Smart Phones And The Flynn Effect

[fresh_42]

"Banana's" on sale.

Ouch! And you can find this sign here as well.

 

[fresh_42]

It's iodine. Iodine has been shown to increase IQ by as much as 15%. Now there is an idiotic trend (at least in the US) to eliminate iodized salt and use un-iodized "trendy" salt.

I think we have a law that it must be added, although probably not to sea salt. But usual salt has to have iodine added, simply because in former times people often had goiters. We even have salt with fluorides added.

 

[fresh_42]

That's just about the only vestige of cases left in English -- that we attach 's to the end of a word to denote possession. E.g., "the dog's bone".

The genitive in German is closer to an attribute than it is to possession. People replace the genitive by the dative, which is more of a belongs to. But I also observed a vanishing accusative (replaced by a nominative). And here we have the same problem which @phinds pointed out: tv moderators and news speakers whose business the language is can't speak correctly anymore either. And worst of all: most people don't even realize it!

 

[phinds]

And worst of all: most people don't even realize it!

And those folks would like be mildly embarrassed if it was pointed out to them but for younger people, they don't even CARE.

 

[Evo]

The genitive in German is closer to an attribute than it is to possession. People replace the genitive by the dative, which is more of a belongs to. But I also observed a vanishing accusative (replaced by a nominative). And here we have the same problem which @phinds pointed out: tv moderators and news speakers whose business the language is can't speak correctly anymore either. And worst of all: most people don't even realize it!

I find that to be true and it's alarming. I was trying to be helpful and correcting a non-English speaker's use of English and was chastised by another member telling me to accept it because it was just the language "evolving", soon English as we knew it will not be recognizable, it will just be a mix of anything goes slang and txt spk. I know my grammar and punctuation has gone down the drain, my use of commas, for example. I know languages evolve, but this isn't a case of words changing, it's the basic rules of the language being forgotten.

Edit: Just saw phinds' post about this same thing. Geeze, is it phinds' or phinds's?

 

[Bystander]

Geeze, is it phinds' or phinds's?

That's actually "dealer's" choice.

 

[phinds]

Edit: Just saw phinds' post about this same thing. Geeze, is it phinds' or phinds's?

 

[DennisN]

it will just be a mix of anything goes slang and txt spk. [...] Geeze, is it phinds' or phinds's?

Idk. (sorry, I could not resist ).

 

[fresh_42]

Edit: Just saw phinds' post about this same thing. Geeze, is it phinds' or phinds's?

That's exactly the point where the dative comes in here: "post of phinds". It sounds weird even in English ...

 

[fresh_42]

Edit: Just saw phinds' post about this same thing. Geeze, is it phinds' or phinds's?

We have a rather old fashioned solution for this. The difficulty: How to append an 's' at Gauß to indicate his algorithm? Apostrophe is forbidden, 'ßs' as well, and the English bypass 'Gaußean' does not exist. Halt! It does exist and is probably even of the same origin. The solution is an additional 'i' to make it "Gaußischer Algorithmus". I assume that it is of the same origin since the German 'i' is pronounced 'ea'. But very few people know this.

And now for the funny part of it: We figured that out at university with the active help of an American!

 

[PeterDonis]

That's exactly the point where the dative comes in here: "post of phinds". It sounds weird even in English ...

Actually, in English that's still considered a genitive. In German, IIRC, it is considered a dative.

See the note on expressing the possessive periphrastically here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_possessive#As_determiners

 

[fresh_42]

Actually, in English that's still considered a genitive. In German, IIRC, it is considered a dative.

I know, but it's probably a degenerated dative. It's difficult to translate cases if they do not exist formally. Even the question word for dative doesn't exist anymore in English: who - nominative; whose - genitive; whom - accusative; ? - dative.
Probably: "The John his trousers."

 

[PeterDonis]

it's probably a degenerated dative

The "history" section of the same Wikipedia article seems to suggest that the periphrastic form of the genitive evolved from Old and Middle English. (The quote given from the Wycliffe Bible, for example, has "the ymage of God", and the literary periphrastic form is mentioned a little later on.)

Also, as you note, the dative in English doesn't even exist formally (and hasn't since about the transition from Old English to Middle English, as far as I know). To me this makes it unlikely that a particular form of another case is a degenerated dative.

 

[Bystander]

"King James's King James' Bible," or "King James's King James Bible?"

 

[fresh_42]

"King James's King James' Bible," or "King James's King James Bible?"

I would have chosen "James' bible". What I find more disturbing is "people's ", I mean they are many, aren't they?

 

[Klystron]

More chilling in aspect than loss of syntax may be restricted vocabulary.

A group of students and faculty at my university attempted to translate popular fiction and classic literature into modern slang forms including Ebonics in an effort to assist teachers and improve minority employment. IIRC research indicated working vocabularies of 600-700 words among sample populations. A related paper on causes of violence within peer groups -- originally focused on environmental lead contamination -- found miscommunication initiated significant numbers of violent encounters.

It must be frustrating to possesses intelligence but lack a vocabulary to accurately express your thoughts.

 

[fresh_42]

It must be frustrating to possesses intelligence but lack a vocabulary to accurately express your thoughts.

Indeed!