Linguisticsy introduction to the Japanese language

I started teaching one of my linguistics major friends how to speak japanese on AIM tonight, so I figure I would post the conversation here.

(01:54:58 AM) evilestmark: learn japanese Lesson 1. A. I. i. Saying your Name!
(01:55:19 AM) evilestmark:
Kurisu des
chris to-be
(01:55:32 AM) Chris: ahhh’
(01:55:46 AM) Chris: watishi-wa kurisu des
(01:55:53 AM) Chris: step 1
(01:56:00 AM) evilestmark: grade: A+
(01:56:32 AM) evilestmark: next: Asking someone else what their name is
O-namae-wa nan-des-ka
(01:56:54 AM) evilestmark: honorable-name-topic what-to.be-question maerk
(01:57:08 AM) Chris: with rising intonation at end?
(01:57:13 AM) evilestmark: hai
(01:57:21 AM) Chris: kawaii!
(01:57:32 AM) evilestmark: inappropriate usage of kawaii
(01:57:42 AM) Chris: i can use kawaii whenever the hell i want
(01:57:46 AM) evilestmark: lol
(01:57:57 AM) Chris: ^__^
(01:58:17 AM) evilestmark: next step: copular sentence
(01:58:29 AM) evilestmark:
hon des
book to.be
(01:58:36 AM) evilestmark: It’s a book
(01:58:46 AM) Chris: neko des
(01:58:49 AM) Chris: it’s a cat
(01:58:55 AM) evilestmark: idea on how you can ask, “Is it a book?“
(02:00:22 AM) Chris: o-hon-wa nan des ka?
(02:00:59 AM) evilestmark: that would literally mean “What is your exalted book?”
(02:01:06 AM) evilestmark: just “hon deska?”
(02:01:11 AM) Chris: i mean, that’s what i meant
(02:01:26 AM) evilestmark:
(02:01:45 AM) evilestmark: also, theoretically “des” is really “desu”
(02:01:54 AM) evilestmark: but the final syllable get’s shortened to nothing most of the time
(02:02:39 AM) evilestmark: here’s a short word list of concrete objects in japanese
(02:04:42 AM) evilestmark:
hon – book,
isu – desk,
kyokasho – textbook
impitsu – pencil
pen – pen
neko – cat
inu – dog
sakana – fish
(02:06:34 AM) evilestmark: oh other good words
(02:07:02 AM) evilestmark:
denwa – phone
keitai – cellphone
teburu – table
kuruma – car
densha – train
(02:08:17 AM) evilestmark: second major grammatical lesson after copular sentences
(02:08:23 AM) evilestmark: existential remarks
(02:08:53 AM) evilestmark: whereas with the previous sentences it’s taken that you’re talking about an object you and your listener are both aware of and just specifying what it is
(02:09:00 AM) evilestmark: the following are actually statements of existance
(02:09:16 AM) evilestmark: for example
(02:09:49 AM) evilestmark:
hon-ga arimas(u)
book-sub exists
“There’s a book/There are books”
(02:10:11 AM) evilestmark:
impitsu-ga arimasu
pencil-sub exists
(02:10:16 AM) Chris: so there are no determiners in japanese?
(02:10:32 AM) evilestmark: kind of like korean, they’re not necessary most of the time
(02:10:36 AM) Chris: okay
(02:10:58 AM) Chris: but only necessary when saying “those” or “these” ?
(02:11:30 AM) evilestmark: so there’s a way of using demonstratives or deictic determiners in japanese as pre-nominals
(02:11:33 AM) evilestmark: it works like this
(02:12:03 AM) evilestmark:
kono-hon This book (by me)
sono-hon That book (by you)
ano-hon That book over there (not by either of us)
(02:12:17 AM) evilestmark: that works for any noun
(02:12:27 AM) evilestmark: you can describe any physical noun with those determiners as a noun-phrase
(02:12:38 AM) evilestmark: it will then act grammatically just like the noun itself
(02:13:11 AM) evilestmark: talking about abstracts is a bit trickier… because relative place isn’t implicit
(02:13:54 AM) evilestmark: so usually with abstracts it comes down to like… how close you feel to the noun you’re describing, whether you want to place it with yourself or the person you’re talking to
(02:14:16 AM) evilestmark: so
(02:14:24 AM) evilestmark: how would I say: “Are there any books?”
(02:16:37 AM) Chris: hmm
(02:16:39 AM) Chris: okay
(02:16:40 AM) Chris: so
(02:17:52 AM) Chris: hon-ga arimasu?
(02:18:05 AM) evilestmark: you can say that
(02:18:12 AM) evilestmark: but it’s better to say hon-ga arimasuka?
(02:18:25 AM) evilestmark: the ka can attach to any verb that ends in -masu
(02:18:31 AM) evilestmark: or -desu
(02:18:41 AM) Chris: hmm
(02:18:50 AM) Chris: and that means question mark?
(02:18:54 AM) evilestmark: yeppers
(02:19:07 AM) evilestmark: it’s not necessary in informal conversation, but those use different verbs
(02:19:37 AM) evilestmark: and typically you use a different post-positional verb marker to indicate that it’s a question
(02:19:46 AM) evilestmark: but i don’t like it.. because it sounds really demanding
(02:19:51 AM) Chris: hmm
(02:19:52 AM) evilestmark: ka is less demanding
(02:20:06 AM) Chris: what’s the more demanding one?
(02:20:26 AM) evilestmark: so… if i were going to ask you politely do you drink alcohol
(02:20:39 AM) evilestmark: i would say, “osake-wo nomimasuka?”
(02:21:00 AM) evilestmark: that’s “honorable-sake-object drink-?”
(02:21:06 AM) evilestmark: if i were asking my friend i would say
(02:21:17 AM) evilestmark: osake-wo nomuno?
(02:21:24 AM) evilestmark: and when i type wo it sounds like “o”

Gender Identification Phonetics Experiment

For my Phonetics and Phonology class’s mid-term grade I was assigned with a project to design an experiment using PRAAT software to test subjects with a multiple forced choice test. I decided to see what could be done with pitch, and explore an area of interest to me: gender identification. The attached file is a write-up of my results.

