Somewhat related question - does anyone know where I can get the raw audio of every Tucker Carlson episode? I want to try to visualize his hypnotic pattern of speech during his monologues...
I just want to make a meme by averaging his monologue waveforms to hopefully reveal his distinctly ridiculous manner of speaking where he alternates his pitch with a specific meter. ;) World domination of TuckGPT can come later.
To what extent are we put into a suggestive state by the stylistic presentation of speech, not just the rythms, but the rest of the oratory and rhetoric? This is a great place for LLMs to make a contribution with neutral, consistent rewording. I hope that the boringreport.org is the start of de-hypnotizing bubble I can deploy between myself and the world.
If say a Maddow vs a Carslon monologue could be stripped down into a sequence of neutral observations and assertions and anonymized it would go a fair way toward switching off the typical tribal inflammation of the ratiocination.
barely related, but it's funny to me how in anglosaxon countries you use the locution "quid pro quo", while here in italy we use "do ut des" to mean "a favor for a favor".
And that "qui pro quo" - in italy - means just a misunderstanding.
It's one of the funniest false friends that I've encountered while studying English
Yeah, quid pro quo literally means "one thing for another thing". The ambiguity of the "for" led to divergent evolutions.
The "pro" (for) can be either mean "instead of", "in the place of" (One thing in the place of another thing). This is where the interpretation currently used in Italy and possibly other places settled on.
But "pro" (for) also means "for the benefit of" and that's the interpretation that caught on in the Anglosphere.
I liked that when a major person in Italian organized crime was arrested, US newspapers called him a “capo dei capi” while Italian newspapers called him a “boss dei boss”.
35 comments
[ 0.19 ms ] story [ 63.4 ms ] threadIf say a Maddow vs a Carslon monologue could be stripped down into a sequence of neutral observations and assertions and anonymized it would go a fair way toward switching off the typical tribal inflammation of the ratiocination.
And that "qui pro quo" - in italy - means just a misunderstanding.
It's one of the funniest false friends that I've encountered while studying English
The "pro" (for) can be either mean "instead of", "in the place of" (One thing in the place of another thing). This is where the interpretation currently used in Italy and possibly other places settled on.
But "pro" (for) also means "for the benefit of" and that's the interpretation that caught on in the Anglosphere.
For example, here’s a book using that title
https://m.libreriauniversitaria.it/amp/product/BIT/978887928...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Praat
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malapropism [2]: https://old.reddit.com/r/BoneAppleTea.
That is, I bet if we asked the speaker to write it down, he would write "quid pro quo", no birds to be seen.
Do they rhyme? Yes. No one's arguing that.
As someone who is a linguist who studies human speech, I am telling you, specifically, in science, no one says "crow" instead of "pro".
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/people/unidan
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eggcorn
When passively asked "what's going on?", her reply: 'oh, much to do about nothing!'
Qui pro quo!