I'm going to let this one basically speak for itself. This may not be entirely 'linguistics related,' but it certainly helps if you have a sharp mind if you want to process linguistics... especially if you're a male, based upon some of the material that I've read on the BBC lately: early adolescent women are typically using language around twice as much as men.
Hence, there must be methods to offset (1) the handicap of being a male, and (2) the onset of aging. I've been reading a lot about Nintendo's "Brain Age" software recently, but nothing really twisted my mental arm to take it seriously. Joshua Green's article on Wired may, however, be the kind of 'nudge' that I need:
A 4 Week Quest to be Smarter
Incidentally, several weeks ago I set up my own "Cognitive Training Center," based upon widgets that I built into the 'fixed' segments of LinguisticFX at
LinguisticFX Cognitive Training Center. However, as Green mentions, web applications largely lack the kind of portability that truly match modern life.
You never know, by tomorrow afternoon I may actually be holding a Nintendo DS and playing Brain Age. Kickstart my heart... why is it that the majority of revolutionary thinking is done before many intellectuals are 30? It's time to turn the tide.
Friday, December 29, 2006
Wednesday, December 27, 2006
Ethnologue: 516 "Nearly Extinct" Languages
516 of the languages listed in the Ethnologue are classified as nearly extinct. They are classified in this way when "only a few elderly speakers are still living."
Ethnologue catalog of endangered languages
Considering that there are 6,912 known living languages, it seems that we're losing our languages (and integrally-tied cultures) at an alarming rate.
Ethnologue catalog of endangered languages
Considering that there are 6,912 known living languages, it seems that we're losing our languages (and integrally-tied cultures) at an alarming rate.
SIL: The Linguist's Shoebox
I forgot about Shoebox a long time ago. I rediscovered it early this morning, after crawling across a PhD student's website (Patrick Ye, University of Melbourne), wherein he converts verbage in movie scripts to approximations in Javascript-type markup... curious. Corpus linguistics takes strange turns sometimes! Anyway, back to the subject of Shoebox:
http://www.sil.org/computing/shoebox/mac.html
http://www.sil.org/computing/shoebox/mac.html
Fast Decoding and Optimal Decoding for Machine Translation
This is a link to a paper on machine translation of natural languages by Ulrich Germann, Michael Jahr, Kevin Knight, Daniel Marcu, and Kenji Yamada.
The paper is highly mathematical/algorithmic, but I'm 'saving it' for future reference, as even at a 'surface scan' level the paper offers some interesting insight into the process/future of machine translation.
Download paper [PDF]
Of course, if we investigate the complexity of machine translation models, it also raises the question of how the human mind might calculate similar probabilities/whether MT is a completely distinct 'animal'/whether processes employed in MT can be back-translated or superimposed onto natural language learning processes in newer evolutionary forms of human SLL.
The paper is highly mathematical/algorithmic, but I'm 'saving it' for future reference, as even at a 'surface scan' level the paper offers some interesting insight into the process/future of machine translation.
Download paper [PDF]
Of course, if we investigate the complexity of machine translation models, it also raises the question of how the human mind might calculate similar probabilities/whether MT is a completely distinct 'animal'/whether processes employed in MT can be back-translated or superimposed onto natural language learning processes in newer evolutionary forms of human SLL.
Saturday, December 23, 2006
Inventory of technologies explored over the past few days
A quick recap of technologies/software/websites explored over the past few days:
Second Life online interactive communities
Vivox voice chat (PC only)
Ventrilo voice chat (Mac compatible)
Blogger
Wikispaces
Thinkfree online office apps
Del.icio.us
YouTube
Google Video
Live Journal
Elluminate
Googlepages
Second Life online interactive communities
Vivox voice chat (PC only)
Ventrilo voice chat (Mac compatible)
Blogger
Wikispaces
Thinkfree online office apps
Del.icio.us
YouTube
Google Video
Live Journal
Elluminate
Googlepages
Integrity vs. Integration - an etymological perspective
It's interesting to see that we have educators who believe that they can maintain the 'integrity' of their programs by sticking to traditional, didactic methodologies, whilst they still want us to respect the traditional roots of language and the 'moral codes' of yore.
