Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
Send mail

Name Search
(Comparative) study (in structure/mode/ways of pronunciation, articulation, phonetics, or whatever; that is, in differences of speaking mouth postures and resultant speaking weight/force center points) between English/foreign languages and mother tongue, for better (more practical/effective/smooth) hearing/speaking of English/foreign languages.       Copyright.   Young-Won Kim,   yw@voicespec.com
open : home | main | Kor | book | FUN member : main II | Kor II


::: Comparative phonetics, brd2 :::


90 11 View counter   Join Member Login Admin
Name   Young-Won Kim
Subject   the structure/principle of trumpet
----- Original Message -----
From: James Mesbur
To: ygwnkm
Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2007 3:33 AM
Subject: Re: phonetics/SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE


When people can feel/see/hear/etc.,    clinical experiments are no longer necessary.
YOU ARE THE ONLY PERSON WHO MAKES THIS CLAIM. "PEOPLE" DO NOT FEEL/SEE/HEAR/ETC. THIS. SO ACTUALLY EXPERIMENTS ARE NECESSARY. THERE ARE MANY EXAMPLES OF THINGS PEOPLE FEEL/SEE/HEAR/ETC IN PHYSICS, BIOLOGY, ETC, WHICH HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE INCORRECT BY DATA-DRIVEN RESEARCH.

 
* If you do/can not feel/see/hear/etc. what (other) feel/see/hear/etc., it is your problem.    

YOU ARE WRONG. FIRST OF ALL, YOU ARE THE ONLY PERSON TO FEEL/SEE/HEAR/ETC. THIS, SO YOU ARE LYING ABOUT "PEOPLE". IT IS "ONE PERSON" (YOU). PART OF SCIENCE IS ABOUT REPRODUCING RESULTS. IF NO-ONE ELSE CAN FEEL/SEE/HEAR/ETC. WHAT YOU CAN, THEN MAYBE THE PROBLEM IS YOUR METHODOLOGY. WHAT IS YOUR METHODOLOGY AGAIN?
 

*I confirmed her saying at the second viewing of the program.    She will/can be more excellent than you.
EXCELLENT AT WHAT? SHE IS A SINGING TEACHER, NOT A LINGUIST OR SCIENTIST OF ANY KIND. MY ABOVE POINT HOLDS. YOU CONFIRMING HER SAYING SOMETHING DOES NOT MAKE IT TRUE, NOR DOES IT MEAN THAT COUNTS AS ANY KIND OF SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE.
* If you do/can not feel/see/hear/etc. what (other) feel/see/hear/etc., it is your problem.
NO, IT IS YOUR PROBLEM. IF NO-ONE CAN REPRODUCE YOUR CLAIMS, THEY WILL NOT BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY. PLEASE LEARN HOW TO DO PROPER SCIENCE.

 
* My speaking postures of cp/bp are completely different from your PHONETIC SETTING.      Read and practice my writings.
YOU IGNORE MY MAIN POINT AGAIN. DO YOU KNOW WHAT PHONETIC SETTING MEANS? YOUR cp/bp ARE BASED ON YOUR OWN FEELINGS/THOUGHTS/IDEAS, RATHER THAN ANY SORT OF VALID LINGUISTIC DATA. I HAVE READ YOUR WRITINGS AND HAVE FOUND NO SUBSTANCE AT ALL. THEREFORE THERE IS NO NEED TO "PRACTICE" THEM.
* I can speak/pronounce any vowel of [a, e, i, o, u, etc.] while fixing my tongue in one place/position, without movement, in the mouth on in the chest.
PROVE IT. MAKE RECORDINGS AND DO SIMULTANEOUS IMAGING TO SHOW THIS. UNTIL YOU CAN DO THAT, YOUR CLAIMS ARE NOT VALID. BY THE WAY, I CAN ALSO PRONOUNCE ANY OF THOSE VOWELS WITHOUT MOVING MY TONGUE; HOWEVER, I MUST MOVE OTHER ARTICULATORS, SUCH AS MY JAW, MY LARYNX OR MY LIPS. NOT MOVING ANYTHING MEANS THE SOUND QUALITY DOES NOT CHANGE. LEARN SOME PHYSICS AND SOME ANATOMY. HAVE YOU STUDIED ANATOMY OR THE PHYSICS AND ANATOMY OF SPEECH?
* I am interested in phonetics, about which I have written much, as you see.    And my board statistics (if correct) now shows about 70,000 visits from U.S.A. since February.
YOU SEND OUT HUNDREDS/THOUSANDS OF SPAM EMAILS TO PEOPLE YOU HAVE NEVER MET AND PEOPLE WHO ARE COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT TO YOUR RESEARCH. OF COURSE PEOPLE WILL CLICK ON THE LINK. IT DOES NOT MEAN THEY ARE INTERESTED IN YOUR RESEARCH. I HAVE SPOKEN WITH OVER 20 PEOPLE WHO WONDER WHAT ON EARTH YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. THEY THINK IT IS VERY BIZARRE AND THEY WISH YOU WOULD STOP SENDING THEM EMAIL. I AM TRYING TO HELP YOU BY EDUCATING YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT PROPER RESEARCH METHODS, BUT YOU CONTINUE TO IGNORE MY POINTS AND JUST STATE THAT YOUR SITE HAS MANY VISITORS. THAT IS IRRELEVANT.

 
* My writings show why English is SIMPLY MERE APPROXIMATION.       My board statistics (if correct) now shows about 70,000 visits from U.S.A. since February,    who will not want A RELIGIOUS ZEALOT.  
YOUR WRITINGS SHOW NOTHING OF THE SORT. YOU USE SPELLING AND WRITTEN DATA AS IF IT MEANS ANYTHING ABOUT HOW PEOPLE SPEAK. WHAT ABOUT ILLITERATE PEOPLE? WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE WHO SPEAK DIFFERENT DIALECTS? WRITTEN DATA IS USELESS FOR STUDYING FINE-DETAILED PHONETICS. PEOPLE ACQUIRE LANGUAGE LONG BEFORE THEY LEARN TO READ AND WRITE. SPELLING AND WRITING IS IRRELEVANT TO THE WAY THEY SPEAK. CITING THE NUMBER OF VISITORS TO YOUR SITE PROVES NOTHING ABOUT YOUR RESEARCH BESIDES THE FACT THAT YOU ARE A SUCCESSFUL SPAMMER.

 
http://voicespec.com/board.cgi?id=test1
http://voicespec.com/
Young-Won Kim
ygwnkm@yahoo.co.kr , ygwnkm@hotmail.com ,
 
----- Original Message -----
From: James Mesbur
To: ygwnkm
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 9:26 PM
Subject: Re: phonetics: conclusions
 

=============

 
----- Original Message -----
From: ygwnkm
To: James Mesbur
Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2007 12:33 PM
Subject: feel phonetics

>>  When people can feel/see/hear/etc.,    clinical experiments are no longer necessary.
YOU ARE THE ONLY PERSON WHO MAKES THIS CLAIM. "PEOPLE" DO NOT FEEL/SEE/HEAR/ETC. THIS. SO ACTUALLY EXPERIMENTS ARE NECESSARY. THERE ARE MANY EXAMPLES OF THINGS PEOPLE FEEL/SEE/HEAR/ETC IN PHYSICS, BIOLOGY, ETC, WHICH HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE INCORRECT BY DATA-DRIVEN RESEARCH.


