While it is interesting to see that Anglo-Saxon is considered an important language at the founding of the school, it is also interesting to see what is not considered to be important. Most of these languages are either Western or Antiquity; a microcosm showing how small the world was to the educators of 1818.

It is fascinating that, from the University's founding, Hebrew was taught as one of the "antient" languages. As a current student in the Modern Hebrew program here at UVa, and as someone who has lived in Israel during a gap year, I have been exposed to contemporary Hebrew in a variety of settings. The ancient, Biblical Hebrew is much different than modern Hebrew, and undoubtably provides a unique perspective on the Jewish religion. Oddly enough though, the ancient Hebrew that the first students at UVa were studying was probably Aramaic, and not Hebrew, as that is the language seen in most Jewish ancient texts. Considering Hebrew as an ancient language places a historical and religious label on the language that is much different from the Hebrew spoken in Israel and across the world today.

I was surprised to see that Hebrew was on the course list. At this point in time, the American Jewish population was very, very small. I suspect this would have been taught in the context of history, relating to the bible, as the old testament was written in biblical/classical Hebrew. From what I know about Western education historically, many of the "humanities" type subjects were very interdisciplinary, so I could understand religion and history being incorporated into this course.

Interesting insight. Austen's narration style becomes unnecessary, as Charlotte's language speaks for itself (pardon the pun)

Austin's use of diction to determine a major factor of Charlotte's decisions on marriage.

More mention of narrative and strong example of Austin's FID. Charlotte's language changes when her subject manner changes. Does Austen choose to make Charlotte a complex, or flat character? I find it amazing that Austen's language (which, as a reader, is easy to overlook) provides so much detail and depth to her characters and their situations.

I think this is a very interesting insight. However, I think Moe does herself a disservice by briefly mentioning this finding without further description. Since part of her argument relies on narrative/text, a further exploration of this idea and Charlotte's particular language would have enhanced her many points.

Moe's language is a bit ambiguous here; is she critiquing or promoting Charlotte's choice? "Self-discipline" is a positive quality and outcome of her marriage to Collins, but "repetitious . . . existence" is made to seem both dreary and wrongful. Of course, no one decision can be simplified to "good" or "bad," but I find her language in this point--which should be a strong closer to the paragraph--to be misleading.

hm. lots of moving parts. Doesn't give the minimal / orthogonal feel of kernel monte + safeScope. No Near / Far refs?

(describe any?) goes to stdout - ambient!

Working and collaborating will promote faster language acquisition

The different modes are extremely important in language learning.

moving away from the red pen and the bad grades, we recognized that our job as teachers is not to pass or fail our students, our job is to teach them to create and obtain information from themselves, to guide them in the right direction for them to learn.

When teaching languages, the importance of changing the pedagogy to integrate multiliteracies.

As a foreing language teacher, we need ti remind our students that information has to be summarize and analize in order to use it.

extremely important when "negocioation of meaning" is at play

I found this very true for languages learners, specially foreign languages. The purpose of language is comunication, for a foreign language classroom, conections to real people gives meaning to the class and those connections would not be possible without the use of technology.

Cognitive skills vs Physical skills when learning languages

Native English speakers tend to be very poor at using English as a lingua franca.

• Don't talk fast.
• Don't use slang, obscure terms, or abbreviations.
• Give the other person time to absorb what you said and construct a reply.
• Restate important points in a different way.
• Make sure you get genuine confirmation.

We would love any leads or ideas about how we might figure out what these lines mean, what language they are in, etc.

Using Sanskrit as a language for computing has been proposed, but seems to go nowhere.

language ruins words

"Natural development" here seems to imply that there are types of language that are not constructed, but of course we can use cultural context to intuit that she does not mean "natural" as the opposite of constructed but to mean something closer to "just as valid as other language, which is all constructed and ever-evolving."

Signaling the psychological connection/validation between seeing your spoken language in the public sphere of written language. Although she is not necessarily arguing for the superiority of written language, she is acknowledging it's psychic importance as a validating power.

I hadn't thought about this aspect of discourse: not just the various context the content but of the experience of learning itself, how a teacher responds to student work, how that work is set up in the first place.

I think hypothes.is is particularly useful in relation to this type of context in the way it makes certain previously hidden aspects of learning visible...

