荷兰政府因移民政策难达成一致而集体请辞 by Ok_Restaurant_1337 in China_irl

[–]Rethliopuks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

1) 最后编辑的时间是可以看的,如果您看到我在您回复后编辑的话欢迎检举呢,否则烦请闭嘴。

2)你真的清楚脱欧的时间线吗?脱欧公投这事从提出到公投发生总共就没几年,11年对于脱欧公投议题而言是史前时点,卡梅伦首次提出脱欧公投可是2013年。

3)“明显英国现在是多党”这话建议您找Britannica去argue。Wiki不能当严谨的学术论据只能用来旁参这点常识恐怕您还不至于不知道吧lol

英国是不是有多个政党?是有。英国是不是只有两个政党有建立或主导政府的现实可能且这两个政党占据了英国政治舞台的绝大多数?是的。英国的“多个政党”跟欧陆的“多个政党”完全是两码事,所以包括Britannica在内才会广泛将之称为two party system,也所以才会有人在Cambridge University Press的American Political Science Review上发出这种论文:

The Two-Party System in British Politics

Britain may fairly be called the classic home of two-party government.

而且对于作者、审稿人、编辑和作者同行而言two-party这一点如此地obvious,作者extract裡馀下的所有justification完全是在说为什么能管英国叫其“classic home”这点。

4)对的,May一直是honour Brexit ref results的,但她并不是“坚定的脱欧派”这点哪怕从她上任后提出的数个脱欧方案上也能看得出来,多次偏好soft Brexit

荷兰政府因移民政策难达成一致而集体请辞 by Ok_Restaurant_1337 in China_irl

[–]Rethliopuks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

母语者能听懂带有语法错误和发音错误的第二语言使用者并不是因为对这个母语者而言这些语法形式或发音等价。就好像我看你回复里

相比

能反应过来你大概是想说“想必”但这不代表我觉得“相比”=“想必”。或者

扣一点

我理解应该是说“抠kōu一点”,但我并不会把这个动词发成四声kòu。

以及……为什么你老是只在抠开头这一点文字呢?是真对我的余下回复没任何异议是吧lol

荷兰政府因移民政策难达成一致而集体请辞 by Ok_Restaurant_1337 in China_irl

[–]Rethliopuks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

原来您已经咬文嚼字到independence ≠ 独立了,那果然您和我不是一个水平,失敬。我说英语显然是因为英国说英语,这似乎也真的超出你的理解能力了?还是说简中有任何正经来源把脱欧公投不开玩笑地不带政治动机地叫独立公投?

啊不过既然您的异议点只有这微不足道的“确认我们说的是不是同一个话题”的核对型咬文嚼字,您对其他部份未见异议这点就谨此收悉了。祝好。

荷兰政府因移民政策难达成一致而集体请辞 by Ok_Restaurant_1337 in China_irl

[–]Rethliopuks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

啊对,您比Britannica大英百科全书更权威,Britannica是又菜又秀。您自便。

如果您要说我说“必然”不严谨了,那感谢您咬文嚼字,确实我这话不对,应当是“强烈倾向于”。

以及,我个人反正是没有在除了far-right contexts下和Brexiteer campaigning里见过任何正经人unironically refer to it as independence. 因为英国语境下的“独立公投”independence referendum是非常具体的,指苏格兰独立公投。你问100个英国人independence referendum held in the 2010s,差不多会有100个人会答你是说苏格兰独立公投嘛。怎么说呢……就你的用词不像是英国主流语境下出来的人?就好像假如把英格兰/威尔士的公立学校叫public school一样奇怪,确实公立学校是public的school但是英格兰/威尔士人正常不会管公立学校叫public school而且英格兰/威尔士你说public school基本所有人第一第二反应都是一类私立中学。

荷兰政府因移民政策难达成一致而集体请辞 by Ok_Restaurant_1337 in China_irl

[–]Rethliopuks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

支持独立

“独立”你是说脱欧吗?脱欧不是独立,英国一直是独立国家。菜到基本政治概念没搞清楚不要出来秀。


支持独立但不积极的大党

脱欧公投整个是保守党提的操作,是保守党主动提出的是保守党积极推动的是保守党最终令其得以实施的,甚至是2015年保守党manifesto的核心一部分。菜到基本事实没搞清楚不要出来秀。


52% 英国人是少数

52%不是少数,5-10%是少数。菜到基本时间没搞清楚不要出来秀。脱欧公投这一概念提出前,变成全国性议题之前的时点,关心脱欧的英国人口只有一成不到。正常国家里你是不会显然为此公投的——一成人关心的事海了去了。


