6 ms·

Bullshit. You're mumbling when I can't understand you. Calling it "data compression" is polishing an indecipherable turd. Of course people make their language

by chasing 12y ago

Bullshit. You're mumbling when I can't understand you. Calling it "data compression" is polishing an indecipherable turd. Of course people make their language more efficient when using common words and phrases. "D'ja do it?" "Yeah." "K." "No prob." But that's not mumbling. I think of mumbling as generally being an expressed disinterest in being understood. Sometimes because the speaker doesn't understand what they're being asked to speak about, sometimes because they're shy and insecure about their words. Sometimes mumbling is a way to express derision or disinterest in the information or the person someone's speaking to. Lots of reasons. Not clever. Kind of the opposite of clever. It's a time-waster compared to just flat-out saying "I don't know" or "I'm not sure" or "I don't care" or whatever.

dbbolton 12y ago
Sorry to break it to you, but psychosocial behaviors aren't always governed by rationality. Edit: also, "to speak incoherently" and "to fail to articulate" are both acceptable definitions of the word "mumble": https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mumble https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mumble
- mehrzad 12y ago
  Isn't that what the article's title kind of implying though?
  - dbbolton 12y ago
    No. It is describing adaptive aspects of some linguistic phenomena. chasing is suggesting that when a person starts to mumble, which they seemed to define as speaking incoherently due to a variety of psychosocial circumstances- completely different from the article's definition- they are behaving irrationally and wasting time because the rational thing to do would be to directly and clearly state the reason, assuming the speaker is even aware of such a reason, that they began to mumble in the first place.
    - anigbrowl 12y ago
      If the output isn't coherent or fails to articulate such that the listener doesn't understand the message, then it's hardly adaptive. And I think either definition above speaks to the incomprehensibility of mumbling. If I tell someone something and they grunt in acknowledgement because they're busy rather than enunciating a clear response, that's easy enough to understand. But when someone mumbles, it usually isn't comprehensible and they are just shifting the cognitive burden of guessing what was meant onto the listener. Most often I've come across this when people are not sure how to pronounce a word properly and mumble in embarrassment instead. I'd much rather someone say 'I'm not sure how to pronounce this...'; trying to figure out what they mean when they mumble is exasperating.
      - dbbolton 12y ago
        I don't think you appreciate the different arguments being made here, and I'm not sure if you read the article past the title. >If the output isn't coherent or fails to articulate such that the listener doesn't understand the message, then it's hardly adaptive. Clipping, assimilation, etc. do not meet your criteria as they do not cause incomprehensibility. They may draw prescriptive criticism, but they do not deprive phrases of all conceivable meaning. Those are the types of phenomena that the article is discussing. More to the point, when I say "adaptive" I am talking about the evolution of language. The winds of change. It isn't always "good" in an objective sense, but it never leads to a breakdown of meaning. >incomprehensibility of mumbling. Think of the definition used by the article as "failure to enunciate" and it should make more sense. Perhaps it wasn't the best word choice, but I'm guessing it's reflective of social use. I don't know what else a layman might call "not enunciating", especially since there are several factors involved such as the examples above. The rest of your comment, as well as chasing's comment, seem to be hinged on the idea that there's only one definition of mumbling, which I just don't agree with, but I won't continue to argue against it either. If you have a better title for the article, I would direct it to the writer.
jt2190 12y ago
> You’re also more likely to [phonetically] reduce words > if they’re predictable in the context, so that the word > fine would be pronounced less distinctly in a sentence > like “You’re going to be just fine” than “The last word > in this sentence is fine.” If pronouncing words less distinctly isn't mumbling, what is it?
- chasing 12y ago
  "Phonetic reductions," according to the article. Although in elementary school we learned to call them "contractions." (Isn't. I'll. 'Cause. Didn't. That'll. Who's.) It's mumbling if the listener doesn't understand the meaning of the word or words at all. Which might be data compression, but I don't think of mumbles a being any more concise, just less intelligible.
  - sushid 12y ago
    But the article has examples that are clearly different from contractions: > ...the word fine would be pronounced less distinctly in a sentence like “You’re going to > be just fine” than “The last word in this sentence is fine.” This is again, just semantics, but I suppose you can say it's something akin to "concatenating" or "slurring," although the latter has its own connotations.
  - jt2190 12y ago
    > Although in elementary school we learned to call them > "contractions. This is the part of your understanding that is incorrect. You're talking about contractions, which linguists call Synaeresis [1]. The article talks about Vowel (Phonetic) Reductions [2], which are changes in the sounds that the speaker emits, not the complete removal of the sounds. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synaeresis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synaeresis [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vowel_reduction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vowel_reduction
dlu 12y ago
+1 for "indecipherable turd" That phrase is a gem
hessenwolf 12y ago
So, like acronyms and abbreviations?
MBlume 12y ago
You appear to have no disagreement with the author of the post apart from the definition of the word "mumbling"
- Dylan16807 12y ago
  Pretty much. It's a bad title.
ctide 12y ago
Sometimes people just talk too fast. To you, it's mumbling. To them, they're just conveying a lot of information quickly and you're struggling to keep up. Don't assume malice in their intent. I won't argue that calling it 'data compression' is nothing more than cute spin, though.
iamtew 12y ago
I've been told I mumble some times. I blame it on switching between three spoken languages daily though. Not being able to properly pronounce the words quick enough, I tend taking shortcuts, and then happen to mumble a bit more than most people. Not always, but enough that people I interact with often will notice. And on the point of switching between languages constantly, I've noticed myself loosing a bit of my pronunciation and vocabulary of my native tongue. I blame it on living and working abroad for 8+ years. Makes sense I guess, but still annoying to myself...

