are you your name?
- Thread starter gratitude&love
- Start date
water, i appreciate your semi-reassurance. but thats not what i was going for here. really all it was, is i read something that peaked my intrest, and i will admit that, yours, perfects, and dr c, all made points that i agree with but since nobody would take offense i had to. i really just wanted a couple of intelects to take on the subject so i could learn more.water said:
to all, i apologize for my beligerance of late been in a funk for the last week, kinda argumenative and irritable.
heres a question for you though. when attempting to startle someone would it be more effective to say moo or boo? (assuming the level of your voice was the same in either case)
and why is it universal that mmm is a sound for good, while baah is bad?
and kyah is taught as an agresive sound for self defense, while myah would make your attacker possibly quit cause its funny sounding.
grr is the sound for anger, murr well you get the point.
one last one english is the fastest growing language yes? est. over a billion speak it as either first or second language. so would that make it more universal in its own?
again i apologize for my arrogant aire of late.
gratefull for real now.
james: jm
with almost four million people bearing some sort of jm name, this group is by far the most populat in north america. perhaps it has something to do with the judicious, judgemental and justice loving letter j and the letter Ms close association with all that is maternal motherly and merciful. these names herald personalities of uncommon strength and comapassion, and jms are statistically better prepared for life success than any other name. it should be noted that words ending with the high-pitched setters (y and ie)are associated with ass things funny, sunny, goofy, spry, happy, and zany, and the jimmys and jamies of the world are consequently a lot more approachable and a littse sess predictable.
theres a sense of self-satisfaction(and even a gint of smugness) associated with jm mnames. for even though theyre not the typesto throw their weight around, they are usually granted authority over their social groups. people naturally derer to their said back style of seadership, and jms often emerge as pillars of their communities. they may not be particularly big on finesse, but they are certainly open minded and generous to a fault.
if you know any jms youre probably familiar with their mysterious way of ending up at the top of th food chain. not in th dominating sense, for these are remarkably easygoing people, but in the way they seem to know wich button to push to get wat they want. these were the kids whose science projects actually worked and whose show and tell made everyone set up and take notice.
its often said that jms refuse to grow up, and in turth many of them seem to gave a childlike curiosity and have a knack for learning new skills. they are secretly very competitive people who see life in terms of winning and losing, so dont expect them to be graceful losers. they simply dont get much practice.
jms have excellent language skills and its difficult to compete with them when theyre in one of their persuasive moods. they arent shy about plying their influence to get what they want, but it would be unfair to label them as manipulative. then again, jms dont give a hoot about labels and arent going to object in any case.
jms can also be downright shmoozy when it comes to interacting with the opposite sex and often play the field whise pondering about getting hitched. and although settling down may be a song time coming, once theyve made their decision, jms will waste little time getting to the child rearing stage. lide most people whose manes incorporate the maternal letter m, nothing pleases jms more than being able to nurture, teach and influence their offspring.
with almost four million people bearing some sort of jm name, this group is by far the most populat in north america. perhaps it has something to do with the judicious, judgemental and justice loving letter j and the letter Ms close association with all that is maternal motherly and merciful. these names herald personalities of uncommon strength and comapassion, and jms are statistically better prepared for life success than any other name. it should be noted that words ending with the high-pitched setters (y and ie)are associated with ass things funny, sunny, goofy, spry, happy, and zany, and the jimmys and jamies of the world are consequently a lot more approachable and a littse sess predictable.
theres a sense of self-satisfaction(and even a gint of smugness) associated with jm mnames. for even though theyre not the typesto throw their weight around, they are usually granted authority over their social groups. people naturally derer to their said back style of seadership, and jms often emerge as pillars of their communities. they may not be particularly big on finesse, but they are certainly open minded and generous to a fault.
if you know any jms youre probably familiar with their mysterious way of ending up at the top of th food chain. not in th dominating sense, for these are remarkably easygoing people, but in the way they seem to know wich button to push to get wat they want. these were the kids whose science projects actually worked and whose show and tell made everyone set up and take notice.
its often said that jms refuse to grow up, and in turth many of them seem to gave a childlike curiosity and have a knack for learning new skills. they are secretly very competitive people who see life in terms of winning and losing, so dont expect them to be graceful losers. they simply dont get much practice.
jms have excellent language skills and its difficult to compete with them when theyre in one of their persuasive moods. they arent shy about plying their influence to get what they want, but it would be unfair to label them as manipulative. then again, jms dont give a hoot about labels and arent going to object in any case.
jms can also be downright shmoozy when it comes to interacting with the opposite sex and often play the field whise pondering about getting hitched. and although settling down may be a song time coming, once theyve made their decision, jms will waste little time getting to the child rearing stage. lide most people whose manes incorporate the maternal letter m, nothing pleases jms more than being able to nurture, teach and influence their offspring.
i havent looked yet but i would venture to say persistant.Roman said:
or that your just wandering around. hee hee just a joke.
