tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-41551601411855639542024-03-14T08:10:07.604+00:00who shall remain antonymousA diary of antonyms, opposites, and contrasts. lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.comBlogger74125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-88895047521815292802023-02-13T23:39:00.000+00:002023-02-13T23:39:05.031+00:00More false morphologies<p>Mo Willems has an opposites book out, <i><a href="https://www.laughingplace.com/w/articles/2021/10/15/book-review-opposites-abstract-by-mo-willems/">Opposites Attract</a></i>, and the Children's Museum of Pittsburgh has <a href="https://pittsburghkids.org/exhibit/oppositesabstract/">a show about it</a>, which has reminded me that there's an 'antonym blog' folder on my desktop with things I've not been posting here. </p><p>So, for the sake of posting something, here are a couple more takes on a now-familiar kind of cartoon, where a series of letters that looks like a word within a word (but isn't a word within that word) is replaced by an opposite. I need a name for these, so I can tag them all. Let's call them false-morphologies. Now that I've tagged them, you can find the others <a href="https://remainantonymous.blogspot.com/search/label/false%20morphology">here</a>. </p><p><br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgcoipLp1tEnHT9bmaQpT2Tw5k_gG0bgxCeMnGBhqg9GCNn4y4_2gXXBn7EcTRXVGRIDgaDQvQTgB7PLYKTQcV1sQu-bAE4Qu2X-y-_Cj18Lv3bcfbCqEvz2QiKCB_e_URlS7_AY_HulV_NRW_40J2650fRA6z4xF1IL0vKe-yyeWGBX8zVLqpnZixK3g/s680/EYtCRgKXYAQmF3B.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="480" data-original-width="680" height="226" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgcoipLp1tEnHT9bmaQpT2Tw5k_gG0bgxCeMnGBhqg9GCNn4y4_2gXXBn7EcTRXVGRIDgaDQvQTgB7PLYKTQcV1sQu-bAE4Qu2X-y-_Cj18Lv3bcfbCqEvz2QiKCB_e_URlS7_AY_HulV_NRW_40J2650fRA6z4xF1IL0vKe-yyeWGBX8zVLqpnZixK3g/s320/EYtCRgKXYAQmF3B.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhM6IZWu6B1hzPbeV81Dh-4c38Erxzu8K16q32sB2kx4e85DXABYcEAYOxOdAMYah5EBl6kgP5gMpfnP1tgN1FzGoygTVhOe6DDfojuuey1RkivAaX3owE-yJ3XnRLIsFxMG3dQPSl9AXSrlQLADFdmIOdMBbw4kSaTq-N-MGWX5UlEXxQE3B4gWyYtvg/s750/FgocEXCWIAIEZys.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="652" data-original-width="750" height="278" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhM6IZWu6B1hzPbeV81Dh-4c38Erxzu8K16q32sB2kx4e85DXABYcEAYOxOdAMYah5EBl6kgP5gMpfnP1tgN1FzGoygTVhOe6DDfojuuey1RkivAaX3owE-yJ3XnRLIsFxMG3dQPSl9AXSrlQLADFdmIOdMBbw4kSaTq-N-MGWX5UlEXxQE3B4gWyYtvg/s320/FgocEXCWIAIEZys.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><p><br /></p>lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-46413103813857662582022-06-25T09:02:00.002+01:002022-06-25T09:02:13.231+01:00Gotcha<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgY2mp0twewYacqnTAwV57fVkbBadEF2hSMnPSE1iof1RTCqk4mMxfNdiw3e76-pTtE-Nhi4jHQx0p8fVtrWdTFSjdLnJH5vp0ON-L2NEyuSBHH4NuZF9TV02sy5-9VzRxkoP4JThZpoOVsjRgUDxQgCpR4mt7lNYIGGa3icrHb9bU3DK6c80Fcao24BA/s720/FromTooheyMatthew.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="518" data-original-width="720" height="288" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgY2mp0twewYacqnTAwV57fVkbBadEF2hSMnPSE1iof1RTCqk4mMxfNdiw3e76-pTtE-Nhi4jHQx0p8fVtrWdTFSjdLnJH5vp0ON-L2NEyuSBHH4NuZF9TV02sy5-9VzRxkoP4JThZpoOVsjRgUDxQgCpR4mt7lNYIGGa3icrHb9bU3DK6c80Fcao24BA/w400-h288/FromTooheyMatthew.png" width="400" /></a></div><br /> Via @tooheymatt<p></p><p><br /></p>lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-9352386798202788902021-09-22T10:28:00.008+01:002021-09-22T10:28:55.367+01:00semantic - orthographical ancillary antonymy<p> The title of this post will only make sense to the nerdiest antonym nerd, but what's neat about this...</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-IPsOdd9Jcy0/YUr24h0N9lI/AAAAAAAADnM/hIcnLoMaMY4AR8WzH9WpP_ZDfNBKdnFoACLcBGAsYHQ/s590/Screen%2BShot%2B2021-09-22%2Bat%2B10.25.34.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="89" data-original-width="590" height="96" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-IPsOdd9Jcy0/YUr24h0N9lI/AAAAAAAADnM/hIcnLoMaMY4AR8WzH9WpP_ZDfNBKdnFoACLcBGAsYHQ/w640-h96/Screen%2BShot%2B2021-09-22%2Bat%2B10.25.34.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p>...is the mix of a semantic opposition involving a proper noun's common noun sense, and an orthographic (spelling) opposition. Very cute.<br /></p>lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-7384730396433861692021-09-05T00:30:00.013+01:002021-09-05T11:26:58.774+01:00"Be kind" versus "don't be mean"<p><span data-offset-key="dpsgi-0-0"><span data-text="true">I'm thinking a bit about all of the admonitions to "be kind" these days. I'm very much in favo(u)r of kindness, especially in the guises of patience and helpfulness, but I do understand why some people express suspicion of "kindness" as an admonition.<br /></span></span></p><div data-block="true" data-editor="cksid" data-offset-key="d45t1-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="d45t1-0-0"><span data-offset-key="d45t1-0-0"><span data-text="true">But now I'm thinking about "be kind" versus "don't be mean" and the power of the negative admonition. <br /></span></span></div></div><div data-block="true" data-editor="cksid" data-offset-key="a20ab-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="a20ab-0-0"><span data-offset-key="a20ab-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div></div><div data-block="true" data-editor="cksid" data-offset-key="bga22-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="bga22-0-0"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-cC3OBEYGNvU/YTQG1RnCD7I/AAAAAAAADm4/HSUhikqarZsCmkSIkZY3bO4sQHH6fJNXwCLcBGAsYHQ/s1106/Screen%2BShot%2B2021-09-05%2Bat%2B00.52.06.