Heterogeneous Linguistics

You need to log in to comment.

Ch. 12
Avatar
This would be somewhat easier to understand as an anime I think, but it might not and I imagine it would be hard in its own way using sounds and gestures to communicate where not all words are known, tranlated or have a translation.
Avatar
@voliol yep, we noticed. Maybe we need to make a table with their genres lol
Avatar
@amtt

On page 3, shouldn’t either Kashoo or Kekoo be referred to as ”she”?
Also, thank you (and the rest of Gold Roze|You’re Welcome Scans) for making this translation :)
Avatar
@Anonyan I really do dislike that you can't even find the common courtesy to make an @. I mentioned it before, but it is annoying.

Your entire statement could be turned against you here. I have a different opinion than you, and that fact alone is not automatically proof that you are right.

At the end of the day, I said 1) using arrows and lines is confusing, and 2) using something like diacritics would be clearer. That has been my position all along. You have said that the use of the arrows was fine. Your only support in favor of that is 1) it is "intuitive" and that 2) alternatives are not as good. You can choose to dispute me on the use of the word "intuitive", but it is something along those lines. "Easier to understand". Is that better? The use of arrows and lines is easier to understand. That has been your position.

I have shown evidence as to why it is not intuitive and that alternatives do exist which are reasonable. I'm not going to reiterate that right now. You want me to show how you misunderstood me? The comment beginning with "I never implied it was more intuitive". Your comment there states "Japanese people have little reason to know diacritics outside of their own unless they know multiple languages or done studies into linguistics in-depth". There, you fundamentally had missed the point. I was never saying that Japanese people need to know diacritics [outside of their own]. I was saying that Japanese people know of diacritics, know that they exist, know generally, oh, this is used for something related to how it sounds, even though they may not know ANY of the specifics.

And I get it. We moved past that point. You now understand what my point is. But to say that you never once misunderstood what I said is just wrong on the face of it.
Avatar
To reiterate, your inability to see beyond your own perspective is astounding. Somebody having a different opinion than you is not automatically proof that you're right, and you can't "disprove" somebody's perspective by just parroting your own over and over. I've never once misunderstood what you said, and I challenge you to quote where I did. What I am doing is disagreeing with you.
Avatar
@Anonyan You failed to read my first post. You failed to read my second. My third. This continued. This is literally what I have been saying this entire time. You did not read.

My point has not changed from the very beginning. The only thing that has changed is you trying to shift around and get me to defend things I don't need to prove. That is what has happened.
Avatar
"I'm just going to ignore the core of your argument and say that because I can take small facets of your explanations that support my point you're saying the exact same thing I'm saying, and even though you've been directly arguing against what I've been saying clearly you only now understood what I've been trying to say."
Yeah okay buddy. Your inability to see beyond your own perspective is astounding. Anybody can force implications out of someone else when they're talking about the same issue from different perspectives. I've only ever been quoting you and explaining how I disagree in reference to your perspective, and you've only ever been replying to the implications you perceive in my arguments instead of the established arguments themselves. But okay, you got me, I've definitely been agreeing with you the whole time and clearly if I mention that diacritics exist but that doesn't mean everybody understands them, all I'm really saying is that diacritics exist and that proves your point 100% no matter what the rest of the sentence is. You surely have bested me in this internet fight through the immense power of your cherry-picking.

Ping me again when anybody besides you on the planet gives a shit and complains about a perfectly functional way to show an idea that only you have a problem with. Nerd.
Avatar
@Anonyan Really? I'm the one misquoting? Yeah, because that totally wasn't you failing to read my posts. It took you this long to get to the heart of what I've been saying ALL ALONG.

And so what if that's POTENTIALLY a better system? My main point HAS ALWAYS been that using arrows and lines is bad. You've proven my point.