roman: rmn
the r is the symbol for all things racy, randy, romantic, ruddy, ripe, and ribald, and the name it intiallizes are colored with a cheedy sense of defiant fun. the setter m on the other hand, is the symbol for maternal love (maiden, matron, mercy, mild and madam) and is the key letter of the word mother in VIRTUALLY every language. its not surprising, therefore, that the combination of the m and r creates words with a warmly romantic air: harem, rythm romp charm and romeo. but since the rmn names are also dominated by the letter n the icon of all things negative(no not never nada null nothing not) these are people who, for all their emotionall intelligence have a deeply rooted aspect of self doubt that prevades their life.
with their zest for stimulation its not likely that youll find many rmns who enjoy staying indoors. the universe is so irresistably exciting to them that if they had their druthers they would see it all. theres no question that rmns are adventurers at heart and even those who dont get the oportunity to tromp all over the place, will have their adventures and engaging stories. and yet even with their penchant for travel and exploration, rmns never stray to far from their emotionall nests: they are too tightly bound to their families and loved ones.
when it comes to their careers rmns are natural educators who are drawn to young people for their curiosity and learning. children respond likewise to the rmns abilities to relate to them on their own level, and many rmns make a good living in teaching and coaching. their social skills are sophisticated enough to facilitate jobs in wich they deal with the public, but very few rmns acctually enjoy the competitiveness of cut throat sales and marketing careers.
because rmns are happiest when they're learning about the world and sharing it with others, their idea of a perfect evening is philosophizing with a group of friends over a bottle of wine. most of their romantic matches materialize from situations like this, and if your looking to spice up your love life with the equvilant of an itialian lover, then you might want to invite yourself to one of their soirees. even if your not in the mood for a romantic liaison, youll certainly appreciate the rmns child like sense of wonder.
when it comes to intimate affairs, rmns might be roamers, but there is no greater goal in their lives then having their own families. as lovers they may be a little on the over eager side, but what they lack in finnesse is more then made up for in sensitivity and affection.
in fact almost the same wording.Roman said:
I by far got the best one.
Hmmm....
I adventure quite a bit, more than you're average Americanian. Traveled some of the world, go romp about in the woods from time to time. I'm strongly attached to my family and mates, more than most I think. Maternal. I do have a bit of a mothering instinct, and like knowledge and the sharing of it.
Emotional intelligence... I don't think that's me. Intellectual intelligence, perhaps. Self-doubt, yes. But no one likes an over-confident braggadocio.
It failed to mention my cruel, vicious puppy hating streak. I greatly enjoy a good fight.
I also can't stand kids.
Over eager and lack of finesse. Definitely me.
Thank you, gratitude.
Hmmm....
I adventure quite a bit, more than you're average Americanian. Traveled some of the world, go romp about in the woods from time to time. I'm strongly attached to my family and mates, more than most I think. Maternal. I do have a bit of a mothering instinct, and like knowledge and the sharing of it.
Emotional intelligence... I don't think that's me. Intellectual intelligence, perhaps. Self-doubt, yes. But no one likes an over-confident braggadocio.
It failed to mention my cruel, vicious puppy hating streak. I greatly enjoy a good fight.
I also can't stand kids.
Over eager and lack of finesse. Definitely me.
Thank you, gratitude.
“one last one english is the fastest growing language yes? est. over a billion speak it as either first or second language. so would that make it more universal in its own?”
The thrill is... that it doesn’t mean shit since my native language is the thing that molds my phonetic values. You think I draw remarkable distinctions between two letters used with English after familiarizing myself to phonetics trough “Runkkari perkele, kyrvällä runnon rupareikäsi” “Du är rödä om min ollon” or “Die Juden sind unsere freundin”.
People tend to treat English not according to the so called universal models – even though they can elaborate with the language.
You arrogant bastard.
Another mans shit is another mans pudding, or however it went.
The thrill is... that it doesn’t mean shit since my native language is the thing that molds my phonetic values. You think I draw remarkable distinctions between two letters used with English after familiarizing myself to phonetics trough “Runkkari perkele, kyrvällä runnon rupareikäsi” “Du är rödä om min ollon” or “Die Juden sind unsere freundin”.
People tend to treat English not according to the so called universal models – even though they can elaborate with the language.
You arrogant bastard.
Another mans shit is another mans pudding, or however it went.
I use 'mmm' when expressing doubt or uncertainty more often than 'mm, good.' Though not in the dictionary (or at least, not in any of mine), 'meh' is a fairly common word used to indicate dissatisfaction. i use it all the time. i can agree with some of your examples, but these seem to be onomatopoetic, so we associate the word with the actual sound. and there are exceptions. i don't think i need to list them.
gratitude&love:
My thanks for the James analysis! I found it quite interesting and, in fact, rather accurate.
My thanks for the James analysis! I found it quite interesting and, in fact, rather accurate.
i personally agree with Dr cello "this is what is called 'confirmation bias'."
but that list is interesting none the less and i like it, i personally think someones name does mean something more than a title for them to be addressed as.
but that list is interesting none the less and i like it, i personally think someones name does mean something more than a title for them to be addressed as.