That terrible word again. Language matters.

결국 메타언어에 존재하는 정보를 프로그래밍 언어에 합리적으로 추가하면, 더 유용하게 사용할 수 있다.

Wonder if anyone has compared these two approaches

I love this phrase but it also sees kind of paradoxical: cultivating authenticity?...

Reaching out.

Ironman.

The language of those in power....

This was me who was doing that.

This was the best work that I could muster at that moment.

Frustration at not having the means to communicate.

I like the inclusion of the original French words throughout this piece, because I think they add more depth and dimension to Derrida's argument. For instance, "dessiner" can be translated into English as "depict" but it's more direct translation is "draw." I'm actually curious if the inclusion of the original French was something that Derrida insisted upon in the English version (and that's just me assuming that he wrote this text in his native French...) or whether that was an decision made by the editor(s) of this version? Anyway, these alternative French words and their alternative definitions/English translations have got me thinking here about Byron's earlier annotation, when he undertook defining polysemy...

So is one example of this the teaching of vocabulary and grammar out of context of authentic reading and conversation?

Love this.

This is just what Naoko is doing by allowing students to choose their topics of research within the context of a language learning course.

Interesting.

Does this map to literary theory in any way?...

And all those layers can be visualized through annotation: vocabulary, cultural context...

Love that phrase.

Wow. Annotation fits quite nicely here as helping to visualize these layers in a slightly more user-friendly way than Escher.

Come on, "not-yet-ness" (Collier).

Everything is inter-related. Language cannot be learned out of context, out of community.

Discourse itself is the rhetor.

as the witch asks for some chestnuts. the well fed lady screams go away witch

This course caters to all people interested in learning German (in Canada or other parts of the world). Participants in this course will gain an insight into so (university) life in Germany and the German-speaking countries. You won't have to be there to still see what Germany feels like!

Intended Audience: Informal students or faculty/ instructors planning a study visit to Germany or people interested in (uni) life in Germany

High-level Course Goal: Build a community of learners of German and provide its members with valuable insights into webtools and open study content, so that the learners can then continue learning German independently after this course.

Length of Course: 10-12 weeks Weekly study time for students: 3-5 hours Communication of instructor with students: General feedback on collaborative activities on a weekly basis (private speaking lessons with one-on-one practice sessions can be arranged for a fee) Track students’ happiness with individual module surveys Assessment: Automated Feedback or General Feedback to community at the end of weekly modules Materials used: all materials and tools used for language learning activities are either Open Educational Resources (OER) or otherwise freely available resources on the internet Course Book: Deutsch im Blick. Online German Course Components including textbook/ audio/ video/ etc. CC-BY-NC-ND: UT Austin. Available: http://coerll.utexas.edu/dib/

(Uni) Life in Germany: A German Language Course on the B1 Level

Sounds like a great idea! I'd try it!

What can you say about the Astrologer's prediction? What does the language reveal about his craft?

"a lighthearted display of wit and cleverness, especially in a work of literature"

protective spirits of a location

Language as action, not just description; rhetoric is not only reflective, but also integral to formation and motivation. Interesting to think about when considering Burke's historical context i.e. the early 20th century was marred by intensely violent acts such as wars, revolution, and genocide. Perhaps the physical omnipresence of violence contributed to a conceptualization of words as a kind of violence.

singular of "bona fides"

use traced back to the mid 16th century

translated from the original latin, meaning "with good faith"

For since sounds are voluntary and indifferent signs of any ideas, a man may use what words he pleases to signify his own ideas to himself: and there will be no im-perfection in them, if he constantly use the same sign for the same idea: for then he cannot fail of having his meaning understood, wherein consists the right use and perfection of language (Locke, 817).

Makes me think back to the subjectivity of what rhetoric and language can be; as long as one person believes it to be true, then it must be true

Thinking back to Sheridan, who would probably disagree: "But tho' all who are blest with the gift of speech, by constantly associating the ideas of articulate sounds, to those characters which they see on paper, come to imagine that there is a necessary connection between them, and that the one, is merely a symbol of the other; yet, that it is in itself, a manner of communication entirely different, and utterly independent of the other..."

