![](/static/66c60d9f/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://sh.itjust.works/pictrs/image/045a2049-eb61-4960-88ba-97e7f1ffbf31.jpeg)
Sekiro has the best combat of any game I’ve ever played, so I’d be satisfied with just having something like it in other FS games.
Sekiro has the best combat of any game I’ve ever played, so I’d be satisfied with just having something like it in other FS games.
…entirely in Sony’s hands.
Just bought $50 of merch off their website – this is the sort of journalism we should all be supporting.
I still cackle like a twelve year old every time that comes up in Duolingo.
Upvoted for the appropriate Salt and Sanctuary reference.
I’m an older millennial and I have no idea who Cypress Hill is.
Thanks!
It wasn’t a criticism - I was just curious if anyone had any more info.
Do we know when Mint 22 is coming yet other than just “summer '24”?
I switched my four home computers to Linux Mint this week. Windows is just more trouble than it’s worth nowadays.
Lol can’t wait to see Jomboy’s video on this one.
Lots of badlinguistics in this thread.
There are far worse examples of Germans getting lost.
You wouldn’t download a culture…
I’ve still been slowly working my way through Monster Hunter Freedom Unite for the PSP. It’s hard as nails, but super chill and fun to take my time with. Highly recommended for fans of old school Monster Hunter, especially the ones who enjoy a bit of clunk in their gameplay.
I can only speak for his linguistic works, but it’s odd how much clearer and more straightforward his earlier works are than his later ones. Syntactic structures and Aspects of a Theory of Syntax are easy enough that I’d even recommend them to Introduction to Syntax students, but starting with Lectures on Government and Binding things get increasingly obtuse to the point that I’d always recommend reading “translations” of his later works rather than the works themselves.
Edit for full transparency, since this comment is getting upvoted while Chomsky is getting blasted in the comments here: Don’t get me wrong, all of Chomsky’s linguistic work is incredibly brilliant. He single-handedly brought about a complete paradigm shift in the field of linguistics. G&B with all of the bells and whistles added by other researchers in the 80s and 90s is still the closest we’ve come to an actual explanatory theory of syntax, and X-bar theory is probably the single most elegant, ingenious innovation in the history of linguistics.
And that’s just syntax. I haven’t even mentioned how he and Morris Halle revolutionized phonology a few years later with The Sound Pattern of English, or how he also revolutionized grammar theory with the idea of context-free and context-dependent grammars the year before publishing Syntactic Structures, and all of this somehow still understates the enormous import of Chomsky’s linguistic work.
If anyone has any questions about Chomsky’s linguistic work, feel free to ask, and I’ll respond as best I can.
“Not in Employment, Education, or Training”
Perfect! I’d been looking for an easy way to get rid of both the baby and the bathwater.
So “'s” is what’s called a “clitic”. It’s a tiny little piece of meaning that can’t stand by itself and has to “lean” on a neighboring thing to be grammatical.
The interesting thing is that their distribution is syntactic, not morphological. So, instead of attaching to a word, like affixes do, “'s” instead attaches to entire noun phrases. This includes all adjectives, prepositional phrases, and even subordinate clauses, as long as they’re part of the possessor noun phrase.
So, “the dude’s car”? Perfectly fine, and it even looks like an affix here. “The dude over there’s car”? Perfectly fine. “The dude I went to school with but who forgot that he ate a capybara yesterday’s car”? Perfectly grammatical in English thanks to the power of clitics.
Bonus fun fact: “'s” used to actually be a suffix, but somehow became separated over time, and it’s a big deal in diachronic syntactic theory, because things are only ever supposed to evolve toward being a suffix, but “'s” is one of the few things that seems like it evolved the other way, which throws a wrench into how we usually view the process (called “grammaticalization”).
In short, Anon’s sentence is a perfectly cromulent use of the English language.
Thank you for your service.