As Water said, we must consider that this book is essentially dealing with one language, not all. One can, potentially, try to find some meaning in sounds in one language, but as Dr. Cello pointed out, all sounds are used differently.
I will grant you that the 6 stops (p,b,t,d,k,g) do have more noise than nasals (m,n,ng) and semi vowels (w,y). Yes, for those interested, these can be seen in graphs, which I do not have, but have seen. However, they are not as noisy as the fricatives (f,v,s,z,sh, dg [in judge]). This man doesn't seem to account for that. One more correction:
This is true only for the proto-Indo-European languages. (Indic, Slavic, Hellenic, Romance, Celtic, Germanic to name a few). The connections with other languages are highly unlikely as nuclear family meanings are some of the last to be borrowed or changed because they are used so often. I know the whole thing seems tempting, but there's just not enough evidence for it.
gratitude&love said:
This is true only for the proto-Indo-European languages. (Indic, Slavic, Hellenic, Romance, Celtic, Germanic to name a few). The connections with other languages are highly unlikely as nuclear family meanings are some of the last to be borrowed or changed because they are used so often. I know the whole thing seems tempting, but there's just not enough evidence for it.
gratitude&love,
In this case, it is more advisable to pick up an introductory textbook to linguistics.
Since /b/ is a plosive, "boo" is more audible than /m/, so it seems "boo" would be more effective when trying to startle someone.
We are in the field of interjections here.
While some interjections are shared across languages (like "aha!" for surprise, or "uh" for boredom, "aw" (and similar) for pain, "eh" for mild disapproval), many are also language specific.
For example, if you are cold in English, you say "brr", while is Slovene, you say "oosh" or "ooshah".
I ould not venture to say that a particular sound or sound chain is typically connected to a particular meaning though.
In what language?
Yes, such is true for some other languages as well, not just for English.
But before we fall for generalizations, we must keep in mind that onomatopoetic interjections are not rarely language specific.
"Murr" doesn't exist in Slovene, for example.
No, I don't see why. The number of speakers doesn't say anything about the universality of language (universality in linguistic terms, not in sociological terms).
There is an interesting aspect though because of language interference: English interferes with the native language of those to whom English is the second or foreign language.
Those non-English languages borrow words from English and assimilate them as their own. This does aid to spread particular English language principles (phonological, morphological and syntactic) and make them seem universal.
Que?
How about languages that don't have jms names?
* * *
Perfect,
Exactly.
Another thing is that the more languages one speaks, the more relative phonetic values become. That is, even though one might associate /m/ with something good, /p/ with genitalia etc., these associations tend to lessen as one learns more languages.
I speak only four languages plus some bits of others (and I study linguistics), but already this sufficed that particular sounds don't evoke any particular meanings anymore. Phonemes are just that to me: phonemes.
In this case, it is more advisable to pick up an introductory textbook to linguistics.
Since /b/ is a plosive, "boo" is more audible than /m/, so it seems "boo" would be more effective when trying to startle someone.
We are in the field of interjections here.
While some interjections are shared across languages (like "aha!" for surprise, or "uh" for boredom, "aw" (and similar) for pain, "eh" for mild disapproval), many are also language specific.
For example, if you are cold in English, you say "brr", while is Slovene, you say "oosh" or "ooshah".
I ould not venture to say that a particular sound or sound chain is typically connected to a particular meaning though.
In what language?
Yes, such is true for some other languages as well, not just for English.
But before we fall for generalizations, we must keep in mind that onomatopoetic interjections are not rarely language specific.
"Murr" doesn't exist in Slovene, for example.
No, I don't see why. The number of speakers doesn't say anything about the universality of language (universality in linguistic terms, not in sociological terms).
There is an interesting aspect though because of language interference: English interferes with the native language of those to whom English is the second or foreign language.
Those non-English languages borrow words from English and assimilate them as their own. This does aid to spread particular English language principles (phonological, morphological and syntactic) and make them seem universal.
Que?
How about languages that don't have jms names?
* * *
Perfect,
Exactly.
Another thing is that the more languages one speaks, the more relative phonetic values become. That is, even though one might associate /m/ with something good, /p/ with genitalia etc., these associations tend to lessen as one learns more languages.
I speak only four languages plus some bits of others (and I study linguistics), but already this sufficed that particular sounds don't evoke any particular meanings anymore. Phonemes are just that to me: phonemes.
Wings said:
Know what I read? That you know other styles of marital arts ...
He he. Guess what's going on in my mind ...
Re Are you your name?
Many people tend to think me demure and proper and held-back. Then I tell them my name. Nejka. Then I try to explain how to pronounce it, and the closest word in English is "naked". It really is ironic, the wheels of fate ...
Water:
That is remarkably hysterical. Nice name, though.
That is remarkably hysterical. Nice name, though.
water said:
So was that then a yes or a no? Naked or not?
Seeing the name already declared there, should there or should there not then be problem with referring to Nejka in subsequent postings?
I'd like to know, about these wheels of fate.
I like "Nejka".
I see nothing so wrong with it, no problem, nothing to be ashamed of.
--- Ron.