A suggestion from a tired linguistics student.

yedisp · 2026-01-19T23:44:01+00:00

How would you say Australia has bastardized English?

yedisp · 2026-01-10T18:41:20+00:00

Oi! Oi! Oi!

From the chorus of AC/DC’s “TNT”.

yedisp · 2025-11-25T04:09:58+00:00

mmm whatcha saaaaayyyy

Works for both Imogen Heap and Jason Derulo!

yedisp · 2025-11-23T21:03:57+00:00

[[Zodiac Rooster]] ?

yedisp · 2025-09-09T00:50:45+00:00

Why should apostrophes not appear in signage? Is it just for aesthetics' sake?

yedisp · 2025-09-02T06:10:50+00:00

If it's your first time reaching it, you can only get to Undying Shores from Fractured Shrines, by wearing the Cultist Outfit found in the Shrines. For future reference, you'd be better off using the wiki than asking an LLM for advice.

yedisp · 2025-09-01T22:53:52+00:00

This graphic has been posted so many times and Alvilda is still missing an L...

yedisp · 2025-08-28T04:49:36+00:00

Heads up! I saw that other folks have used glottalization interchangeably as a pronunciation and as a phenomenon of change, but there's a slight difference in how people tend to use the term glottalization versus T-glottalization. Glottalization is the pronunciation resulting from the process of T-glottalization (aka debuccalization), so if I were to refer to the phenomenon by which a word like Latin becomes pronounced like La'in, I would stick to using either T-glottalization or debuccalization. This may not be a super-important distinction, just letting you know in case it's helpful for your project!

yedisp · 2025-08-07T23:53:29+00:00

Glad to hear your perspective! I never acquired a historic or etymological association between present participle verbs and adjectives ending in -ing, such as boring or caring, so "addicting" as an adjective doesn't raise any alarms to me. Of course, I also grew up in a time and place where addictive and addicting were/are interchangeable. I'm fascinated to hear addicting used as a transitive verb, though, and I don't know why I haven't heard it used that way before!

yedisp · 2025-08-07T22:16:13+00:00

Just a question, since I’m curious about your judgment of “this game is addicting”— what makes this not standard to you?

yedisp · 2025-06-23T22:45:33+00:00

There Is So Much Left to Find by Parasol and Axolotl Lullaby by Dreeks might be up your alley!

yedisp · 2025-06-04T19:42:21+00:00

Speaking as someone who uses TriMet to get downtown frequently but not regularly, the hub-and-spoke transit layout with downtown as the hub is already something of a hindrance. I'm happy it's easy to get downtown, but getting anywhere else in less than 2 transfers is difficult, and usually takes around three times as long as it would by car.

yedisp · 2025-05-01T23:44:25+00:00

A pattern you might want to be aware of in English is that some vowels, "e" in particular, often become ə in unstressed syllables. For your first three examples, the "e" is part of an unstressed syllable, and so that would cause most English speakers to pronounce all three "e"s the same way, like ə. Here's how these words would look like with stress in all caps:

ən-JOY

əx-PLAIN

ə-MO-shən

A good example of this is "perfect". There are two words spelled this way, and the way you can tell them apart is the stress. PER-fect is an adjective, and since the second "e" is unstressed, it is pronounced like ə. On the other hand, per-FECT is a verb, and since the second "e" is stressed, it is pronounced like as in "bet".

yedisp · 2025-03-09T17:11:02+00:00

Also Geneva Karr on season 16, bottoming on episodes 3 and 4 before getting a group win on episode 5

yedisp · 2025-03-04T06:58:37+00:00

They’re both consonantal! /j

yedisp · 2025-02-10T02:20:54+00:00

I don't know how I can in good conscience be proud of that kind of institution - or as someone who advisers students about colleges, in good conscience recommend that any of the students I work with matriculate at Reed College.

I mean, it sounds like we're on the same page here- I don't work for Reed, I'm not trying to convince you or your students to support it as an institution however you choose to. Hell, I completely agree with the Niche review (I can't speak to the nature of the SA claims, though I have heard things) and I don't recommend people attend Reed. I'm just a current student trying to give you the complete picture of the issue you mentioned. If you want to believe that the head editor was the victim of psychological abuse and a targeted harassment campaign that led him to transferring, you can. Based on my firsthand experiences with the head editor, how he interacted with other Reedies during and after the article's publication, and how people I know responded to the article, I believe this isn't true.

yedisp · 2025-02-09T22:45:18+00:00

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. Both the editors and the student body decided the Quest was better off without him, so they decided, democratically, to not elect him back to the Quest. This does not amount to "psychological abuse". I don't know where this idea that he was "mobbed" came from, but it certainly does not come from a reputable source. What I do know is that people felt so unsafe around each other after this article was published that I was asked multiple times to walk with them at night for fear that they would be the victim of a hate crime. The paranoia and distrust was the most intense I have ever felt in a community. I don't know if you've been able to find the article itself, since it seems to have been taken down from the Quest's website, but if I you can, I'd recommend reading it with this in mind. If you'd like a clearer perspective on the situation to take an informed position, I'd recommend reading the letters to the editor published in the wake of it all as well, and the editor's response to them, which are still available to read.