*    Do not say “people” but you.     You asked and I replied as follows:

“>> I would like to verify your results and re-create your experiments myself so I can trust your conclusions.


*  It took about ten seconds or one minute (for me) to find the fact that speaking sounds are made by the vibration of the (hemi-) diaphragms.      If you want/try to verify (one of) my discovery/results at all,   it will take not-much time.”

“>> This sound is then shaped by other articulators, including the tongue, lips, shape of the mouth, etc. This is not an argument. This is not even theory. This is simple fact. If you don't believe this, you MUST provide actual evidence, and not simply statements that you have found some "new" form of phonetics. Where is the substance of your arguments? Where is the data? Where is your methodology? I cannot find any of those things on your pages.


*  The article of (No. 95) “Diaphragm” seems to explain how I came to think/find/test that the hemi-diaphragms are the source of voice.         If you have mechanical/engineering/technical sense,     you can (soon/easily) understand that the structures of the tongue, lips, shape of the mouth, etc. can not make/produce any human language-like sound.”

Do you have tried to test/feel the method of < The article of (No. 95) “Diaphragm” > at all?      Or though you have tried, could you feel nothing on the hemi-diaphragms or near them?    Your body itself is a good object of clinical experiment or data.    Use your body/head or yourself.    The data/methodology is in your body.     Use/test/experiment your body/head or yourself.


>>* If you do/can not feel/see/hear/etc. what (other) feel/see/hear/etc., it is your problem.    

YOU ARE WRONG. FIRST OF ALL, YOU ARE THE ONLY PERSON TO FEEL/SEE/HEAR/ETC. THIS, SO YOU ARE LYING ABOUT "PEOPLE". IT IS "ONE PERSON" (YOU). PART OF SCIENCE IS ABOUT REPRODUCING RESULTS. IF NO-ONE ELSE CAN FEEL/SEE/HEAR/ETC. WHAT YOU CAN, THEN MAYBE THE PROBLEM IS YOUR METHODOLOGY. WHAT IS YOUR METHODOLOGY AGAIN?


* Thank you very much for your saying that YOU ARE THE ONLY PERSON TO FEEL/SEE/HEAR/ETC.,    since which means I am the first/creator and there can not be “any/all your references to the work of other scholars or the likes”      Again, use/test/experiment your body/head or yourself.


>>* I confirmed her saying at the second viewing of the program.    She will/can be more excellent than you.
EXCELLENT AT WHAT? SHE IS A SINGING TEACHER, NOT A LINGUIST OR SCIENTIST OF ANY KIND. MY ABOVE POINT HOLDS. YOU CONFIRMING HER SAYING SOMETHING DOES NOT MAKE IT TRUE, NOR DOES IT MEAN THAT COUNTS AS ANY KIND OF SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE.
* If you do/can not feel/see/hear/etc. what (other) feel/see/hear/etc., it is your problem.
NO, IT IS YOUR PROBLEM. IF NO-ONE CAN REPRODUCE YOUR CLAIMS, THEY WILL NOT BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY. PLEASE LEARN HOW TO DO PROPER SCIENCE.


People of various fields study phonetics.    Voice singers, audio electricians, speech teachers, etc. study phonetics,   and they can have more practical experience/know ledge/technologies/etc. than ivory-towered (fake) IPA-sort linguists.      Again, use/test/experiment your body/head or yourself,   which are real science.


>>* My speaking postures of cp/bp are completely different from your PHONETIC SETTING.      Read and practice my writings.
YOU IGNORE MY MAIN POINT AGAIN. DO YOU KNOW WHAT PHONETIC SETTING MEANS? YOUR cp/bp ARE BASED ON YOUR OWN FEELINGS/THOUGHTS/IDEAS, RATHER THAN ANY SORT OF VALID LINGUISTIC DATA. I HAVE READ YOUR WRITINGS AND HAVE FOUND NO SUBSTANCE AT ALL. THEREFORE THERE IS NO NEED TO "PRACTICE" THEM.

*  I myself use/tested my body and have found phonetic facts.    If you do not use/test your body or yourself,  you will/can not find any phonetic facts.


>>* I can speak/pronounce any vowel of [a, e, i, o, u, etc.] while fixing my tongue in one place/position, without movement, in the mouth on in the chest.
PROVE IT. MAKE RECORDINGS AND DO SIMULTANEOUS IMAGING TO SHOW THIS. UNTIL YOU CAN DO THAT, YOUR CLAIMS ARE NOT VALID. BY THE WAY, I CAN ALSO PRONOUNCE ANY OF THOSE VOWELS WITHOUT MOVING MY TONGUE; HOWEVER, I MUST MOVE OTHER ARTICULATORS, SUCH AS MY JAW, MY LARYNX OR MY LIPS. NOT MOVING ANYTHING MEANS THE SOUND QUALITY DOES NOT CHANGE. LEARN SOME PHYSICS AND SOME ANATOMY. HAVE YOU STUDIED ANATOMY OR THE PHYSICS AND ANATOMY OF SPEECH?

*  You said “BY THE WAY, I CAN ALSO PRONOUNCE ANY OF THOSE VOWELS WITHOUT MOVING MY TONGUE”.    The statement of “HOWEVER, I MUST MOVE OTHER ARTICULATORS, SUCH AS MY JAW, MY LARYNX OR MY LIPS.” means that you unconsciously take the speaking posture of cp/bp in order to condition the vowel point in the mouth and eventually so as to reflect/pronounce/vibrate the hemi-diaphragms.  


>>* I am interested in phonetics, about which I have written much, as you see.    And my board statistics (if correct) now shows about 70,000 visits from U.S.A. since February.
YOU SEND OUT HUNDREDS/THOUSANDS OF SPAM EMAILS TO PEOPLE YOU HAVE NEVER MET AND PEOPLE WHO ARE COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT TO YOUR RESEARCH. OF COURSE PEOPLE WILL CLICK ON THE LINK. IT DOES NOT MEAN THEY ARE INTERESTED IN YOUR RESEARCH. I HAVE SPOKEN WITH OVER 20 PEOPLE WHO WONDER WHAT ON EARTH YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. THEY THINK IT IS VERY BIZARRE AND THEY WISH YOU WOULD STOP SENDING THEM EMAIL. I AM TRYING TO HELP YOU BY EDUCATING YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT PROPER RESEARCH METHODS, BUT YOU CONTINUE TO IGNORE MY POINTS AND JUST STATE THAT YOUR SITE HAS MANY VISITORS. THAT IS IRRELEVANT.

* THOUSANDS OF phoneticians/linguists/voice-singers/etc. will not visit repeatedly so as to record 70,000.    They sometimes have sent thank-e-mail to me for my information-e-mail.

