← Home ← Back to /lit/

Thread 24866976

56 posts 8 images /lit/
Anonymous No.24866976 [Report] >>24866985 >>24867271 >>24868018 >>24868632 >>24868679 >>24868817 >>24870010
>Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.
Anonymous No.24866982 [Report]
>express it.
Anonymous No.24866985 [Report]
>>24866976 (OP)
Great post. This board fucking sucks
Anonymous No.24866996 [Report] >>24868586 >>24868666 >>24868752 >>24868845
Any time someone tries to connect new slang to Newspeak here it makes zero sense. You're getting mad at dispersed trends that last a month while our textbooks teach children about Israeli "conflict." Real linguistic and mental changes do take place in classrooms, it's just not the ones you think.
Anonymous No.24867271 [Report] >>24868586 >>24868731
>>24866976 (OP)
Do you understand what “narrow thought” means you fucking groid? Slang increases linguistic diversity. Newspeak is rigidly created to limit it. How the fuck can you quote the text and still not get it?
Anonymous No.24868018 [Report]
>>24866976 (OP)
He's quoting Joyce. You have no culture.
Anonymous No.24868586 [Report] >>24868595 >>24868599 >>24868781 >>24868885
>>24866996
>>24867271
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289618302198

>When controlled for educational attainment, the vocabulary of the average U.S. adult declined between the mid-1970s and the 2010s. Vocabulary declined across all levels of educational attainment (less than high school, high school or 2-year college graduate, bachelor's or graduate degree), with the largest declines among those with a bachelor's or graduate degree. Hierarchical linear modeling analyses separating the effects of age, time period, and cohort suggest that the decline is primarily a time period effect. Increasing educational attainment has apparently not improved verbal ability among Americans. Instead, as educational attainment has increased, those at each educational level are less verbally skilled even though the vocabulary skills of the whole population are unchanged.
Anonymous No.24868595 [Report]
>>24868586
>even though the vocabulary skills of the whole population are unchanged.
So ultimately what's the issue?
Sounds the classes are melting into one, which isn't inherently bad it the total number of smaht people hasn't declined.
All this seems to do is tell us that college is for gay retards who like to waste money, which is already intuitive.
Anonymous No.24868599 [Report] >>24868627 >>24868632
>>24868586 #
>even though the vocabulary skills of the whole population are unchanged.
So ultimately what's the issue?
Sounds the classes are melting into one, which isn't inherently bad if the total number of smaht people hasn't declined.
All this seems to do is tell us that college is for gay retards who like to waste money, which is already intuitive.
Anonymous No.24868627 [Report] >>24868642
>>24868599
>So ultimately what's the issue?
Talking like a nigger is the issue, because it creates the understanding of a nigger. Everyone's turning into niggers.
Anonymous No.24868632 [Report]
>>24866976 (OP)
nuh uh
>>24868599
on god fr fr no cap
Anonymous No.24868642 [Report] >>24868672
>>24868627
>even though the vocabulary skills of the whole population are unchanged.
Anonymous No.24868666 [Report] >>24868700 >>24872492
>>24866996
>Israeli "conflict."
Pretty revealing how you get mad at neutral language, as if it's some kind of sin to *not* infuse social engineering and propaganda into everything.
Anonymous No.24868672 [Report] >>24868687 >>24868696
>>24868642
That's poorly worded, disproven by the rest of that paragraph.
>the vocabulary of the average U.S. adult declined between the mid-1970s and the 2010s. Vocabulary declined across all levels of educational attainment (less than high school, high school or 2-year college graduate, bachelor's or graduate degree)
The vocabulary skills of the population clearly are changed, and they say as much.
The more accurate statement would have been that the *average* vocabulary skills haven't changed.
Taking that conclusion as gospel however is foolish, it might simply not be true, and statistically, there's a better chance that their results are not reproducible than that they are.
Assuming it is true, you still have young adults turning into intellectual niggers, which will eventually displace the older adults who are not. And unless there subsequent generations are not intellectual niggers, then it's true that everyone is turning into niggers.
I hope you're being a midwit on purpose.
Anonymous No.24868679 [Report]
>>24866976 (OP)
NIGGER
Anonymous No.24868687 [Report] >>24868696 >>24868713
>>24868672
>I hope you're being a midwit on purpose.
I was getting ready to write a calm and agreeable response your post until you blew it at the end. I'm not a midwit for literally quoting *your* source. Thanks for playing, queer.
Anonymous No.24868696 [Report] >>24868713
>>24868672
>>24868687
Also, backing off the 4chan insult rhetoric, the way I read your source was that more people are getting degrees but the vocabulary scores arent increasing as one might think.
That paper doesn't seem to say that people's vocab is getting smaller, only that degrees seem to correlate less and less with a large vocabulary.

