This is not nottheonion. See the pinned post at the top of the community for why.

This is just news. See the pinned post at the top of the community for why this isn’t nottheonion.

This is just political news, which is not nottheonion according to the pinned post at the top of this community.

This government? Not at all. They’ve even done this once already with the new elecric mail trucks. Unfortunately this is just another Wednesday in the Trump administration.

Refer to the pinned post in this community to see that the mods agree - these sorts of posts are not nottheonion.

Wrong community - this is just news.

This is why I think Tomorrow Never Dies is one of the most underrated films in the franchise.

Wrong community.

I was a linguistics professor for almost a decade, and many of my comments here on Lemmy provide in-depth explanations from an informed theoretical linguistic perspective. See here and here, for example.

In my opinion, the phonetic (acoustic) resemblances are superficial, and nowhere in their paper do they identify the sorts of systematic patterns of alternations that constitute the phonology of human languages. It’s not just about seeing patterns in the sounds of the whales - it’s about showing that these patterns are specifically organized in a similar way to human phonologies, and that they also distinguish meaning in the same structured ways that human phonologies do.

But beyond just phonetics and phonology, and more importantly, the researchers haven’t provided any evidence that whale communication in any way resembles the systems of communication that we call “language”. Human language is characterized by specific features that aren’t found anywhere else in the animal kingdom in the same combination. To an extent the selection of these features is arbitrary, but the sum total of them makes a compelling argument for a categorical distinction between what we call human language and animal communication.

It’s possible, of course, that whale communication does in fact include all of these features, but the articles in question are a far cry from demonstrating it, and so using the word “language” is at best premature and at worst disingenuous.

This just seems like one of those sensationalist pop articles that come out every few years, driven largely by researchers without a significant background in theoretical linguistics, that do more to confuse people about the nature of language than to educate them.

(And, for some reason, like 70% of them are related to whales. The two most common responses I get to telling people I’m a linguist are: 1) How many languages do you speak? and 2) You know, I read this article recently on how whale language is really just like human language. I have yet to understand the obsession with whales.)

Whales having similar vocalizations (I think using the terms “phonetics” and especially “phonology” are quite a stretch) to humans is a far cry from saying that whale communication is at all similar to human language.

What a crazy misleading headline (as usual).

The actual story from the article is that farmers are having to turn to visas to get enough workers, which is expensive for them. That’s all.

Lol, the irony of this being so highly upvoted on Lemmy, of all places.

I know. We’ve had this conversation before.

Willy Wonka?

That’s the only one where the pronunciation actually is thorn. The rest are eth (ð).

How will this fuck over their competition? Like, what’s the actual argument there?

Note that they will still be able to sell them though. The products are allowed - they just won’t be allowed to mislead consumers anymore. I really don’t understand why y’all are getting so up in arms about this.

And which food companies are those I wonder. Probably the ones with a business interest in keeping consumers confused.

Ok, you’ve made it completely clear by this point that you know practically nothing about dialectology and refuse to be educated (much less respond to the points I made in my comment), so I think I’m gonna just leave the conversation here.

And my point is that most Americans know of hockey just like most Canadians do

Unfortunately for you, two groups of people having knowledge about the same thing does not mean that they use the same words to refer to that knowledge (see “aluminum” vs. “aluminium”, or maybe more appropriately, “soccer” vs. “football”). Americans and Canadians both knowing about ice hockey does not mean that they use the same words to refer to the sport, and to assume otherwise is uninformed and wrong. Like, this is Ling 101 levels of basic.

I expect most Americans also refer to ice hockey as hockey, and field hockey as field hockey.

Ah the hubris that comes with unquestioned assumptions based on your own dialect.

My wife cracked up the first time I asked her if she wanted me to “carry her to the store” (meaning “drive her”), which genuinely shocked me, because I had had zero reason up until that moment to think that idiom was unique to my own dialect area, especially when we’re from roughly the same region.

The point is, you’re very clearly, demonstrably wrong about this. Based on a poll of just the four people in my household, three of them would say “ice hockey” while the other says that they would probably just say “hockey”.

One can also reference how the promoters of the leagues refer to themselves.

One can also realize that not everyone speaks like people paid to have a career in a specific sport. Maybe asking people with literally the most possible bias for one over the other isn’t the best way to go about capturing linguistic diversity.

that likely doesn’t apply to someone who grew up in New York City

Based on what? Your ass? Because New Yorkers famously sound just like Canadians and don’t at all have a very famous, particular way of talking…

We already have an excellent data point that this may not in fact be true. That data point? The fact that Trump, who is a New Yorker, educated in New York, as you pointed out, said “ice hockey” in fluent speech instead of saying “hockey”.

So how they refer to hockey in some region of America that hasn’t touched ice that wasn’t floating in a drink isn’t really relevant to this discussion.

Demonstrating that there clearly exist Americans who say “ice hockey” instead of “hockey” is an excellent data point when discussing whether this is a dialect difference between some American and Canadian speakers.

All of your assertions come, like I said, straight from your ass, and are therefore much less relevant to the discussion.

And, of course, the main point, once again, because I think it’s important:

WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU CRITICIZING TRUMP FOR SAYING “ICE HOCKEY” INSTEAD OF, Y’KNOW, CRITICIZING HIM FOR THE HORRIBLE SHIT HE’S DOING TO CANADA??

The point wasn’t that field hockey is a major league sport (though it is a popular recreational sport - my high school had a field hockey team but not an ice hockey team, for example).

The point is that this is a clear dialectal difference between some speakers of American and Canadian English, and so criticizing Trump for this, of all the things you should be criticizing him for, is stupid (and ignorant)!