 
>>* My writings show why English is SIMPLY MERE APPROXIMATION.       My board statistics (if correct) now shows about 70,000 visits from U.S.A. since February,    who will not want A RELIGIOUS ZEALOT.  
YOUR WRITINGS SHOW NOTHING OF THE SORT. YOU USE SPELLING AND WRITTEN DATA AS IF IT MEANS ANYTHING ABOUT HOW PEOPLE SPEAK. WHAT ABOUT ILLITERATE PEOPLE? WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE WHO SPEAK DIFFERENT DIALECTS? WRITTEN DATA IS USELESS FOR STUDYING FINE-DETAILED PHONETICS. PEOPLE ACQUIRE LANGUAGE LONG BEFORE THEY LEARN TO READ AND WRITE. SPELLING AND WRITING IS IRRELEVANT TO THE WAY THEY SPEAK. CITING THE NUMBER OF VISITORS TO YOUR SITE PROVES NOTHING ABOUT YOUR RESEARCH BESIDES THE FACT THAT YOU ARE A SUCCESSFUL SPAMMER.

* No additional comment required.

http://voicespec.com/board.cgi?id=test1
http://voicespec.com/
Young-Won Kim
ygwnkm@yahoo.co.kr , ygwnkm@hotmail.com ,
 

==========================

 
----- Original Message -----
From: James Mesbur
To: ygwnkm
Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2007 9:21 PM
Subject: Re: feel phonetics


On 11/2/07, ygwnkm < ygwnkm@yahoo.co.kr> wrote:
>>  When people can feel/see/hear/etc.,    clinical experiments are no longer necessary.
YOU ARE THE ONLY PERSON WHO MAKES THIS CLAIM. "PEOPLE" DO NOT FEEL/SEE/HEAR/ETC. THIS. SO ACTUALLY EXPERIMENTS ARE NECESSARY. THERE ARE MANY EXAMPLES OF THINGS PEOPLE FEEL/SEE/HEAR/ETC IN PHYSICS, BIOLOGY, ETC, WHICH HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE INCORRECT BY DATA-DRIVEN RESEARCH.
*    Do not say "people" but you.      You asked and I replied as follows:


YOU DID NOT ADDRESS MY  POINT.

" >> I would like to verify your results and re-create your experiments myself so I can trust your conclusions.
*  It took about ten seconds or one minute (for me) to find the fact that speaking sounds are made by the vibration of the (hemi-) diaphragms.      If you want/try to verify (one of) my discovery/results at all,   it will take not-much time."
 
" >> This sound is then shaped by other articulators, including the tongue, lips, shape of the mouth, etc. This is not an argument. This is not even theory. This is simple fact. If you don't believe this, you MUST provide actual evidence, and not simply statements that you have found some "new" form of phonetics. Where is the substance of your arguments? Where is the data? Where is your methodology? I cannot find any of those things on your pages.
*  The article of (No. 95) "Diaphragm" seems to explain how I came to think/find/test that the hemi-diaphragms are the source of voice.         If you have mechanical/engineering/technical sense,     you can (soon/easily) understand that the structures of the tongue, lips, shape of the mouth, etc. can not make/produce any human language-like sound."

YOU DID NOT ADDRESS MY POINT. YOU STATED SOMETHING WHICH YOU BELIEVE TO BE TRUE WITH NO ACTUAL PROOF. THIS IS NOT SCIENCE.


Do you have tried to test/feel the method of < The article of (No. 95 ) "Diaphragm" > at all?      Or though you have tried, could you feel nothing on the hemi-diaphragms or near them?    Your body itself is a good object of clinical experiment or data.    Use your body/head or yourself.    The data/methodology is in your body.     Use/test/experiment your body/head or yourself.
 
 
>>* If you do/can not feel/see/hear/etc. what (other) feel/see/hear/etc., it is your problem.    

YOU ARE WRONG. FIRST OF ALL, YOU ARE THE ONLY PERSON TO FEEL/SEE/HEAR/ETC. THIS, SO YOU ARE LYING ABOUT "PEOPLE". IT IS "ONE PERSON" (YOU). PART OF SCIENCE IS ABOUT REPRODUCING RESULTS. IF NO-ONE ELSE CAN FEEL/SEE/HEAR/ETC. WHAT YOU CAN, THEN MAYBE THE PROBLEM IS YOUR METHODOLOGY. WHAT IS YOUR METHODOLOGY AGAIN?
* Thank you very much for your saying that YOU ARE THE ONLY PERSON TO FEEL/SEE/HEAR/ETC.,    since which means I am the first/creator and there can not be "any/all your references to the work of other scholars or the likes"      Again, use/test/experiment your body/head or yourself.

NO, IT MEANS YOU STATED SOMETHING AS TRUTH/FACT WITH NO ACTUAL PROOF. THIS IS NOT SCIENCE.


>>* I confirmed her saying at the second viewing of the program.    She will/can be more excellent than you.
EXCELLENT AT WHAT? SHE IS A SINGING TEACHER, NOT A LINGUIST OR SCIENTIST OF ANY KIND. MY ABOVE POINT HOLDS. YOU CONFIRMING HER SAYING SOMETHING DOES NOT MAKE IT TRUE, NOR DOES IT MEAN THAT COUNTS AS ANY KIND OF SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE.
* If you do/can not feel/see/hear/etc. what (other) feel/see/hear/etc., it is your problem.
NO, IT IS YOUR PROBLEM. IF NO-ONE CAN REPRODUCE YOUR CLAIMS, THEY WILL NOT BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY. PLEASE LEARN HOW TO DO PROPER SCIENCE.
People of various fields study phonetics.    Voice singers, audio electricians, speech teachers, etc. study phonetics,   and they can have more practical experience/know ledge/technologies/etc. than ivory-towered (fake) IPA-sort linguists.      Again, use/test/experiment your body/head or yourself,   which are real science.

YOU AGAIN DISPLAY NO KNOWLEDGE OF ACTUAL LINGUISTICS. YOU IGNORE MY POINT ABOUT THE IPA NOT BEING A THEORY. YOU CALL UNIVERSITY RESEARCHERS "FAKE" LINGUISTS. WHAT ARE YOU??? A NON-SCIENTIFIC LINGUIST. REAL SCIENCE IS NOT "USE/TEST/EXPERIMENT YOUR BODY/HEAD OR YOURSELF". REAL SCIENCE IS STATISTICALLY SOUND EXPERIMENTATION ON A WIDE RANGE OF SUBJECTS, WITH AS LITTLE EXPERIMENTER BIAS AS POSSIBLE, REPRODUCIBLE BY MULTIPLE SCIENTISTS. YOUR "JUNK" SCIENCE IS NONE OF THIS.
 

>>* My speaking postures of cp/bp are completely different from your PHONETIC SETTING.      Read and practice my writings.
YOU IGNORE MY MAIN POINT AGAIN. DO YOU KNOW WHAT PHONETIC SETTING MEANS? YOUR cp/bp ARE BASED ON YOUR OWN FEELINGS/THOUGHTS/IDEAS, RATHER THAN ANY SORT OF VALID LINGUISTIC DATA. I HAVE READ YOUR WRITINGS AND HAVE FOUND NO SUBSTANCE AT ALL. THEREFORE THERE IS NO NEED TO "PRACTICE" THEM.
 
*  I myself use/tested my body and have found phonetic facts.    If you do not use/test your body or yourself,  you will/can not find any phonetic facts.

NOT TRUE. I CAN EASILY FIND PHONETIC FACTS BY EXAMINING OTHER PEOPLE, CORPORA OF RECORDED SPEECH (HIGH-QUALITY), ETC. YOU ARE AGAIN MISSING THE POINT ABOUT WHAT SCIENCE IS.
 

