thegoodfellas/blogset-br huggingface dataset:
have found citations to this effect from the 1940s and 1950s; the latest edition of the OED shows that the term was so used in the 1960s as well. And then there is the fact that when English words are modeled on French words ending in -ie which in turn derive from Greek words ending in - or -, then, with extremely few exceptions, the English ending becomes -y (monarchy, therapy, theology, philosophy, and so on ad infinitum), unless the word describes a specific medical condition, in which case the Latin-like ending -ia is adopted (anemia, neuralgia, myasthenia, etc.); English even has the doublet melancholy/melancholia. The only exceptions that come to mind are mania (along with its compounds) and nostalgia, both of which have medical analogues (and, of course, many would not have worked). An unusual case is that of anomie, where the French ending has been kept. In fact, in 1959 the word diglossia was present in unabridged dictionaries (such as Websters Third International) with condition of the tongue being bifid as its only meaning, while the linguistic term diglossy was being used at least by linguists specializing in Greek, for example P. C. Costas,(2) and continued to be so used after the publication of Fergusons paper, for example by Robert Browning.(3) It is only in dictionaries published in 2000 or later that the sociolinguistic meaning of diglossia can be found. So much for the word itself. Its choice shows, if nothing else, that even an outstanding linguist can be insensitive to the nuances of his native language. One point that Ferguson insisted on was a distinction between diglossia as he defined it and the more common dialect-standard dichotomy, the difference being that while in the latter situation there are people who actually speak standard (as Ferguson no doubt thought of himself as doing), under diglossia no one speaks H colloquially. But I have been told by a Greek friend about an uncle of hers, a priest, for whom katharevousa was the natural medium of expression. And I firmly believe that no one really speaks standard as taught in school, with all the grammatical and syntactic rules that one is expected to follow in expository writing. People who think that they speak standard (incorrectly, they often believe) actually speak a dialect that is a colloquial, regionally colored variant thereof; I will call such a dialect, for lack of a better term, a parastandard (I would welcome suggestions for a better term). In German it is referred to as Umgangssprache; Italians, French and others speak of italiano regionale, francais regional, and the like. In any parastandard there are, of course, degrees by which any idiolect differs from the standard; people who read a lot academics, for example are more likely to have their natural speech influenced by the written language. But, as the Israeli linguist Menachem Dagut(4) has written, [e]very living language displays a greater or lesser degree of diglossia between its spoken and written use. Another characteristic of diglossia that Ferguson considered essential was stability. I dont consider the fact that
not hostile, not to mention that their internationalist views, in general, mesh poorly with regionalism. Conversely, all conservatives are ardent supporters of Breton among the peasants, whether to keep the latter tied to the land or for the sake of social conservation. And as recently as the year 2000, Jean-Pierre Chevenement, the leader of the leftmost faction of French socialism, resigned as interior minister in order to protest Prime Minister Lionel Jospins plan of autonomy for Corsica that would include the teaching of Corsican in the islands public schools. Church and language Indeed, most of the nineteenth-century movements that promoted the revival of previously suppressed languages (and of the national or regional identities underlying them) were conservative in nature. In much of Europe, the Catholic Church played no small part in them. The Catholic Church has a very old tradition of fostering regional dialects. While, for the almost two millennia preceding Vatican II, the formal liturgy as well as the official writings of the Church (canon law, bulls, encyclicals) were in Latin, for a good deal of that time local vernaculars were used in the informal, mainly oral proceedings such as preaching and communal singing, but sometimes also including written uses such as parish records and individual pastoral letters (in Roussillon, Catalan was used by the Church as late as the 1890s, a century after the Revolution proclaimed the universality of French). It was already in the days of Charlemagne that, while the study of good Latin was promoted, clergy were enjoined by several Church Councils to preach in the vulgar tongue, in order that the people may understand, since the common people were no