ITT we make fun of filthy cognitivists

How is "can't get any" a double negative? It's just a negation of "can get any."

Do you realize that this is not his opinion but that of the field of linguistics?

>>9791569
>prescriptivism
oh anon

File: Noam_Chomsky,_2004.jpg (14KB, 200x267px)

14KB, 200x267px

>>9791620
don't get me started on linguistics lad. "field" of worthless plebs like pic related. LMAO have fun with your autistic """""field"""""

>>9791635
What sort of valuable contributions to humanity have you made since you're willing to call chomsky a worthless pleb?

>>9791640
>What sort of valuable contributions to humanity have you made
He called Chomsky a worthless pleb

>>9791640
i'm rewriting the western canon rn. what about you lad?

>>9791640
I voted for Hilliary

>>9791640
He is here for some epic trollin, not worthwhile to spend our time on
I did like the video, I remember watching it years ago

Why is there this suddenly deluge of Jewish Canadian Pseuds with Youtube Channels all the sudden around here, who the fuck is posting this shit? if the mods would just ban the one guy, and you know it's one guy, probably some redpilled fag who's anti-semitic but too stupid to realized what he's posting, then these threads will just be a bad memory

>>9791635
you don't understand what linguistics are

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chomsky_hierarchy

>>9791665
>linguistics are
the ironing

>>9791640
Comsky is an american linguist. It's like a mongolian sailor.

>>9791633
>he thinks one way of speaking is better than another way of speaking because of arbitrary rules
But I bet he's used double negatives, split infinitives, and verbs nouns all the time without realizing his hypocrisy.

>>9791685
At least he isn't a europoor one, which is like being a mongoloid sailor

>>9791605
pls respond

>>9791707
It could be worse: he could be Australian, which makes him like a blind and retarded mongolian sailor

>>9791569
That's correct you stupid /lit/ard. There's is nothing inherently "proper" about the prestige dialect of a language. The upper echelons of society don't speak a more "correct" language, they speak a different (often more complex) version of the language.

>>9791672
You just proved my point again. You think linguistics is the study of languages and their grammar like english or something. WRONG.

>>9791605
Also his story of double negatives is wrong. These were removed from official English grammar by around XVII or XVIII century as a deliberate effort to make the language more logical. The guy is full of shit, who could've guessed
>>9791810
There is, at any given time, a "proper" language as a set of norms and rules that are officially recognised to be correct (which are rooted in centralised education and the basic literature that people are expected to read). Wherever you call negro speech a bastardised English or a dialect, the fact remains that it's not a proper English, nor a proper language at all, but an artificial construction originating from the black population's exclusion from American society. Much like the black nationalism.

>>9791569
I found that vid pretty interesting desu.

Gonna post it on reddit

>>9792395
What about the Scottish dialect then?

If anything it's closer to old English than modern English is

>>9791569
reminder that linguistics is a cognitive science and that all other antiquated pursuits 'within' it are useless / not taken seriously academically

>>9792395
>There is, at any given time, a "proper" language as a set of norms and rules that are officially recognised to be correct (which are rooted in centralised education and the basic literature that people are expected to read). Wherever you call negro speech a bastardised English or a dialect, the fact remains that it's not a proper English, nor a proper language at all, but an artificial construction originating from the black population's exclusion from American society. Much like the black nationalism.
No there isn't. It's randomly chosen as standard and it's not even consistent in of itself, it constantly changes. Dialects that were lucky enough to not be chosen as standard are not improper as a result. That isn't how language works.

How's AAVE correct when it's culturally incorrect, thus AAVE is descriptively incorrect grammar? Language is cultural, so if the culture demands to use a defined proper language then that defined proper language is a proper language by description.

File: chris ryan.jpg (71KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 1280x720px

>>9791569
fuck steven pinker and fuck agriculture.