#it’s easy for me to use in a sentence :)

[remnantglow]

so normal about the gender fuckery of the Polish murderbot translation (lie i am on the verge of tears)

[the---hermit]

Not me adding annotations to a book to make it more accessible for my mom when she will read it

[alacetor-the-duckies-deer]

(Can't quit decide what would set Alastor off this much- a breakup, Lucifer getting a little to close to Alastor reason for actually being at the hotel, or just the worst timed yo mama joke in history- but let's be real, Alastor was drafting this the second Lucifer walked in the front door in Dad Beat Dad, so yeah, have my re-write Open Letter (Interlude) a deleted Hamilton song)

An open letter to the short, arrogant, anti-charismatic, realm-wide embarrassment known as Lucifer Morningstar.

(Husk downstairs at the bar: Shit!)

The man's irrational. He claims that I'm in league with Roo in some vast catastrophical intrigue!?

Bitch! Pease.

You wouldn't know what I'm doing.

You're always goin' berserk- but you never show up to work!

Give us your thoughts on Roo and Eve, next time you talk about my lack of moral compass!

At least I do my job up in this rumpus!

Ooh!

The line is behind me!

I crossed it again!

Well His Majesty lost it again!

Aw, such a rough life- better run, tell your ḙ̸̫̈́x̴̢͗͜͝-̵̣̿͘wife!

'ey! Our King's back at The Haz-bin!

Let me ask you a question. Who sits- on the throne, when you fuck off with your "projects"?

The angels were callin you Pride before A̸̞͝n̶̙̂̕y̵̝̹͒̈́one died, and you haven't done anything right since!

You nuisance, with no sense!

You will ḓ̸̹͉̙̑͘ǐ̷̖͕̰ě̶̛̱̏ of irrelevance!

Oh, sure, and they call you the devil!

You aspire to my level!

You inspire my m̵͋̆a̶͕͐͋̑ļ̷̲͚͒͐͆e̷̳͇̙̒̀͋v̷͓͝o̸̧̿̕͠l̵͙̣̉͝͝e̷̹̿̚ņ̸̭́͑̍c̷̻͑͑͘͜e̴͙̽͝

Say hi to the other Sins!

A̸n̶d̷ ̸th̸e̴s̵e̸ ̴e̶y̵e̴s̷ ̵a̴ll̴ a̸r̷o̷un̸d̷ ̵m̷e̷!̷

M̴a̶y̴b̸e̶ ̴t̸h̶e̵y̴ ̸c̵a̵n̴ ̴c̶̹̞̅̈õ̴͍n̸̰͒̀ḟ̴͎̓i̶̞̎ṟ̶̈́̑m̷͚̗̔̓!

I̷̬̤͂͝ ̷̯̇͜d̷̖̒o̷̮͗̈n̴͙̤̏'̵͌ṭ̶̨̓͝ ̷̡̀c̶ã̸̛͔rê̶͉͂ ̴̪̍ḯ̵̃ͅf̷̛̗͚͑ Ȉ̴͍ ̵̪͊Ki̴̒̑ͅl̶͓͎̄l ̸̌m̵͍̰̔͂y̴̯̐ ̵͔̟̊c̷̗͛à̸r̴̹͐è̶̖ē̵̈ř̴͖͘ ̶̝́̎w̶̖̣̍it̴̐h̵ ̷̀̄t̶̞͐h̸̖͆̎i̶͠ş̸̛͙̀ ̶͍̀̑b̴͖̐r̵̻̋o̶͚̰̓a̵̐͂d̵̖̉́c̷̀à̸̛̰͈s̶̾t̸̰́͛ͅ!̴͍̆

I̷̭͛'̶͎̊ĺ̷͔l̶̜̏ ̸͛Fi̵͌g̸̯̅h̸̺̑t̸͓̑ ̴̡̃y̵̻̆o̴̰̽u̵̜̐ ̶̰̀ö̸̘́ṋ̵͒ ̶̧͑m̵̪̂y̴̤̆ ̵̺̄o̸̤͆ẅ̶́n̶̺͑ ̴̖̀t̵̖̐e̷̺̒rm̷̥̓ş̶͗!

Come get me, Lucifer, you pathetic motherfucker!

