There were issues with the upgrade, so it was decided to revert to the old server at 11:00pm. The site is now running on the old server and should be used as normal. We will make another attempt when we believe we have the issue resolved.
For the first time in my life, I closely observed someone inputting Korean on a cell phone. (I was sitting behind the person doing it on the train ride to the city this afternoon.) Of course, I don't know exactly how it works, but what I observed was very interesting.
First of all, the young woman's phone had a special feature I've never seen in any other type of inputting. Namely, she could use a little, built-in, popup, electronic magnifying glass to hover over a particular syllable block that she had composed to inspect it carefully to see that she had formed it correctly. She did this fairly often.
Next, she seemed to spend a lot of time typing and retyping individual syllable blocks to make sure she got them right.
An article I'm writing led me to wonder when the idea of a conversing automaton first arose, or at least was first published. I'm ruling out magical creations like golems and divine statuary; brazen heads seem to have either been magical or created using arcane secrets of alchemy; I don't know enough to evaluate the legend of King Mu and Yen Shih's automaton, whose conversational abilities are not clearly described in the texts I've found.
There are many early documented automata doing things like playing music, and plenty of enlightenment philosophizing about what human abilities might or might not be clockwork-like, so I would have thought that there would be plenty of fictional conversing automata over the past four or five hundred years.
But apparently not: it's possible that the first real example was as late as 1907 or even 1938.
At the beginning of this week, we looked at a new term for "troll" in Chinese, and that led to a discussion of just what a troll is and how they behave "The toll of the trolls" (5/25/19).
One of the things we found out is that trolls love to argue for the sake of arguing / argument. They are by nature argumentative, quarrelsome, contentious, contrarian, disputatious, and truculent. So I looked around to see if there were any precedent in history or outside of the internet for this type of cantankerousness.
Yesterday, I was thinking of words to express "commotion", "(noisy) disturbance", etc. "Hustle bustle" and "hurly burly" quickly came to mind. Thinking analogically, "hubbub" also presented itself for consideration. Tangentially, "hullabaloo", "hoopla", "hoo-ha", and, through a process of inversion, "ballyhoo" and "brouhaha" also tagged along, but were less convincing as support for a thesis that was swiftly emerging. Namely, "h-b" words seem to be naturally configured for expressing an energetic state of affairs full of movement and din.
While restaurant hunting in the East Bay, I happened upon these dishes with the intriguing English names of "Mr and Mrs Smith" and "Boiled Omasum with Chili Pepper." Omasum turns out to be an obscure name of a variety of tripe, but I'm puzzled as to how the Smith family made it into Chinese cuisine.
For over a hundred years now linguists have known of a small Indo-European family comprised of two closely related languages, Tocharian A and Tocharian B, in the Tarim Basin of eastern Central Asia (Chinese Xinjiang). Tocharian B speakers occupied the northern edge of the Tarim Basin, north of the Tarim River, from its origin at the confluence of the Kashgar and Yarkand rivers eastward to about the halfway point to the Tarim’s disappearance into Lop Nor. Politically Tocharian B speakers were certainly the major constituent of the population of the kingdom of Kucha and natively they called the language (in its English form) Kuchean. To the east-north-east, in the Karashahr Basin, were speakers of Tocharian A, centered around Yanqi (Uighur Karashahr, Sanskrit Agni). On the basis of the Sanskrit name this language is sometimes referred to as Agnean, though we do not have any direct or conclusive evidence as to what the speakers themselves called it. To the east-south-east of Kuqa, along the lower Tarim was the historic kingdom of Kroraina (Chinese Loulan < Han Chinese *glu-glân). The administrative language of Loulan was Gandhari Prakrit, obviously imported into the Tarim Basin along with Buddhism from northwestern India. In documents of the Loulan variety of Gandhari Prakrit are non-Gandhari words that have been attributed to the native language of the area. Some of those non-Gandhari words look like Tocharian (e.g., kilme ‘region’ beside TchB kälymiye ‘direction’) and it has seemed a reasonable hypothesis that the native language of Kroraina/Loulan was another Tocharian language, “Tocharian C.” (That the native language of Loulan was Tocharian was first suggested by Thomas Burrow in his The Language of the Kharoṣṭhī Documents from Chinese Turkestan, 1937.) This is a reasonable hypothesis, for which the evidence is admittedly meager, and many have been (reasonably) dubious or unconvinced.