I present a simple argument based upon the etymological roots of 'integrity' and 'integration' (as borrowed from www.etymonline):
integrity
c.1450, "wholeness, perfect condition," from O.Fr. integrité, from L. integritatem (nom. integritas) "soundness, wholeness," from integer "whole" (see integer). Sense of "uncorrupted virtue" is from 1548.
integrate (v.)
1638, "to render (something) whole," from L. integratus, pp. of integrare "make whole," from integer "whole" (see integer). Meaning "to put together parts or elements and combine them into a whole" is from 1802.
Thus, aside from the obvious modern similarities between the words 'integrity' and 'integrate,' we find that the roots of both of these words are strikingly similar, in the sense that we are are striving toward the "whole," rather than just a disparate collection of parts.
Hence, is it 'reasonable' to educate in parallel domains without looking toward both the integrity and the integration of these parts? Is it reasonable for an educator to teach in isolation from history, sociology, technology, natural sciences, linguistics, and all of the other 'parts' that we've gradually transformed into 'specialities'?
Why do we look back at The Enlightenment and The Renaissance with their capitalized articles? Parallel programs do not make 'integrated' programs...and 'integrity' has unfortunately be nominalized to the point where it means little more than 'security' or 'lack of corruption' in modern colloquial terms.
I present a simple argument based upon the etymological roots of 'integrity' and 'integration' (as borrowed from www.etymonline):
integrity
c.1450, "wholeness, perfect condition," from O.Fr. integrité, from L. integritatem (nom. integritas) "soundness, wholeness," from integer "whole" (see integer). Sense of "uncorrupted virtue" is from 1548.
integrate (v.)
1638, "to render (something) whole," from L. integratus, pp. of integrare "make whole," from integer "whole" (see integer). Meaning "to put together parts or elements and combine them into a whole" is from 1802.
Thus, aside from the obvious modern similarities between the words 'integrity' and 'integrate,' we find that the roots of both of these words are strikingly similar, in the sense that we are are striving toward the "whole," rather than just a disparate collection of parts.
Hence, is it 'reasonable' to educate in parallel domains without looking toward both the integrity and the integration of these parts? Is it reasonable for an educator to teach in isolation from history, sociology, technology, natural sciences, linguistics, and all of the other 'parts' that we've gradually transformed into 'specialities'?
Why do we look back at The Enlightenment and The Renaissance with their capitalized articles? Parallel programs do not make 'integrated' programs...and 'integrity' has unfortunately be nominalized to the point where it means little more than 'security' or 'lack of corruption' in modern colloquial terms.
Transitional Technologies: Why bother?
About a fortnight ago I was discussing the “Second Life” online platform with Leigh-Anne and I fobbed it off as a ‘transitional technology’ that would be soon be replaced with something more functional, engaging, and user-friendly. I made the same remark to a colleague, and they replied, “Well, isn’t everything a transitional technology?” This got me thinking – if everything is a transitional technology, and I ‘opt out’ as a result of an argument that it will soon (or someday in the distant future) be replaced, then will I completely miss out on engaging myself with the modern world?
A fortnight has passed, and after some nudging from Clay Burell I’ve now been tinkering with the possibilities of “Second Life.” In fact, people like Clay, Jeff Utecht, and I are constantly experimenting with these kinds of online tools, as are millions of people around the globe. If I look back on my year, I have to wonder which of these technologies/tools/platforms was worth bothering with in the long run, but also what the concept of “transitional technologies” means for us in this day and age, when the concept of a ‘format war’-ala-Beta Vs. VHS now looks like a walk in the park.
I need to choose a blogging format, a video publishing format, an audio compression format for my ‘mp3’ player that will survive into the future, a photo taking and publishing format, online teaching formats, offline software formats, an operating system, and so many other types of choices that are now much more abstract than they ever were in the past. In previous decades, I may have had to choose a brand of car or washing machine that seemed like a ‘good bet’ so that I could still get parts in the future, but now I’m not just looking at the future of my hardware, I’m gambling with the investment of time that I put into “flash in the pan” websites and software, and also with the prospect that I’ll have to invest double that amount of time storing or saving that information in the future if I want to keep it.