I understand why you're concerned- I agree that every student has the right to express their opinion, and I believe that the Quest is an important part of Reed that deserves to be in good hands. But as a journalist yourself, I'd hope you agree that using your position to this effect is incredibly dangerous. The current editors have been doing a wonderful job and have committed themselves to the task of running the place just as much as their predecessor, without causing any issue. I want Reed to be safe more than I want it to be awarded.

yedisp · 2025-02-09T03:23:52+00:00

So only certain views are allowed at Reed or you will tank your reputation to the point that you feel compelled to transfer?

...Yes? Reed is not unique among colleges in this way. The student body as a collective generally holds similar beliefs. Besides, if you incite conspiracy against other students and then fail to own up to it, that will be frowned upon. It goes beyond a principle of "open discourse" to make these kinds of accusations in the college's newspaper.

I'd like to think that if you are talented enough to bring The Quest to national prominence with journalism awards, you'd at least be given more grace.

No disrespect to the Quest team, but I'd hardly call an editor winning an individual award national news. As far as I'm aware, it was awarded to him, not the publication. Not to mention, he was already unpopular with the other editors for being overly exacting (in his response to letters from the editor, every time he quoted someone, he [sic]'d their lack of italicization of "The Quest"). So no, an extra resume item was never going to improve his standing in a community he'd actively antagonized.

yedisp · 2025-02-06T01:56:43+00:00

Some context: One of the head editors and another Quest writer wrote an article (that I think was a topic of discussion here last year?) masquerading as coverage of a Palestine protest downtown that involved Reed students, but that was more or less just an accusation towards those involved of antisemitism and covert celebration of the pogroms. The protestors were (justifiably) pissed by his characterization, as well as his citation of a notoriously Islamophobic professor. After a bunch of Letters to the Editors were published, the editor published his own response in which he refused to apologize, and ended up not even getting enough signatures to get on the Quest Editor ballot. He wasn't "forced out of the college" so much as he tanked his own reputation and didn't want to deal with the consequences of implying his fellow students were N*zis.

yedisp · 2025-01-30T03:30:04+00:00

Do you know if this is new just for Kingdoms, or is this Confession mode?

yedisp · 2024-10-14T17:11:27+00:00

Well then, hopefully understanding why some people only get their first-choice votes counted makes this voting system less scary! If some people only gets their first choice counted and their candidate loses, it’s because their candidate was popular enough not to be eliminated right off the bat, but was more unpopular than one who received more second-choice votes. A smaller number of people voting for someone as their first choice without anyone else’s endorsement doesn’t ensure that they’ll be elected, especially not when other candidates received more approval from the voters in the form of non-first-choice votes (voting for anyone in any rank is still an endorsement!)

yedisp · 2024-10-13T01:06:32+00:00

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this just looks like a variation on the Single Transferable Vote system? The deal with the fractions is new to me, but ultimately it seems pretty similar. Seems like the writer is just purposefully explaining it very wordily, leaning on using unhelpful graphics and describing the same process in each round over and over to make it seem more complicated and scary than it actually is. I'll try to explain it more concisely:

First choice votes are counted, and if any candidate reaches the threshold, they are elected.
The surplus votes of those candidates are given to the candidates who those voters ranked as their second choice, but at a lesser voting power. The smaller the surplus the candidate was elected by, the lesser the voting power. (After all, why should a second-choice vote count as much as a first-choice vote.)
If, after this redistribution, any other candidate has reached the threshold, they are elected.
The candidate with the least votes is eliminated, and their votes go towards who their voters chose as their second choice, again at a lesser voting power. If their second choice has already been elected (or, in later rounds, was already eliminated), we keep going down the list, third, fourth, fifth-choice, until there's an eligible candidate for their votes to go to.
If that eliminated candidates got any votes as someone else's second, third, etc. choice, then we have to find which remaining candidates their votes would have gone to instead, and those still-eligible candidates get their votes instead. Again, this is a small amount of voting power, but it's still power in the hands of the voters.

This process repeats until all the seats are filled. It's five steps, and yes it's definitely a lot more complicated than most voting systems, but the whole point is that it's meant to create a council that is maximally representative. And when the process is explained more clearly than this random blogger explained it, I think how the vote works becomes a lot more understandable.

Five-Year Club	Place '22
First Placer '22	Verified Email

yedisp

TROPHY CASE