>>* I can speak/pronounce any vowel of [a, e, i, o, u, etc.] while fixing my tongue in one place/position, without movement, in the mouth on in the chest.
PROVE IT. MAKE RECORDINGS AND DO SIMULTANEOUS IMAGING TO SHOW THIS. UNTIL YOU CAN DO THAT, YOUR CLAIMS ARE NOT VALID. BY THE WAY, I CAN ALSO PRONOUNCE ANY OF THOSE VOWELS WITHOUT MOVING MY TONGUE; HOWEVER, I MUST MOVE OTHER ARTICULATORS, SUCH AS MY JAW, MY LARYNX OR MY LIPS. NOT MOVING ANYTHING MEANS THE SOUND QUALITY DOES NOT CHANGE. LEARN SOME PHYSICS AND SOME ANATOMY. HAVE YOU STUDIED ANATOMY OR THE PHYSICS AND ANATOMY OF SPEECH?
 
*  You said "BY THE WAY, I CAN ALSO PRONOUNCE ANY OF THOSE VOWELS WITHOUT MOVING MY TONGUE".    The statement of "HOWEVER, I MUST MOVE OTHER ARTICULATORS, SUCH AS MY JAW, MY LARYNX OR MY LIPS." means that you unconsciously take the speaking posture of cp/bp in order to condition the vowel point in the mouth and eventually so as to reflect/pronounce/vibrate the hemi-diaphragms.

YOU MISINTERPRET HOW SOUND IS PRODUCED. YOUR CONCLUSIONS ARE FAULTY SINCE YOU HAVE NO REAL DATA. STUDY THE PHYSICS AND ANATOMY OF SOUND AND YOU WILL UNDERSTAND PROPERLY. UNTIL THEN, YOUR STATEMENTS ARE COMPLETELY EMPTY.


>>* I am interested in phonetics, about which I have written much, as you see.    And my board statistics (if correct) now shows about 70,000 visits from U.S.A. since February.
YOU SEND OUT HUNDREDS/THOUSANDS OF SPAM EMAILS TO PEOPLE YOU HAVE NEVER MET AND PEOPLE WHO ARE COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT TO YOUR RESEARCH. OF COURSE PEOPLE WILL CLICK ON THE LINK. IT DOES NOT MEAN THEY ARE INTERESTED IN YOUR RESEARCH. I HAVE SPOKEN WITH OVER 20 PEOPLE WHO WONDER WHAT ON EARTH YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. THEY THINK IT IS VERY BIZARRE AND THEY WISH YOU WOULD STOP SENDING THEM EMAIL. I AM TRYING TO HELP YOU BY EDUCATING YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT PROPER RESEARCH METHODS, BUT YOU CONTINUE TO IGNORE MY POINTS AND JUST STATE THAT YOUR SITE HAS MANY VISITORS. THAT IS IRRELEVANT.
* THOUSANDS OF phoneticians/linguists/voice-singers/etc. will not visit repeatedly so as to record 70,000.    They sometimes have sent thank-e-mail to me for my information-e-mail.

PRINT ONE EXAMPLE OF SUCH A "THANK-YOU" EMAIL FROM AN ACTUAL LINGUIST/PHONETICIAN. I THINK YOU ARE LYING. AND AGAIN, JUST BECAUSE PEOPLE VISIT A SITE DOES NOT MEAN THE CONTENTS OF THE SITE ARE VALID IN ANY WAY AT ALL.
 

>>* My writings show why English is SIMPLY MERE APPROXIMATION.       My board statistics (if correct) now shows about 70,000 visits from U.S.A. since February,    who will not want A RELIGIOUS ZEALOT.  
YOUR WRITINGS SHOW NOTHING OF THE SORT. YOU USE SPELLING AND WRITTEN DATA AS IF IT MEANS ANYTHING ABOUT HOW PEOPLE SPEAK. WHAT ABOUT ILLITERATE PEOPLE? WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE WHO SPEAK DIFFERENT DIALECTS? WRITTEN DATA IS USELESS FOR STUDYING FINE-DETAILED PHONETICS. PEOPLE ACQUIRE LANGUAGE LONG BEFORE THEY LEARN TO READ AND WRITE. SPELLING AND WRITING IS IRRELEVANT TO THE WAY THEY SPEAK. CITING THE NUMBER OF VISITORS TO YOUR SITE PROVES NOTHING ABOUT YOUR RESEARCH BESIDES THE FACT THAT YOU ARE A SUCCESSFUL SPAMMER.

* No additional comment required.
WHY NOT? YOU IGNORE MY POINTS AGAIN.

SUMMARY:
YOU IGNORE THE RESEARCH OF REAL LINGUISTS. YOU IGNORE THE VALID POINTS I MAKE AGAINST YOUR METHODS. YOU USE FAULTY DATA, YOU DO NOT PERFORM ANY SORT OF ACTUAL EXPERIMENTS, YOU "EXPERIMENT' ONLY ON YOUR "FEELINGS" OF WHAT HAPPENS IN YOUR BODY. YOU USE NO INSTRUMENTS OR MEASUREMENTS WHATSOEVER TO REACH YOUR CONCLUSIONS. YOU HAVE NO ACTUAL "DATA" OF ANY SORT EXCEPT POOR-QUALITY INTERNET "READINGS", WRITTEN TEXTS, AND YOUR OWN SPEECH. THAT IS LAUGHABLE AT BEST, DISHONEST AT WORST.

FURTHERMORE, YOU ARE RUDE AND ACCUSATORY, AND CONSIDER THE HARD WORK REQUIRED TO ATTAIN PROFESSORSHIP "FAKE". THIS IS EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTING COMING FROM A SELF-PROCLAIMED INTELLECTUAL.

I HAVE EVALUATED MANY OF YOUR PAGES AND FOUND ZERO VALID RESEARCH WHATSOEVER.

GOOD LUCK AND I HOPE YOU GET A REAL EDUCATION IN LINGUISTICS SOMEDAY, SINCE YOU SEEM TO CLEARLY FEEL PASSIONATE ABOUT IT, BUT ARE EXTREMELY MISGUIDED AND BELLIGERENT.


http://voicespec.com/board.cgi?id=test1
http://voicespec.com/
Young-Won Kim
ygwnkm@yahoo.co.kr , ygwnkm@hotmail.com ,
 
 
==================

 
----- Original Message -----
From: ygwnkm
To: James Mesbur
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 2:24 PM
Subject: fake phoneticians

* What is science/PROOF/data?

You said "BY THE WAY, I CAN ALSO PRONOUNCE ANY OF THOSE VOWELS WITHOUT MOVING MY TONGUE".    

The above-statement of “I CAN ALSO PRONOUNCE ANY OF THOSE VOWELS WITHOUT MOVING MY TONGUE.” is science/PROOF/data,   which was clinically experimented and felt/confirmed (not by other data or other people but) by your own body.    
And after all, you (mean to) say that IPA-sort phoneticians are fake, who say “ANY OF THOSE VOWELS WITHOUT MOVING MY TONGUE can not be pronounced.”

You abstractly say "HOWEVER, I MUST MOVE OTHER ARTICULATORS, SUCH AS MY JAW, MY LARYNX OR MY LIPS."    
But my writings say specifically the facts.


* I asked, but no reply.
Do you have tried to test/feel the method of < The article of (No. 95 ) "Diaphragm" > at all?      Or though you have tried, could you feel nothing on the hemi-diaphragms or near them?    
 

