Gwilym
@gwilymlockwood.com
Chart botherer. Bad runner. Noise listener.
gwilymlockwood.com
gwilymlockwood.com
I feel like people are shifting towards writing and saying "for fuck sake" instead of "for fuck's sake". Not sure if this is a phonological thing where the the consecutive /s/es get deleted, or influenced by autocorrect not recognising "fuck's" and that catching on in speech.
October 20, 2025 at 9:21 AM
I feel like people are shifting towards writing and saying "for fuck sake" instead of "for fuck's sake". Not sure if this is a phonological thing where the the consecutive /s/es get deleted, or influenced by autocorrect not recognising "fuck's" and that catching on in speech.
This is daft but the clichés quiz is a nice marker of whether Spanish Duolingo is working for me. Every quiz, I understand just a bit more of the "stuff dubbed into other languages" round if there's a Spanish question, so I feel a tiny sense of achievement even without knowing any 6'7 players.
September 5, 2025 at 7:16 AM
This is daft but the clichés quiz is a nice marker of whether Spanish Duolingo is working for me. Every quiz, I understand just a bit more of the "stuff dubbed into other languages" round if there's a Spanish question, so I feel a tiny sense of achievement even without knowing any 6'7 players.
Example:
A: "hi B, office reception here, your interview candidate has arrived."
B: "great, thanks, I'll come and collect them."
B knows that the candidate is a woman called Jane Doe. But B hasn't met Jane yet and doesn't know her, so still uses the impersonal they.
A: "hi B, office reception here, your interview candidate has arrived."
B: "great, thanks, I'll come and collect them."
B knows that the candidate is a woman called Jane Doe. But B hasn't met Jane yet and doesn't know her, so still uses the impersonal they.
August 11, 2025 at 12:27 PM
Example:
A: "hi B, office reception here, your interview candidate has arrived."
B: "great, thanks, I'll come and collect them."
B knows that the candidate is a woman called Jane Doe. But B hasn't met Jane yet and doesn't know her, so still uses the impersonal they.
A: "hi B, office reception here, your interview candidate has arrived."
B: "great, thanks, I'll come and collect them."
B knows that the candidate is a woman called Jane Doe. But B hasn't met Jane yet and doesn't know her, so still uses the impersonal they.
In this case, I think I used "they" to convey uncertainty over who the rider was, not uncertainty over the rider's sex/gender. Maybe also to not imply I'm a friend of the rider. I've also heard people use it when they know the name and sex of the referent, but don't know the referent personally.
August 11, 2025 at 12:27 PM
In this case, I think I used "they" to convey uncertainty over who the rider was, not uncertainty over the rider's sex/gender. Maybe also to not imply I'm a friend of the rider. I've also heard people use it when they know the name and sex of the referent, but don't know the referent personally.
Example: I was watching the men's Tour de France, and saw that one rider had crashed and was on the floor before the camera cut away. I said out loud "oh, that looked nasty, not sure who that was but hope they're okay".
August 11, 2025 at 12:27 PM
Example: I was watching the men's Tour de France, and saw that one rider had crashed and was on the floor before the camera cut away. I said out loud "oh, that looked nasty, not sure who that was but hope they're okay".
I think there's a new trend for what you might call the "impersonal they". I specifically do not mean gender-neutral; I mean using "they/them" for a singular third person where you do actually know the sex/gender of the referent, but you're using it to convey distance between you and the referent.
August 11, 2025 at 12:27 PM
I think there's a new trend for what you might call the "impersonal they". I specifically do not mean gender-neutral; I mean using "they/them" for a singular third person where you do actually know the sex/gender of the referent, but you're using it to convey distance between you and the referent.
(In most cases, I've had a quick search to see if it's a known thing, but my access to the literature (and my appetite for searching through it) is lower than it used to be! If you've got a link to a paper showing this, give me a shout)
August 11, 2025 at 12:27 PM
(In most cases, I've had a quick search to see if it's a known thing, but my access to the literature (and my appetite for searching through it) is lower than it used to be! If you've got a link to a paper showing this, give me a shout)
Well now I just want to know what the dangers are!
June 25, 2025 at 1:05 PM
Well now I just want to know what the dangers are!
Just to be clear, I agree with your post here. My point is more that it should pretty much all be done by experts at this point rather than letting people like me with no expertise potentially derail or stall the process by opening up a public consultation again.
bsky.app/profile/smit...
bsky.app/profile/smit...
Elected officials being experts in transport, demand, planning and civil engineering? I know we had enough of experts but...
2 -3 years to update/complete detailed design, safety assessments, passenger profiles, adjust for what has changed, tender, appoint contractor (no VIP list), planning
2 -3 years to update/complete detailed design, safety assessments, passenger profiles, adjust for what has changed, tender, appoint contractor (no VIP list), planning
June 4, 2025 at 12:36 PM
Just to be clear, I agree with your post here. My point is more that it should pretty much all be done by experts at this point rather than letting people like me with no expertise potentially derail or stall the process by opening up a public consultation again.
bsky.app/profile/smit...
bsky.app/profile/smit...
You're absolutely right we need detailed plans for building the trams, but after the extensive consultation we've already had, I'm not sure what sort of constructive feedback another public consultation is going to add that we haven't had already, while also adding extra avenues for objection.
