i'll stick to sign language

10:59pmCharles

what is your status from?

11:01pmJane is offline.

11:03pmJane is online.

11:04pmJane

haha

haha

11:04pmCharles

?

same basic considerations for codeswitching between a head and its complement: although the language of the head does not necessarily determine the language of the complement, there are basic features (gender) of the D which restrict its complement language.

11:05pmJane

that would be my contribution to theoretical syntax

it's not from anything

11:05pmCharles

whats the head?

11:05pmJane

well

the head

is normally a lexical or a functional category

so

within a syntax tree

the

"the"

is the head of the noun phrase

which is the complement

so

in "the noun"

"the" is the head and "noun" is the complement

or

a subject

in a SVO language

is the head of the IP

inflectional phrase

so

kathy went to the store

kathy

is the head

of

went to the store

: )

11:08pmCharles

i follow most of that

svo?

11:08pmJane

well

all the world's languages

11:08pmCharles

dang, and you thought you were done teaching for the day!

11:08pmJane

are essentially split into two types

90%

45%

are SVO

and the other

are SOV

it just indicates

word order

so

english is SVO

11:09pmCharles

subject verb object?

11:09pmJane

subject verb object

yeah

whereas japanese is SOV

and german

can take either

which is AWESOME

and this is probably WAY more than you wanted to hear

way too nerdy this late

11:10pmCharles

it's pretty interesting

11:11pmJane

i think so

11:11pmCharles

i liked the update more before i understood it though

hahaha

11:11pmJane

oh darn

11:11pmCharles

guess that makes it art

11:11pmJane

syntax is art

truly

language is algorithmic art

the beauty lies in its precision

11:12pmCharles

i'm an admirer, but not a practitioner

11:12pmJane

predictability

11:12pmCharles

me an' werds don' get along

11:12pmJane

and the things which make it unpredictable

i would argue

you are a practitioner more than anything else

11:14pmCharles

you can never put into words what you can express with a glance

11:14pmJane

well

11:14pmCharles

and people have to much faith in their words

11:14pmJane

it depends

are you a poet?

because i would argue that they are effective

with their words

and it depends

on how well versed in eye communication you are

some people

are facially unexpressive

but you're right

a picture is worth a 1000 words

11:15pmCharles

people don't see them as vessels, but as the object they express.

11:15pmJane

n'est pas?

11:15pmCharles

clever

then i would argue that a picture is worth a thousand misunderstandings

11:16pmJane

cleverer

: )

11:16pmCharles

it does feel good when you nail it down with words, though

11:16pmJane

but this nullifies your "eyes are more expressive" theory

11:17pmCharles

today i told my friend, "hiroshima did not cause pearl harbor," as an analogy to something else going on, and it worked perfectly.

11:17pmJane

well

that is the beauty

of analogy

11:17pmCharles

i love 'em

11:17pmJane

did you see pinker speak

?

11:17pmCharles

no

11:17pmJane

at asu

oh too bad

he was clever

deals with language and psychology

and talked about analogies quite a bit

11:18pmCharles

dang

11:18pmJane

and the underlying algorithm underlying them

and how we make sense of them

it's beautiful

you working tomorrow/

11:19pmCharles

yeah, campus job, not cowtown

11:19pmJane

lame-o

well

i gots to go to bed

exhausted

back up at 6

: (

i hope you sleep well

11:19pmCharles

that's rough

i shall do my best

same to you!

11:20pmJane

thanks for the inquiry

11:20pmCharles

thanks for the thorough answer!

11:20pmJane

haha

poor you

11:21pmCharles

i know, right? you know how to send a wordophobe into a panic attack.

good night.

11:21pmJane

night

11:22pmJane is offline.



(this will probably only be interesting to ari, if even.)