[tkbrokkoli]

nnnnggghh are these ppl fuckling stupid wtffffff

[kittyb1tz]

no WAY is deltarune having me fight a god damn biblically accurate angel made of darker than darkness with a fight system that its previously only used for THIS lonely dyslexic sweetie pie

[rigelmejo]

UNRELATED: at 344 hours of chinese listening and I finished HP5 audiobook. (and the audiobook did NOT need to be 31 fucking hours, it had so much filler, but being optimistic I guess it made me practice listening for 31 more hours >o>)

My options now are: force myself to listen to and finish HP6 and HP7, despite being sick of these fucking audiobooks, because that's around ~60 more hours of practice listening and I am a stubborn fucker. I am stubborn and spiteful and I KNOW I'll fucking understand HP6 and HP7, so they'll be 'comprehensible input' listening material. I know I'll understand so they'll definitely cause improvement, I know I'll understand even if I only pay partial attention because I understood all of HP5 with partial attention, I might learn 1000-2000 more new words from them which will make FUTURE listening easier, and I can say I honestly tested out 'using all of the HP audiobooks to improve my listening in a language' and can compare my experiences to others who have done it.

Like this Spanish learner, and these people in the comments, including ZoomSOM "At ~550 hours right now and halfway through the fourth audiobook.  I understand 95-99% of the "story" but miss some of the details." A lot of people mention 600-1000 hours to understand HP1, but as we know HP4 is much harder than HP1 and HP5-7 are the hardest with the most unique words. I am guessing maybe 1000-1500 hours to understand HP7... but I can't find anyone listing specifically HP7. This person read all of HP by 1500 hours.

So it looks like HP5-7 seem understandable to many people learning Spanish by around 1000-1500 hours. For the early learners, 450-600 hours (but it was 450 hours for HP1). So for Chinese, (a doubled Dreaming Spanish roadmap) that would be 2000-3000 hours. And for early learners, 900-1200 hours in Chinese. I have 891 hours of Chinese listening total now (547 estimated hours of prior listening, 344 hours since starting my chinese listening experiment). So either I am REALLY good at listening to audiobooks... or I may have underestimated the hours of prior listening/hours of comprehensible input I got.

I wonder if my estimated hours of prior comprehensible input should be higher...

I also wonder if when I finish HP6 and HP7 audiobooks, I'll be as good at listening to Chinese as those people with 1500 hours of Spanish are with listening to Spanish. Not necessarily, as some people listened to HP1-7 in Spanish from hours 450-600ish, and still had to keep listening to Spanish until 1500 hours to see the progress they wanted.

I will probably... just fucking finish this audiobook series. I can't properly compare myself to other learners who listened to these, and their results, if I don't even finish doing it myself. So I suppose that's settled. -.- I'm going to 'speedrun' these fucking audiobooks, and somehow listen to them in a few days each. So I can get through them asap. Thankfully, I no longer need to re-listen to them to understand them. (A form of self torture I'm sure, making myself listen to HP1-4 two times. I sure felt like I was suffering by the time I got to HP4).

Afterward I'm gonna fucking reward myself and either listen to MoDu audiobook all the way through or ZhenHun all the way through. I'm already rewarding myself by listening to MoDu audio drama in the evening, a nice palette cleanser. (And yes, alternatively learner podcasts could be listened to but I just get SOOOOO bored of slice of life daily life podcasts, so fucking bored of learner materials so fast)

[superconductivebean]

#1539

I disdain and hate Engish dialogue punctuation. I'll explain.

With M-dashes for dialogue and quotation marks for thoughts and inner monologues, the text is objectively a lot easier to read without actually reading the script. You're aware of what to expect, grammatically, and can adjust to the author's pace this way.

I am a fast reader, it's all vital for me and it's a generally good exercise to try and implement grammar as a pace marker.

But the way English-language allows for random placements of the spoken speech is aggravating; it's not, technically, the language's fault, but I totally understand why people constantly feel lost or don't understand the system completely. I don't understand it either, and in a sense, I reject and resent it.

How are you supposed not to if everything looks exactly the same?

Especially when it allows this to exist:

"A lengthy line of dialogue", character A says. "A line that belongs to its own paragraph and is poorly indicated, if at all", character B adds. [Unrelated things are happening here and it's not clear why they're not their own paragraph.] "Line." [who said that???]

Bonus point if there is no indication and the reader is expected to utilise the power of cosmos to understand who said what lest they don't want to reread an entire scene multiple times to simply be able to digest it.

It's partly author's fault. A paragraph is a concealed thought, it should be lone in most cases, but intertwined with everything else. We as authors should always remember this.