You say “I CAN EASILY FIND PHONETIC FACTS BY EXAMINING OTHER PEOPLE, CORPORA OF RECORDED SPEECH (HIGH-QUALITY), ETC.”      Why not clinically experiment your own mouth/body??        Your own mouth/body are free and always prepared.      Your own mouth/body will tell half the facts of phonetics.     Professional/experienced phoneticians like me will seek factual/real SPEECH rather than HIGH-QUALITY speech.  



>> PRINT ONE EXAMPLE OF SUCH A "THANK-YOU" EMAIL FROM AN ACTUAL LINGUIST/PHONETICIAN. I THINK YOU ARE LYING. AND AGAIN, JUST BECAUSE PEOPLE VISIT A SITE DOES NOT MEAN THE CONTENTS OF THE SITE ARE VALID IN ANY WAY AT ALL.

* I (usually) do not keep those kinds of "THANK-YOU" EMAIL as proofs.   I only remember.


>> Your SUMMARY:
YOU IGNORE THE RESEARCH OF REAL LINGUISTS. YOU IGNORE THE VALID POINTS I MAKE AGAINST YOUR METHODS. YOU USE FAULTY DATA, YOU DO NOT PERFORM ANY SORT OF ACTUAL EXPERIMENTS, YOU "EXPERIMENT' ONLY ON YOUR "FEELINGS" OF WHAT HAPPENS IN YOUR BODY. YOU USE NO INSTRUMENTS OR MEASUREMENTS WHATSOEVER TO REACH YOUR CONCLUSIONS. YOU HAVE NO ACTUAL "DATA" OF ANY SORT EXCEPT POOR-QUALITY INTERNET "READINGS", WRITTEN TEXTS, AND YOUR OWN SPEECH. THAT IS LAUGHABLE AT BEST, DISHONEST AT WORST.

*  What VALID POINTS Did you specifically MAKE AGAINST my METHODS at all?    I have heard of recordings of many people,   while comparing with my own speaking    and continuously finding phonetic facts,    which are not experiment/science/measurement?       When studying phonetics, I do not need any instruments of speedometer/x-ray/etc.        Who else in the world wrote so many (original/scientific/invaluable/real) articles on phonetics except me?


>> FURTHERMORE, YOU ARE RUDE AND ACCUSATORY, AND CONSIDER THE HARD WORK REQUIRED TO ATTAIN PROFESSORSHIP "FAKE". THIS IS EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTING COMING FROM A SELF-PROCLAIMED INTELLECTUAL.

* I agree that it can be often harder TO ATTAIN "FAKE" PROFESSORSHIP than real achievements.     I think you and fake professors (who say “ANY OF THOSE VOWELS WITHOUT MOVING MY TONGUE can not be pronounced.”) are really rude to the world.


>> I HAVE EVALUATED MANY OF YOUR PAGES AND FOUND ZERO VALID RESEARCH WHATSOEVER.

Say specifically what you HAVE read/EVALUATED at all.


http://voicespec.com/board.cgi?id=test1
http://voicespec.com/
Young-Won Kim
ygwnkm@yahoo.co.kr , ygwnkm@hotmail.com ,
 
 
==================


 
----- Original Message -----
From: James Mesbur
To: ygwnkm
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 9:03 PM
Subject: Re: fake phoneticians


* What is science/PROOF/data?
I GUESS YOU HAVE TO ASK BECAUSE YOU CLEARLY DON'T KNOW. I HAVE TRIED TO DESCRIBE IT TO YOU, BUT YOU CHOOSE TO IGNORE IT.

You said "BY THE WAY, I CAN ALSO PRONOUNCE ANY OF THOSE VOWELS WITHOUT MOVING MY TONGUE".    
 
The above-statement of "I CAN ALSO PRONOUNCE ANY OF THOSE VOWELS WITHOUT MOVING MY TONGUE." is science/PROOF/data,   which was clinically experimented and felt/confirmed (not by other data or other people but) by your own body.
IT IS NOT SCIENCE/PROOF... IT IS ONE TINY PIECE OF DATA THAT CAN BE USED TO BUILD A HYPOTHESIS. THAT HYPOTHESIS THEN MUST BE TESTED WITH LARGER AMOUNTS OF DATA FROM A WIDE VARIETY OF SOURCES. YOU HAVE NOT DONE THIS. YOU ARE NOT PRACTICING SCIENCE.
And after all, you (mean to) say that IPA-sort phoneticians are fake, who say "ANY OF THOSE VOWELS WITHOUT MOVING MY TONGUE can not be pronounced."
 
You abstractly say "HOWEVER, I MUST MOVE OTHER ARTICULATORS, SUCH AS MY JAW, MY LARYNX OR MY LIPS."    
But my writings say specifically the facts.
THIS IS NOT AN "ABSTRACT" STATEMENT. DO YOU KNOW WHAT "ABSTRACT" MEANS?? YOUR WRITINGS DO NOT STATE ANY FACTS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT HOW SOUND IS PRODUCED. YOU ONLY STATE WHAT YOU BELIEVE TO BE TRUE, BUT YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE BESIDES WHAT YOU "FEEL" IN YOUR OWN BODY. THIS IS THE WORST KIND OF EVIDENCE, AND HAS BEEN SHOWN AGAIN AND AGAIN TO BE THE WORST KIND OF EVIDENCE IN MANY DIFFERENT SCIENCES: BIOLOGY, PHYSICS, CHEMISTRY, ETC.

* I asked, but no reply.
Do you have tried to test/feel the method of < The article of (No. 95 ) "Diaphragm" > at all?      Or though you have tried, could you feel nothing on the hemi-diaphragms or near them?    
DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE DIAPHRAGM IS??? IT'S A THICK WALL OF MUSCLE UNDER THE RIBCAGE THAT CONTROLS THE SIZE OF THE THORACIC CAVITY THROUGH ITS CONTRACTIONS. IT AIDS IN RESPIRATION. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ARTICULATION OF SPECIFIC SPEECH SOUNDS EXCEPT IN THAT IT PLAYS A ROLE IN THE SOURCE OF THE AIR THAT MOVES ACROSS THE ACTUAL ARTICULATORS. JUST BECAUSE YOU CLAIM TO FEEL IT VIBRATING OR WHATEVER DOES NOT MEAN IT IS DOING WHAT YOU THINK IT IS DOING.
 