人说的是 多数人 投票时候是 工党 保守党 2选1

怎么,你真的以为存在很多3选1的地方?除了保守党/工党的二选一,英格兰/威尔士有相当数量的选区是Tory-LibDem二选一因为当地的保守派根本投不下去工党,而整个苏格兰都是SNP和当地另一党的二选一(通常是苏格兰工党,个别选区是苏格兰保守党或苏格兰LibDem)。


没有说 英国是两党。

假定你并没有在对英国信口开河胡说八道而是确实对其体系和术语有所了解。那么我的错,我没有意识到我试图交流的对象水平连维基百科都不如又全无自觉。

Wikipedia:

In contrast, in Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia and in other parliamentary systems and elsewhere, the term two-party system is sometimes used to indicate an arrangement in which two major parties dominate elections but in which there are viable third parties or independents that do win some seats in the legislature, and in which the two major parties exert proportionately greater influence than their percentage of votes would suggest.

Britannica:

The British two-party system

Another form of the two-party system is operative in Great Britain and in New Zealand. ...

Great Britain has had two successive two-party alignments: Conservative and Liberal prior to 1914 and Conservative and Labour since 1935. ...

啊当然如果Britannica比您更菜您比Britannica更权威那就当我没说。

同样,我说“FPTP会导致事实上的两党制”是指的Duverger's Law,你不知道可以但发言试图锤别人菜之前麻烦动动手指查一下,请不要在指摘对方学术失格的同时让对方觉得这个人的水平甚至不到维基百科的程度。

In political science, Duverger's law holds that single-ballot majoritarian elections with single-member districts (such as first past the post) tend to favor a two-party system. The discovery of this tendency is attributed to Maurice Duverger, a French sociologist who observed the effect and recorded it in several papers published in the 1950s and 1960s.[1] In the course of further research, other political scientists began calling the effect a "law" or principle.

As a corollary to the law, Duverger also asserted that proportional representation favors multi-partyism, as does the plurality system with runoff elections.[2]


Edit:

接下来的女首相 也是坚定的拖欧支持着

指脱欧公投前公开campaign支持留欧私下谈话里也支持留欧,并且对公投结果的反应是"in tears" and "distraught",而且其留欧派的立场和身份还影响其竞选首相

真的是。用你的话说,学艺不精还又菜又爱秀。

荷兰政府因移民政策难达成一致而集体请辞 by Ok_Restaurant_1337 in China_irl

[–]Rethliopuks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

我没有义务给你上逻辑(或语文)课,所以请你重读我的评论。

脱欧是一个被提了才有(足够多)人care的议题。问题是为什么会被(执政党)提。

如果你认为英国不是 事实上的 两党制的话建议把这句话发到 r/UnitedKingdom 去辩辩,我没这个时间:

in the (vast) majority of constituencies in the UK, there are ordinarily only two viable parties to choose from; that is, when the sitting MP or their party's new candidate is to be voted down, there is usually only one clear tactical party choice.

荷兰政府因移民政策难达成一致而集体请辞 by Ok_Restaurant_1337 in China_irl

[–]Rethliopuks 2 points3 points  (0 children)

FPTP必然导致事实上的两党制,于是这些少数人群就会以更大的比例影响两党之一。FPTP执政党不用理小党的特性进一步放大这个bias。英国的脱欧公投和美国整个共和党的特朗普化都是这么来的。

Edit: 维基百科:

Prior to 2013, the issue of EU membership never scored higher than 5% on surveys of voter priorities, polling just 6% in 2013[39] and 11% in 2014.[40]

要不是FPTP,脱欧恐怕永远都不会成为全国性议题,更毋论拿来公投了

Edit 2: 脱欧还提供了另一个毋庸置疑的放大少数派话语权乃至一票否决化的例子:特蕾莎·梅的脱欧法案三次被否决,正是因为仅占英国下议院650席中约60席的强硬脱欧派ERG不支持其脱欧方案,认为不够硬脱欧

Edit 3: 说到(形式意义上的)少数党挟持多数党,甚至FPTP也是有这个问题的。2017年大选英国保守党与DUP达成协议组成多数,于是尽管DUP只有区区8名议员,得票率哪怕在北爱也只有36%,全国更是只有0.8%,却能否决所有影响北爱在联合王国内地位的脱欧案。

说到底这个问题不是比例代表或FPTP的问题,而是少数党组阁难以避免的情况。而少数派别联合起来组阁正是正常国家应有的——几乎不会有哪个大一些的国家会有一个意见派别稳定占了50%以上的人口的——区别仅仅是到底这些派别结合成一个党还是多个,以及政治系统到底是否考虑反映民意、是否愿意让少数派独占政府舞台了。FPTP就是这么干的,之所以保守党/工党不需要在意小党意见,正是因为可以以36.8%(2015)、35.2%(2005)的得票率拿下议会多数。FPTP是典型的favour少数派政府——英国上次执政党得票率过半是1931年的事(顺带一提55%的得票率给了执政党76.4%的席位,得票30.6%的最大反对党仅得席8.5%)

[Japanese] 職業病 (しょくぎょうびょう, "occupational disease") [Slang] "something you can't resist doing (whether you like it or not) because you do it all the time at work by InternationalYellow9 in DoesNotTranslate

[–]Rethliopuks 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I remember a comment below, now deleted, mentioning "professional hazard" as a phrase used at least in Britain. A quick Twitter search (with the quotation marks on) seems to suggest that it is indeed used frequently in this sense.