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="516" data-original-width="1106" height="149" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-cC3OBEYGNvU/YTQG1RnCD7I/AAAAAAAADm4/HSUhikqarZsCmkSIkZY3bO4sQHH6fJNXwCLcBGAsYHQ/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2021-09-05%2Bat%2B00.52.06.png" width="320" /></a></div><span data-offset-key="bga22-0-0"><span data-text="true">When feeding back on others' writing, I often advise them to lead with positive statements rather than negative ones where possible. (I read so many "This study will not study X, but Y." Lead with the Y, please!) But in this kind of admonition, I think leading with the negative does more. Google's famous(ly abandoned) "don't be evil" feels like a better check on behavio(u)r than "be/do good", for instance. Being good is a tall order. Not everything you do will be good, and that has to be OK. But it's important that what you do isn't evil. It's the line between not-evil and evil that we don't want to cross. Less important is the line between good and not-good.<br /></span></span></div></div><div data-block="true" data-editor="cksid" data-offset-key="apl0m-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="apl0m-0-0"><span data-offset-key="apl0m-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div></div><div data-block="true" data-editor="cksid" data-offset-key="96cmc-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="96cmc-0-0"><span data-offset-key="96cmc-0-0"><span data-text="true">Self-improvement gurus often push the positive. For instance, for weight loss, they prescribe mantras like "eat more vegetables" rather than "don't eat sweets". Such cases are different from the good/evil case, though. "Don't eat sweets" tells you not to do something you want to do. "Don't be evil" tells you to not do something you didn't want to do in the first place. It needs to be said not because you would otherwise set out on an evil pathway, but because it keeps you mindful of the potential for evil. It makes you scan your behavio(u)r for inadvertent or coincidental evil. (This might be an argument against <a href="https://remainantonymous.blogspot.com/2015/10/the-law-of-ridiculous-reverse.html">The Law of the Ridiculous Reverse</a>.)<br /></span></span></div></div><div data-block="true" data-editor="cksid" data-offset-key="fqd4j-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="fqd4j-0-0"><span data-offset-key="fqd4j-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div></div><div data-block="true" data-editor="cksid" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true">I was thinking about this because I chuckled at a Facebook post that implied that people with certain views are stupid, and I've been trying to ask myself "is this kind?" before I do things on the internet. Would it have been kind of me to share that post? No. </span></span></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true"> </span></span></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true">But then again, most of the posts I share are not kind. I just shared a picture of a chandelier I liked. Not actually kind. If my intention is to only share kind things on Facebook, then maybe I shouldn't have shared it. </span></span><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true"></span></span></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true">The "don't be mean" admonition allows the sharing of the chandelier, but discourages the sharing of the put-down. It gets down to what's important and therefore is a less boring and more direct question to repeatedly ask myself: is this mean (to/about someone)? So much more satisfying than "is this kind?"</span></span></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true">Our university has kindness as one of its corporate values. This means that whenever something I don't like is happening at the university, I annoyingly ask the higher-ups: "How is our value of kindness being practi{c/s}ed here?" </span></span></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true">But what if instead of saying "we will be kind to each other" the university community agreed "we won't be mean to each other"? I have to say, I think I'd have a much easier time knowing if people were acting mean than if they were being kind... <br /> </span></span></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true">Of course, having indefinable values makes things easier for a corporation, because it's harder to hold them to their values and slogans. This is <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_be_evil">why Google's "don't be evil" motto</a> was refreshing, and why other corporate entities aren't rushing to imitate it. Their (parent company's) new motto is "Do the right thing"—unhelpfully presupposing that there is exactly one right thing (as opposed to many bad ones?) and thus making it a nearly impossible motto to follow. Which is evil. </span></span></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true"> </span></span></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true">But then<a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/2021/2/16/22280502/google-dont-be-evil-land-of-the-giants-podcast"> it's