You say "I CAN EASILY FIND PHONETIC FACTS BY EXAMINING OTHER PEOPLE, CORPORA OF RECORDED SPEECH (HIGH-QUALITY), ETC."      Why not clinically experiment your own mouth/body??        Your own mouth/body are free and always prepared.      Your own mouth/body will tell half the facts of phonetics.     Professional/experienced phoneticians like me will seek factual/real SPEECH rather than HIGH-QUALITY speech.
YOU ARE DESCRIBING THE SCIENCE OF CHARLATANS, DELUDED PEOPLE, AND NON-SCIENTISTS. SURE, YOU CAN START WITH A HYPOTHESIS BASED ON SOMETHING YOU FEEL, BUT THEN A REAL SCIENTIST WOULD GO OUT AND USE FURTHER DATA FROM OTHER SOURCES TO CONFIRM OR DISPROVE THE HYPOTHESIS, THROUGH ACTUAL OBJECTIVE EXPERIMENTATION. YOU ARE PRACTICING THE SO-CALLED "IVORY-TOWER" "FAKE" SCIENCE YOU CLAIM TO HATE. IVORY-TOWER SCIENCE IS PRACTICING IN ISOLATION, AWAY FROM OTHER RESEARCHERS AND REAL PEOPLE. THAT IS WHAT YOU DO.
* I (usually) do not keep those kinds of "THANK-YOU" EMAIL as proofs.   I only remember.
THEN HOW CAN I BELIEVE YOU? AND WHY SHOULD I BELIEVE YOU? IF YOU HAVE TRUE CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK, YOU SHOULD USE IT AS EVIDENCE TO HELP SUPPORT YOUR IDEAS. BUT YOU DON'T. SO YOU ARE LYING TO ME KNOW. THAT IS SAD.
 
*  What VALID POINTS Did you specifically MAKE AGAINST my METHODS at all?     I have heard of recordings of many people,   while comparing with my own speaking    and continuously finding phonetic facts,    which are not experiment/science/measurement?       When studying phonetics, I do not need any instruments of speedometer/x-ray/etc.        Who else in the world wrote so many (original/scientific/invaluable/real) articles on phonetics except me?
POINT #1: YOU DON'T DESCRIBE YOUR METHODS IN ANY SUCH WAY AS TO BE REPRODUCIBLE BY OTHER SCIENTISTS. (I MENTIONED THIS AT LEAST TWICE)
POINT #2: YOU DON'T USE ANY VALID LINGUISTIC FORM OF DATA (I DESCRIBED THIS IN DETAIL SEVERAL TIMES)

"Who else in the world wrote so many (original/scientific/invaluable/real) articles on phonetics except me?"
YOUR ARTICLES ARE ORIGINAL, BUT THEY ARE *NOT* SCIENTIFIC, AS I HAVE SHOWN REPEATEDLY AND ANY PERSON WITH ANY SCIENTIFIC TRAINING WOULD AGREE. SINCE THEY ARE NOT SCIENTIFIC, THEY ARE NOT "INVALUABLE". I HAVE NO CLUE WHAT YOU MEAN BY "REAL", UNLESS YOU ARE SAYING THAT YOU HAVE DISCOVERED THE "TRUTH" (WHICH YOU CLEARLY BELIEVE). THAT IS THE MOST ARROGANT ATTITUDE A SCIENTIST CAN HAVE. WELL DONE!!!

PLENTY OF PHONETICIANS THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE DEVELOPED SCIENTIFIC AND INVALUABLE THEORIES OVER TIME. WHETHER THEY ARE "REAL" IS ALWAYS UP FOR DEBATE; THIS IS PART OF WHAT MAKES GOOD "SCIENCE". PALATOGRAPHY WAS DEVELPED TO UNDERSTAND HOW SOUNDS ARE ACTUALLY BEING PRODUCED IN THE MOUTH AND VOCAL TRACT. THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF USING AN INSTRUMENT TO VERIFY WHAT IS ACTUALLY GOING ON, AND CAN BE REPRODUCED BY ANY RESEARCHER ON ANY SUBJECT AT ANY TIME. MORE RECENTLY, ULTRASOUND IMAGING TECHNIQUES HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED TO EXAMINE THE MOTION OF THE TONGUE, JAW AND VELUM. YOU CLAIM ALL OF THIS TO BE INVALID. WHY??? WHAT IS YOUR EVIDENCE? NONE. THERE ARE OTHER TECHNIQUES INCLUDING STUDYING THE ANATOMY OF CADAVERS WHICH HAVE PROVIDED GREAT EVIDENCE OVER THE PAST 150 YEARS. WHY IS ALL THE RESEARCH DONE BY EVERYONE ELSE IN THE WORLD WITH REAL DATA AND REAL INSTRUMENTS INVALIDATED BY YOUR CLAIMS BASED ON HOW LANGUAGE IS SPELLED AND WHAT *YOU* FEEL IN YOUR OWN BODY? THAT'S RIDICULOUS. REALLY, REALLY RIDICULOUS.
* I agree that it can be often harder TO ATTAIN "FAKE" PROFESSORSHIP than real achievements.     I think you and fake professors (who say "ANY OF THOSE VOWELS WITHOUT MOVING MY TONGUE can not be pronounced.") are really rude to the world.
YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT. YOUR STATEMENT IS NONSENSICAL. WHY IS THIS RUDE? AS I STATED BEFORE, THE TONGUE IS NOT THE ONLY ARTICULATOR. LET ME RE-STATE FOR CLARITY:

1. THE QUALITY OF A VOWEL MAY BE AFFECTED BY MOVING THE TONGUE.
2. IT MAY ALSO BE AFFECTED BY KEEPING THE TONGUE STILL BUT BY MOVING OTHER ARTICULATORS, SUCH AS THE LIPS, LARYNX AND JAW
3. DIFFERENT PHONETIC GESTURES MAY RESULT IN SIMILAR PERCEPTIONS OF VOWEL QUALITY: FOR EXAMPLE, ROUNDING THE LIPS CAUSES THE VOCAL TRACT TO LENGTHEN, WHICH AFFECTS VOWEL QUALITY IN A SIMILAR WAY TO LOWERING THE LARYNX.
MORE POINTS:
4. THE PHARYNX IS THE LOWEST ARTICULATOR THAT HAS ANY DIRECT EFFECT ON VOWEL QUALITY.
5. THE DIAPHRAGM HAS NO DIRECT EFFECT WHATSOEVER ON VOWEL QUALITY:

THESE 5 POINTS ARE ACCEPTED BY A WIDE VARIETY OF SCIENTISTS IN VARIOUS DISCIPLINES.

PLEASE EXPLAIN WHY YOU (AND ONLY YOU) REJECT EACH OF THESE POINTS, AND THEN YOU CAN BEGIN TO PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE ACCOUNT BASED ON REAL EVIDENCE. IF YOU DON'T HAVE SUCH EVIDENCE, THEN STOP SPAMMING ALL THE PEOPLE IN OUR LINGUISTICS DEPARTMENT. YOU DO NOT DO PROPER RESEARCH, AND YOUR IDEAS ARE EXTREMELY SHALLOW AND LACK SUBSTANCE. YOU HAVE ZERO LINGUISTICS OR SCIENTIFIC TRAINING, AND THEREFORE YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE PROPER WAY TO FORMULATE A TRUE SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENT (NOT "TRUE" IN THE SENSE OF DEFINITELY A FACT, BUT "TRUE" IN THE SENSE I DESCRIBED ABOVE WITH RESPECT TO SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH).

 
>> I HAVE EVALUATED MANY OF YOUR PAGES AND FOUND ZERO VALID RESEARCH WHATSOEVER.

Say specifically what you HAVE read/EVALUATED at all.
1. YOUR CLAIMS ABOUT HOW SOUND IS PRODUCED BY THE (HEMI-)DIAPHGRAM. THIS IS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY REAL EVIDENCE.
2. YOUR CLAIMS ABOUT cp/bp. THIS IS BASED ON WRITTEN DATA AND YOUR OWN "FEELINGS". THERE IS NO STATISTICAL EVIDENCE, THERE IS NO EXPERIMENTATION, THERE IS NO REAL LINGUISTIC DATA. YOU SIMPLY STATE THINGS AND EXPECT PEOPLE TO ACCEPT THEM.


