Skip to content

Tag Archives: amusement

The ‘controversy’ goes ‘meta’

Fair warning: this post will make absolutely no sense to anyone who thinks creationism is as dead as it should be.1 In the US it’s alive and well and trying to get itself into school curricula. PZ Myers writes a lot about it; it’s horrifying but often horribly funny. Yesterday he quoted an Intelligent Design [...]

Coffee

Olga is trying to get me to give up coffee. She seems to think some mad musical Frenchman is going to convince me. Silly girl. (Black, one sugar, thanks.)

Poeh

Growing up in this tiny little country must be weird. Flatmate Ella was shocked this morning to discover that Olga didn’t know Winnie the Pooh. “You know,” she said, “Winne the Pooh from the Seven-Acre Woods!”

Naked mole rats

I’ve noted recently a certain zoological obsession on the part of formal semanticists. It’s not just formal semantics, it turns out, but philosophy of language in general. I hope, in fact, that this will turn into an irregular Friday feature (Friday being the day we usually have talks). Today’s speaker, Herman Cappelen, told us that [...]

Exorcising Laplace’s Demon

A magnificent new Dresden Codak exposes the diabolical true meaning of the “Laplace Transformation.” If you enjoyed that, check out Dungeons and Discourse (featuring Tiny Carl Jung) and Advanced Dungeons and Discourse (“Guys, shut up I found it! The map to Occam’s Razor!”). And really the whole of DC, although you’ll be hopelessly confused by [...]

Three-and-a-half horses

Formal semantics has some kind of fascination with animals. At some point I plan to list a whole menagerie of examples,1 for which this post is just a taster (so to speak). I found some fresh spoor in the question session of today’s DIP lecture (quotes are approximate, alas): Fred: We have a theory of [...]

Lambada Calculus

We get regular mail about conferences, workshops, summer schools and so on in our research area. Today’s crop included an advertisement for a five-day “minicourse on Lambada Calculus“. Who says logicians can’t get jiggy with it, after all?

Ironie

Suppose one wrote one’s PhD thesis on translation studies. Suppose further that said dissertation was published in a series devoted to translation studies. Wouldn’t one want to check that the back-cover blurb doesn’t read like a too-literal translation from Dutch into slightly broken English?

Who says philosophy is out of touch with the real world?

Theory: We of the jury may wish to ignore [a particular possibility], and wish it had not been mentioned. If we ignored it now, we would bend the rules of cooperative conversation; but we may have good reason to do exactly that. [...] We would ignore the far-fetched possibility if we could—but can we? Perhaps [...]

Portmantypeau

A mail I received today ended with (my italics): Tot ziens op dinderdags 13 november aanstaande… “Dinsdag” is Tuesday, “donderdag” is Thursday. Split the difference and meet on Wednesday?