longer expected to understand Latin (the Council of Tours of 813 specifies in Romance or German, in rusticam romanam linguam aut theotiscam). While the boundaries of ecclesiastic provinces usually followed historical lines, dioceses were more often than not organized along linguistic ones; the Leys dAmor, a 14th-century codification of Occitan poetry, specifically states that there are as many dialects (parladuras) as dioceses, except that the large diocese of Toulouse has several. Some relics of this organization have persisted until very recently; for example, the diocese of Lleida, in Catalonia (Spain), until the 1990s included a strip of land that has always belonged politically to Aragon, but where the spoken dialect is Catalan. It was only when, in the wake of Vatican II, Latin was replaced by the national languages in the liturgy that the local dialects had to give way to the official standards. In part this was a recognition of the fact that, in the modern world, the laity in general could no longer be assumed to be illiterate, while literacy no longer implied knowing Latin. The history of Protestant churches is quite different in this regard (a difference that seemed to be lost on Ferguson when he discussed the relation between religion and diglossia). The doctrine of justification by faith and the central place of the Bible as the sole source of truth and salvation common to the Lutheran and Calvinist churches meant that [i]n
order that all could have access to the Holy Writ, Protestantism soon came to stand for elementary education for all.(6) The result was that the language of the Bible version used by a given church was necessarily the language of the church and of schooling. Now, a Bible translation was, and still is, a major undertaking, and obviously not every regional language variety could have one of its own. Martin Luther is often given credit for creating modern German by means of his Bible translation. He deserves this credit only in the sense that the language of his translation immediately became the school language in those parts of historic Germany that turned Protestant, except for some northern states that, for a few generations, clung to Low German (which in the Middle Ages had a prestigious written standard). German as Luther wrote it is, in fact, not greatly different from that used by scribes and writers throughout middle and southern Germany since the early 15th century, when a kind of amalgam of Middle and High German began to be used in the Imperial chancery (at the time located in Prague) and in the chanceries of many states and cities. When Denmark turned Lutheran, it imposed the Danish Bible in Norway, which was under its rule, on the not unreasonable assumption that the Norwegian dialects were close enough to Danish so that Norwegian children could learn the written language without too much difficulty. Swedish children could no doubt do the same, and probably would have if Sweden had not shaken off Danish rule a short time before the Reformation. As the American linguist Einar Haugen(7) has written, After their political separation the Swedes were not inclined to tolerate Da[nish] features in their writing, and chose to emphasize their differences. The [Bible] translators ... developed a fairly consistent norm, and one that on many points was consciously different from Da[nish]. But the political motivation for a separate versus a common Bible language was the exception rather than the rule; usually, the motivation was pragmatic. A Bible translation was, as I said, a major project, to be undertaken if linguistically necessary; while the Norwegians did not get their own Bible under Danish rule, the Icelanders did. Similarly Finland, ruled by Sweden at Reformation time, got a Finnish Bible. Scotland was an independent kingdom when John Knox, after many years in England and among the English in Geneva, returned to lead the Church of Scotland, bringing with him the Geneva Bible and a habit of preaching and writing in English. But even before this event, the Tyndale and Coverdale Bibles, as well as the Book of Common Prayer, were used by Scottish Protestants. The Lowland Scots did not perceive written English as a foreign language; they generally referred to their own language as Inglis, calling it Scottis mainly when they wanted to contrast it with that of England, which they called Southroun or Sudrun, that is, southern (to knap Southroun was to affect Anglicisms in speech). And so it was natural that English became the language of