June 4, 2025 at 12:29 PM
You're absolutely right we need detailed plans for building the trams, but after the extensive consultation we've already had, I'm not sure what sort of constructive feedback another public consultation is going to add that we haven't had already, while also adding extra avenues for objection.
Especially as we've already had a consultation of sorts last year about which route the proposed lines should follow! There's massive support, just crack on.
June 4, 2025 at 12:01 PM
Especially as we've already had a consultation of sorts last year about which route the proposed lines should follow! There's massive support, just crack on.
So, the rule is: for a team name A B FC
1. If A and B are nouns, choose the main noun, which will almost always be B
2. If A is a noun and B is an adjective, choose the main noun...
3. ...unless there is also a team called A C, in which case choose the adjective.
1. If A and B are nouns, choose the main noun, which will almost always be B
2. If A is a noun and B is an adjective, choose the main noun...
3. ...unless there is also a team called A C, in which case choose the adjective.
February 14, 2025 at 12:21 PM
So, the rule is: for a team name A B FC
1. If A and B are nouns, choose the main noun, which will almost always be B
2. If A is a noun and B is an adjective, choose the main noun...
3. ...unless there is also a team called A C, in which case choose the adjective.
1. If A and B are nouns, choose the main noun, which will almost always be B
2. If A is a noun and B is an adjective, choose the main noun...
3. ...unless there is also a team called A C, in which case choose the adjective.
The opposite case is Charlton Athletic. We talk about Charlton (the main noun), not Athletic (the adjective). But if there was also a Charlton Town or something, we'd talk about Athletic instead.
February 14, 2025 at 12:21 PM
The opposite case is Charlton Athletic. We talk about Charlton (the main noun), not Athletic (the adjective). But if there was also a Charlton Town or something, we'd talk about Athletic instead.
This is different with other names like Manchester United, where United is an adjective that's put after the main noun (pretty weird in English), and so the rule there is to choose the modifier, possibly because it's structurally weird and therefore special, more likely as a disambiguation.
February 14, 2025 at 12:21 PM
This is different with other names like Manchester United, where United is an adjective that's put after the main noun (pretty weird in English), and so the rule there is to choose the modifier, possibly because it's structurally weird and therefore special, more likely as a disambiguation.
Aston Villa = a villa that's in Aston
Nottingham Forest = a forest that's in Nottingham
Queens Park Rangers = the rangers who play in and around Queens Park
Leyton Orient = "the orient" as it was originally known, and it's in Leyton (this is weirder)
Manchester City = a city, called Manchester
Nottingham Forest = a forest that's in Nottingham
Queens Park Rangers = the rangers who play in and around Queens Park
Leyton Orient = "the orient" as it was originally known, and it's in Leyton (this is weirder)
Manchester City = a city, called Manchester
February 14, 2025 at 12:21 PM
Aston Villa = a villa that's in Aston
Nottingham Forest = a forest that's in Nottingham
Queens Park Rangers = the rangers who play in and around Queens Park
Leyton Orient = "the orient" as it was originally known, and it's in Leyton (this is weirder)
Manchester City = a city, called Manchester
Nottingham Forest = a forest that's in Nottingham
Queens Park Rangers = the rangers who play in and around Queens Park
Leyton Orient = "the orient" as it was originally known, and it's in Leyton (this is weirder)
Manchester City = a city, called Manchester
Onto football team names. The preference to shorten the name by picking the second word is actually the preference for choosing the main noun in a situation where the team name is a modifying noun-main noun phrase.
February 14, 2025 at 12:21 PM
Onto football team names. The preference to shorten the name by picking the second word is actually the preference for choosing the main noun in a situation where the team name is a modifying noun-main noun phrase.
In "shower beer", beer is the main noun, and "shower" describes it. In "beer shower", "shower" is the main noun, and "beer" describes it. English has a very strong preference for the main noun to be the second noun in the phrase.
February 14, 2025 at 12:21 PM
In "shower beer", beer is the main noun, and "shower" describes it. In "beer shower", "shower" is the main noun, and "beer" describes it. English has a very strong preference for the main noun to be the second noun in the phrase.
The team names thing comes down to nouns as modifiers in noun phrases. In English, you can have a noun modifying another noun, which is pretty much always [modifying noun] [modified noun]. e.g. a "shower beer" is a beer you have in the shower, whereas a "beer shower" is when you get covered in beer.
February 14, 2025 at 12:21 PM
The team names thing comes down to nouns as modifiers in noun phrases. In English, you can have a noun modifying another noun, which is pretty much always [modifying noun] [modified noun]. e.g. a "shower beer" is a beer you have in the shower, whereas a "beer shower" is when you get covered in beer.
Ironically he didn't include the "pressure is for tyres" bit despite tyre pressure being quite important for riding a bike.
January 14, 2025 at 4:32 PM
Ironically he didn't include the "pressure is for tyres" bit despite tyre pressure being quite important for riding a bike.
Not an MHD, but one for the panel. Thibau Nys won the Belgian cyclocross national championships this weekend and took to instagram to celebrate using the full "Palmer Bellingham Saka Toney Trent, pressure, what pressure?" quote. Why is this getting used like this?
January 14, 2025 at 4:31 PM
Not an MHD, but one for the panel. Thibau Nys won the Belgian cyclocross national championships this weekend and took to instagram to celebrate using the full "Palmer Bellingham Saka Toney Trent, pressure, what pressure?" quote. Why is this getting used like this?