I do think using diacritics above kana would not be best because then it could make it look like a completely different character. Either way, you've still proven my point that using arrows and lines, as has been done, is not optimal. The fact that you keep accusing me of not paying attention when you don't even realize the implications of what you say is laughable.
Avatar
What are you talking about? Romaji is taught in schools and used for typing, but Japanese people aren't nearly as used to reading it as they are to katakana. We've already established that the actual diacritic used doesn't matter because it's going to be defined by context, so there's nothing stopping the mangaka from just drawing the diacritics above katakana. Jesus fucking christ you're denser than a shounen manga protagonist, this entire conversation has been you misrepresenting my points because I don't spell them out clearly enough, then when I ask you to provide a solution and you provide a shitty one, you imply that romaji is somehow more agreeable to read than katakana for a Japanese person because I didn't explicitly spell out that someone drawing manga can draw symbols above katakana.
Avatar
@Anonyan wow, you're stupid. Romaji is taught in schools. It's literally already known by the majority of japanese people. And yet you say that's more effort? Wow. You're just being stupid and grasping at straws.

And kana would not work because there are no indications of tone in japanese kana.
Avatar
Congratulations, transliterating to romaji is already more effort than a mangaka should have to spend on something that works fine as-is once explained to please a single complaining foreigner who he doesn't know exists. The point of the manga is that what the characters are saying is already vague and relies on context in-universe to figure out an entire new language, readers shouldn't have to go through the extra hurdle of reading in their least common alphabet. If anything, you could've said " the author should have written everything in katakana," which would've worked just as well since each character corresponds to one syllable, but this just shows how you don't actually give a shit about how easy it is for the Japanese audience to parse and are just trying to justify your own stupid fix to your anecdotal problem that only you have.
Avatar
@Anonyan Easy. Use romaji to transliterate the Japanese words and then put in an accent wherever.

For example, you could have "ínu". (That may not be very visible on the forum; I wrote an acute accent over the i, so í). Inu is dog. A Japanese person familiar with romaji (it's taught in schools) would understand that as dog but also notice the diacritic. Then just have almost the same conversation that already exists, stating that the accent indicates possibility, edibility, whatever they're trying to convey.

Importantly, I don't care WHICH accent is used because that's not standardized across languages (as I've mentioned). Sure, it's an acute accent, and that means something in, say, Spanish, but it could easily be used very differently in Werewolf. The important point is that it indicates that tone is being used in the first place. That means the author doesn't have to spend a lot of time researching. They can pick whatever.

That's readily understandable to the Japanese audience and it avoids using potentially confusing arrows and lines. There, done.
Avatar
No no no, no more sidestepping.
I'm not gonna keep this back and forth going while you cherry pick whatever you can misrepresent and ignore the rest.

What the hell is even your problem then? If you're saying the author could've just used any diacritics and explained them from context, which they already did in their own way, then are you saying that you would've been fine with the squiggly lines being over different syllables instead of next to them? That's not always even possible when writing with Kanji where one character represents multiple syllables. So yeah, if your idea is so much better, please give us a real example of what the author should've done, instead of just saying "my idea is better and totally possible."


Show me how you could do it better. And since you made this more about the Japanese than everything, you have to make it work in Japanese. Show me how you would use a diacritic to represent tone for a character that represents multiple syllables.
Avatar
@Anonyan

I'm saying that knowing something exists doesn't mean you know how it's used and that it makes the situation harder to understand for someone unfamiliar with them


And I've been saying that 1) it is absolutely unnecessary to know how it's used (for various reasons) and 2) it does not make the situation harder to understand for someone unfamiliar with them if you explain it with context.

1) Knowing that they exist is all that is needed. Knowing that the umlaut, the acute accent, the etc. diacritic exists means that the reader knows that it's an issue of pronunciation, of tone of some sort. That is better than the issue with arrows, where it could very realistically be head movement, body movement, etc., etc., whatever. By using a diacritic, you set up some general expectations.

2) In both what I want as well as what the manga already does, there would be context given. That context explains what things mean. The only difference is point 1), where if you used diacritics, you're already expecting something related to tone, whereas if you don't, then you're somewhat surprised and potentially confused about the provided context.

I've been saying this throughout. No, you still didn't get what I meant. You didn't even see that the existing work already does the things that you're criticizing; you act as though it's so much clearer to use arrows and squiggly lines.