Because this project was somewhat informal and the number of subjects was fairly small (10 total) it’s hard to say if the results accurately describe a larger population. I also did not do any hard background research but instead only received background information from class and reference from professors here at William and Mary.

http://linguiquium.files.wordpress.com/2007/03/phonetics-experiment.doc

Etymology Assignment

For History of English we had to do an Etymology Assignment. It was kind of interesting so I thought I would post what I wrote. It’s kind of really long so I’m going to put it behind a break.

Names and Metaphor

My cultural anthropology professor mentioned something that I think is very interesting. He suggested that what separates humanity from the rest of life on earth is our perception and cognition of everything in a symbolic world. He illustrated this by telling the story of Hellen Keller, saying that once she realized that objects, people, characteristics, and actions all had names it was like a ray of light from above, an epiphany of everything at once.

I think this is brings up a very interesting line of questioning. It seems to me as though my professor is correct in saying that we think symbolically. I don’t picture every idea in my mind when considering it, but instead I think of the name that I associate that idea with. This follows with cognitive psychology’s ideas of associative networks. So that brings us to the value of names themselves and metaphors.

Names seem entirely arbitrary. It doesn’t matter what the name is once we’ve associated it with an Idea. There are some issues though. What happens when multiple things have the same name, or when there doesn’t seem to be an adequate name to describe something with, and an arbitrary one won’t drive the point home? As my History of English Language professor mentioned today, cultures don’t have names for things that they don’t need names for, but they can generate names for anything. A 2nd century Roman wouldn’t understand the words: spaceship, spacesuit, google, or googol, but we could describe these things to him using his own language so that he could associate these names with ideas. He also mentioned using loan words, after all, why make up a new word when someone else already has one?

At anyrate, my main point here concerns metaphor. Metaphor seems to me to be incredibly powerful. Without attributing a name to something and instead using an entire experience we can describe an idea often more powerfully than had we just used a name. The name is just a node index for our minds to search to pick out a single idea, or a category of ideas. But a metaphor is not limited to one idea or one category of ideas. In conversation with my friend Zan he quoted a line from Shakespeare’s King Henry IV, part 2:
“We have heard the chimes at midnight, Master Shallow.”

When Falstaff says this he means not only that they have literally heard the chimes at midnight, but also that they have experienced a large and encompassing amount of things and feelings. If Shakespeare had instead written,

“We have experienced a great many things, Master Shallow.”

it would be more clearly stating the underlying idea, but neglecting a feeling associated with that idea. By using metaphor we can associate emotion, experience, and additional imagery to an idea or set of ideas.

Perhaps metaphor is language’s most powerfully communicative aspect, or perhaps not. But I would say that our literature and tendancy to base what most consider great works around metaphor is a testament to its brilliance.

More things I want to talk about or Research

Conotation based on phonetics without actually looking at vocabulary… for instance across languages the same sounds have similar meanings?

Describing things using simile, metaphor, and regular adjectives and how it differs drastically depending upon the subject (He was as ugly as homemade soap, the Stars are sort of like The Postal Service meets Johann Sebastian Bach who has been drinking with the Rolling Stones, That fire hydrant is red, My life is a roller coaster). You get the point.

Names

It’s really amazing, this mp3 by John Hodgman and Jonathon Coulton exemplifies some interesting aspects of what I’ve been pondering with respect to linguistics and names. The names of 700 hoboes… Why not? They could be any kind of person’s names but William Fenimore Cooper (famous author) the Hobo just sounds more interesting.

I really would like to do a descriptive comparative analysis of naming conventions across time and cultures.

Abbrev.

Briefing myself quickly on the topic by browsing Wikipedia’s article I’m realizing I do not wish to go into to much detail, as much as merely muse.

I was working construction this evening with a part-time carpenter and a painter/artist/paint-salesman. We were putting up sheetrock for a ceiling. It seemed newly interesting to me the way the carpenter, John, used abbreviations. He simply labeled things like “C” for chimney, “CL” (with the L crossing through the C) for Center Line, “TL” for total length. These are clearly personal use, not intended for anyone else to see, interpret, or even understand. The idea made me think of something I realize time and time again working construction: human tool-use. There’s always an easier way to do something, but sometimes figuring out what that easier way is takes longer than doing it the hard way. Linguistic tools are becoming more and more interesting to me the more I see them used in practical day-to-day activity. Things like non-standard abbreviations are just tools, and it’s interesting somewhat that we use language not just for communicating ideas to others, but also to help with our own mental facilitation.

Just musing.

Things I’d Like to talk about

I’ve been really busy lately and pretty frustrated with some projects I’m working on, but as incentive for me to write I’m going to post some ideas I’ve had or things I’ve been thinking about.

Memes: phrases and words that are used almost like trends or fads, particularly seen in school and college environments either locally or globally used (ex: “sweet” “daves!” “tubular”) also how they change with time.

Naming Conventions: How different cultures appropriate names to various things whether they be people or places. For example, Japanese family names are often derived from the area where ancestors were from (Yamashita = under the mountain), whereas in Anglo-european instances surnames frequently derived from professions (Smith, Carpenter, Thatcher).

I’d also like to discuss the observance of the phonetics of a speaker’s native tongue based on the accents observed in second, third, and later languages.