It didn't seem to say or imply that younger people have less robust vocab vs older people. But if it does, then, yes, I missed that.
Anonymous No.24868700 [Report]
>>24868666
satan trips for israel, how fitting
Anonymous No.24868713 [Report] >>24868729
>>24868687
You're not a midwit for quoting that anon's source. You're a midwit for not being able to read it critically, not being able to synthesize your own thoughts, and for assuming I'm the same person who made that post.

>>24868696
I'm not sure how you read that when the opposite was clearly stated in that excerpt. It literally says, over time, young adults, across all levels of education, have had a declining vocabulary, in spite of generally increasing levels of higher education.
Anonymous No.24868715 [Report] >>24868729
Watch out guys we got a ""status quo"" defender in thread. Nothing is getting worse, everything is perfectly fine and if things are bad it's always been bad, but the past is also much worse. Watch the mental gymnastics unfold.
Anonymous No.24868729 [Report] >>24868734 >>24868748
>>24868713
I'm beginning to think you're the midwit mate.
The source says that college attainment is higher but vocabulary is staying the same.
So what's going on is that college attainment is becoming uncoupled from vocabulary.

Reading it your way seems like the more contorted position imo.

>>24868715
>nothing is getting worse
We are talking about one topic and one paper.
Tons of things are getting worse, such as the environment ;^)
Anonymous No.24868731 [Report]
>>24867271
>Slang increases linguistic diversity

Slang has historically been used by the lower classes who indeed have a smaller vocabulary. Would you like to guess why it's historically restricted to the peasants and proletariat?
Anonymous No.24868734 [Report] >>24868745 >>24868808
>>24868729
Not him but you are one of the dumbest people I've ever seen on this board. You literally can't read. Go google for 5 minutes and see how many other studies crop up about shrinking vocabularies.
Anonymous No.24868745 [Report] >>24868746
>>24868734
Other studies very well might. Please tell me what I'm misinterpreting about *this* study.
Cards on the table I would put money on vocabulary getting smaller and I recently read article talking about how bad education is getting.
But regarding the paper that has been cited in this thread, I fail to see how I'm interpreting it incorrectly.
And please don't post a glib one liner like
>and that's the problem
Anonymous No.24868746 [Report]
>>24868745
*read an
Anonymous No.24868748 [Report] >>24868766 >>24868824
>>24868729
>The midwit thinks I'm the midwit
I'm downgrading you to retard.

>vocabulary of the average U.S. adult declined between the mid-1970s and the 2010s.
>Vocabulary declined across all levels of educational attainment
It's not "my way" of reading it, it's just reading.
Anonymous No.24868752 [Report]
>>24866996
Pretty unpatriotic of you to say this. We at the department of defense need to use enhanced interrogation techniques on suspected terrorists and project force in other countries by doubletapping military targets
Anonymous No.24868766 [Report] >>24868824 >>24868905 >>24870229
>>24868748
Oh I did forget about the non college grads also going down. So I'm retarded. However that still doesn't explain the fact that they say that the vocabulary of the population hasn't gone down.
Even accounting for old vs young, better wording etc, still- how could that be?
The older people arent getting smarter, so the average would still be declining.

Basically the article makes no sense.
Anonymous No.24868781 [Report] >>24868905
>>24868586
That's just a sign of breakdown in the educational system (which basically any teacher/professor can attest to), not some kind of plot to change people's vocubalaries
Anonymous No.24868793 [Report] >>24868905
Serious question lit: why do they do this?