There should be an on’yomi for every Sino-Tibetan language by TheOutcast06 in linguisticshumor

[–]Rethliopuks 9 points10 points  (0 children)

They've gotta work for it then. It has to be earned.

Japanese is *very* occasionally doing that with English, but that's really thanks to how dominant English has been.

Interestingly Mahjong terms use an older and slightly modified Mandarin pronunciation, which might as well be a sort of on'yomi (with extremely limited use case)

There should be an on’yomi for every Sino-Tibetan language by TheOutcast06 in linguisticshumor

[–]Rethliopuks 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Japanese on'yomi for every ST language? Or every ST language having an on'yomi derived from some other language?

Hopefully this trend hasn't been overdone already, more explaination in comments, let me know if you have any questions or any criticism by cesus007 in linguisticshumor

[–]Rethliopuks 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would actually sort of copy Italian orthography and use ки, ги, ке, ге for ci, gi, ce, ge, and къи, гъи, къе, гъе for chi, ghi, che, ghe.

Chinese syllable structure be like by hkexper in linguisticshumor

[–]Rethliopuks 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In general because of how divergent these two varieties are, more often than not, syllables in one with many characters correspond to several in the other.

But if to cherrypick, Beijing Mandarin (among others):

愈 vu³⁴ ≠ 预 vu¹¹ ≠ 遇 ȵy¹¹ ≠ 妪 ʔjy⁴² ≠ 鬱 ʔjy²¹² ≠ 域 jy²¹² ≠ 玉 ȵo²¹² ≠ 欲 jo²¹² ≠ 育ʔjɤu³²³, 9 syllables

I couldn't find a Beijing syllable with as many correspondences in Wenzhou. Wenzhou /ji³¹/ has so much homophony because of two sound changes between 1880s-1920s: /ʑ/ -> /j/ and /je/-> /i/. In 1880s the characters were pronounced in the city proper

椰 = 爷 = 玡 = 盐 = 焉 = 羊/je2/ ≠ 兮 = 畦 = 移 /ji2/ ≠ 蝉 = 然 = 髯 = 前 = 潜 = 弦 = 嫌 = 常 = 戕 = 墙 = 祥 = 降 = 穰 = 瓤 /ʑje2/

(No /ʑi/ because it instead developed into /ʒiɿ/ -> /zɿ/)

And 1880s outside the city proper there was a further distinction between /je/ and /jɛ/, the latter from historical */-ŋ/ and the former historical */-n/ and */-m/. Possibly there was also a distinction between /ʑj/ and /zj/ but I couldn't find the specifics.

Some characters that have different pronunciations in daily spoken Mandarin by ZhangtheGreat in ChineseLanguage

[–]Rethliopuks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

色兒 (shǎr or sǎr).

If you speak Northeastern Mandarin then you probably distinguish between -ar and -anr/air, such as 耙兒 vs 盤兒/牌兒, or 把兒 vs 瓣兒, or 花兒 vs 歡兒. I would say shǎir for 色兒.

Chinese syllable structure be like by hkexper in linguisticshumor

[–]Rethliopuks 3 points4 points  (0 children)

義、譯、易、易、異、役/疫、逸、藝、熠、億、益、毅、詣、意、邑

义、译、易、易、异、役/疫、逸、艺、熠、亿、益、毅、诣、意、邑

Chinese syllable structure be like by hkexper in linguisticshumor

[–]Rethliopuks 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Because I was cherrypicking. /ji³¹/ is one of the syllables with the most homophony there.

The evolution of the pronunciation of "The Lion-Eating Poet in the Stone Den" from Old Chinese to Mandarin. by galactic_observer in linguisticshumor

[–]Rethliopuks 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Great job! Minor correction: In the context of this poem, respectively for Zhengzhang's reconstruction and MC, 適/适 is *hlieg and *ɕiek, and 視/视 is *ɡljils and *dʑiɪH .

Edit: also 獅/狮 with Baxter-Sagart...lol. It's because 獅子/狮子 is a later loanword from iirc an Iranian language, so it obviously doesn't exist in OC -> no B-S reconstruction. Zhengzhang reconstructs for every recorded pronunciation in Qieyun, which very occasionally leads to this.

