FishFace

joined 2 months ago
[–] FishFace@piefed.social 13 points 1 month ago

Kant touch this

[–] FishFace@piefed.social 1 points 1 month ago

I have never heard anyone fully elide the first vowel sound in "the morning" -it's a schwa. The exception is Yorkshire accents which do so, and indeed, that shows you there is more to elide in "in the" than "at".

"At m" is easier to say simply because it is fewer syllables - inserting more sounds rarely makes things easier to pronounce, and the fact that we say "at midday", "at most" and "at many times" shows that there is no pressure to change these combinations of sounds.

But the whole thing is based on the faulty, unsupported premise that "in the" and "at" are in free variation. You can't just start saying "in the midday" because it is ungrammatical, so if there were pressure to simplify "at most" we'd simplify its pronunciation (maybe to "ab most") not swap preposition.

This is why I'm not giving more of a detailed argument about ease of pronunciation - because it's not even relevant. That's not how language picks prepositions. Like why do we say "I'm in the car" but "I'm on the bus"? I don't know, but I suspect the answer lies in the history of the (Omni)bus, which used to often be open-topped, whereas the (motor)car was generally enclosed since its invention.

To find the answer in the case of morning and night requires tracing the etymology of the words and understanding the grammar used at the time they arose.

[–] FishFace@piefed.social 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The sounds of "in th" can be said without moving any part of the mouth except the tongue, so I have no idea what you mean. Like, you can see them with your teeth touching and holding your lips completely still.

Your argument is completely post hoc to the extent that you're forgetting whatever you were taught about phonology.

And you've skipped the vowel of "the" why, exactly? That's a whole extra syllable in "in the" compared to "at", which is definitely not easier. Your analysis is completely based on the difference between "the m", "the n", "at m" and "at n" but "at the" is grammatical so what about "at the morning"?

[–] FishFace@piefed.social 10 points 1 month ago

Yet another example of why fascists try to take over the education system and curriculum.

[–] FishFace@piefed.social 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You assume that the things that informed you of trump's lies were heard and found convincing by all the magas. Here's living proof that people are capable of understanding, eventually.

[–] FishFace@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago

Everywhere with an Atlantic climate doesn't have the equipment to deal with this. I tried riding my bike in the snow, and besides being slippy in places my gears got clogged and wouldn't shift properly, and my glasses got covered in snow so I couldn't see well.

Not worth it.

[–] FishFace@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago (4 children)

How on earth is "in the morning" less effort than "at morning"? Doubly so for "afternoon"?

Prepositions in general don't follow regular patterns in English. I would bet on there being, if any explanation, an etymological one: the origin of morning, afternoon, evening and night are all different, so the constructions which have since been contracted away will have been different.

[–] FishFace@piefed.social 8 points 1 month ago

I always thought carol of the bells was something mainly used in American movies to make choirs sound fancy. In contrast to ordinary carols which are easy tunes and don't need multiple parts.

[–] FishFace@piefed.social 3 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Some people are like that, but some aren't. Some people are convinced to hate a group because of lies, propaganda and confirmation bias. When the lies start to be exposed, it can also start to unravel the hatred.

It can be difficult to expose lies in a way that is convincing, especially nowadays when media is so polarised, so people from another camp are likely to think you are lying if you challenge their existing beliefs. But this is obviously an example of people starting to realise they've been lied to nevertheless.

[–] FishFace@piefed.social 3 points 1 month ago

Appropriately enough the phrase "seed of doubt" is often used in religious contexts :)

[–] FishFace@piefed.social 14 points 1 month ago (11 children)

That right there is a wedge that can be opened. (Not be someone who comes across as being left-wing, who they'll likely reject out of hand, mind).

The seed of doubt has been sown, and now it remains to be asked just how kidnapping brown people (phrasing it that way won't work but I'm not currently trying to convince anyone...) benefits them, personally. It's an opportunity to examine the disconnect between things they feel are connected - "everything is shit and I don't have enough money" and "there's too many foreigners and brown people".

[–] FishFace@piefed.social 9 points 1 month ago

And you can turn poo into plants. And you can feed the plants to chickens.

ITS THE CIIRRRCLLLLLLEEE

view more: ‹ prev next ›