It's always annoying when someone quits and acts like the victim when they were the one holding a nonsensical position. That's exactly what's happening here.
Avatar
EEEU
Avatar
I want to clarify something here. You're misunderstanding my points, because you keep reiterating points and explaining what diacritics mean and accusing me of missing points when I'm challenging your points (and throwing the word "literally" around like candy on Halloween, jesus christ it's like a generation-z picnic). I understand what you're saying perfectly, and saying you're wrong. I'm not saying that people that read don't generally have intrinsic knowledge of diacritics existing, I'm saying that knowing something exists doesn't mean you know how it's used and that it makes the situation harder to understand for someone unfamiliar with them. Someone knowing what diacritics are but not how they're used tonally doesn't "support you" just because you view people knowing they exist at all as a point for you when I'm challenging that core point directly and someone not knowing about tonal diacritics is also an example I'm using. You've got a mean case of "because I'm right everything supports me, even if that same evidence is also an example of something they cited, and if they disagree with me they're not understanding me so I don't need to try to disagree with them, just imply that they're stupid."
An anecdote is still a valid data point. I've also provided additional reasons why my anecdote could be generalized. It wasn't just herp derp, I had this experience, so everyone else should too. It was I had this experience because of X, Y, and Z reasons, and X, Y, and Z reasons generally hold true for other people, so it makes sense that others would have similar experiences.

Here's an example of what I mean right here. I've never made any effort to imply that other people won't agree with you. I've specifically made an effort to point out that some people don't fall into your anecdote, and that you being the only person to speak up doesn't mean you're the only person who knows what diacritics are, but that specifically you're the only person who it bothered enough to complain about it. Instead of debating the actual point I put out there, that being the idea that arrows make more sense for someone who doesn't know what diacritics are and learning new diacritics is less clear than arrows that directly show tone movement, you're debating some imaginary point I didn't make where I said you're the only person who could possibly be confused by this.

But anyway, I'm not gonna let this shitshow devolve any further by giving you other points to misquote and say that disagreeing with you is not understanding you. Address this core of the issue (which, to be fair, I edited in so you may have missed it), and if you can give me an example of how you would've done it better than the author by using diacritics in a language where one character can mean ten syllables, I'll give you your internet trophy:

What the hell is even your problem then? If you're saying the author could've just used any diacritics and explained them from context, which they already did in their own way, then are you saying that you would've been fine with the squiggly lines being over different syllables instead of next to them? That's not always even possible when writing with Kanji where one character represents multiple syllables. So yeah, if your idea is so much better, please give us a real example of what the author should've done, instead of just saying "my idea is better and totally possible."
Last edited 5 mo ago by Anonyan.
Avatar
@Anonyan I wish that you would at least make an @ to me.

I just think you are fundamentally wrong on the intuitive/intuition point. "People who know what diacritics mean already have intuitive knowledge of how to parse characters and won't think twice about seeing them used, but people who don't understand them don't." ... That doesn't make sense. You're literally not making sense. It's not intuitive if you have to have previous knowledge of the diacritics. You're not making sense. Either way, it's not really all that important to the rest.

The professor literally explains exactly what it is on page 5.
I'm shortening quotes to make the posts shorter.

You're literally proving my point. You literally didn't read. I said ALREADY that the manga ALREADY gives context to explain what the arrows mean. That shows that it isn't intuitive. That shows it needed to be explained. I said that using diacritics WOULD BE BETTER. The fact that the existing manga had to explain what the arrows meant shows that it isn't intuitive, AND I ALREADY SAID THAT.

And then you accuse me of not reading the pages of the manga? How about you actually read my comments instead of being lazy and ignoring what I already addressed?

My point is that the need for context would be LESSENED if the author used diacritics instead of the weird arrows. I said that I didn't understand the arrows UNTIL the character explained it meant tonality. You're literally not reading my comments.

What diacritics should be used? It doesn't matter! I don't care what diacritics should be used just so long as the author actually used them BECAUSE then it indicates tonality. I've said this MULTIPLE times. In languages such as Chinese and Vietnamese, the SAME EXACT tone marking could be used to indicate DIFFERENT sounds That's fine! That's completely fine! The difference is that you use a tone marking to indicate that there's a tone to begin with!

What the fuck kind of point is this? I generally know that rocket science exists too, but I'm not going to bother learning it just so the fake rocket science in my fantasy manga is easier to parse.


Wow, you again miss the point. I don't care what diacritic is used. The very fact that ANY diacritic is used indicates that tone is being used. That's the important part.