claimed that</a> the problem with the old slogan was that <i>don't be evil</i> means different things to different people. I don't think that matters that much because one doesn't need to please everyone here. Taking "don't be mean" as my motto means that I should not do things that I consider to be mean. If other people consider other things to be mean, then it would be <i>kind</i> to listen to what they have to say about that. But what "don't be mean" means to me is that I should be running my potential behavio(u)rs past <i>my</i> conscience. There's a reason they call the conscience a "little voice". It's easily drowned out. So I have to listen for it. Don't be mean, Lynne. And maybe sometimes you'll be kind. </span></span></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true"> </span></span></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true"> </span></span></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true">P.S. I've just been reminded of the similar admonition "Don't be a dick". I'm going to stick with "don't be mean" because <i>mean</i> is an adjective and <i>dick</i> is a noun. Nouns are more time-insensitive than adjectives, which means that the barriers to nounhood are higher. To put it as an analogy:</span></span></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0" style="text-align: center;"><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true">Don't be mean:Don't be a dick::Be kind:Be a saint.</span></span></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0" style="text-align: left;"><span data-offset-key="cljgj-0-0"><span data-text="true">You can be kind without being a saint. Kind is the gateway to sainthood. Similarly, you can be mean without making it to dickhood. So, I could justify some mean behavio(u)r by saying "Well, it's mean, but that doesn't make me a complete dick." My goal is to stay off the path to dickhood entirely, so I'm going to stick with <i>don't be mean.</i> </span></span><br /></div></div>lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-16416552234811277282021-02-02T23:02:00.007+00:002021-02-02T23:14:17.451+00:00longage and coolth<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-EuExpv0_BpY/YBnZ1KlxABI/AAAAAAAADbg/VWd8I3AWMrIj3Gu29eB9JJ6TvKgtF0fewCLcBGAsYHQ/s1849/Measuring-tape.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1259" data-original-width="1849" height="136" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-EuExpv0_BpY/YBnZ1KlxABI/AAAAAAAADbg/VWd8I3AWMrIj3Gu29eB9JJ6TvKgtF0fewCLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h136/Measuring-tape.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>Antonyms are often (if not usually) uneven. <i>Long</i> and <i>short</i> describe different directions in the same dimension, but we can only (unless we're being a little silly) measure things in <i>length</i>: <i>two feet long</i>, not <i>two feet short</i>. Even if two feet is short, the thing has a <b>length</b>, not a <b>shorth</b>. Because of the way measurement works, it's generally the word that describes the upward direction on the scale that is more 'unmarked', which is to say it can be used in more contexts, like measurements. <p></p><p>One word that I like a lot, because it seems to go against this trend, is <i><b>coolth</b></i>. This is convenient for the particular treatment of gradable adjective meaning that was central to my doctoral work—<i>coolth</i> works better than <i>shorth</i> (semantically speaking) because measurement of temperature and measurement of length work a bit differently. Things can usually get colder (yes, there's an absolute zero, but you'll be dead before you experience it), but once they get too short, they cease to exist.</p><p>The word <b><i>coolth</i></b> has been around since at least the 1540s, but it probably gets re-invented nearly every time it's used, since no one's hearing it much. It's easy enough to see how to make it. <b><i>Warmth</i></b> has given us the recipe.</p><p>But anyway, I thought of my love for <i>coolth</i> when I read James Harbeck's blog post about the word <i><b>longage</b>. </i>It's the opposite of <i><b>shortage</b>. </i>It doesn't seem to have quite the history that <i>coolth</i> has, but then <i><b>shortage</b></i> has only been around since the late 19th century. (Thank you, American English.) And I thought: good for you, <i>short</i>. You got to be the word that did something morphologically interesting and then your opposite copied you. You got to have the kind of 'getting out and about' fun that the unmarked adjective usually gets to have. </p><p>Anyhow, <a href="https://sesquiotic.com/2021/02/01/longage/">have a read of James's blog post about <i>longage.</i></a></p><p><a href="https://sesquiotic.com/2013/05/04/coolth">And now I find out he's got one about <i>coolth</i> too!</a><br /></p>lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-59870670803481978992020-05-22T13:22:00.002+01:002020-05-22T14:42:34.138+01:00unnegative<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
One of the Twitter accounts I follow is <a href="https://twitter.com/NYT_first_said">New New York Times,</a> which automatically tweets words that are published in the NYT for the first time in its history. (Very often, they are typos.) Here's one that caught my eye:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
unnegative</div>