I’ve worked in government before and while yes there are plenty of stupid and pitiful people, they were all still people with families and love for movies and books and all sorts of media. I’ve never met a single government employee that wanted to censor books or anything. Worst case is the high level political office making some adjustments to press releases never going back and fucking with literature written 200 years ago to cut out curse words. Is this just an American phenomenon brought on by their jewish protestant roots?
Anonymous No.24868808 [Report]
>>24868734
>you are one of the dumbest people I've ever seen on this board
Before I accept your concession since you haven't responded, i want to address my error: my only error appears to be getting lazy and saying "college" instead of "educational attainment". Otherwise, my position is correct.
Despite increasing educational attainment, vocabulary has stayed stagnant. It hasn't gone down. According to this paper.
Anonymous No.24868817 [Report] >>24868976
>>24866976 (OP)
SIX-SEVEN!
Anonymous No.24868824 [Report]
>>24868748
>>24868766
Going to bed, so i accept your concession as well.
Anonymous No.24868845 [Report]
>>24866996
Keep crying Achmed, it won't un-bomb Rafah.
Anonymous No.24868885 [Report] >>24869087
>>24868586
is speaking nigger a class now? Or is there a english-nigger dictionary, like other real languages have
Anonymous No.24868905 [Report] >>24868933
>>24868766
>However that still doesn't explain the fact that they say that the vocabulary of the population hasn't gone down.
It has gone down, for 40+ years. They literally said as much. The only way to reconcile those statements is that they meant, "on average, vocabulary hasn't gone down", or they're wrong. Those are the two options. The former implies significant growth of the vocabularies of some members of those younger cohorts and growth of the vocabularies of older cohorts to keep that number balanced. The latter is just as, if not more likely.
>The older people arent getting smarter, so the average would still be declining.
That's not true, vocabularies tend to increase until the age of about 65.

>>24868781
There's no reason whatsoever to believe those things are mutually exclusive of one another.

>>24868793
>why do they do this?
Simply put, because nobility and aristocracy are not based on merit. People with larger vocabularies are more capable of forming complex thoughts, expressing them to others, organizing others, and so more capable of creating problems for the people in charge. This is a problem itself, but a significantly more pronounced problem if the people in charge are not all that intelligent. That's an old problem in Europe that's led to all sorts of revolutions and in general suppressed intellects finding refuge in the new world. It's a newer problem in America, where many of those people fled to Largely, these people, the great thinkers and industrialists and movers and shakers, were fathers and grandfathers etc of the people in power now, and they've ridden their coattails into the halls of power and desperately seek to maintain their power. That's made even more difficult in the age of the internet, when nearly the whole of the world's collective knowledge is at the tips of an ever increasing numbers of people's fingertips. Censorship, panopticon surveillance, police states, the dumbing down of the general population through any means possible - chemicals, education, fear, etc. - and replacement of more intelligent, less compliant populations with less intelligent, more compliant ones - massive immigration, reduced birthrates through all sorts of means like feminism and birth control, destroying economic well being through exporting labor, etc.. Basically every social problem that we face conveniently meets the needs of a not-all-that-intelligent hereditary aristocracy desperately trying to cling to power.
Anonymous No.24868933 [Report] >>24868936 >>24868999 >>24869248
>>24868905
>There's no reason whatsoever to believe those things are mutually exclusive of one another.
There is when better explanations exist than a largescale government conspiracy. Just complex economic systems and well-intentioned legislation backfiring.
Colleges make money from students. Failing large #s of them causes them to lose money. Ergo colleges are incentivized to engage in grade inflation to improve passing rates
Similar thing with K-12 schools. High schools are penalized for having low graduation rates, so they will do whatever it takes to pass more kids
Anonymous No.24868936 [Report] >>24868985
>>24868933
You are a very stupid person. Please stop polluting lit with your garbage posts.
Anonymous No.24868976 [Report]
>>24868817
unc that one is already dead
Anonymous No.24868985 [Report] >>24869029
>>24868936
You're right anon, I'm sorry for being retarded. Obviously large complex systems can't have unintended effects, and everything is da joo's fault
Anonymous No.24868999 [Report] >>24869010
>>24868933
Creating a massive competency crisis is only on the economic interest of a tiny minority. You're making a lot of assumptions about quality of explanations and about legislative intention.
Anonymous No.24869010 [Report] >>24869019
>>24868999
>economic interest of a tiny minority
Yes, teachers and administrators. That's exactly my point
>legislative intention
I'm guessing you have a functional mindreading device then, to discern people's intentions
Anonymous No.24869019 [Report] >>24869031
>>24869010
That's not the tiny minority I'm talking about. Teachers salaries suck whether they do a good job or not.
>I'm guessing you have a functional mindreading device then, to discern people's intentions
You don't? I assumed you did, the way you stated how well-meaning it all was.
Anonymous No.24869029 [Report] >>24869036
>>24868985
Systems controlled by Jews. Do you deny this? I’m not going to go full pol mode on you and dump the infographics you know so well, but your smug wasp nose has selective olfactory receptors that is a liability for the white race. I’m afraid the sentence is death.
Anonymous No.24869031 [Report] >>24869055
>>24869019
>Teachers salaries suck whether they do a good job or not.
Their job however depends on whether they "do a good job." If a teacher or professor is told "raise your classes grade's by 10% or you're fired", do you think they will risk their livelihood for the sake of 'academic integrity'? If they do, then they're just replaced by someone else
>You don't?
No, I just make fewer assumptions about the world than you. I assume people generally mean what they say, and are generally well meaning, which seems to map pretty well onto reality
Anonymous No.24869036 [Report] >>24869047
>>24869029
>I’m afraid the sentence is death
I know, you hate 'race traitors' even more than you hate ethnic minorities, which is why your movement is doomed to fail. Surprisingly most people dislike being told their family is evil, and are hesitant to kill them
Anonymous No.24869047 [Report]
>>24869036
No I mean I sentence you to death, retard, for the crime of being retarded.
Anonymous No.24869055 [Report]
>>24869031
>I just make fewer assumptions about the world than you
That's quite an assumption.
>I assume people generally mean what they say, and are generally well meaning, which seems to map pretty well onto reality
You're retarded, got it. Carry on.
Anonymous No.24869087 [Report] >>24869104
>>24868885
I've definitely noticed more and more young people using ebonic grammar. Not just ESLs either, or even people younger than me. It just appears to be something that's leaked into the psyche of certain outgoing people, usually Type-A personalities too.
Anonymous No.24869104 [Report]
>>24869087
>ebonic grammar
kek thanks for the new term
Anonymous No.24869248 [Report]
>>24868933
Where does corruption end and conspiracy begin?
Anonymous No.24870010 [Report]
>>24866976 (OP)
I honestly though all this lingo was ironic until I heard zoomers using it in speech in real life. I still have trouble believing it.
Anonymous No.24870229 [Report] >>24870237
>>24868766
The national average vocabulary hasn't changed, but the numbers of people in each group has changed. Read the study and look at the data. In the 70s there were 1395, 2367, and 612 people in the no-hs, hs, and college/grad degree groups. They averaged 4.67, 6.20, and 8.06 words for an overall average of 5.97 words.

