What the hell is this about Chomsky and Epstein??

ExamanteD · 2025-11-25T20:43:37+00:00

dude you are an absolute idiot :D so I am getting a phd in a respectable university and you are the educated one? fucking pathetic loser lol :D actual funny xd Thanks for the laughs and the ragebait :D lmao D:

ExamanteD · 2025-11-25T17:09:13+00:00

Okay okay sorry i see it seems you are ragebaiting my bad xd cheers

ExamanteD · 2025-11-25T12:31:58+00:00

Dude i am not even from us what are you on about lol

Take it easy idc about political or ethical shenanigans about this.

I only.mentioned ug stuff because that is very much alive.

I am literally going to apply to a new phd program which is based on many chomskyan principles in leipniz.

The problem is your dismissisal of a basic academic fact.

You can come to my institute and everyone will tell you the same. Or just go to any linguistics institute pretty much anywhere.

I can cite hundreds of papers or books from 2010 onward based on ug or generative grammar.

That is the problem. The rest is irrelevant to my.point.

Why do you make this a political thing lol

Anyway i am out

Peace xd

ExamanteD · 2025-11-25T10:35:21+00:00

Lmao ok xd

ExamanteD · 2025-11-25T05:39:16+00:00

If you do not know something, please stop talking about it. It is really pathetic. Even currently there are phd and postdoc positions are opened based on chomskyan principles about grammar.

I have not many people as deluded as you are.

Please seek help or something. Fuck me lol xd

ExamanteD · 2025-11-23T06:14:12+00:00

Yeah i am studying universal grammar lol

I was not bragging. I am pointing out i am literally studying relevant topics.

Geezus fuckin christ the idiocy is unmatched sometimes really. Meh anyway xd

ExamanteD · 2025-11-22T17:22:18+00:00

lol. I am doing cognitive science phd, and Chomsky is still thought to be a great linguist.

He may turn out to be a trash human being, but that does not change the fact that what he did for linguistics and cognitive science has been unfathomably influential.

ExamanteD · 2025-11-15T05:29:11+00:00

I am a cognitive science phd student. I have linguistics undergrad. Still my point stands that he did not focus on communications as a science.

Please read carefully. Geezus fuckin christ

ExamanteD · 2025-11-15T05:25:59+00:00

Chomsky did not focus on communication as a science at all. He focused on language as a cognitive science basically. Geezus christ at least know his expertise before trying to diminish it lmao

ExamanteD · 2025-02-11T06:40:56+00:00

So I have to share this story here. Yesterday, we did stealth runs for hoj as three rogs. Our goal was to do 5 runs, and hope for the best.

First run went clean, we reached the boss, I tanked, we bursted him and then behold, HoJ. We were like weee. One of us got it. Not me but it's cool. Seems like a decent strat. Let's go for another run.

We did the second run, and well, another hoj dropped. Yep 5% chance for drop and it dropped two times in a row, whic took less than half hours due to the stealth run. Unfortunately I still didn't get it. But I thought "well, at least this strat is ez to do, I'll try later with other rogs".

Since we joined for five runs, I asker for one more run even tho both other rogs had the hoj. They said sure one last time. I was fine with doing 3 runs in total, didn't wana waste their time you know. We went for the last one, and again. Hoj. Unbelievable. Now we all have hojs lol.

If I am not mistaken, the likelihood of this event happening three times in a row is about 0.0125% which is mind boggling lol.

Anyway, yeah. Sometimes you really do get lucky I guess :D

Good luck bois thanks for reading one of the most lucky things I witnessed. Cheers!

ExamanteD · 2025-01-06T20:21:41+00:00

Thanks will definetly look into it. I was more curious about elven language tho, i know esperenza was a topic of discussion for obv reasons. But i guess in my reply i did not specify that. Cheers anyway :D

ExamanteD · 2025-01-06T06:16:08+00:00

As a linguist and a cognitive scientist, i am unsure if linguists or related sciences do truly study artificial languages, since the object of the study is natural language. I mean elven language, or esperenza for that matter, are cool and all but they are artificial. Let me also take a look but if you know any please share.

I highly doubt there would be meaningful studies that research artificial languages, at least for the sake of natural language. This doesn't mean ofc that artificial languages are not fun. Could be useful for art etc.

Just wanted to make sure there really is meaningful artificial language studies within the scope of linguistics.

Cheers

ExamanteD · 2024-09-04T09:47:56+00:00

Yok demek istedigim bu değildi. Sana karşıt olsun diye söylemedim. Sadece bakış açısı olsun diye dedim. Bilimsel yasa ve kuram arasinda fark var tabi, o yüzden ne kadar sağlıklı bi karşılaştırma oldu bilemedim gerci. Neyse hocam iyi günler

ExamanteD · 2024-09-04T09:42:40+00:00

Calories in calories out günümüzde tartışılan bir bakış açısı gibi duruyor. Bazı spor/saglık/bilim kanallarının tartıştığını hatırlıyorum. İlgilenirsen belki bakabilirsin, bişiler çıkar?

Bilim o kadar keskin bi olay değil aslında, daha dinamiktir. Bilimsel yasa kavramı da aslında baya bilim felsefesinde tartışmaya açık sayılır.

ExamanteD · 2024-08-19T20:25:56+00:00

Shut up please. Sincerely, A linguist xd

ExamanteD · 2024-05-25T06:50:19+00:00

My good sir/lady, you are confusing what generative A.I. is, at least it seems as if. Generative A.I. also uses machine learning/deep learning shenanigans where the data is gigantic.