— New New York Times (@NYT_first_said) <a href="https://twitter.com/NYT_first_said/status/1263739112462462977?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 22, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script> <br />
Two of the other Twitter accounts I follow respond to these one-word tweets. One is<a href="https://twitter.com/NYT_said_where"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"> NYTfirstsaid Context</span></span></a>, which gives the context for the tweet, in this case:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i class="css-2fg4z9 e1gzwzxm0">[imitating Trump]</i> When it comes
to being negative, my test was extremely positive, because, not to be
negative, but, being positive would be super negative, and I wouldn’t
want to not be unnegative. Of that, I’m positive — in a negative way. <i class="css-2fg4z9 e1gzwzxm0">— STEPHEN COLBERT</i></blockquote>
In other words, it's a comedian's imitation of Trump's claim that he<a href="https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-says-he-tested-positively-toward-negative-for-coronavirus-2020-05-21"> "tested positively toward the negative"</a> for coronavirus. This is a man whose ego is so fragile (and intellect so limited) that he doesn't want to classify himself as anything negative, even when it's a good thing to be negative.<br />
<br />
The <a href="https://remainantonymous.blogspot.com/2020/05/alive-not-alive.html">last post here</a> was about <i>unalive</i> versus <i>alive</i> and <i>dead</i>, where something <i>unalive </i>isn't necessarily something that's<i> dead</i> because in order to be <i>dead</i> you have to have been alive, whereas in order to be <i>unalive</i> (in the sense used in the cartoon), you presumably don't. You can be in the class of things that are not alive.<br />
<br />
But is <b><i>unnegative</i></b> anything other than <i>positive</i>? And is the opposition, like <i>dead/alive</i>, restricted to a particular domain? Various things could be positive or negative, but when we shift from one semantic domain to another, things seem to change.<br />
<br />
When <i>positive/negative </i>are applied to numbers, there's a middle ground between them: zero. <br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 <b>0</b> +1 +2 +3 +4 +5</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Here <i>unnegative</i> would presumably refer to the numbers {0, 1, 2, 3...}, unlike <i>positive</i>, which refers to {1, 2, 3...}. We could call <i>negative/unnegative</i> a <b><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privative#Privative_prefixes">privative</a> </b>relation, where <i>unnegative</i> just means the absence of negativity. It works as a contradictory antonym (if a number is not negative, it's unnegative<i><b> </b></i>and vice versa), where <i>positive/negative</i> doesn't quite (because of zero).</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
I think we'd have to call this type a<b> non-gradable contrary </b>antonym pair. <b>Contraries</b> have a middle ground (can be neither X nor Y), but they are usually properties that exist to greater or lesser extents (<b>gradable</b>). You can be neither tall nor short because you can be an unremarkable height, but even if you're short, you can be taller than someone else. But +3 is not "more positive" than +1. It's more than +1, but not more positive than this. The thing is, the way many people talk about contraries, you'd think they were always gradable, so it's a bit funny to talk about non-gradable contraries. (<a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/semantics/333321733E6A52B6452F5C73CA4D894D">John Lyons</a> talks about non-gradable contraries with respect to directional opposites. And indeed this seems to be a kind of directional opposite.)</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
In the context of medical tests, there seem also to be three possibilities (putting aside the possibility of not taking the test): positive, negative, and inconclusive. An inconclusive result for a test could be classed as an <i>unnegative</i> result, so in that case <i>unnegative ≠ positive.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
But "inconclusive" is not really a middle ground, and it's not the same
as the reality of whether one has the disease, it's "We don't know". In terms of who has a disease or not, <i>positive/negative</i> is
complementary: you either have the virus or you don't. It's <b>yes</b> or <b>no</b> with <b>no</b> <b>maybe</b>. <i> </i></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
The last of the NYT-neologism Twitter feeds I follow is called <a href="https://twitter.com/NYT_finally/with_replies">NYT Bibliography</a> and it documents how many times the new-to-the-NYT word has occurred in Google Books. There was no such tweet-response yet, and so I looked for myself and found... </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BokQmki19R0/XsfBx68_RdI/AAAAAAAACsQ/8cuzUHL2shUN5Mc_reE0rd1NLLrJapHoQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/Screenshot%2B2020-05-22%2Bat%2B13.12.19.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="596" data-original-width="1600" height="118" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BokQmki19R0/XsfBx68_RdI/AAAAAAAACsQ/8cuzUHL2shUN5Mc_reE0rd1NLLrJapHoQCLcBGAsYHQ/s320/Screenshot%2B2020-05-22%2Bat%2B13.12.19.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