Further down in the paragraph it is suggested that this blurred line between written and spoken rhetoric could possibly be attributed to Douglass' blending of African, European, and American cultural elements, beyond just necessary last-minute additions of antislavery tracts. Could it then be because of Sheridan's homogenous rhetorical background that he believed written and spoken word to be distinct?

Poetic - Blank verse, ending with a rhyming couplet. His language about Olivia is generally very well crafted and deliberate. There is a hint therefore of artificiality.

Use of metonymy. Orsino is asking for everything of Olivia - Hyperbole. http://digilander.libero.it/mgtund/elizabethan_beliefs.htm

"Accordingly, in all tongues, perhaps without exception, the ordinary terms, which are considered as literally expressive of the latter [material subjects], are also used promiscuously to denote the former [spiritual subjects]." - Campbell

The distinct, even though here tightly connected, between words and things.

As though any stylistic choices just float to the surface of language, rather than existing as the product of real work and thought on the part of the author? I could buy into an argument that such "ornamentation" comes more easily/naturally to some authors than others, but this phrasing seems to imply that artful language is the product of beauty from the thing itself, as though it is truth shining through. (Which, to be clear, I think is bullshit.)

Lol. Why do I get the feeling that Campbell would be one of those Baby Boomers who angrily tweets about how Millennials are whiners and snowflakes and brunch-loving degenerates who are ruining all that is good and holy in the world with their "newfangled" technology; I can just picture him being appalled by my use of "lol" and how it's usage is a great detriment to language. Which actually brings me to an earlier ~debate~ between myself and Kevin about the "associative meanings" behind words in regards to their origins. How have modernity and, as Campbell says, convenience shaped language today, and have shortened words like "Lol" or "Tbh" or "Lmao" increased or decreased in their intended meaning? For instance, do we actually "Laugh out loud" when we say "Lol" or has that old meaning disassociated itself from the word and been supplanted by something else? And do we think that we are overlooking worthier occupants in our vocabulary? And how do emojis fit in to this whole picture? (Poor Campbell is probably rolling over in his grave...) Also I'm realizing just now that this is a little off topic sorry someone plz bring me back to center.

Even if there was a universal language, would it avoid the problem of humans applying disparaging meanings to words, as suggested by Locke? Locke suggests that even those who speak the same tongue do not fully comprehend one another because individuals apply different meanings to the same word based on feelings, background, culture, etc.

Conceit - a clever, and surprising way of using figurative language. This gives the speech not only a poetic, but scholarly quality.

Language is elevated through mythological allusions. The allusion also suggests that Olivia has a high status of a goddess.

How is the language on one hand innocently childish, and yet for an adult reader somewhat disturbing?

Makes me think of the Jungle Book. One of our brilliant teacher's rants: How the hell does Mowgli know/understand the concept of language?

Rhetoric is already complicated enough, and I was only viewing it through an English lens up until this point. Thinking about how rhetoric influences other linguistic interpretations of a thought/feeling/idea/opinion, and how other linguistic practices that incorporate cultural differences in turn influenced the development of rhetoric makes my brain hurt.

In it's own way, the body also engages in rhetoric. I find it interesting that Austin tried to document it in such a visual manner, although the execution was... meh.

From what I remember in History of English Language, language has been defined more broadly since Sheridan's day, if language was really strictly defined to words. I think language is now considered as a system of intentional, conventional signs. Unfortunately, animals and the "melancholy mournings of the turtle" (shoutout to kpolizzi and gilmanhernandez) are not considered language within this definition. This reading and the definition of language from the HOEL textbook by Algeo both heavily emphasized oral-aural communication, so I'm curious about the deaf community's perspective on language. Also I was definitely not expecting to bring up disability as much as I have been; I can try to limit my annotations on that subject.

Reflects Locke's annoyance with the inconsistency in meaning applied to language

There is a strong moral component here in Locke's thinking about language.

From what I've read so far, it seems that for Locke improvement in language means that language would more accurately convey knowledge. But I also wonder about how language changes over time. Language has certainly changed over time; for example, there are many new terms because of computer technology and social media. Language changes because of cultural/technological context, but it seems that no amount of change in language can remove language's distance from reality (language represents ideas which represent the essence of things).