So what is a “transitional technology”…and what is not? Considering that my colleague challenged this concept entirely, I started to make a mental list of things that do not appear to be transitional technologies to me…at least not within the span of a millennium or so. The kinds of ‘technologies’ that sprang to mind included soap, the toilet, a table, glass, knives and forks, chopsticks, and many other items that have an enduring physical quality, due to their day-to-day use around the globe. As for items that are undeniably transitional technologies, I considered iPods, disc players, computers, specific software, websites, and a whole lot of items that are quite obviously in a high state of flux.
However, if a toilet now doesn’t look like a toilet 50 years ago, then isn’t it a transitional technology? Isn’t the function of the toilet what I’m really alluding to as being ‘non-transitional?’ On the flip side, isn’t the function of an iPod exactly the same as an old gramophone record player that my grandparents have – to play music? Hence, I think my colleague was completely correct – the whole point of ‘technology’ is that it’s transitional. I can create a generic term like ‘soap’ and say that it’s not transitional because it’s been around in the form of soap bars for a long time, but haven’t we changed the methods of production and the chemical compounds that go into our soap? The same applies to software: I might create version 401.3.9 of a word processor, but it’s still a word processor. How about a blog? Is my blog any less a blog because the company I chose to set my blog up on was a failed startup, and my blog disappeared?
My ability to use soap is anchored in the fact that I know what the function of soap is, as is my ability to use a word processor, and to blog. Whether or not we are dabbling in the world of ‘transitional technologies,’ it’s difficult to deny that each time we do, we’re building a skillset that allows us to adapt as the technologies themselves metamorphose and transition into their future manifestations.
I think the central question here is to look more closely at function. What do I really want to do with technology? If I want to clean myself I use soap or just water. Which is more effective? If I want to write and communicate then I can choose to use paper and a pencil, or I can choose a blog? What’s my purpose? Do I need something reliable and transportable, or am I more concerned with reaching the widest audience, or am I most concerned with the future security of my writing? A blog can disappear with a server failure, but I could also lose that paper book that I was writing in, or it could go up in a house fire.
Whether physical or digital (which is ultimately stored in a physical fashion – somewhere), it’s all transitional technology. Whether or not something may fade away is not really an excuse to not try to use something. What’s your purpose and does the technology that you choose function in a way that works for you? Furthermore, if the technology isn’t here tomorrow, are there skills that you developed from using the technology that will somehow be useful to you or others?
A fortnight has passed, and after some nudging from Clay Burell I’ve now been tinkering with the possibilities of “Second Life.” In fact, people like Clay, Jeff Utecht, and I are constantly experimenting with these kinds of online tools, as are millions of people around the globe. If I look back on my year, I have to wonder which of these technologies/tools/platforms was worth bothering with in the long run, but also what the concept of “transitional technologies” means for us in this day and age, when the concept of a ‘format war’-ala-Beta Vs. VHS now looks like a walk in the park.
I need to choose a blogging format, a video publishing format, an audio compression format for my ‘mp3’ player that will survive into the future, a photo taking and publishing format, online teaching formats, offline software formats, an operating system, and so many other types of choices that are now much more abstract than they ever were in the past. In previous decades, I may have had to choose a brand of car or washing machine that seemed like a ‘good bet’ so that I could still get parts in the future, but now I’m not just looking at the future of my hardware, I’m gambling with the investment of time that I put into “flash in the pan” websites and software, and also with the prospect that I’ll have to invest double that amount of time storing or saving that information in the future if I want to keep it.
So what is a “transitional technology”…and what is not? Considering that my colleague challenged this concept entirely, I started to make a mental list of things that do not appear to be transitional technologies to me…at least not within the span of a millennium or so. The kinds of ‘technologies’ that sprang to mind included soap, the toilet, a table, glass, knives and forks, chopsticks, and many other items that have an enduring physical quality, due to their day-to-day use around the globe. As for items that are undeniably transitional technologies, I considered iPods, disc players, computers, specific software, websites, and a whole lot of items that are quite obviously in a high state of flux.