...nothing. I was really quite surprised. I checked for it with a hyphen (<i>un-negative</i>), just in case and got none that way either. Congratulations to Stephen Colbert for not only getting the word into the NYT, but for being so original.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Googling the word more generally brings up more hits, many of which are hyphenated. They mostly relate to the semantic domain of emotional states. There's even an <a href="https://twitter.com/unnegative">@unnegative<i> </i></a>Twitter feed, and I found its profile description interesting:</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ikyRTJy23Tc/XsfDE3iYwWI/AAAAAAAACsc/UMh-K4yoDusyUwJfVqBxMdJ4MdO0Ik0MACLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/Screenshot%2B2020-05-22%2Bat%2B13.16.33.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="786" data-original-width="1256" height="200" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ikyRTJy23Tc/XsfDE3iYwWI/AAAAAAAACsc/UMh-K4yoDusyUwJfVqBxMdJ4MdO0Ik0MACLcBGAsYHQ/s320/Screenshot%2B2020-05-22%2Bat%2B13.16.33.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<i> </i></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
I was kind of hoping that the <i>un</i>- in this <i>un-negative</i> would be the verb prefix, which means 'reversal' rather than 'not'. (When you <i>untie</i> your shoes, you don't <i>not-tie</i> them.) I had hoped this person was going to unnegative the news for us. But they're definitely using it as an adjective, and they have <a href="https://www.dictionary.com/browse/excluded-middle">excluded the middle</a> between <i>positive</i> and <i>negative</i>: unnegative news is positive news. No neutral news here. </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Anyhow, that's a smidgen of what goes through my head when a one-word tweet comes into view. </div>
</div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-50958418506954088042020-05-20T22:51:00.000+01:002020-05-20T22:51:43.249+01:00Alive - Not Alive<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<i><b>Dead/alive</b> </i>is often given as an example of complementary (or contradictory) antonymy. That's when if X is true, Y must be false and vice versa. If Lincoln is dead, then Lincoln is not alive. If Lincoln is alive, then Lincoln is not dead. Complementaries have no middle ground. You either are or you aren't.<br />
<br />
But try to use <i>dead/alive</i> as an example in a classroom or a textbook, and someone will say "what about vampires?" For them, we have the category of the <i><b>undead</b>. </i>Is <i>dead </i>the opposite of <i>undead</i>? Or is <i>alive</i>? (I'll always answer such questions with 'depends on the context'.)<br />
<br />
The supernatural aside, a complementary antonym pair is only complementary in the semantic domains to which they apply. My sofa is not alive, but that doesn't mean it's dead. Something has to have been alive to be dead, so the semantic domain for <i><b>dead/alive</b> </i>(and even <i>undead</i>) is 'living things'.<br />
<br />
<b><i>Not</i></b> or the prefix <b><i>non</i>-</b><i> </i>put things in contradictory (or complementary) relations to one another regardless of the semantic domain. <br />
<br />
What <a href="https://m.xkcd.com/2307/">xkcd</a> gives us in this comic is <b>alive/not-alive</b>. But although there's a firm line between the two, it treats both as gradable states, where prions and viruses are not alive, but rocks are <i>really</i> not alive. The upward scale seems to be based on animacy and perhaps similarity to humans, while the downward scale mixes up criteria a bit more. I'm not entirely sure that I consider a prion to less not-alive than a rock with a face. In terms of things I'm likely to worship, the rock with a face comes higher, and surely I'm more likely to worship the less not-alive? <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-p5ZWu9Pl0z8/XsWkWE9RVgI/AAAAAAAACsA/ZxPmfebNRhIjyostUaXx3RXP2l2lZ8WRgCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/alive_or_not.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="435" data-original-width="348" height="320" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-p5ZWu9Pl0z8/XsWkWE9RVgI/AAAAAAAACsA/ZxPmfebNRhIjyostUaXx3RXP2l2lZ8WRgCLcBGAsYHQ/s320/alive_or_not.png" width="256" /></a></div>
Anyway, it's funny. Thanks, xkcd. </div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-9993698057620622712020-05-14T10:47:00.001+01:002023-02-13T23:32:21.691+00:00plover/plunder<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
If you don't follow Moose Allain on Twitter, you should. Might be useful when I teach about how to (not) recognize morphemes.<br />
<br />
<samp class="EmbedCode-container"><code class="EmbedCode-code"></code></samp><br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
<code class="EmbedCode-code">I have a cartoon
in the current <a href="https://twitter.com/PrivateEyeNews?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@PrivateEyeNews</a>
<a href="https://t.co/zFwOPLyCyz">pic.twitter.com/zFwOPLyCyz</a></code></div>
<code class="EmbedCode-code">—
Moose Allain Ꙭ (@MooseAllain) <a href="https://twitter.com/MooseAllain/status/1260867501728174080?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May
14, 2020</a></code></blockquote>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-dB3QP24c-gY/Xr0T_e2cnFI/AAAAAAAACqw/jvuTYy3jamkbBdezdfC8Fs4k0I91LELCACLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/EX-ATmAWoAAJwCQ.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="980" data-original-width="1200" height="261" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-dB3QP24c-gY/Xr0T_e2cnFI/AAAAAAAACqw/jvuTYy3jamkbBdezdfC8Fs4k0I91LELCACLcBGAsYHQ/s320/EX-ATmAWoAAJwCQ.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
