kick the issue into the long grass for a few months and then carry out our plans as intended”“I'm a conviction politician” means “I will say whatever you want to hear as long as you vote for me”
From www.ted.comBiologist Mark Pagel shares an intriguing theory about why humans evolved our complex system of language. He suggests that language is a piece of "social technology" that allowed early human tribes to access a powerful new tool: cooperation.
The Barnet Times uses a profanity filter on its web site to prevent the posting of obscene language. Fair enough, you might think. But what constitutes obscene language?Earlier today, a message was posted on their web site which included the phrase ‘cock-up’. This was redacted by the software and published as ****-up. The Cambridge University Press on-line dictionary defines cock-up simply as: “something that is done wrong or badly”. According to “The Origins and Common Usage of British Swear-words” published by the BBC:“…the phrase ‘cock-up’ might appear to have come about in a similar way to ‘balls-up’, its origins are actually in beer making. If the batch went bad, they turned the cock (i.e. tap, or faucet) up to drain the barrel.”
Leaving aside the question of whether the word ‘cock’ in this context was obscene, it is clear that profanity filters are of limited use. The substitute word ‘kok’ was accepted by the newspaper’s software. Changing a few letters will beat the filters without detracting from the intended meaning.This was exemplified in the classic Monty Python ‘Travel Agent’ sketch featuring Eric Idle as a customer with a speech impediment, which made him pronounce the letter ‘c’ as ‘b’. Upon realising that he could substitute the letter ‘k’ instead, he declared: “what a silly bunt!”Unfortunately, the BBC cut this line from the broadcast version, although it is included in the album Monty Python's Previous Record.