Dear Speculative Grammarian,
If those fine fellows at the CLAP were to extend their system beyond the limits of kinship systems, they could place the whole of language on a logical, or even philosophical basis. Hopefully some linguists of real character will be able to take up the challenge.
We’ve heard rumors from one of our more reliable sources
I read your recent duograph (and while I am offended in the abstract by such an ugly hybridism, I accept its use as necessary for distinguishing your work from bigraphs, which are much more rigorous, and digraphs, which unlike your work are actually necessary to language) and have the proper legal standing to prohibit its use. When my wife Amber’s son Mica married Garnet, a single mother, it made me a step-
Jasper Armalcolite Feldspar
Halftime Runny Brook, TX
You can’t trademark a legal status. More than that, our legal counsel Scrum Diddly & Dumm assure us that with a sufficiently large retainer they can convince enough judges that your trademarked title constitutes a state-
—The Management (of you).
Is there an academia version of Jones’s kinship system? During my PhD, I had two senior supervisors and three second supervisors. I want a term for the students now supervised by someone who was my second supervisor but who wasn’t that when I finally submitted.
Also, I want a word for the boothmate of someone I shared an interpreting booth with.
X. Y. Zee
Dear Χ. Ψ. Ω.,
It seems that “second supervisee, once removed” and “boothmate-
Cari grammatici speculativi,
I confess to not having learned Jones’s Pseudo-
Centro de Linguistica Antropologico Proactiva
Roma, Repubblica Italiana
This topic became a matter of fierce debate among the senior editorial staff. Two camps quickly emerged: those who felt that annulment essentially retcons a marriage out of existence, and those who felt that while that may be theoretically true in the ecclesiastical realm, it did not hold, practically speaking, in the temporal realm. The only consensus was that terminological improvements are indeed hard to accept.
Rather than continue the philosophical debate, we devised an experiment. A couple dozen random interns were let go, half fired, half “annulled” (i.e., all history of them ever having worked for SpecGram erased, including all of their pay, for the ones who received pay). Afterward, we asked them all whether they felt like they are now “ex” employees or not. Alas, none would take our survey, so the matter is as yet still unsettled.
I’ve managed to skim most of Pèl-
Primary Reinvestigator of Interrogatives
Conservationalists & Conversationalists, Inc.
Be silent and listen, Sparely Diuretics:
Your letter has angered and enraged the entire editorial board. Such resistance to the ancestries of modern thought! Reactive rather than creative! Your doctrinarism is nought but an unfair discriminator! Your nonuniversalist involuntariness elicits declamations of anecdotalism. Having triangulated and discounted your adulterating deductions, the undefinability of such cornucopiate re-
—The Storied Editors
After reading Trey Jones’s Pseudo-
Tweebuffelsmeteenskootmorsdoodgeskietfontein, South Africa
Obviously, a maternal uncle2 named Simon gets an additional gar- prefix.
Would the cremains of a cremated uncle be a carbuncle? And
Speculative Grammarian accepts well-