I always thought the most helpful evidence (that was once pointed out to me) that sound-symbols are arbitrary is proof that even onomatopoeia varies from language to language. So even the sounds that we claim represent most directly are not necessarily similar from language to language. Here are some good examples:

http://mentalfloss.com/article/51996/12-onomatopoeias-around-world

https://vimeo.com/25215616

(This video is also interesting in that the more complex the animal's sound, the more dramatically onomatopoetic words vary from language to language. A cat's "meow" sounds almost the same in any language, whereas there are many different ways of representing a dog's bark, or a rooster's crow. I guess "meow" is the closest humanity can get to non-arbitrary language. Meow = Truth???)

It seems really provocative to study rhetoric before ancient Greece; it's certainly something I had never heard of, not that that is saying much. Also, I've only encountered materiality and rhetoric in regards to modern technology, so it's really interesting to trace this back waaaay before computers and even books. It's also interesting that this is a time when there wasn't a written, standard language. Other articles for this week discussed delivery and body language, but uses of some sort of standard language was always a focus, so going all the way back to the Paleolithic really stretches the boundaries of rhetoric in an exciting way.

Spanish he/she has a wide range of options in job opportunities after the completion of graduation. Spanish major is really very helpful for the students as it provides them with a greatly enriched view of the entire world around them. It is helpful to them because it also provides them with the best Spanish language skills which are really important in many professional occupations.

Today English is the most commonly used, i.e. spoken, written and listened language, making it extremely popular all around the world. In many countries, it has become the second official language, as they have understood the importance of it in the modern context. http://blog.selectmytutor.co.uk/top-10-books-on-english-language/

Translates to: “When shall I be as the swallow?” This is referring to Philomela (daughter of Pandion, King of Athens). In the story, she was transformed into a nightingale or something like that.

Datta: give/giving

Dayadhvam: compassion/be compassionate

Damyata: control/self-control

"Da" in German is similar to the English word "there." It is also used to mean "being present," not just as a location pointer. It was originally "there" as in "not here" but as all words' meanings morph over time, it can now also mean "then." So "Da" as a word occupies a space and a time.

There is peace in the rubbish. (Spelling?)

they teach their 2nd lang

even adults teaching english isn't 1st lang. so they are learning as they teach

its true they need to preserve the languages so more ppl learn it and so it won't die

offering more instruction=more children to learn

This is pretty good for salvadorians who want to practice their english, if they are choosing to learn it. It is also nice for the visiting americans, to read the news if they can't read/speak spanish.

thats a pretty large poplation...

If u were to visit El Salvador, this would be very useful seeming English is the most common second language. It would be a good idea to learn some Spanish survival sayings first though.

language spoken

these are examples of explicit culture. Something in a culture that you can't actually touch or feel but helps you learn about the culture for example language and traditions.

blah blah

Cue Roman Jakobson. In a way, by giving the illusion of mutual understanding, these apps exacerbate the problem. Also, because they do the worst job with rich language work (nuance, subtlety, wordplay, polysemy, subtext…) they encourage a very “sterile” language which might have pleased Orwell like it pleases transhumanists, but which waters down what makes language worth speaking.

Though he’s been associated with a very strange idea he never had, Edward Sapir was quite explicit about this loss over a hundred years ago. Thinking specifically about a later passage warning people about the glossocide English language. But it’s been clear in his work from long before that excerpt that we’re missing out when we focus on a single language.

One might think that those other languages are well-represented. People connected with the Open Knowledge Foundation are currently tackling this very issue. Here, Open Education isn’t just about content.

I should write this in English

De ce point de vue, il n'est pas nécessaire d'argumenter longuement sur ces dispositions car le convergence des structures de productivité peut produire des miracles et agrémenter le soutien du jeu des stratégies des forces en présence.

Sure, we’ve heard that before. But there’s reason to be cautiously optimistic about this one.

Glad Anglophone prescriptivists aren’t having their way. If they did, chances are that the language would have a similar fate to German as a colonial language. Chances are that a predilection for normative language has greatly impacted language insecurity among Francophones.

This is an archaic use of the -eth suffix for third-person indicative. This faded from usage during the Middle and Early Modern English periods.

I much prefer this nomenclature especially since it allows me to add Christopher Alexander to the mix. He argued that there are machine systems and growing systems. Or perhaps we can think of the distinction as between engineered and rhizomatic? Or using James Scott's terms: legible v illegible.

