I mean, sure, things like that are super dangerous, but at least they’re obviously, flashily dangerous and for that reason have a lot more attention paid to them. The real nasties are arguably the ones that aren’t so flashy but are much more common amd don’t have immediate effects. Formaldehyde and benzene will give you cancer, and acrylate monomers will make it so you one day wake up allergic to the modern world.
Not gonna lie, I thought about your comment multiple times today trying to make sense of it, and only just now did I realize what you meant by it.
Yes, like Alan Turing. Ugh.
Ya “an historic”, when the h is clearly pronounced, strikes the wonderful double blow of being both pretentious and wrong as far as I’m concerned. Looking at you, NPR. Go run up an hill, why donchya?
I think cleanse and clean are not quite interchangeable. Cleanse has a gravitas that clean lacks. For example, growing up, I heard a lot of things like “be cleansed of your sins”. “Be cleaned of your sins” makes me vaguely uncomfortable.
Hard agree on business lingo, though.
Homogeneous, meaning having a uniform composition. Hoe-moe-jee-nee-us (or hoe-muh- and/or -jee-nyus; point is, there’s an ee sound before the last syllable). Saying homogenous (huh-mah-jeh-nus) in that sense is not only wrong but also means something else.
I went up to the Lake Champlain area where there was some high altitude cloud cover. Fortunately, it didn’t affect the viewing basically at all. A cool side effect of the clouds/related atmospheric conditions though was that the sun had a 22° halo. I wish that 1) I’d had a camera that could capture it and that 2) I’d had the presence of mind to pay attention to what happened to it in the moments before and after totality.
I have this problem with organic chemistry more broadly. On the one hand, I understand that rattling off the IUPAC name of a compound is much less concise and harder to get right than just saying the brand name or chemical name (which, for pharma, is often just as bullshit of a name as the brand name). On the other, you come across names like the Eschenmoser-Claisen rearrangement vs the Johnson-Claisen rearrangement, or the Suzuki vs Stille vs Negishi vs Kumada vs Hiyama/Denmark vs Sonogashira* cross couplings. Each set consists of fundamentally the same reaction with slight variations in the specific reagents. Just saying e.g. “organozinc” instead of “Negishi” would be so much more descriptive. The authors’ names often aren’t even that helpful in an attributive sense. For instance, some of the cross couplings were actually first reported by someone else in that list (though IIRC everyone got at least one), and most of the chemists published work on at least one of the other reactions at some point.
* Okay fine Sonogashiras are a little different what with the copper co-catalyst, but still, same mech at Pd.
Committee members be like “Oh, I definitely read your thesis titled “New Palladium-Catalyzed Reactions for the Manufacture of Pharmaceuticals”. So what is the band gap of thallium antimonide doped with 5% polonium in foot-pounds per mol? Why aren’t you answering? Even my undergrads know this!”
Man I just built a new rig last November and went with nvidia specifically to run some niche scientific computing software that only targets CUDA. It took a bit of effort to get it to play nice, but it at least runs pretty well. Unfortunately, now I’m trying to update to KDE6 and play games and boy howdy are there graphics glitches. I really wish HPC academics would ditch CUDA for GPU acceleration, and maybe ifort + mkl while they’re at it.
The point about stress is interesting. I’ve been playing with pronouncing the phrase, and almost everything tends toward [ɐ] when I speak the syllables one at a time, even the ones I marked with and pronounce as a schwa in normal speech. The notable exceptions are the final schwas in “obstruction” and “onions”, which tend toward [ɪ], and the -nel of “tunnel”, which is something like [nɫ] (vocalic ɫ) ~ [nəɫ].
It helps when most of the vowels are the same and most other letters match their English counterparts lol.
In case you get the urge to learn sooner:
Here are some quick refs for consonants and vowels in English (RP = received pronunciation (a standardized form of English from the UK), GA = General American). Wikipedia pages for specific English dialects (e.g., Australian English) also contain a bunch of word/IPA pairs. Here are audio charts for vowels and consonants.
Thank you for reminding me of this channel, I’d forgotten about it.
Interesting about the merging. Schwa has always been weird for me because in my dialect it can be many sounds. I grew up saying “obstruction” as [ʌbstɹʌkʃɪn] like those around me. Then I hit grade school and was told by a straight-faced teacher that both the first and last syllables in this and similar words were schwas while pronouncing them differently :)
Don’t a lot of these use the “strut” vowel (/ʌ/) and not schwa (/ə/) per se?
My transcription would be
/wʌts ʌp? wʌz dʌg gənə kʌm? dʌg lʌvz bɹʌntʃ. nʌʔʌ dʌgz stʌk kəz əv ə tʌnəl əbstɹʌkʃən. ə tɹʌk dʌmpt ə tʌn əv ʌnjənz. ʊχ./
Huh TIL. Growing up with the merger, I suppose I’ve come to assume that non-merger folks have different pronunciations for any words with a- or o-adjacent spellings.
cot-caught merger be like that sometimes
Or spiced lentils… dal bhat <3
Professional zero finders of derivatives of mathematical models built from duct tape, prayers, and Jimmy’s observations from before he got cataracts.
I’m just tickled that this map shows MN’s northwest angle as the (pseudo)exclave that it is.
deleted by creator