Here are a few more of our favorite things people have said about Speculative Grammarian over the years, collected wild on the internet, or domesticated in email.
Q700. Why natural language processing is hard.
Q699. Syntactic ambiguity explained with cartoons!
Q698. The fact that I understand this and want this to happen to me both horrifies me and intrigues me.
Q697. Linguistics: Ruining your social life, one conversation at a time.
Q696. After years of studying linguistics, it took me a few minutes to remember that small talk was a thing.
Q695. Another excellent illustration from SpecGram.
Q694. Damn Amerindian languages, you scary! xɬp’χʷɬtɬpɬɬskʷc’—who needs vowels?
Q693. Speculative Grammarian: ...weil Grammatik Spaß macht...
Q692. Μια ξεκαρδιστική αποτύπωση είκοσι μη-επισήμων ρητορικών φορμών, που όμως αποτελούν μέρος της καθημερινότητας των ανθρώπων.
Q691. Oh, YES!
Q690. Lingua Pranca is also quite funny.
Q689. This site has some hilarious ambiguities:
Q688. The Perils of Parody: There are times when reality severely strains the resources of parody. But some brave souls try and try (god bless their hearts). This one came my way recently. A good friend tells me that s/he found the original far less plausible and much funnier. Judge for yourself.
Q687. A damn good joke.
Q686. Oh my.
Q685. This makes me so happy. Why didn’t I think of this when I was taking Syntax classes?!
Q684. If you don’t teach syntax using a lot of BDSM jokes, you’re doing it wrong.
Q683. Yeah, it’s all about raising-
Q682. Linguistics has the funniest, most under-
Q681. I’ve been looking for a way to make linguistics visually interesting. I think I found it.
Q680. Since stumbling on SpecGram several days ago, I have wasted countless seconds reading the entire archives of back issues. Please keep up writing about satirical linguistics, as otherwise I will have to go back to work.
Q679. If you’ve got a spare 40 minutes, linguistic laffs with those wacky funsters at Speculative Grammarian. No, really.
Q678. That is the strangest blog post I’ve read in a while, but quite funny. xD
Q677. Love that first Table of Contents. Sheer brilliance!
Q676. That was very amusing.
Q675. Those are lovely!
Q674. Lightweight, and recommended: “Important Idioms in Contemporary Science.”
Q673. All this talk of over-
Q672. “I’ll have whatever Chomsky is having.” The whole neighborhood heard me laughing.
Q671. Coincidentally, I take a hearty structuralist approach to every meal
Q670. Read the whole post. It’s truly mad.
Q669. The entire thing is great.
Q668. Pls check SpecGram for more fun!
Q667. This literally has to be the best thing I’ve ever read lol. And I use the words “literally” and “best” quite loosely.
Q666. A bit of linguistic dork humor: the difference between phonemics (the sounds) and phonetics (the way the sounds are realized).
Q665. Listening to Language Made Difficult keeps me connected to the weird side of academic linguistics now that I’m out of grad school. I also say “pyalatalization” a lot since the Self-
Q664. I am the Phonetician.
Q663. AAAAAAAAAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHH MINIMALIST SYNTACTICIANS DO NOT HAVE ‘WHATEVER CHOMSKY IS HAVING’ AAAAAARRRGGGHHHHH. But the rest is funny.
Q662. I gotta disagree here. I believe that a corpus linguist would go for spaghetti, because you get more bits of data per plate.
Q661. Loving it, though I’m pretty sure the OT person would have responded by going through a list of pasta constraints, e.g. *BREADTH for flat wide lasagna noodles or whatever…
Q660. I sure as hell hope Chomsky never actually said any of the things the satire quotes him as saying.
Q659. Patterns of language contact and the helical structure of DNA: Coincidence? I think not! Sershen has only scratched the surface with the example in this article. Nobel Prize, anyone?
Q658. Hahahaha!! Seems serious, doesn’t it? Startling...
Q657. You guys make me laugh so hard. Awesome.
Q656. Lucky Frog. Lucky Toad. They still had a coffee pot. And I bet they had a teaspoon as well. They obviously don’t teach at Monash...
Q655. My day is so much better for reading this.
Q654. And they lived happily ever after.
Q653. /OT/ → [Obviously Thrown-
Q652. Why do they say it was a hoax? It works beautifully for Pirahã.
Q651. There was a really disappointing lack of puns in the piece