IF YOU CANNOT RESPOND DIRECTLY TO THE 5 POINTS ABOVE IN AN INTELLIGENT MANNER, THEN PLEASE STOP EMAILING ME, AND STOP SENDING EMAILS TO MY LINGUISTICS DEPARTMENT.

THANK YOU.


=================


 
----- Original Message -----
From: ygwnkm
To: James Mesbur
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 11:21 AM
Subject: Diaphragm/phonetics

* I asked, but no reply.
Do you have tried to test/feel the method of < The article of (No. 95) "Diaphragm" > at all?      Or though you have tried, could you feel nothing on the hemi-diaphragms or near them?    

>> DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE DIAPHRAGM IS??? IT'S A THICK WALL OF MUSCLE UNDER THE RIBCAGE THAT CONTROLS THE SIZE OF THE THORACIC CAVITY THROUGH ITS CONTRACTIONS. IT AIDS IN RESPIRATION. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ARTICULATION OF SPECIFIC SPEECH SOUNDS EXCEPT IN THAT IT PLAYS A ROLE IN THE SOURCE OF THE AIR THAT MOVES ACROSS THE ACTUAL ARTICULATORS. JUST BECAUSE YOU CLAIM TO FEEL IT VIBRATING OR WHATEVER DOES NOT MEAN IT IS DOING WHAT YOU THINK IT IS DOING.


* Anyhow,    test/feel the method of < The article of (No. 95) "Diaphragm" >    hopefully with your LINGUISTICS/phonetics fellows and let me know the results: then I will reply to your usual nonscientific/absurd (below) questions/etc.

The test of the method of < The article of (No. 95) "Diaphragm" > will take ten seconds or one minute.


http://voicespec.com/board.cgi?id=test1
http://voicespec.com/
Young-Won Kim
ygwnkm@yahoo.co.kr , ygwnkm@hotmail.com ,



Fw: fake phoneticians
----- Original Message -----
From: James Mesbur
To: ygwnkm
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 9:03 PM
Subject: Re: fake phoneticians

Send this message to email View Printable version
DATE: 2007.11.07 - 11:10

61.102.131.184 - Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)


 Prev message James Mesbur/upenn
 Next message Diaphragm/phonetics
WriteDeleteEditReplyShow all list