born before 1945, more or less) that grew up speaking Corsican while learning French in school believes that it speaks [true] French, with all the grammar and all the rules, while young people dont speak it so well, that is, they speak it more naturally.(9) This transition was once a slow process. In the Protestant regions of Europe where the Bible language was noticeably different from the vernacular, it is generally attested that the change didnt occur in any great measure, even among the more educated urban classes, until the 18th century, a good two centuries after the Reformation. Examples include the displacement of Norwegian by a Norwegianized form of Danish (Dano-Norwegian, the basis of what is now called bokmal), of Scots by a Scottish-inflected English, of Frisian by a Frisianized Dutch (called Stadfries or city Frisian). In the aforementioned Cevennes region of southern France, while knowledge of standard French was common, everyday speech was in Occitan until the nineteenth century. In northern Germany, it appears that in Hanover perhaps because of the presence of the electoral (later royal) court a parastandard High German was spoken by the 18th century as well, at least among the educated, with the curious result that Hanover speech though non-native became the model of German pronunciation on the stage (Buhnendeutsch), since everywhere else in Germany dialects were still spoken by everyone. Other capitals (Berlin, Dresden, Munich, Vienna) eventually developed their own Umgangssprachen, but the Hanover model remained the ideal. In the Hansa cities, however, even the merchant class spoke Low German till the end of the nineteenth century, as attested (for Lubeck) in Thomas Manns Buddenbrooks. In the twentieth century the process has been greatly accelerated by the mass media, which carry the parastandard of the cultural centers to once isolated areas where formerly the standard was learned only in school. This doesnt mean that the parastandard heard on television, on radio or in the movies is necessarily the one adopted, except perhaps by a minority that wants to appear up-to-date. In France, Spain and the United States, the peculiar southern modalities of speech seem to be resisting the dominance of Parisian French, Madrid Spanish and General American English, respectively. (In the United Kingdom a kind of reversal seems to be taking place: British people no longer feel the need to lose their regional accents as they rise socially, and the BBC is no longer dominated by speakers of Received Pronunciation [RP], so that this variety has lost its former designation of BBC English.) What it does mean is that massive exposure to parastandard changes the perception of the language from that of a rigid, school-taught and rule-bound medium to that of a living, spoken one since people dont consciously differentiate between standard and parastandard and makes it easier for them to form their own parastandard. The displacement of a dialect by a parastandard is, however, but one possible way of weakening diglossia. The opposite can happen as well: an old standard is replaced by a new one that is based on the dialect of a
prestigious locality (such as Beijing for modern standard Chinese). The standardization of dialects for literary purposes is usually driven by regional or ethnic consciousness, not purely literary needs. When individual authors have chosen to write in dialect, typically in order to represent the speech of common folk, they have usually created their own versions (examples in American literature include Mark Twains Huckleberry Finn and Alice Walkers The Color Purple). It is only in the context of a collective effort that a standardized written form for a dialect is created. In Europe this has, historically, been limited at first to the needs of poetry, narrative and other popular forms, with science, history, law and the like being left in the domain of the standard. I will call such a more-or-less standardized version of a dialect a semistandard. Many modern standards began life as semistandards. In medieval Western and Central Europe, for example, Latin was the universal standard, and the written forms of the vernacular were used mainly for popular poetry and stories. It is significant that Dante, who may be said to have created literary Italian, wrote his famous essay on the subject, De vulgari eloquentia, in Latin, just as Pompeu Fabra, the codifier of modern Catalan, wrote his first Catalan grammar in Spanish. A semistandard may acquire official status and become the language of elementary (but usually not secondary) education, or of parliamentary debate (but not bills); this is the case of Letzebuergesch in Luxembourg (which in addition to this semistandard has two standards, French and German) and of Haitian Creole. There can thus be situations where a patois, a semistandard based on it, a standard and a parastandard exist side by side, as is the case of the Peruvian highlands, where a Quechua semistandard (based on Cuzco speech) now has a measure of official status. Standard Catalan began its ascent from semistandard to full standard in the 1930s, but this process was rudely interrupted by the Franco regime. It was