by chasing 12y ago

dbbolton 12y ago

Sorry to break it to you, but psychosocial behaviors aren't always governed by rationality. Edit: also, "to speak incoherently" and "to fail to articulate" are both acceptable definitions of the word "mumble": https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mumble https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mumble

mehrzad 12y ago
Isn't that what the article's title kind of implying though?
- dbbolton 12y ago
  No. It is describing adaptive aspects of some linguistic phenomena. chasing is suggesting that when a person starts to mumble, which they seemed to define as speaking incoherently due to a variety of psychosocial circumstances- completely different from the article's definition- they are behaving irrationally and wasting time because the rational thing to do would be to directly and clearly state the reason, assuming the speaker is even aware of such a reason, that they began to mumble in the first place.
  - anigbrowl 12y ago
    If the output isn't coherent or fails to articulate such that the listener doesn't understand the message, then it's hardly adaptive. And I think either definition above speaks to the incomprehensibility of mumbling. If I tell someone something and they grunt in acknowledgement because they're busy rather than enunciating a clear response, that's easy enough to understand. But when someone mumbles, it usually isn't comprehensible and they are just shifting the cognitive burden of guessing what was meant onto the listener. Most often I've come across this when people are not sure how to pronounce a word properly and mumble in embarrassment instead. I'd much rather someone say 'I'm not sure how to pronounce this...'; trying to figure out what they mean when they mumble is exasperating.
    - dbbolton 12y ago
      I don't think you appreciate the different arguments being made here, and I'm not sure if you read the article past the title. >If the output isn't coherent or fails to articulate such that the listener doesn't understand the message, then it's hardly adaptive. Clipping, assimilation, etc. do not meet your criteria as they do not cause incomprehensibility. They may draw prescriptive criticism, but they do not deprive phrases of all conceivable meaning. Those are the types of phenomena that the article is discussing. More to the point, when I say "adaptive" I am talking about the evolution of language. The winds of change. It isn't always "good" in an objective sense, but it never leads to a breakdown of meaning. >incomprehensibility of mumbling. Think of the definition used by the article as "failure to enunciate" and it should make more sense. Perhaps it wasn't the best word choice, but I'm guessing it's reflective of social use. I don't know what else a layman might call "not enunciating", especially since there are several factors involved such as the examples above. The rest of your comment, as well as chasing's comment, seem to be hinged on the idea that there's only one definition of mumbling, which I just don't agree with, but I won't continue to argue against it either. If you have a better title for the article, I would direct it to the writer.

jt2190 12y ago

> You’re also more likely to [phonetically] reduce words > if they’re predictable in the context, so that the word > fine would be pronounced less distinctly in a sentence > like “You’re going to be just fine” than “The last word > in this sentence is fine.” If pronouncing words less distinctly isn't mumbling, what is it?

chasing 12y ago
"Phonetic reductions," according to the article. Although in elementary school we learned to call them "contractions." (Isn't. I'll. 'Cause. Didn't. That'll. Who's.) It's mumbling if the listener doesn't understand the meaning of the word or words at all. Which might be data compression, but I don't think of mumbles a being any more concise, just less intelligible.
- sushid 12y ago
  But the article has examples that are clearly different from contractions: > ...the word fine would be pronounced less distinctly in a sentence like “You’re going to > be just fine” than “The last word in this sentence is fine.” This is again, just semantics, but I suppose you can say it's something akin to "concatenating" or "slurring," although the latter has its own connotations.
- jt2190 12y ago
  > Although in elementary school we learned to call them > "contractions. This is the part of your understanding that is incorrect. You're talking about contractions, which linguists call Synaeresis [1]. The article talks about Vowel (Phonetic) Reductions [2], which are changes in the sounds that the speaker emits, not the complete removal of the sounds. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synaeresis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synaeresis [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vowel_reduction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vowel_reduction

dlu 12y ago

+1 for "indecipherable turd" That phrase is a gem

hessenwolf 12y ago

So, like acronyms and abbreviations?

MBlume 12y ago

You appear to have no disagreement with the author of the post apart from the definition of the word "mumbling"

Dylan16807 12y ago
Pretty much. It's a bad title.

ctide 12y ago

Sometimes people just talk too fast. To you, it's mumbling. To them, they're just conveying a lot of information quickly and you're struggling to keep up. Don't assume malice in their intent. I won't argue that calling it 'data compression' is nothing more than cute spin, though.

iamtew 12y ago

I've been told I mumble some times. I blame it on switching between three spoken languages daily though. Not being able to properly pronounce the words quick enough, I tend taking shortcuts, and then happen to mumble a bit more than most people. Not always, but enough that people I interact with often will notice. And on the point of switching between languages constantly, I've noticed myself loosing a bit of my pronunciation and vocabulary of my native tongue. I blame it on living and working abroad for 8+ years. Makes sense I guess, but still annoying to myself...