90Simple view***   NOTICE (공지) :   member registration (sign in) for LOGIN,        (LOGIN을 위한 회원 가입) Y... 2013.01.04
89Simple view          common/same  (phonetic) structure  in  Korean,  Chinese,  Japanese  &  English  alphabets/characters Y... 2012.08.20
88Simple viewSenkaku せんか Islands, 釣魚台群島,       Hokkaido/Ainu, Sakhalin/Сахалин,       Liancourt Rocks 독도,  Tsushima Y... 2012.03.06
87Simple view釣魚台群島/尖閣諸島, 琉球諸島, 南西諸島, 薩南諸島, 吐噶喇列島, 沖縄諸島, 慶良間諸島, 先島諸島, 宮古列島, 八重山諸島 Y... 2013.05.06
86Simple view東海/日本海/한국해,   Scarborough Shoal,   Parece Vela, 冲鸟礁/Okinotorishima,   **Luzon Sea, South China Sea Y... 2012.05.11
85Simple view>>             Response to We the People Petition on the Sea of Japan Naming Issue Y... 2012.06.30
84Simple viewSocotra Rock 이어도,      Falklands,       Paracel Islands,       Spratly Islands,     Yonaguni 與那國,     Hans Island Y... 2012.04.20
83Simple viewJapan/China/Vietnam/Thai/Cambodia/Laos/Burma/Malaysia/Indonesia/Brunei/Singapore/Philippines/Taiwan/Okinawa Y... 2012.07.12
82Simple view>>                                        Korea,  한국 [han gug], 韓國 or 瀚國 ?? Y... 2012.07.17
81Simple viewPhonetics between    Keats' Endymion/Lamia &    Homer's Odyssey,      Hyperion/Sonnets/Calidore/Isabella Y... 2011.06.27
80Simple view>> 'Notebooks of Leonardo Da Vinci',   'Thoughts on Art and Life by Leonardo da Vinci',    Apollonius' Conics Y... 2011.07.20
79Simple view>> 'John Aubrey;  Brief Lives,  Miscellanies,  Natural History of Wiltshire',          Alberti's 'De pictura' Y... 2011.07.15
78Simple view>> Pascal's  'Lettres provinciales',  'De Esprit géométrique'  &  Pensées;          Vitruvius' "De Architectura" Y... 2011.07.19
77Simple view "Lex Talio  :  Phonetic translation"           &          "Phonetic study  on  German/French   words/sentences" Y... 2011.06.12
76Simple view>>       'Phonetic study  on  English  nouns'        < Lingering of articles >        'definite/indefinite article' Y... 2011.12.29
75Simple view>>      English  verb/adjective/adverb'     (derived nouns)               < have / be as v.aux. > Y... 2011.12.29
74Simple view                                 "English    spelling/vocabulary"                   (Korean connection) Y... 2011.05.19
73Simple view>>         Who/how made English/German/French spellings??            'Indo-European'       Aryan Y... 2012.07.03
72Simple viewPyrrho/Galen/Avicenna/Averroes/Maimonides, 'Albertus Magnus', 'Thomas Aquinas', 'Duns Scotus', Copernicus Y... 2011.05.17
71Simple viewArchimedes/Aspasia/Euclid/Hipparchus/Hippocrates/Leonidas/Pericles/Ptolemy/Solon/Themistocles/Epicurus Y... 2011.05.14
70Simple viewAeschylus/Aesop/Euripides/Hesiod,   Homer/Lucian/Menander/Pindar,  Polybius/Sappho/Sophocles, Alcibiades Y... 2011.05.11
69Simple viewThales/Anaximander/Anaximenes/Pythagoras,  Anaxagoras/Empedocles,  Antisthenes/Diogenes/Crates/Zeno Y... 2011.05.07
68Simple viewSocrates/Thucydides/Plutarch/Herodotus/Xenophon/Aristophanes/Plato/Aristotle/Parmenides/Democritus, etc. Y... 2011.05.04
67Simple view'The Star-Spangled Banner'   &   'God Save the Queen'   &    'Land of Hope and Glory';        national anthems Y... 2011.02.10
66Simple view              Shakespeare       &       Plutarch Y... 2010.10.28
65Simple view>>                  Sir Thomas More         &        Marcus Salvius Otho Y... 2010.11.13
64Simple viewPhonetics/linguistics              &             Bible Y... 2010.07.08
63Simple view>>    'phonetic study on Jesus Christ  &  Moshe'          'Twelve Apostles'           'Hellenistic civilization??' Y... 2011.04.10
62Simple view>> 'Moses & Jesus Christ'           teacher/Christianity/Christ/Jesus,    '(white) Christmas (tree/carol)' Y... 2010.12.18
61Simple view>>                 Confucius/Mencius,      Moshe, "Jesus Christ"      &     Laozi/Micius Y... 2011.03.28
60Simple view>> '論語/논어 [non  ŋΛ]  &  Old Testament'      Pentateuch     'Why Torah, Prophets, Writings, 四書五經' Y... 2011.04.05
59Simple view>> translation :           논어(論語)/공자(孔子/Confucius),               etymological analysis Y... 2011.04.08
58Simple viewNoam Chomsky    vs    Philip Lieberman,  fred m. seed professor, Brown.edu Y... 2009.05.26
57Simple view>> grafting Y... 2009.09.04
56Simple view>> The pied piper of Cambridge,                 by PHILIP LIEBERMAN Y... 2010.04.30
55Simple view>>         Fw: cognitive biologists Angela Stoeger and Tecumseh Fitch Y... 2012.11.27
54Simple view>>                  Newborns Know Their Native Tongue, Study Finds Y... 2013.01.04
53Simple viewunimelb/mq.edu.au,    let.ru.nl/taalunie.org/leidenuniv.nl/mpl.nl,    jussieu.fr/lpl-aix.fr Y... 2009.04.27
52Simple viewalberta/mun/brock/qam/montr-/ubc/mcmaster/concor-/carleton/queens/vic/mcgill/manito-/sfu/calgary Y... 2009.04.15
51Simple viewSweden (gu/umu/kth/lu/su/uu)           Uk (soas/york/ucl/cam/ed/essex/city/sussex) Y... 2009.04.07
50Simple viewumd/unc/utah/sjsu,              Germany (eva.mpg/jena/koeln/konstanz/potsdam/saarland/stuttgart)  Y... 2009.03.31
49Simple view>> Andre M. of Linguistics,          Max Planck Institute, Germany Y... 2009.04.07
48Simple viewnorthwestern/siu/Princeton/pitt/sc/Rutgers/rochester/uiowa/georgetown/ucdavis/uiuc/ucsd/colorado Y... 2009.03.12
47Simple viewyale/Haskins/uchicago/stanford/nyu/umich/hawaii/harvard/uoregon/Brown/ucsb/umass/buffalo/stonyb- Y... 2009.03.04
46Simple viewarizona/UCLA/upenn/USC/washington/osu/udel/ucsc/mit/indiana/utexas/cornell/rice/ku/msu/berkeley Y... 2009.02.24
45Simple viewQ & A      between cognitive linguistics/etc. and phonetics. Y... 2008.11.19
44Simple viewStonehenge Y... 2008.05.31
43Simple view>> Dr. Mike Parker Pearson Y... 2008.06.03
42Simple view>> Stonehenge/2 Y... 2009.07.03
41Simple viewmcmaster.ca, brocku.ca, mun.ca, ualberta.ca, ucw.cz, ut.ee, philol.msu.ru, phonetics.pu.ru, ngslt.org Y... 2008.05.20
40Simple view>> yorku.ca,    mun.ca,    mff.cuni.cz,    ffzg.hr,    zrc-sazu.si,    ff.uni-lj.si,    guest.arnes.si Y... 2008.06.24
39Simple viewcsulb/csun/gmu/ucdavis/ucr/ucsd/colorado/umd/unc/utah/virginia/uwm/sjsu/lldsa/wwu/sil/swarthmore Y... 2008.05.13
38Simple viewnorthwestern/siu/sc/Rutgers/rochester/Princeton/pitt/unm/uiowa/iastate/uiuc/uic/georgetown/byu, Y... 2008.05.06
37Simple view>> All vocabularies and grammar(s) of all languages are (already) inside babies' heads at birth. Y... 2008.05.06
36Simple viewStanford, nyu, umich, Hawaii, Harvard, uoregon, bu, Brown, ucsb, umass, nmsu, buffalo, stonybrook Y... 2008.04.29
35Simple viewRice,    ku,    msu,    gsu,    Berkeley,    yale,    haskins.   yale,    purdue,    uchicago Y... 2008.04.22
34Simple viewemich,  u.washington,  email.arizona,  usc,  udel,  ucsc,  mit,  indiana,  utexas,  cornell Y... 2008.04.15
33Simple viewCanada     &     ohio-state.edu Y... 2007.12.19
32Simple viewAustralia.  Austria,  Belgium,  France,  Israel,  Netherlands,  New Zealand,  Singapore, Y... 2007.12.12
31Simple viewTo publish something in a peer-reviewed journal of conference. Y... 2007.12.19
30Simple view>> univ-tlse2.fr Y... 2008.06.11
29Simple view>>  IPA,    enl.auth.gr,    flinders.edu.au,    uab.es,      uab.cat,     mpi.nl, Y... 2008.06.17
28Simple viewroot of (all) grammar(s); phonetics.        UK    &     Ie. Y... 2007.12.05
27Simple viewroot of (all) grammars; phonetics.      SWEDEN,       Bielefeld/ GERMANY Y... 2007.11.28
26Simple viewroot of (all) grammars; phonetics.         GERMANY Y... 2007.11.21
25Simple viewgrammars:     upenn,    ucla, Y... 2007.11.07
24Simple viewJames Mesbur/upenn Y... 2007.11.07
23Now readingthe structure/principle of trumpet Y... 2007.11.07
22Simple viewDiaphragm/phonetics Y... 2007.11.07
21Simple viewyale,  purdue,  uchicago,  stanford,  nyu,  umich,  hawaii,  harvard,  uoregon Y... 2007.09.19
20Simple viewLinguistList,    Wikipedia Y... 2007.11.08
19Simple viewNorway; @hf.ntnu, @nor.uib, @iln.uio, @hum.uit, Y... 2007.08.07
18Simple viewFinland; @helsinki, @joensuu, @campus.jyu, @oulu, @uta, @utu, @uwasa, @abo, Y... 2007.08.07
17Simple view@rice.edu, @ku.edu, @byu.edu, @msu.edu, @gsu.edu, @berkeley.edu, Y... 2007.07.19
16Simple view@udel, @ucsc, @mit, @indiana, @mail.utexas, @cornell, Y... 2007.07.02
15Simple view18th International Congress of Linguists Y... 2007.06.18
14Simple view@u.washington ; @u.arizona; @ling.ohio-state  Y... 2007.06.18
13Simple viewCanadian phonetics Y... 2007.06.06
12Simple viewBritish phonetics Y... 2007.05.15
11Simple viewPhonetics, Sweden, uu.se, umu.se, su.se, kth.se, gu.se Y... 2007.05.15
10Simple viewUSC phonetics Y... 2007.04.13
9Simple viewPhonetics of Lund University, Sweden Y... 2007.03.23
8Simple viewUni-Stuttgart.de/phonetik Y... 2007.03.23
7Simple viewPhonetik in Deutschland Y... 2007.05.25
6Simple viewProfessor Wolfgang Hess, Universität Bonn. Y... 2007.08.15
5Simple viewUCLA Phonetics Y... 2007.03.12
4Simple viewChallenge to upenn phonetics/phonology Y... 2007.02.24
3Simple viewWhat kind of response are you expecting? New person/UPenn Y... 2007.02.24
2Simple viewthat of a reasonable academic, UPenn Y... 2007.02.24
1Simple viewUltimate knowledge. UPenn Y... 2007.03.02
This is the first page. This is the last page.
Prev 1 Next
Write Reload
Add/Remove Name on search listAdd/Remove Subject on search listAdd/Remove Content on search list Return to main page


open : home | main | Kor | book | FUN member : main II | Kor II