quickly completed, however, in constitutional Spain after 1979. In Catalonia today, the population is split about evenly between those who use Spanish and those who use Catalan as their primary vernacular (though there are many families, especially in Barcelona, where both languages are spoken interchangeably). In addition, standard Spanish and standard Catalan are both official at all levels of government and education. Only in the courts does Spanish have an advantage, due to Spains centralized judiciary in which judges may be assigned to positions all over the country. In the autonomous parliament and local councils, by contrast, Catalan predominates, as it does in the realm of high culture: it is the only language of supertitles at the opera, while at lectures, book presentations and poetry readings, even if the text presented is itself in Spanish (or any other language), the introductions are likely to be in Catalan. Technically, then, those who speak Catalan as their primary dialect and use Spanish as their preferred standard (as well as the reverse, though in this case the numbers are probably small) are in a
in most other weakly diglossic ones, through the concept of registers. In the vernacular certain verb forms of standard French the simple past and the imperfect subjunctive are simply not used, the interrogative is constructed differently, the negative particle ne is often skipped, and so on. But, even if such standard features are heard as stilted or excessively formal, they are still judged as more correct or better French. It may even be, as Leonard Bloomfield wrote in 1927, that the notion that some persons are felt to be better models of conduct and speech than others... may be a generally human state of affairs, true in every group and applicable to all languages, and the factor of Standard and Literary Language versus dialect may be a superadded secondary one.(13) The great pitfall in teaching the standard to children who speak a parastandard is the generalized belief, even (especially) on the part of teachers, that they are not distinct language varieties but that the former is just a better and the latter a worse form of the language. Rather than introducing the standard as a code to be mastered, with special emphasis on the ways in which it differs from the vernacular which, however, would be acknowledged as a valid medium in its own right teachers set out to correct what are called faulty speech habits. Many such corrections may be based on grammarians outdated notions of correctness; an example in English is the proscription of they (them, their) in the sense of he or she (him or her, his or her) a usage that goes back (in writing!) to Middle English and includes Shakespeare, Byron and most notably Jane Austen. Among non-immigrant English-speakers of North America, diglossia is generally weak except among those whose dialect is AAVE (African-American Vernacular English, also known as Black English and unfortunately as Ebonics). The notorious Ebonics controversy of 1997 resulted from an attempt (however clumsy) to teach standard English to AAVE-speaking children in the way that such teaching is done in strong diglossia, implying, of course, an acknowledgment that the dialect (in this case a patois) is a legitimate language variety. But this kind of acknowledgment is difficult for a society accustomed to think in terms of good English versus bad English, with Black English a particular case of the latter. Another perverse effect of teaching the standard as a better form of the language is that it sets up, in those of a rebellious or simply an intellectually lazy nature, a negative reaction to authority in the form of a refusal to adopt the norms of the standard even under circumstances that clearly call for it. I cant think of a better example of this effect than the diction of the current President of the United States. Notes 1. "Diglossia in Word, Vol. 15 (1959). 2. An Outline of the History of the Greek Language with Particular Emphasis on the Koine and the Subsequent Stages (1936). 3. Medieval and Modern Greek (1969). 4. "The revival of Hebrew and language planning in J. D. Woods