But the language allows to mush these thoughts together. It creates a sense of the flow, yes, to write like this; but then its reading is done backwards. You have to look at the end of the next sentence to know who said it, then read the line, then read everything assembled together, and even if your eyes were trained to do that in seconds, it's tiring and unnecessary. Cute but rocky flow, perhaps you shouldn't write like this, maybe it's better to opt out for something like this:

"Line." "Line?" "Line x10." "Oh. Line then."

If a paragraph is a concealed thought, the thought can also be a compound of smaller thoughts. Yet they shouldn't be convoluted or smooched together too tightly they're nigh impossible to untangle?

With M-dashes, this would look like this:

— A lengthy line of dialogue, — character A says. Character B adds: "A line that could still be its own paragraph but now fits as it is clearly marked as an addendum BEFORE the line begins; could be possible with the previous example but is rarely, if ever, structured this way". [Things became their own paragraph.] — Line. — Still unclear who said that but at least it is its own thing now.

And this is one of two cases when "" aren't used for thoughts and inner dialogues; another one is when your entire dialogue is back and forth and can be presented as its own paragraph.

It also makes the text read extremely fast because you take in the sentence structure first and then populate it with words and senses.

I'm angry at this, evidently. A lot of thought goes into where it should not belong—ttp it feels like a honest downgrade from Russiаn. The punctuation should be the rail regulating of reading, not a labyrinth or a some kind of twister game.

[lighthouseas]

should start speaking some spanish on here. for funsies

[itwoodbeprefect]

i love websites that contain text-based information

[keenestpeach]

give it up for duolingo not explaining grammar rules yet again!!

[sentofight]

ooc. u know since i started teaching i think my grammar is getting..........tiny..........tiny...weeensyyyyyy eaaannyyyy better. i know how grammar works but then i write my brain: *slides arabic structure here because it can* and then you have arabizi*

[crabbng]

Yahuul is the women of all time i love her and she speaks sign language? Love her even more, SHES A BADDIE SHE DOES NOT CARE

just for clarification, yahuul is nonbinary and does use they/them pronouns BUT i don't think there's any way you would know that from the comic only so do not feel bad.

THAT BEING SAID, you are so right. an absolute baddie. an icon.

[famewolf]

if im being honest and allowing myself to vent a bit about it ... another red flag was when the DM went 'wow i love the detail of your backstory but idk what i can do with it tho ):'

[angorwhosebabyisthis]

i think it is probably a sign of the process of healing from the trauma of having every word out of my mouth ripped apart, mocked, and treated as an unforgivable offense warranting Extreme Rage and Vitriol, and having it explained to me in excruciating and hateful detail why my thought processes and basic turns of phrase and the things i thought were worth expressing were stupid worthless gibberish, unbearable to listen to, and the root of everything wrong with society, by redditor-ass faux-intellectuals in my life growing up for being awkwardly phrased/not concise enough/mildly whimsical, that some days i'm proud of my meta and some days i can barely stand to look at it. but god that does not make the second one more fun.

[lit-in-thy-heart]

Choose your fighter: being able to feel confident in writing a scene with more than two characters, not worrying about sentence structure, or writing effortless descriptions.

[askshivanulegacy]

Lol what?

Fourth person POV is a literary perspective and it doesn't involve "fourth person pronouns" because "fourth person pronouns" do not exist. "We" and "us" are first person. Regardless of how you use them, they can only be first person. People are confusing numbers again, just because they want the numbered items to be the same.

Chat is a noun. You can replace chat with "y'all" because chat is a noun and you can replace nouns with pronouns. You can replace chat with "someone" or "everyone" because those are also pronouns and that is still how pronouns function.

Noun or collective noun, definite or indefinite, it is still a noun. You can identically replace it with "reader" or "viewer" or "listener", and still cover whatever specific meaning the speaker might have in their head at the moment of use. Those are also nouns.

Chat is a noun, and it's simply not that complicated. People can try to call it fourth person all they want, and they will still be wrong about it. Doing complicated mental gymnastics doesn't improve the argument.

Speaker intent doesn't matter and neither do the ill-educated opinions of schoolteachers who evidently don't understand what a noun is.

I keep seeing the "chat is a fourth person pronoun" post and it's getting increasingly hard to avoid starting discourse in the notes of it. chat I don't think they know what these linguistics terms they're using mean