I guess I do have a prejudice for this one. Don't all people use language to learn, reason, argue, and communicate, no matter their discipline or field?

The Book of Human Emotions, Tiffany Watt Smith

Emotions are not just biological, but cultural. Different societies have unique concepts for combinations of feelings in particular circumstances.

If you know a word for an emotion, you can more easily recognize it, control it -- and perhaps feel it more intensely.

Emotions and how they are valued also varies across time as well as space. Sadness was valued in Renaissance Europe: they felt it made you closer to God. Today we value happiness, and we may value it too much. Emodiversity is the idea that feeling a wide range of emotions is good for you mentally and physically.

This could be the first time we can talk with empirical evidence about language requiring innate components or not.

Can we embrace diversity?

I don't totally agree with the fact that writers the creation of language is the target of a writer, I think language is just a means, the "algorithm" that "plays" with words/semanthincs, as any machine can do

Do you have what it takes? Signup on www.venturesity.com and unlock opportunities.

This makes me think of David Abram's The Spell of the Sensuous, an exploration of the sensuous foundations of language.

I wonder about the relationship between "attachment" and sensation. Could one become attached without sensing the attachment? And is attachment rhetorical: is it like a language, even if it is not (only) epistemic?

Here I start to wonder about "translating" sensory perceptions into (written) language; namely, are we ever not doing that.

What is the "self-" qualifier doing here? Is this useful for some reason? No one exists in a bubble.

Here's one article about the term: http://aclj.org/jihad/self-radicalized-islamic-terrorist

Yeah, grammar marmism is rampant in our worlds. Some people mistake language for a machine when it is really a joshua tree or a redwood or some kind of fungus. The only disease that would kill language would be the evolution of telepathy and I don't think that would do it. To adapt Johnny Paycheck: take your rules Mr. Heller and shove 'em.

Correction, the link location for Unspeakableness has changed to http://peiyinglin.net/unspeakableness.html

More details accessible here: http://unspeakableness.net/

That sounds good. I aim to get fluent this semester!

Hdt. 2.2. The Nature vs. Nurture enigma is presented here. It is advocated here that language is biologically programmed here and thus language is a nature phenomenon. However, the nature v. nurture debate has become bane in the field of psychology. Do the lengths or widths make a rectangle?

collaboration-driven ethos

We take a turn here to see how deceptive language can be. It's power to persuade by verbiage, not just by what is being said.

A 'snowflake' sort of ideal applied to other words... but a valid point. Our language is imperfect, inaccurate, and vague- every time I read through Nietzche I come around to his thought process a little more.

It's fascinating to consider how if our language had been constructed differently... based on, somehow, a logical reasoning of stimuli... mankind would think entirely differently.

It would be hard to imagine human language without a humanocentric bent, but a completely fair point nonetheless.

And this is exactly what linguists are talking about when they say that words are simply symbols for the things that they represent

I can understand his reasoning in this statement. Our language describes the world and things around us in relation to mankind. Kind of ego-centrical if you think about it

Great question, and I think the answer is 'no'. Each language has it's own restrictions in expressing certain ideas, emotions, or situations. I definitely think that there are boundaries that can confine our expression in any language

I'm not sure exactly what he is trying to say here. Is he saying that while language is not pulled from out of know where, words and language are built upon connections to other words instead of the intrinsic nature of a thing?

Language vs. Truth

Do we lose something in this dissolution?

Well, how else are people supposed to function in a real world? Nothing's constant, so all we can do is make assumptions and generalizations in an attempt to make sense of our surroundings

definition of language

Implies that the sound is, somehow, directly related to the perception of something?

I wanted to highlight "Is language the adequate expression of all realities?"

Without language, what exists?

If deception is only deception because of a negative result, is deception without a negative result still deception?

We are only continually approximating out thoughts, not fully communicating

Language is probably the greatest tool human kind has. Reasoning exists in many animals, but extensive communication networks and language is ours! Also, poor use of the word "Universal" here. If it was a universal gift, it would be for everyone and not just man.

Read some Chompsky. Language is an internal process. The Language Instinct from Pinker is good, too.

Early study of a language needed.

beautiful