(ed.), Language Standards and their Codification: Process and Application (1985). 5. Les patois; evolution-classification-etude (1946). 6. H. P. Douglas and E. deS. Brunner, The Protestant Church as a Social Institution (1935). 7. The Scandinavian Languages (1976). 8. Jeannine Treffers-Daller, Mixing Two Languages: French-Dutch Contact in a Comparative Perspective (1994). The difference between the French-speaking inhabitants of Brussels and those of the rest of Belgium is that for the former French has displaced Flemish, while for the latter it has displaced the Walloon patois. 9. Marie-Jose Dalbera-Stefanaggi, Les corses et leurs langues: science et conscience in J.-C. Bouvier (ed.), Les Francais et leurs langues (1991). 10. Here I am taking advantage of the distinction that English allows between Catalonian (referring to the country of Catalonia) and Catalan (referring to the language and culture), analogous to Serbian versus Serb. 11. If there is any linguistic contamination in strong diglossia, it is usually the opposite: the vernacular contaminated by the standard. Spanglish is a well-known example; another is the extent to which colloquial Catalan has been affected by Spanish during the hundreds of years that the latter was the only school language, to the extent that many Catalan-speakers name the letters of the alphabet in Spanish, including (with sounds that dont exist in Catalan) [e] for C and [e] for G. 12. Gertrud Aub-Buscher, French and French-based Creoles: the case of the French Caribbean in C. Sanders (ed.), French Today (1993). 13. Literate and illiterate speech in C. F. Hockett (ed.), A Leonard Bloomfield Anthology (1970). November 12, 2002 Revised July 20, 2004 2002 by Jacob Lublinerhttp://www.ce.berkeley.edu/~coby/essays/refdigl.htm
Camisa Laranja Camuflagem e saia, tamanho M. O tecido parece um veludo de tao lisinho que e, mas na etiqueta diz que e poliester com um pouquinho de elastano.E bem legal para se usar aberta com outra camiseta por baixo, esta com pouco uso. A saia e curta e possui ziper atras, tambem com pouco uso.Preco: R$50,00 Saia de seda T V Z, tamanho 38. Linda saia preta totalmente forrada. O seu comprimento e bem abaixo do joelho, esta nova.Preco: R$50,00 Blusa turquesa de um ombro so,tamanho G. Muito charmosa fica essa blusa, cor que vai ser muito usada no verao, tecido bem leve e importado por isso nao tem etiqueta interna, nova sem uso.Preco: R$35,00 Sandalia vermelha e prata, numero 38. Otima para o dia dia, e tambem com um look mais produzido, para a noite, esta impecavel, sola e salto novos, detalhe na frente e de strass.Preco: R$40,00 Vestido preto rendado tamanho 38. Esse vestido tem uma renda que imita um croche, e forrado e muito bonito, e de uma marca que foi muito conhecida,.. Galpao..,podemos considerar um modelo retro, esta num preco bem legal.Preco: R$ 35,00 Marcos Pinguim: ZTE lancara smartphone com Firefox OS em 2013: Firefox OS (anteriormente Boot to Gecko ou B2G) e um sistema operacional livre desenvolvido pela Mozilla baseado no navegador da web ... Fonte: http://www.hardware.com.br/Por Marcos Elias Picao Em 17 de agosto de 2011 as 06h21Foi lancado nesta semana o Linux Mint 11 com LXDE, ambiente que mantem o visual classico. Em tempos de Unity e GNOME 3, o LXDE e uma boa opcao para quem quer um ambiente leve e atual com a disposicao de menus dos anos 90. A estrutura do Mint (Ubuntu) com a leveza do LXDE apresenta um sistema robusto e facil de usar, com suporte a praticamente todos os softwares atuais para Ubuntu, sem as complicacoes que voce teria ao usar um sistema mais antigo so por ser leve.O gerenciador de software e um dos aplicativos que mais recebeu alteracoes nesta versao, ficando mais pratico e amigavel. Alem de alteracoes visuais ele exibe uma lista das dependencias e dos pacotes que serao removidos para instalar o programa selecionado, oferecendo mais controle antes de efeturar as modificacoes.A quantidade de dados (download) e o espaco em disco serao exibidos considerando essas dependencias.O gerenciador de atualizacoes recebeu aprimoramentos tambem, agora todas as janelas de mensagens sao modais (nao ficam mais por tras das janelas ate serem fechadas).Se voce nao gosta daquelas frases que o Linux Mint exibe no terminal, agora elas podem ser desativadas com um clique na ferramenta Configuracoes da area de trabalho:Ha algumas outras alteracoes importantes, listadas em detalhes na pagina de novidades e no anuncio.O Mint com LXDE requer pelo menos 256 MB de RAM e 3 GB de espaco em disco. E uma distro que se adapta bem a notebooks e computadores de varios anos atras, especialmente se voce achar o GNOME ou KDE lentos nas distros atuais.Links dos mirrors estao no anuncio, voce tambem pode baixar por torrent. Comunidade Linux Indaiatuba: Blog Seja Livre - agora de
esse nome em Pt.)no Discovery Kids.bem como eu tenho aula pela manha pedi pra minha querida mamae para gravar no meu celular :3Valewoooh mae te amoh \o/bem ou foi falha porque gravar da TV pro Celular fica com som muito ruim ou oque eu percebi e a pura verdade:Spitfire ficou com voz de homem cara eu fiquei super decepcionada com isso (pela Celestia)porque pra mim a SpiFire e mulher!!! existe uma enorme diferenca entre ponysMACHOS E FEMEAS pra mim a diferenca so ta no nariz :\e aqui vai outro fail do ep:Doctor Whooves tem asas na parte que Rainbow Dash troca os numeros dos flancose deu pra perceber porque ele e unico :D e tambem pela sua Cutie Mark em Bronies, fails inesqueciveis e super notaveis que acontecem geralmente em MLP:FiMmais do mesmo jeito esse e o meu ep. preferido ;D