讀Linguistics既你入黎交流下

linguistics minor lm

concentrate？

想讀 但我1st degree 完全唔關事 有無簡介?

聽講好多科都轉得ling.
stat,cs,cognitive science,language,psycho etc

咩科都轉得～呢個世界好自由㗎 ;)

想讀 但我1st degree 完全唔關事 有無簡介?

其實好多field都關linguistics事
佢冇分macro micro，反而係有好多分支
例如有巴打係bio既，可以向neurolinguistics發展
可能有人1st degree係computing既，咁computational linguistics又會比較適合
不過語言學相對其他field易入手，你有冇底都好，由degree讀起，一樣咁易吸收

上面巴打講嘅research呢
係咪得kongu cu
有無詳細少少介紹?

想讀 但我1st degree 完全唔關事 有無簡介?

其實好多field都關linguistics事
佢冇分macro micro，反而係有好多分支
例如有巴打係bio既，可以向neurolinguistics發展
可能有人1st degree係computing既，咁computational linguistics又會比較適合
不過語言學相對其他field易入手，你有冇底都好，由degree讀起，一樣咁易吸收

上面巴打講嘅research呢
係咪得kongu cu
有無詳細少少介紹?

我傾向做下ra先再諗讀唔讀

想讀 但我1st degree 完全唔關事 有無簡介?

其實好多field都關linguistics事
佢冇分macro micro，反而係有好多分支
例如有巴打係bio既，可以向neurolinguistics發展
可能有人1st degree係computing既，咁computational linguistics又會比較適合
不過語言學相對其他field易入手，你有冇底都好，由degree讀起，一樣咁易吸收

上面巴打講嘅research呢
係咪得kongu cu
有無詳細少少介紹?

咁ug你想走去其他dept做就緊係要你間學校有,如果唔係就等pg先再做ra/讀pg
識個prof係bio上phonetics

之前搞event都叫做識啊ben sir
係咪應該fb message佢問下

想讀 但我1st degree 完全唔關事 有無簡介?

其實好多field都關linguistics事
佢冇分macro micro，反而係有好多分支
例如有巴打係bio既，可以向neurolinguistics發展
可能有人1st degree係computing既，咁computational linguistics又會比較適合
不過語言學相對其他field易入手，你有冇底都好，由degree讀起，一樣咁易吸收

上面巴打講嘅research呢
係咪得kongu cu
有無詳細少少介紹?

我傾向做下ra先再諗讀唔讀

我間u無啊

我都算半個IT人，份人都幾跨科吓嘅，我會覺得語言係一個現象，唔可以話分開唔同範疇去學。好多基礎嘢，無論你研究邊方面（語音、音系、句法、語義）嘅嘢，用咩角度（心理、神經、電腦）去切入，鍾意邊一種理論（形式語言學、功能語言學），都係要識。

我都算半個IT人，份人都幾跨科吓嘅，我會覺得語言係一個現象，唔可以話分開唔同範疇去學。好多基礎嘢，無論你研究邊方面（語音、音系、句法、語義）嘅嘢，用咩角度（心理、神經、電腦）去切入，鍾意邊一種理論（形式語言學、功能語言學），都係要識。

我最弱係phonetics同phonology
與其話弱，不如話係提唔起興趣去苦讀

我都算半個IT人，份人都幾跨科吓嘅，我會覺得語言係一個現象，唔可以話分開唔同範疇去學。好多基礎嘢，無論你研究邊方面（語音、音系、句法、語義）嘅嘢，用咩角度（心理、神經、電腦）去切入，鍾意邊一種理論（形式語言學、功能語言學），都係要識。

我最弱係phonetics同phonology
與其話弱，不如話係提唔起興趣去苦讀

我會覺得係好唔同嘅範疇。可能係啲IPA真係好煩？

拋磚引玉 樓豬豬點睇futured language 同less futured language ，點解講futured language 嘅人傾向會食煙

香港人算係講futured定less futured language?

食煙同futured language我真係冇睇法...
香港人L1多數都係廣東話，亦有bilingual會有英文係第2個L1（英文係futured language）
，咁我當係前者啦～
香港人會係futureless，平時我地要表示過去現在未來都好，都唔會有modal去標示tense，包括future，而係用同一個verb form去講
eg:
我而家去學校 I go to school now.
我聽日去學校 I WILL go to school tomorrow.

有錯請指正

佢本身篇paper冇correct到genetics同geography嘅影響，correct咗之後唔significant（佢自己已經認咗）

However, Chen's original analysis assumed languages are independent. This neglects the fact that languages are related, causing correlations to appear stronger than is warranted (Galton's problem). In this paper, we test the robustness of Chen's correlations to corrections for the geographic and historical relatedness of languages. ... When applying the strictest tests for relatedness, and when data is not aggregated across individuals, the correlation is not significant.

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0132145

好多時同relativity有關嘅large scale study都有呢個問題（cf http://humans-who-read-grammars.blogspot.hk/2017/03/spurious-correlations.html），睇relativity文最好睇番experimental嗰類

拋磚引玉 樓豬豬點睇futured language 同less futured language ，點解講futured language 嘅人傾向會食煙

香港人算係講futured定less futured language?