</div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-79133354340555588362019-07-10T16:22:00.003+01:002023-02-13T23:33:46.080+00:00'nice' is the opposite of 'dick'<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-5Lmfj0fEjHI/XSYCmiyVfkI/AAAAAAAACYw/zF2Jw-wLRFs_LxG_YcBkI-9RD6v0RITXACK4BGAYYCw/s1600/66334010_3021221437893011_8356829352293302272_n.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-5Lmfj0fEjHI/XSYCmiyVfkI/AAAAAAAACYw/zF2Jw-wLRFs_LxG_YcBkI-9RD6v0RITXACK4BGAYYCw/s320/66334010_3021221437893011_8356829352293302272_n.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-21002889724277552912019-04-24T10:38:00.003+01:002023-02-13T23:34:20.514+00:00<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/BsYS1ElB_vI/?fbclid=IwAR0ZczOtWX4NmOVoqtYjPjwYghb47AQTC8ocPU9I_eG2addLgNTwE0jmBHE"><br /></a>
<span style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/BsYS1ElB_vI/?fbclid=IwAR0ZczOtWX4NmOVoqtYjPjwYghb47AQTC8ocPU9I_eG2addLgNTwE0jmBHE">From Terrible Maps</a></span><a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/BsYS1ElB_vI/?fbclid=IwAR0ZczOtWX4NmOVoqtYjPjwYghb47AQTC8ocPU9I_eG2addLgNTwE0jmBHE"><br /></a><span style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/BsYS1ElB_vI/?fbclid=IwAR0ZczOtWX4NmOVoqtYjPjwYghb47AQTC8ocPU9I_eG2addLgNTwE0jmBHE"><img alt="From Terrible Maps" border="0" data-original-height="444" data-original-width="980" height="180" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fJqQ-AoBh1I/XMAt6p_NhKI/AAAAAAAACW0/8ab-v7MDG0cBxT4i7nQps6AEHBAgfh_dQCLcBGAs/s400/INdonesiaOutdonesia.JPG" width="400" /></a></span><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
This is not the first opposite that's been recorded for Indonesia on this blog. <a href="http://remainantonymous.blogspot.com/2015/12/whats-opposite-of-indonesia-poland.html">Have a look at this one</a>.</div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-22611872983912621642019-03-20T16:10:00.000+00:002019-03-20T16:11:17.585+00:00Google trends: contextual oppositions<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
xkcd presents some contextual oppositions:</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<a href="https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/google_trends_maps.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="800" data-original-width="344" height="640" src="https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/google_trends_maps.png" width="273" /></a><br />
<br /></div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-34831229757498951352019-03-20T15:47:00.003+00:002019-03-20T15:47:48.762+00:00oh no - not oh no<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<a href="http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=3417">Dinosaur Comics has a guest artist </a>and a comic I love:<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=3417"><img alt="http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=3417" border="0" data-original-height="686" data-original-width="1000" height="219" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-FZ4zXwDg5TQ/XJJgb4iH19I/AAAAAAAACVY/N5YzWilqrDkKFtcAutSAui-HeewA2LUogCLcBGAs/s320/ohno.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br /><br /></div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-33694119750595075242019-03-12T23:04:00.001+00:002019-03-12T23:04:41.047+00:00big little large small great<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Every work on antonymy needs a big ol' section on why <i>big/little</i> are 'better' antonyms than <i>large/little</i>. I know, I've written more than one.<br />
<br />
Too bad I didn't have xkcd's handy guide!<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/size_venn_diagram.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="770" data-original-width="740" height="320" src="https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/size_venn_diagram.png" width="307" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-75929925776878463632018-12-07T00:37:00.000+00:002019-04-24T10:39:12.021+01:00the blog opposite<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Arnold Zwicky has recently written a couple of post relating to antonymy on his blog. Always worth reading AZ, whose own initials seem a bit oppositey.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><br />
11/21/18: One Big Happy analyses:<br />
<a href="https://exchange.sussex.ac.uk/owa/redir.aspx?C=DWrGQY3ic3MMbNV9YRMactG3-FDBu7Aue8PYm7aUggBZrK5521vWCA..&URL=https%3a%2f%2farnoldzwicky.org%2f2018%2f11%2f21%2fobh-analyses%2f" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://arnoldzwicky.org/2018/11/21/obh-analyses/</a><br />
<br />
12/5/18: uncle-o-nym:<br />
<a href="https://exchange.sussex.ac.uk/owa/redir.aspx?C=nJ8jOP05o8T-ZBDlyBpsBM7Y04i_QSIaZyTsp8P5GWlZrK5521vWCA..&URL=https%3a%2f%2farnoldzwicky.org%2f2018%2f12%2f05%2funcle-o-nym%2f" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://arnoldzwicky.org/2018/12/05/uncle-o-nym/</a></span></span></div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-89846666514211871982018-09-05T23:10:00.002+01:002018-09-05T23:10:38.196+01:00electric/acoustic<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Love it.