No, I understand perfectly what your point is.


No, you very clearly missed my point because your comment very clearly shows you didn't understand it.

It's a super important point because we're talking about an anecdotal experience and you're asserting that everyone would have been less confused, like you would have been, if they used diacritics instead of silly lines, but I would wager money that there would have been some people that would be even more confused.


An anecdote is still a valid data point. I've also provided additional reasons why my anecdote could be generalized. It wasn't just herp derp, I had this experience, so everyone else should too. It was I had this experience because of X, Y, and Z reasons, and X, Y, and Z reasons generally hold true for other people, so it makes sense that others would have similar experiences.

Hell, if anything the fact that you had explain tonal diacritics to someone who speaks German


Uh, no. Did you even read their comment? Did you even see how their point literally dovetails and ends up supporting what I said? I didn't have to explain diacritics to them. They ALREADY had a general understanding.
Avatar
Do you even know what intuitive means? You literally just described what intuitive means and in the same breath said oh, you didn't imply it was intuitive. I'm literally foreheading right now. You accuse me of being autistic but don't even understand this?

No, intuition has to do with how well knowledge transmits without reasoning, without actively thinking too hard about it. People who know what diacritics mean already have intuitive knowledge of how to parse characters and won't think twice about seeing them used, but people who don't understand them don't. In cases where 100% of people can figure something out given context (like with arrows that go up, down, and/or squiggly) that isn't intuitive because the context was required.

And I literally proved, as a normal reader, that I didn't know what the arrows meant. I am not some language expert. I honestly am not. I thought the arrows meant something like head movements. You knwo, since there had already been head movements before for language? Or something like a body movement, an actual movement. That already disproves your "100% of people can figure out what it means given context". That's already wrong.

The professor literally explains exactly what it is on page 5. That's context. Just because you skimmed the chapter and missed a character mentioning tone doesn't mean it isn't there and that you couldn't have figured it out if you had paid attention. And if you honestly did read everything thoroughly and still managed to be confused until they were gone, then okay, my bad, 99.99% of people can figure it out given context, whereas I would say that much fewer people could figure out tonal diacritics without needing to look them up or without the mangaka wasting time drawing extra pages explaining what they mean in real life. What diacritics should they even have used, since the original work is Japanese and the only diacritics they use in Japanese writing are used for kana to distinguish entirely different words?

And you're literally ignoring what I said. I never said that Japanese people know how to use diacritics. I said Japanese people know of the existence of diacritics. Does an English speaker know how to use diacritics? There's a good chance that no, they don't. Do they know ABOUT them and GENERALLY that they exist? Almost certainly! It's the same thing with Japan!

What the fuck kind of point is this? I generally know that rocket science exists too, but I'm not going to bother learning it just so the fake rocket science in my fantasy manga is easier to parse.

And you literally don't understand what my point is. My point is not "oh, this fantasy language should be like this or that because X reason in the real world". No! My point is "make it so that readers can understand what you've literally typed/written/drawn"! Using the existing system makes it easier for readers to understand what the hell is going on. You can still do ALL of your fantasy stuff, but don't use a system that is confusing!

No, I understand perfectly what your point is. My point which you don't seem to be understanding is that more confusing for you is not more confusing for everyone, and that diacritics that represent a change in tone are in fact less informative to someone who has no idea which diacritics mean what than arrows that show you exactly the direction that tone is going.

And oh, so what if I'm the only person saying this? Why the hell is that an important point? This is literally a comment system on a manga website. I'm literally making a comment. Don't just make crap up and pretend like I'm making this grand speech. I know no one cares. I'm still right about what I'm saying though, and this is literally a comment system where you can say whatever you want.

It's a super important point because we're talking about an anecdotal experience and you're asserting that everyone would have been less confused, like you would have been, if they used diacritics instead of silly lines, but I would wager money that there would have been some people that would be even more confused.
I don't know why you would even think "I'm making a comment in a comment system" is somehow a rebuttal to somebody pointing out that you're the only person bothered by a perceived problem. I never said you're not allowed to make a comment, just that you're the only one who complained, which gives us an idea of how many people were bothered, and the length of your posts shows that you care way more about it than you should. Like I said, big "math major nitpicking math" vibes. Obviously the two situations are different, because the math in that metaphor I used before has way less influence than tone in this manga, but the attitude you have is exactly the same which is why I bought it up in the first place.
Hell, if anything the fact that you felt the need to explain tonal diacritics to someone who speaks German, where they're much more aware about them and that they generally exist because their language absolutely relies on the umlaut, just proves my point.