In the 2010s there were 778, 3635, and 1740 in those categories, knowing 4.28, 5.79, and 7.12 words, respectively, for an overall average of 5.97.

Taken together, this tells us that the national averages haven't changed, though the group averages have. How? We changed the number of people in each group. In the 70s the no-hs group made up 32% of the population, while in the 2010s only 13%. Meanwhile the college group went from 14% to 28%. In other words, in the 2010s we had fewer people in the lowest performing group and more in the highest performing group. Some people we added to the highest performing group brought down the average of that group, but still raised the national average.

This is a good example of Simpson's paradox, btw. Statistics are tricky, and require a lot of careful thought. That is one reason why the article is frustratingly vague.

Hope this helps.
Anonymous No.24870237 [Report] >>24870374
>>24870229
Right so that means that the change is simply that educational attainment is decoupling from vocabulary knowledge.
So the vocabulary of the nation isn't going down.
Anonymous No.24870374 [Report]
>>24870237
Possibly. Maybe even likelt. The authors mention several arguments for the increase or decrease of vocabulary.

One could look at these data and conclude that education has become more available and actually increased the vocabulary for many people. For example, someone in the 2010s who finished college may not have finished HS in the 70s. Their vocabulary may have increased compared with a similar person in the 70s.

One might argue as well that there are more immigrants and ESLs in the 2010 data than the 70s data. These authors didn't check, but it could be possible that the education system has actually increased the vocabulary for Americans while adding ESLs to the data pool who have lower vocabulary.

Further, one might argue that the 2010s data set includes people who would not have been reached at all in the 70s, but who would have had low vocabs in both cases. In other words, having more resources to test more people could itself lower the vocabulary, assuming that those we didn't test in the 70s were likely to be lower vocabulary. Again, this would suggest that education has gotten better, because the vocabulary didn't fall off when we increased the dataset.

There are many other possibilities. Statistics rarely give clear, simple insights.
Anonymous No.24872492 [Report]
>>24868666
language exists in a context. if the media is only neutral in israel's ""conflict"", while infusing social engineering and propaganda into every other case, what does that tell us? the same thing: israel is getting special treatment.