<br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en-gb">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
10 year old just asked if he should brush his teeth “electric or acoustic” 🤟🏻</div>
— Lauren Laverne (@laurenlaverne) <a href="https://twitter.com/laurenlaverne/status/1036696500527656960?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">3 September 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
</div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-47417820281456693492018-07-16T10:01:00.002+01:002018-07-16T10:01:55.920+01:00the opposite of digital nomad?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
This came in my inbox today.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wGpbEneKkvY/W0xcRD_HczI/AAAAAAAACJM/Nuu7IiQG_TQRffHSNPaBv6svSgO3QEouACLcBGAs/s1600/Untitled.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="493" data-original-width="772" height="255" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wGpbEneKkvY/W0xcRD_HczI/AAAAAAAACJM/Nuu7IiQG_TQRffHSNPaBv6svSgO3QEouACLcBGAs/s400/Untitled.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
I've read enough articles about digital nomads in my time. (That amounts to two articles, I think.) but I had to skim this one enough to find out what the opposite was. And the answer is (according to this author): <i><b>digital settler</b></i>. That is, an entrepreneur who stops traveling:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: left;">
I’m digital without the nomad. What does that make me? A settler?
Whether saying no to travel is mad or wise, I don’t know. But I can
wholeheartedly say: Most of the happiness you gain from working for
yourself comes from having a choice, much more so than from whatever
choice in particular you make.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
Of course, another possibility is that the opposite of a digital nomad is a non-digital nomad. But I suppose that's just a nomad. And the thing about opposites is that they have to be <b><a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=o3g5dMofckgC&pg=PA118&lpg=PA118&dq=minimally+different+antonym&source=bl&ots=oCxlKfsTOP&sig=4tlQexRN2HrcSIhkIwJQZubxa-o&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjnuJngn6PcAhUJ0RoKHZIYA9YQ6AEIrAEwEA#v=onepage&q=minimally%20different%20antonym&f=false">minimally different</a></b>. A nomad, especially the <a href="http://www.ello.uos.de/field.php/Semantics/SemanticsPrototypes">prototypical</a> nomad, traveling on foot or animal through desolate landscapes, is different in many ways from a young person who works on a laptop in cafés around the world. A person staying in one place working on a laptop is closer to a person who jets around and works on a laptop. <br />
<br />
So, the author has gone from traveling to not-traveling, and this is for him enough to make him the opposite of his former identity.</div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-78795074119990316222018-06-17T09:37:00.000+01:002018-06-17T09:37:54.137+01:00My new fave antonym<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Titus Andromedon in <i>The Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt</i> (Season 4, episode 5):<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<h2 style="text-align: left;">
"It didn't backfire! It frontwatered!"</h2>
</blockquote>
</div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-67867484263442021882018-04-20T13:20:00.001+01:002018-04-20T13:21:55.280+01:00many kinds of 'happy'<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
One thing that always interests me as an antonymist is how a single positive term can have many different-meaning opposites. So, <i>sweet</i> can be the opposite of <i>sour</i>, <i>salty</i> or <i>bitter</i>, depending on context, and <i>happy </i>is opposed to <i>sad, angry, </i>and possibly others. It reminds me of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Karenina_principle">Anna Karenina principle</a>: "Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way."<br />
<br />
Anyhow, I like T-Rex's attention to the different kinds of positive emotion (click to enlarge):<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-v73Y1OH7bsE/WtnbDhyirSI/AAAAAAAACF4/iQitvFSm6_ky3xss1s0u91fvyf8GHt2ZgCLcBGAs/s1600/comic2-3282.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="500" data-original-width="735" height="271" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-v73Y1OH7bsE/WtnbDhyirSI/AAAAAAAACF4/iQitvFSm6_ky3xss1s0u91fvyf8GHt2ZgCLcBGAs/s400/comic2-3282.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<span id="goog_1092835619"></span><span id="goog_1092835620"></span> </div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-55460330642614217622017-12-23T10:32:00.004+00:002017-12-23T10:33:52.146+00:00Dinosaur comics are the most antonymous comics<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
On the difference between 'same but for one difference' and 'different but for one similarity'.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=3230" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="500" data-original-width="735" height="271" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-qBpIuDngoFQ/Wj4wvOo6rXI/AAAAAAAACBI/-t_GT1G-lDk65AbLvSExkBlGpT04Awj8wCLcBGAs/s400/comic2-3235.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<a href="http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=3230">Original source: http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=3230</a><br />