我認為呢個分類法好有問題，一聽到就着晒 bad linguistics 警報。

心底裡面係linguistics lover
實際上做緊工程撚 做speech processing

其實我係嚟留名

Every time I fire a linguist, the performance of the speech recognizer goes up. -Frederick Jelinek

拋磚引玉 樓豬豬點睇futured language 同less futured language ，點解講futured language 嘅人傾向會食煙

香港人算係講futured定less futured language?

食煙同futured language我真係冇睇法...
香港人L1多數都係廣東話，亦有bilingual會有英文係第2個L1（英文係futured language）
，咁我當係前者啦～
香港人會係futureless，平時我地要表示過去現在未來都好，都唔會有modal去標示tense，包括future，而係用同一個verb form去講
eg:
我而家去學校 I go to school now.
我聽日去學校 I WILL go to school tomorrow.

有錯請指正

佢本身篇paper冇correct到genetics同geography嘅影響，correct咗之後唔significant（佢自己已經認咗）

However, Chen's original analysis assumed languages are independent. This neglects the fact that languages are related, causing correlations to appear stronger than is warranted (Galton's problem). In this paper, we test the robustness of Chen's correlations to corrections for the geographic and historical relatedness of languages. ... When applying the strictest tests for relatedness, and when data is not aggregated across individuals, the correlation is not significant.

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0132145

好多時同relativity有關嘅large scale study都有呢個問題（cf http://humans-who-read-grammars.blogspot.hk/2017/03/spurious-correlations.html），睇relativity文最好睇番experimental嗰類

巴打點睇cross-sectional 同 longitudinal research
experimental算係邊樣？

想讀 但我1st degree 完全唔關事 有無簡介?

聽講好多科都轉得ling.
stat,cs,cognitive science,language,psycho etc

maths都唔少

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantonese_nasal-stop_alternation

粵語算少喇。侗台語系應該超多。

拋磚引玉 樓豬豬點睇futured language 同less futured language ，點解講futured language 嘅人傾向會食煙

香港人算係講futured定less futured language?

我認為呢個分類法好有問題，一聽到就着晒 bad linguistics 警報。

點會冇呀...

我都算半個IT人，份人都幾跨科吓嘅，我會覺得語言係一個現象，唔可以話分開唔同範疇去學。好多基礎嘢，無論你研究邊方面（語音、音系、句法、語義）嘅嘢，用咩角度（心理、神經、電腦）去切入，鍾意邊一種理論（形式語言學、功能語言學），都係要識。

Agger

拋磚引玉 樓豬豬點睇futured language 同less futured language ，點解講futured language 嘅人傾向會食煙

香港人算係講futured定less futured language?

我認為呢個分類法好有問題，一聽到就着晒 bad linguistics 警報。

點會冇呀...

想讀 但我1st degree 完全唔關事 有無簡介?

其實好多field都關linguistics事
佢冇分macro micro，反而係有好多分支
例如有巴打係bio既，可以向neurolinguistics發展
可能有人1st degree係computing既，咁computational linguistics又會比較適合
不過語言學相對其他field易入手，你有冇底都好，由degree讀起，一樣咁易吸收

上面巴打講嘅research呢
係咪得kongu cu
有無詳細少少介紹?

我傾向做下ra先再諗讀唔讀

我間u無啊

comp ling 留名

打算暑假讀熟jurafsky & martin，到時唔識問下大家先

心底裡面係linguistics lover
實際上做緊工程撚 做speech processing

其實我係嚟留名

Every time I fire a linguist, the performance of the speech recognizer goes up. -Frederick Jelinek

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantonese_nasal-stop_alternation

粵語算少喇。侗台語系應該超多。

出個粵文wiki post? 我見英文有啲想tldr

拋磚引玉 樓豬豬點睇futured language 同less futured language ，點解講futured language 嘅人傾向會食煙

香港人算係講futured定less futured language?

食煙同futured language我真係冇睇法...
香港人L1多數都係廣東話，亦有bilingual會有英文係第2個L1（英文係futured language）
，咁我當係前者啦～
香港人會係futureless，平時我地要表示過去現在未來都好，都唔會有modal去標示tense，包括future，而係用同一個verb form去講
eg:
我而家去學校 I go to school now.
我聽日去學校 I WILL go to school tomorrow.

有錯請指正

佢本身篇paper冇correct到genetics同geography嘅影響，correct咗之後唔significant（佢自己已經認咗）

However, Chen's original analysis assumed languages are independent. This neglects the fact that languages are related, causing correlations to appear stronger than is warranted (Galton's problem). In this paper, we test the robustness of Chen's correlations to corrections for the geographic and historical relatedness of languages. ... When applying the strictest tests for relatedness, and when data is not aggregated across individuals, the correlation is not significant.

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0132145

好多時同relativity有關嘅large scale study都有呢個問題（cf http://humans-who-read-grammars.blogspot.hk/2017/03/spurious-correlations.html），睇relativity文最好睇番experimental嗰類

巴打點睇cross-sectional 同 longitudinal research
experimental算係邊樣？

其實我唔係真係咁熟relativity，sor

你講緊嘅longitudinal同cross sectional係咩研究？（唔係點諗到relativity點樣做到longitudinal ）

我講嘅experiment係類似controlled elicitation嗰啲，例如levinson，lucy