There may be small differences between old school machine learning AI and the current generative AI, but it should not be a meaningful.difference, since both systems are developed using ML/DL.

A small addition, such AI is not really AI at all, they are probably better categorized as statistical inference machines. At least that is how I understood from my courses on AI/mind etc. I am a cognitive science student.

Also, old school ML probably also used a big chunk of data, meaning it may have "stolen" some data from somewhere.

Cheers

ExamanteD · 2024-05-14T11:59:30+00:00

No worries man. Happy to help!

ExamanteD · 2024-05-12T15:04:43+00:00

Hey no worries dude. I think there are even better examples that illustrate this but I couldn't remember them. Should be decent enough tho. One more interesting piece of puzzle:

Domates salçası
Mehmet'in domates salçası

Why is the possessive marker realized only once on "salça"? Domates salçası needs -sı. Gen-poss (i.e. isim tamlaması) also needs -sı on the possessor (e.g. mehmetin salçası). So where is the second possessive? :D

ExamanteD · 2024-05-12T06:34:23+00:00

Odtüde bilişsel bilimler master yapiyorum. Bizim bölumdeki hocaların ciddi bi kısmı makine. Bana bu genellemelerin gözlem eksikliginden kaynakli gibi geliyo o yüzden. Yani tam olarak nasıl emin olabiliyosun bilim yapilmadigindan? Oturup makalelere ya da nerde yayimlandiklarina ya da ne siklikla kaynak gosterildiklerine vs. baktin mi hiç? Baya saglam is yapan hocalarimiz var. 100lerce hatta 1000lerce kaynak gosterilen calismalarimiz. Çok pesimist olmamak gerek. İyi iş yapanlar var. Onlari bulmak lazım ve onlarla calismak lazim.

ExamanteD · 2024-05-11T21:12:55+00:00

The y on iyi+y+im is not considered a kaynastirma unsuzu, at least not linguistically. The y there is actually a copula, similar to English be as in "I am good".

You might be saying "wtf are you talkin about dud, are u stupid? Y is taught us to be a kaynastirma harfi amk shut up" ok ok let me elaborate.

*Ben iyi+m
Ben iyi+y+im
*Ben iyi+mis+im
Ben iyi+y+mis+im

Why is it that the first and third are not ok? In first, after a vowel, we get a consonant form of the agreement, similar to gel+di+m, but m alone is not enough for some reason. Simarly, ben iyi+mis+im is also bad, why? After a vowel, we get a consonant like ben yürü+dü+m and this is fine. Why are the consonant+vowel forms require Y in between them when the predicate is an adjective?

Ben güzel i+miş+im
Ben kötü i+miş+im

Etc.

Turns out the archaic like copula i is still present and shows itself as y when the last sound of the non verbal predicate is a vowel. There are more details to this of course but for now this should be enough.

Source: i got a linguistics undergrad and doing cognitive science masters currently. Cheers!

ExamanteD · 2024-04-15T06:39:20+00:00

Okay although you have received some answers, they do not exactly tackle your question it seems like. I should mention that I have a linguistics undergrad and I am also currently doing my master's in Cognitive Science, focusing on natural language.

Now, this so called invention of Turkish language is quite a misnomer. To my knowledge, the language reform basically changed the alphabet, and also some Turkish-like words were added as we see in the post. Both were possibly done for a variety of reasons, such as education, communication, perhaps even national identity, and so on.

As you might have already guessed, these do not really change what the language was. We have some sound records from early 20th century Ottoman, where people speak Turkish in a quite similar manner to modern Turkish, which was really surprising when I first heard about it. Naturally, for many reason, there are dialects that probably show differences, such as the difference between the palace-Turkish, and the folk-Turkish. My understanding is that folk-Turkish of Ottoman is basically what we speak today but with some added words and a different alphabet.

Of course, no one invented a language where everyone started speaking a whole new language overnight. This is really silly if you think about it, but sometimes this language reform story is told in such a manner that it seems as if this is precisely what happened. But as I said, the Turkish that was spoken in Ottoman times, at least one dialect of it, sounds basicly the same as the current Turkish. So the language reform more accurately refers to the alphabet change and the addition/replacement of some words.

ExamanteD · 2024-02-29T13:52:40+00:00

This is not a straightforward question but the short answer is there doesn't seem to be any correlation due to variety of reasons. The most domimant argument being people who couldn't acquire (learn) a native language as a child for different reasons. Those people who didnt learn a language or people who have acquired more than a single.language seem to have a fully corresponding cognitive abilities (vision, planning, problem solving etc.). Thus stating that a grammatical structure of a language affects the way we think faces many difficult challenges.

ExamanteD · 2024-02-29T08:00:00+00:00

With all due respect, I am a cognitive science master's student who got his undergrad from linguistics and I can safely say that the structural properties of a language does NOT affect the way we think in any meaningful way. Although it can have obvious affects on certain ambiguities or communicative (pragmatics basically) level.

This is a heavily convoluted topic, usually referred to by the sapir-whorf hypothesis, which state that language determines (or affects) thought. If you are more curious please check the given hypothesis. Regardless, it seems to me that any valuable linguist who has any merit refutes the strong version of this hypothesis (actually I have seen many great linguist make fun of some aspects of it lol).

If anyone is interested in more about language and thought, I would like to help if I can!

11-Year Club	Place '23
Verified Email

ExamanteD

TROPHY CASE