<br /></div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-82164324016171296992017-11-18T17:44:00.000+00:002017-11-18T17:53:30.408+00:00Dinosaur Comics does my dissertation<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
So, as part of my PhD research I asked people questions like "what's the opposite of <i>grass</i>?" and things like that. <br />
<br />
So, basically, <a href="http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=3215">Dinosaur Comics</a> is replicating my doctoral research--and comes to pretty much the same conclusion. (click to enlarge)<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-jt24jbIYVl4/WhBwUZiPKkI/AAAAAAAAB-c/jHTbrDP36icpvF8ZhpxbS_HPf2OchgdwwCLcBGAs/s1600/tumblr_ozl46rRn3s1rwewyjo1_1280.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="500" data-original-width="735" height="270" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-jt24jbIYVl4/WhBwUZiPKkI/AAAAAAAAB-c/jHTbrDP36icpvF8ZhpxbS_HPf2OchgdwwCLcBGAs/s400/tumblr_ozl46rRn3s1rwewyjo1_1280.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br /></div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-82496875195529840802017-07-13T12:15:00.003+01:002017-07-13T12:15:40.197+01:00Not open because we're closed<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Via <a href="http://www.thepoke.co.uk/2017/07/13/well-answers-question/">the Poke,</a> with more examples there.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-v5dMnyyejfA/WWdWANRXsvI/AAAAAAAABzs/JDFqxjF4AckQCjPmioSLrdBk0ZlpjeDrQCLcBGAs/s1600/eq1Fsmi6VujLlD9LmLYabX9q2XLI5q3Cybh_ku80xYI.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="420" data-original-width="800" height="168" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-v5dMnyyejfA/WWdWANRXsvI/AAAAAAAABzs/JDFqxjF4AckQCjPmioSLrdBk0ZlpjeDrQCLcBGAs/s320/eq1Fsmi6VujLlD9LmLYabX9q2XLI5q3Cybh_ku80xYI.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Raises a semantic question: is 'not-open' necessarily the same as 'closed'? Probably, but it's a distraction to think of other possible states...</div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-64211052125077667682017-07-11T15:21:00.000+01:002017-07-12T11:23:34.658+01:00At the oxymoron museum<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
A lovely little cartoon by <a href="https://wronghands1.com/2017/07/07/at-the-oxymoron-museum/">Wrong Hands</a> gives a map of the Oxymoron Museum.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hrSiQ8gQuPA/WWX4iIpOInI/AAAAAAAABy0/cNe7Kzrg23A4uiQkjcI1T58QueR3UkCNgCLcBGAs/s1600/at-the-oxymoron-museum.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="603" data-original-width="753" height="320" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hrSiQ8gQuPA/WWX4iIpOInI/AAAAAAAABy0/cNe7Kzrg23A4uiQkjcI1T58QueR3UkCNgCLcBGAs/s400/at-the-oxymoron-museum.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br /></div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-66936229143379974242017-04-25T23:13:00.002+01:002017-04-25T23:13:34.681+01:00not quite a Janus word, but almost...<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en-gb">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
Make the word 'boring' exciting by simply removing the 'r'.</div>
— Moose Allain (@MooseAllain) <a href="https://twitter.com/MooseAllain/status/856908072740061184">25 April 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script></div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-12812036989083801762017-04-22T18:15:00.001+01:002017-04-22T18:15:28.347+01:00The best of times, the worst of times<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-M-3dNs28Vxc/WPuPjCW-YeI/AAAAAAAABvY/axYEYzKgackZvYqfnLernIqOyE8Js3F5QCLcB/s1600/17991195_1604049576289762_6615920601238335991_n.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="313" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-M-3dNs28Vxc/WPuPjCW-YeI/AAAAAAAABvY/axYEYzKgackZvYqfnLernIqOyE8Js3F5QCLcB/s320/17991195_1604049576289762_6615920601238335991_n.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span class="fbPhotosPhotoCaption" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" id="fbPhotoSnowliftCaption" tabindex="0"><span class="hasCaption">(Credit: <a href="http://www.walthandelsman.com/" rel="nofollow nofollow" target="_blank">http://<wbr></wbr><span class="word_break"></span>www.walthandelsman.com/</a>)</span></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br /></div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155160141185563954.post-79463242073931795682017-04-02T14:20:00.000+01:002017-04-02T14:20:37.124+01:00improving the negative<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
This came through in the <a href="http://linguistlist.org/issues/28/28-1602.html">abstract of a linguistics (AmE) dissertation/(BrE) thesis</a>:<br /><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The ungrammaticality can be improved by supplying the expression with a tense or a syntactic context.</blockquote>
<br />
I'm pretty sure that means that the expression seems more grammatical if it has supporting context, but 'improving ungrammaticality' seems a different thing. My impression is that this kind of<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
negative thing + positive growth = less negative</blockquote>
interpretation is more likely to happen in passive contexts ('ungrammaticality was improved' versus the active 'this improves ungrammaticality').<br />
<br />
<a href="http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?cat=19">Language Log covers a lot of similar things</a> with regularity. </div>
lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.com0