Hell, thinking about it some more...
I said very clearly that the author could have just used diacritics purely for the sake of conveying that it's a matter of tone. Then you use the surrounding words to describe what that means. The author literally already did something similar, just in a fairly confusing way.

What the hell is even your problem then? If you're saying the author could've just used any diacritics and explained them from context, which they already did in their own way, then are you saying that you would've been fine with the squiggly lines being over different syllables instead of next to them? That's not always even possible when writing with Kanji where one character represents multiple syllables. So yeah, if your idea is so much better, please give us a real example of what the author should've done, instead of just saying "my idea is better and totally possible."

Oh also, if we're being autistic about language, please stop overusing "literally" when you aren't saying things that could be taken figuratively, that really grinds my gears.
Last edited 5 mo ago by Anonyan.
Avatar
@Ibri That's because in certain languages, modifications of existing letters have become letters themselves. For example, W, named "double u", is literally a double u. It evolved from existing letter(s) into a letter in its own right. Similarly, certain things have become independent letters in German. And you've proven my point. You literally just said that you would know it means to change their pronunciation. You also did say that you wouldn't know in what way to change their pronunciation (but then go into how you could guess), but that wasn't my point. I already said previously that the same tone markers can vary wildly in different languages. For example, a "falling" tone can be represented in different languages with the same diacritic, but those same languages would ascribe a completely different tone to the same "falling" tone.

I said very clearly that the author could have just used diacritics purely for the sake of conveying that it's a matter of tone. Then you use the surrounding words to describe what that means. The author literally already did something similar, just in a fairly confusing way.

@Anonyan Do you even know what intuitive means? You literally just described what intuitive means and in the same breath said oh, you didn't imply it was intuitive. I'm literally foreheading right now. You accuse me of being autistic but don't even understand this?

And I literally proved, as a normal reader, that I didn't know what the arrows meant. I am not some language expert. I honestly am not. I thought the arrows meant something like head movements. You knwo, since there had already been head movements before for language? Or something like a body movement, an actual movement. That already disproves your "100% of people can figure out what it means given context". That's already wrong.

And don't just say oh, then that means you're not part of the 100% or something trite like that.

And you're literally ignoring what I said. I never said that Japanese people know how to use diacritics. I said Japanese people know of the existence of diacritics. Does an English speaker know how to use diacritics? There's a good chance that no, they don't. Do they know ABOUT them and GENERALLY that they exist? Almost certainly! It's the same thing with Japan!

And you literally don't understand what my point is. My point is not "oh, this fantasy language should be like this or that because X reason in the real world". No! My point is "make it so that readers can understand what you've literally typed/written/drawn"! Using the existing system makes it easier for readers to understand what the hell is going on. You can still do ALL of your fantasy stuff, but don't use a system that is confusing!

And oh, so what if I'm the only person saying this? Why the hell is that an important point? This is literally a comment system on a manga website. I'm literally making a comment. Don't just make crap up and pretend like I'm making this grand speech. I know no one cares. I'm still right about what I'm saying though, and this is literally a comment system where you can say whatever you want.
Last edited 5 mo ago by givemersspls.
Avatar
@givemersspls as someone from germany I don't perceive üöä as telling me to say uoa differently but as letters that are similiar to uoa, the dots have no independent meaning for me so if you put them over something else I wouldn't have the slightest idea what you meant by it. Well I guess I would know it means to change their pronunciation but I wouldn't know in what way. (Well not entirely true the modification is similiar enough that I could make some guesses but point is they are part of the letters for me not things I use to modify letters.) Anyway to make this concrete which diacritics would you use to convey what the manga wants to convey? And how since as Anonyan says we only get the meaning of what is spoken an diacritics are for specific characters if I am understanding it correctly.
Last edited 5 mo ago by Ibri.
Read older comments