Subscribe
Notify of
guest

15 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Francis MacGabhann
Francis MacGabhann
2 years ago

I remain to be convinced. One of the Shakespeare “candidates” is Christopher Marlowe based on the fact that, linguistically, it’s almost impossible to tell the two apart. It’s only the fact that Marlowe couldn’t write female parts and had no sense of humour whatsoever that separates them. Oh, and Rowling was “unmasked” as Robert Galbraith when the sales of the Galbraith novels turned out to be…ahem…disappointing..

Lennon Ó Náraigh
Lennon Ó Náraigh
2 years ago

I know a North American professor who never uses definite article in peer-review. Academic will write “methodology used in paper is flawed, paper must be rejected”. Author then thinks reviewer is Russian. Extra anonymity for reviewer.

Drahcir Nevarc
Drahcir Nevarc
2 years ago

Is it you?

Lennon Ó Náraigh
Lennon Ó Náraigh
2 years ago
Reply to  Drahcir Nevarc

Nyet!

Drahcir Nevarc
Drahcir Nevarc
2 years ago

Извините, просто я не мог не заметить вашего нежелания употреблять определенный артикль.

Galeti Tavas
Galeti Tavas
2 years ago

I have become resigned to spending my later years in some camp/gulag because of my commenting, my guess is my style is rather distinctive, and my words provocative; but one must do what one must do…..

Bret Weinstein had a good youtube on the new definition of being a ‘Domestic Terrorist’ just released by USA Homeland Security, and remarkably scary as it lists Domestic Terrorism as including the three below words “And, with a law Barack Obama signed on New Year’s Eve 2011, this allows the state to ‘disappear’ you without any due process at all.” if you are a Domestic Terrorist, which doing the three below may be sufficient.

Mis-information, (“false or misleading narratives, not necessarily to cause harm”)

Dis-information (False or misleading to cause harm)

Mal-information (based on fact, but out of context, to mislead, harm, or manipulate)

The video, ‘Don’t Say Anything At All’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nfhg1PcTync By Weinstein

This is real – what just happened in Ottawa, under Biden’s Urging, apparently, shows great deal on the post covid world. If you watch the section on the video (it is clearly marked) it shows the actual link to Homeland Security saying this…..

And Jungian Synchronicity appeared today – I ended up having a long talk about ‘One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich’ with someone out of the blue, discussing the – of all things – the positive side of the story and of his life in the gulag…..and they were quite convincing – an argument I am sure I will repeat here one day, as it was quite good….

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
2 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

I play a game with people I meet which goes where would the be in Nazi Germany. 95% would buy in to the regime, much as they have bought in to the Covid regime. Many if not most would become active advocates and enforcers. Again, much the same as with Covid. Me, I always end up in the camp not because I am particularly righteous bur because I can’t help saying but this odes not make sense.

Jason Highley
Jason Highley
2 years ago

I love playing that game! I’m always one of the first ones gassed because I suck at not wearing my contempt for authority on my sleeve.

Brendan O'Leary
Brendan O'Leary
2 years ago

Many, perhaps most, of us on any type of forum, can work out who it is when a prolific poster reappears with a new handle.
We don’t need deep computing to have that kind of “forensic intelligence”.
I guess the difference, when you do have the deep computing, is that you can search the whole online world in a short time. It’s not “what they can do” which is new, but the scale and speed of it.

Mark Duffett
Mark Duffett
2 years ago

Supremely ironic that an article on linguistics uses the misbegotten nonsense yet increasingly common phrase “honed in”. “Homed in”, yes. “Honed”, yes. But “honed in”, never, no, no.

Andrea X
Andrea X
2 years ago

And I thought the article was going to talk about qu€€r theory (and I would have had more of a clue what it was about…)

John Riordan
John Riordan
2 years ago

Lucky I don’t post stuff anonymously and that everything I say is defensible then, isn’t it?

Galeti Tavas
Galeti Tavas
2 years ago
Reply to  John Riordan

Don’t you understand? The world is now ‘Post Truth’. Nothing is defensible if They say it is not.

“In any case, to wear an improper expression on your face (to look incredulous when a victory was announced, for example) was itself a punishable offence. There was even a word for it in Newspeak: facecrime, it was called. — George Orwell”


Ingsoc, bellyfeel doubleplusgood.

John Riordan
John Riordan
2 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

The world has never been post-Truth, or indeed pre-Truth. What is true equates to what is real, and reality cannot be escaped.

Don’t overstimate the comparisons between modern life and Orwell’s 1984. The paroxysms we are presently witnessing are not the triumph of totalitarianism, but its death throes.

Last edited 2 years ago by John Riordan
Mike Smith
Mike Smith
2 years ago
Reply to  John Riordan

I think you are right. We are no tuned into their mind tricks and can see what they are doing – just as George Orwell intended us to be.