loppy

I was responding to “Look at an image for a second. Can you only remember 10 things about it?” I didn’t think that was a fair characterization. I see you probably specifically meant 10 yes/no questions about an image, but I don’t think yes/no questions are a fair proxy for “things”.

In any case you can read the preprint here https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.10234v2 and they make it immediately clear that 10 bits/s is an order-of-magnitude estimate, and also specifically list (for example) object recognition at 30-50 bits/s.

10 bits means 2^(10) = 1024 different things can be encoded.

Where are you getting this information? This “pull your cheeks together a bit” sounds completely out of left field to me.

This is a strange take. In Japanese it’s literally a consonant cluster [ts], which is to say it’s literally a Japanese “t” followed by a Japanese “s”. The Japanese “t” and “s” are not exactly the same as English, but they’re close enough, and English has the same cluster in, say, the plural “mats” of “mat”.

What “tsunami” breaks in English is not really the sound, but instead just the fact that English doesn’t allow [ts] unless it’s preceeded by a vowel.

equivalent to a shonen manga’s plotline.

It’s funny you should say that as there is actually a loose anime adaptation, titled “Gankutsuou”.

The stuff about “w” is wrong, but there’s a good reason you would think this. The lip shape for the “w” sound in English and Japanese is different; in English the shape is like English “u”, and in Japanese the shape is like Japanese “u”, but you definitely shouldn’t have an actual “u” sound.

in the same way the English version lets out a bit of air before the W itself.

I think, especially considering your comment about ホワイト howaito, that you’re confusing two things. There are English dialects which have two separate “w”-like sounds, one of which is typically written “wh” and the other “w”. (To my ear, this distinctiln also sounds old-fashioned.) In these dialects, “w” as in “water” and “wood” is pronounced like you would expect, whereas “wh” as in “who” and “what” is pronounced somewhat like an “h” sound followed by just-“w” sound. I don’t think the “wh” sound is used for all instances of “w” in any dialect; in fact, most dialects have just the “w” sound.

BTW to help appreciate the difference, when the Japanese try to emulate the English W sound they add a ho first, as in howaito (white).

This is false, they only do this for “wh” sounds (and maybe not even for all of them). Counterexamples to your claim are easy: ウェイトレス weitoresu = waitress, ワット watto = watt, etc.

Uhhh… ok dude. I really doubt anyone “has to” learn this, as long as they learn to hear pitch accent I’m sure anyone can pick it up “naturally”. I spend my time learning this sort of stuff because it’s cool and interesting.

Pitch does, but accent placement counts mora but only assigns to syllables. For example, if an accent pattern will put an accent mid-syllable, the accent will move further back to the beginning of the syllable. This is also why accents only occur on the first mora of a long vowel. You can also see this in action in accent placement for compound nouns.

Another good thing to know is that adjacent vowels within the same morpheme (typically one kanji) are part of the same syllable. So 帰る is an accented verb, so the accent goes one mora back from the end like with all accented verbs. But this would put the accent on the え in かえる, and かえ is one syllable here, so in fact the か gets the accent.

Edit: I was looking over my main source[*] for this, and was reminded of one really good example of the role of syllables in accent assignment: genitive の. Nouns can lose their accent if followed by の, and when this occurs is exactly when (1) the noun is at least bisyllabic, and (2) the noun’s accent is on the final syllable. Thus monosyllabic 本 (ほ＼ん) stays accented ほ＼んの, but bisyllabic 日本 (にほ＼ん) becomes unaccented にほんの, and 男 (おとこ＼) becomes unaccented おとこの.

[*] The Handbook of Japanese Linguistics (1999), edited by Natsuko Tsujimura, published by Blackwell Publishers, Ltd.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_phonology

Go to the Consonants section. There are lots of useful notes there, and you can also click on the individual consonants for more information, including how to configure your mouth to make the sound. “ch” and “sh” are tɕ and ɕ, “j” is dʑ at the beginning of utterances or after ん and is ʑ after a vowel, “w” is w.

Compare to English under the Phonemes section. “ch” and “sh” are tʃ and ʃ, “j” is dʒ, “w” is w.

I think he titled it 7 because he explicitly presents 7 different cases. I’m not sure what you mean by saying three are the same though? Two are obviously exactly the same. Personally, I would only consider it three different “things”:

• A uvular nasal at the end of an utterance.
• The nasalization of a following consonant when that consonant has the tongue contacting the roof of the mouth.
• The nasalization of a preceeding vowel when the following phoneme has the tongue not making contact.

I think it’s fair to even say that it’s almost exactly one thing: an instruction to let air out of your nose whilst producing the surrounding phonemes.

You are correct (for standard Japanese 標準語 hyoujungo; other dialects can be quite different). NoneOfUrBusiness’s response is not a great take. Every word has an accented syllable or no accent at all (and it really is based on syllables, not mora). The accent is realized as a relatively sudden drop in pitch after the accented syllable with no (necessary) change in length or loudness. The drop can complete within the next syllable or after. Usually at the beginning of an utterance you start low, climb up in pitch to a certain point, and then either hit an accent and drop suddenly or gradually drop across a longer period of time if there’s no accent.

The precise pitch does not matter, and it’s definitely possible to have two accents close together resulting in a high-mid-low kind of pitch pattern.

Things are also complicated by the fact that Japanese likes devoicing certain syllables. Devoiced syllables can still be accented even though they can’t carry pitch in the same way as voiced syllables.

I believe you, I had just never heard it was “wrong” and it’s never stood out to me.

Yeah, I’ll agree, without any pauses it’s less natural and it’s more of a “buying time to think” thing.

I really don’t see why you would think this.

Sooooo, Carl, on Thursday, said that…

Completely normal thing I would expect to hear.

Idk if you’re a native speaker or not, but as a native speaker of American English there is absolutely nothing wrong with this to me. You could put it in about 4 different places:

On Thursday the press freedom group Reporters Without Borders announced ____.

The press freedom group Reporters Without Borders on Thursday announced ____.

The press freedom group Reporters Without Borders announced on Thursday that ____.

The press freedom group Reporters Without Borders announced ____ on Thursday.

The first one typically has a comma after “Thursday”. The second one you could offset “on Thursday” with commas. The third one is at best really awkward without a “that” or a question word (who, what, where, why, how) and you could offset “on Thursday” with commas; you can also drop the “on”, in which case you can’t use commas. The last one is possible but could be ambiguous (it could be that “on Thursday” is part of their announcement).

Just want to clarify for others like me who might initially have a negative reaction to this claim: this is referring specifically to a phrase like “I have the itis” (which personally I have never heard). The suffix -itis, of course, does not come from this and is much older.

103% increase. The number of people leaving increased by a factor of 1+1.03 = 2.03. Which is to say, the number of people leaving more than doubled, which would have been a better title, but either way there is nothing wrong with math in the title per se.

“Terror”. I have no idea why he suddenly grew a non-rhotic accent.

https://elv.sh