Archive for Linguistics in the comics

Digraphs in the gossip column

Today's xkcd — "Linguistics Gossip":

The mouseover title: "The E's wedding invitation definitely used the word LOVE more times than was strictly necessary."

Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (6)

Data, information, knowledge, insight, wisdom, and Conspiracy Theory, part 2

From Phillip Remaker:

The one that claimed authorship clipped the edge of the unicorn tail.

 
The only version I have found that doesn't clip the edge of the unicorn tail is this one from farhan
 
I don't know if that means I found the original or if the author touched it up. The page is not archived on the Internet Archive.
 
It seems consistent with his other art.

Read the rest of this entry »

Comments off

Thrilling linguistics?

Comments (4)

PIE Day

Comments (7)

Linguistic Laws

Comments (8)

Named anatomy

Today's xkcd:

Mouseover title: "If an anatomical structure is named for a person, it means they were the only person to have it. Pierre Paul Broca had a special area of his brain that created powerful magnetic fields, enabling him to do 19th century fMRI research."

Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (22)

It's "Hammie", not "Ammie"

"Baby Blues" by Rick Kirkman and Jerry Scott for January 16, 2023:


(source)

Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (29)

Social media substitutions

Brian McFadden's recent comic on "Social Media Substitutes" starts with this panel:

Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (13)

Yally-teep

Following up on "Words: Too many? Too few?", T-Rex is discussing lexical issues again:

Mousover title: "as the French say – or will soon say if they know what's good for them – c'est TRES yally-teep."

Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (32)

A B C (D E)

Today's xkcd:

Mouseover title: "WARNING: PEOPLE NAMED EVE ARE PROHIBITED FROM INSTALLING THIS APP!"

Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (3)

Words: Too many? Too few?

In Dinosaur Comics for 10/17/2022, T-Rex seems to encounter a lexicographical problem:

Mouseover title: "i'll be communicating entirely through glances and MAYBE raised eyebrows from now on"

Archive description: "words were a mistake, an error, a blunder, a blooper, a fault, a folly, a gaffe, an oversight, a misjudgment, a slip-up, a mix-up, a trip-up, a series of errata,"

Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (7)

Eye Dialectsk

The term "eye dialect" has come to cover a range of non-standard spellings. At one end, we have a non-standard representation of a totally standard pronunciation, like "wuz" for "was" — and that's how the phrase's inventor, George Philip Krapp, meant "eye dialect" to be used:

The impression of popular speech is easily produced by a sprinkling of such forms as ain't, for isn't, done for did, them for those, and similar grammatical improprieties. This impression is often assisted by what may be termed "eye dialect," in which the convention violated is one of the eye, not the ear. Thus a dialect writer often spells a word like front as frunt, or face as fase, or picture as pictsher, not because he intends to indicate here a genuine difference of pronunciation, but the spelling is merely a friendly nudge to the reader, a knowing look which establishes a sympathetic sense of superiority between the author and reader as contrasted with the humble speaker of dialect.

It's natural to extend the phrase to cover representations of contextual reductions that are also entirely standard, like "ta" for "to" in a phrase like "went ta town", representing the pronunciation [tə]. American, at least, would always say it that way — it would be weird to say [wɛnt tu tɐʊn], unless some special context motivated that hyperarticulation.

And there's a further common extension, to things like "oi" or "ah" for "I" — regional, ethic, or class pronunciations.

Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (23)

Plain Language

Comments (17)