However, if a toilet now doesn’t look like a toilet 50 years ago, then isn’t it a transitional technology? Isn’t the function of the toilet what I’m really alluding to as being ‘non-transitional?’ On the flip side, isn’t the function of an iPod exactly the same as an old gramophone record player that my grandparents have – to play music? Hence, I think my colleague was completely correct – the whole point of ‘technology’ is that it’s transitional. I can create a generic term like ‘soap’ and say that it’s not transitional because it’s been around in the form of soap bars for a long time, but haven’t we changed the methods of production and the chemical compounds that go into our soap? The same applies to software: I might create version 401.3.9 of a word processor, but it’s still a word processor. How about a blog? Is my blog any less a blog because the company I chose to set my blog up on was a failed startup, and my blog disappeared?
My ability to use soap is anchored in the fact that I know what the function of soap is, as is my ability to use a word processor, and to blog. Whether or not we are dabbling in the world of ‘transitional technologies,’ it’s difficult to deny that each time we do, we’re building a skillset that allows us to adapt as the technologies themselves metamorphose and transition into their future manifestations.
I think the central question here is to look more closely at function. What do I really want to do with technology? If I want to clean myself I use soap or just water. Which is more effective? If I want to write and communicate then I can choose to use paper and a pencil, or I can choose a blog? What’s my purpose? Do I need something reliable and transportable, or am I more concerned with reaching the widest audience, or am I most concerned with the future security of my writing? A blog can disappear with a server failure, but I could also lose that paper book that I was writing in, or it could go up in a house fire.
Whether physical or digital (which is ultimately stored in a physical fashion – somewhere), it’s all transitional technology. Whether or not something may fade away is not really an excuse to not try to use something. What’s your purpose and does the technology that you choose function in a way that works for you? Furthermore, if the technology isn’t here tomorrow, are there skills that you developed from using the technology that will somehow be useful to you or others?
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
26 video uploads later...
This afternoon/evening I've spent about 12 hours clipping, compressing, and uploading videos to YouTube, and then creating blog entries for them at http://samscast.blogspot.com
They're primarily choir/band/performances pieces, but I've enjoyed the 'language' of the music, and also the 'language' of communicating with these web 2.0 systems that allow me to create an on-demand video system like this.
I wish I could upload video at higher quality, but I already seem to be skirting the acceptable boundaries of bandwidth.
Now to pack for Macau, and get ready for a holiday!
They're primarily choir/band/performances pieces, but I've enjoyed the 'language' of the music, and also the 'language' of communicating with these web 2.0 systems that allow me to create an on-demand video system like this.
I wish I could upload video at higher quality, but I already seem to be skirting the acceptable boundaries of bandwidth.
Now to pack for Macau, and get ready for a holiday!
Sunday, December 17, 2006
Technological Compensation for Dyslexia and Visual Disorders
Technology to support dyslexics and visually challenged readers and writers
I dug this up this afternoon after reading a post on www.thethinkingstick.com from someone who's trying to find ways to compensate for her dyslexia as she uses her computer.
I dug this up this afternoon after reading a post on www.thethinkingstick.com from someone who's trying to find ways to compensate for her dyslexia as she uses her computer.
2006's "Missing Month" and the psycholinguistics of blogging
As I've been reviewing my blog archives, I've noticed that November is conspicuously absent. Although service to various blogging clients had actually returned to mainland China by mid-November (after being 'inaccessible for about a month), I think I'd lost my blogmentum (no, that's not a word - it's just my attempt to create another stupid blend, because there aren't enough of these around in celebrity news articles).
Is it worth a longitudinal psycholinguistics study? I'm not entirely sure that it's really a topic that too many people would be interested in at the moment, although if you think about it, checking into individuals' blogging patterns (ie. how they 'jump in and out' of the habit of blogging) would potentially give advertisers some valuable information about a lot of their prime, moneyed targets.
Fortunately for anyone reading this, my MacBook's battery is almost dead, so here's the rapid conclusion: the end.
Is it worth a longitudinal psycholinguistics study? I'm not entirely sure that it's really a topic that too many people would be interested in at the moment, although if you think about it, checking into individuals' blogging patterns (ie. how they 'jump in and out' of the habit of blogging) would potentially give advertisers some valuable information about a lot of their prime, moneyed targets.
Fortunately for anyone reading this, my MacBook's battery is almost dead, so here's the rapid conclusion: the end.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
