@ArjinFerman's banner p

ArjinFerman

Tinfoil Gigachad

2 followers   follows 4 users  
joined 2022 September 05 16:31:45 UTC
Verified Email

				

User ID: 626

ArjinFerman

Tinfoil Gigachad

2 followers   follows 4 users   joined 2022 September 05 16:31:45 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 626

Verified Email

"Tend to", sure, but my experience of the middle class (I only had very rare and short brushes with the upper strata) is that they rarely can actually use a third language. They certainly study them, but push comes to shove, they wouldn't even be able to ask for directions.

Let's not get into the details of where I'm at, but yeah, I spent some time there too. Sure, I agree this probably varies by country, and I haven't seen the entirety of Europe yet.

I just disagree on the facts. I'd cut your numbers by half. That might be above your threshold, but not by much.

I don't get it. Even though I'm in the same situation as you - my friends tend to know 2 foreign languages - that's still "almost no one".

When I say "as a child", I mean in the critical period. I don't mean as a twelve year old.

I started picking it up when I was 5, or something. Then, when I was 7, Cartoon Network made a sudden appearance on the TV, and the people who were rebroadcasting it didn't have the resources to translate it, so my English really picked up at the time. All the vidya I was playing since I was old enough to hold a controller was also untranslated. It helped a bit with reading.

It's simply a fact that language rules are an emergent phenomenon determined by the, let's say, ummah made up of speakers of each language or dialect

Yeah, every category is. Transcription errors exist even on a biomolecular level, and we can tell they're errors because we can trace what they're meant to be transcribing.

Sometimes, it's harmless enough. Sometimes it's even adaptive, and you get evolution, but the descriptivist approach is akin to saying "cancer is, like, just another way of being, man".

Perhaps this is a class thing? Me and most of my friends can at least make our way in countries speaking our third language and understand media in it.

Yeah, me too, but all my friends are IT guys that moved to another country, so that lines up perfectly with what he said. Either way, it being a class thing throws a wrench into the "generally expected to" idea.

A native speaker is one who learned a language as a child

That's way too loose of a definition. I learned English as a child, and while I consider myself fluent, I'm definitely not a native speaker.

People have been able to tell if kids are speaking grammatically since long before there were grammar books, so the relevance is not clear to me.

My point is just that the kind of deconstruction games that are used to argue against prescriptivism can be used to argue against descriptivism as well. I think each of those frameworks has a grain of truth to it, trying to make sense of the world with just one of them will lead to absurd results.

French immersion students know all the different words for binders, folders, duotangs, etc, but that isn't very useful on les rues.

Is this just kindergarden / early elementary level? Otherwise I'd expect them to pick up some vocabulary related to math, science, history, art... the stuff they're supposed to be learning while at school. Reading classical literature and writing essays about it in French should help too.

Therefore you can’t get “immersion” from reading if you’re reading at home

Eh... I feel like this is way too strict. Arguably this would make immersion impossible these days, because the gateway to your native language is right there in your pocket, whether you live in a foreign country or not.

What do you guys mean by immersion?

Learning by interacting with the natives, in any form. It can be talking to them, it can be reading books, or consuming their media. The more you do it, the more "immersed" you are.

One thing I'd add here is that while I understand the US focus in this discussion, a quick glance north of the border, or across the Atlantic, will show that we already have regimes that will directly penalize political speech, without relying on proxies like guns, or fig leafs like "hostile work environment".

Even if everyone originally involved in this conversation is from the US, I think "I'm worried the US will become like Europe" is inherently less sneerworthy than worrying the US will implement restrictions that are seen as beyond the pale in the West in general.

What even is a native speaker? Children have to learn their language too.

So? You can do immersion with reading the same way you do it with listening.

No. You might say they are expected to learn English, and even then the variance you'll see in the population is going to be pretty big. They definitely aren't expected to learn a third language, and in the case where they studied one, they're usually unable to actually use it.

In that case we can also say beginner-level students don't make mistakes, they just speak in beginner dialect.

Ok, I see this wasn't fun for you so:

  • I'm sorry
  • I'll stop.

But I assure you there was both, even if it didn't come through.

Calm down, it was a joke.

instead of asking @ArjinFerman, who's a bad-faith anklebiter trying to gotcha me with less skill than you. (For example, above he's quoting that one line to imply that essentially nothing realistic will convince me. Maybe it's not obvious to you, but I tend to be rather literal. When I say "literally Orwellian," I mean literally Orwellian.)

This you?

Poetic simile was strictly limited to statements like 'his mighty steed was as fleet as the wind on a fairly calm day, say about Force Three,' and any loose talk about a beloved having a face that launched a thousand ships would have to be backed by evidence that the object of desire did indeed look like a bottle of champagne.?

At best, you could say she had reason to believe he might not be the father.

Isn't that enough? If she told him - no fraud, if she didn't tell him and it turns out to not be his kid - fraud.

Prosecuting for intentional paternity fraud is a different proposition than prosecuting for being unfaithful and lying about it.

Is a Ponzi scheme not fraud, because you don't know for a fact you might not be able to recruit the next sucker?

It's not trivially easy to prove intentional "paternity fraud"

Doesn't the woman name the father for the birth certificate?

(which if you really want to prosecute or bring civil cases for, would have to be defined more narrowly than "She cheated on me").

"She cheated on me, never told me, and named me the father on an official document" sounds sufficiently narrow to me.

What could possibly change your mind, before it was too late?

Here's something to help you set your expectations:

Yes, if you want to claim things are literally Orwellian, then I do think you need to show me a literal Ministry of Truth.

Does carrying a mate, who's had a few too many, count as not leaving behind a fallen comrade?

Well, like I said last week, collision detection was easy, I also figured out how to switch animations to a death sequence once a bug gets hit, though it's a bit janky. I wanted to link a screen grab, but it's a bit hard to set up in a way that clearly shows what I wanted to show, but basically it's looping instead of stopping on the "dead" frame, and since it has less frames than the walking animation, there are a few blank frames causing the bug to disappear. For this week I want to un-jank it, and hopefully start on using the sorting system to remove dead creatures from the simulation.

How have you been doing @Southkraut?

The proto-woke ideas were related to trans issues so it's kinda hard to tell. One interaction that got stuck in my mind went something like:

  • Would you sleep with a trans woman?

  • Sure! As long as it washes itself.

Ages ago, when I was on an Internet Atheist board, a trans woman showed up, and started arguing for proto-SJW/woke ideas. The kind of shit they got in response, from all the Obama-loving liberals that the forum consisted of, would get people banned from here let alone any mainstream space. This was either late 00's or early 10's.

People definitely were not more tolerant them than of gay people.

How is this supposed to make sense? He said that that the outraged-sampled videos of ICE aren't actually that outrageous compared to the non-outraged-sampled videos of other police forces. In other words, they are not the same.

Also even if they were the same, it tells you nothing about the prevalence. You have no idea how many actually outrageous videos there are available for either group.