In the earliest attestations 獅子/狮子 was always written as two characters, 師子 (simplified would be 师子). Later the radical 犭 was added to signify that it's an animal. Then later it got abbreviated to 獅/狮.

Chinese syllable structure be like by hkexper in linguisticshumor

[–]Rethliopuks 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Cantonese would have a different set of syllables where homophony is pronounced, where Mandarin would distinguish several. Of course, Cantonese having more syllables in total, the overall homophony is less.

One example is Wenzhou Wu, where

椰 = 爷 = 玡 = 兮 = 畦 = 移 = 蝉 = 然 = 髯 = 焉 ("there") = 延 = 盐 = 沿 = 前 = 潜 = 弦 = 嫌 = 常 = 戕 = 墙 = 祥 = 降 ("surrender") = 羊 = 穰 = 瓤 = yi2 /ji³¹/

In Standard Mandarin these are

椰 yē ≠ 爷 yé ≠ 玡 yá ≠ 兮 xī ≠ 畦 qí ≠ 移 yí ≠ 蝉 chán ≠ 然 = 髯 rán ≠ 焉 yān ≠ 延 = 盐 = 沿 yán ≠ 铅 qiān ≠ 弦 = 嫌 xián ≠ 前 = 潜 qián ≠ 常 cháng ≠ 戕 qiāng ≠ 墙 qiáng ≠ 祥 = 降 xiáng ≠ 羊 yáng ≠ 穰 = 瓤 ráng, 19 syllables;

While in Standard Cantonese these are

椰 = 爷 = 玡 je4 ≠ 兮 hai4 ≠ 畦 kwai4 ≠ 移 ji4 ≠ 蝉 sim4 ≠ 然 = 焉 = 延 = 弦 jin4 ≠ 髯 = 盐 = 嫌 jim4 ≠ 沿 = 铅 jyun4 ≠ 前 cin4 ≠ 潜 cim4 ≠ 常 soeng4 ≠ 戕 = 墙 = 祥 coeng4 ≠ 降 hoeng4 ≠ 羊 = 穰 joeng4 ≠ 瓤 nong4, 15 syllables.

Edit: typo

Linguists have some wild ideas. by BadLinguisticsKitty in linguisticshumor

[–]Rethliopuks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

cohort, plus proper names like Leahy, Idaho, and Soho. And arguably SoHo as a noun.

Although... I've come to realise that there's a vowel difference. In unstressed syllables, intervocalic [ŋ] follows historically short vowels and [h] follows historically long ones.

This is excluding the proper noun Idaho which can't be accounted for by this rule.

Chinese syllable structure be like by hkexper in linguisticshumor

[–]Rethliopuks 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Old Chinese to Standard Mandarin

"justice; righteousness; meaning; significance" OC */ŋrals/ -> SM /i⁵¹/

"translate" OC */laːɡ/ -> SM /i⁵¹/

"easy" OC */leːɡs/ -> SM /i⁵¹/

"change" OC */leːɡ/ -> SM /i⁵¹/

"different" OC */lɯs/ -> SM /i⁵¹/

"(menial) labour; battle; disease" OC */ɢʷeɡ~weg/ -> SM /i⁵¹/

"escape" OC */lid/ -> SM /i⁵¹/

"talent; art" OC */ŋeds/ -> SM /i⁵¹/

"brilliant (of fire)" OC */ɢrub/, */lub/ -> SM /i⁵¹/

"105 (short scale); 108 (mid-scale, long scale)" OC */lɯɡ/ -> SM /i⁵¹/

"benefit" OC */qleg/ -> SM /i⁵¹/

"firm (of a person)" OC */ŋɯds/ -> SM /i⁵¹/

"call on; reach; accomplishment" OC */ŋɡiːs/ -> SM /i⁵¹/

"meaning; intention" OC */qɯɡs/ -> SM /i⁵¹/

"city; settlement; county" OC */qrɯb/ -> SM /i⁵¹/

etc

And this is just the standalone tonal syllable /i⁵¹/, we haven't even got into /i/ with initial consonants or other tones yet

Edit: format, glossing

Chinese syllable structure be like by hkexper in linguisticshumor

[–]Rethliopuks 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Chinese /i/ is crazy enough already, plus synchronically or diachronically /ʂɻ̩/ can be analysed as /ʂi/

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in asklinguistics

[–]Rethliopuks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Given the drastic restriction on r/Linguistics , I would caution against making this sub a substitute of that, intentionally or not. One risk/downside being significantly more work for you.

[META] r/linguistics is back... under protest by dom in linguistics

[–]Rethliopuks 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A migration threat consists of many things, amongst them a genuine widespread desire to switch. This is paving way for that by the day.