Language Log

I was curious about the Unicode characters involved in the "shrug" text art:

so I ran it through charnames.pl:

Too Faced is a cosmetics company acquired by Estée Lauder in 2016. The name is obviously a pun, substituting too "to an excessive degree" for  the two in two-faced  "deceitful" — though too here apparently connects to the literal idea of a second face, more than to the idea of deceit or hypocrisy.

A couple of days ago, Rachel Strugatz wrote an article with the headline "Et Too Faced?", which relies on a second punning layer, connecting too to Latin tu in the quotation "Et tu, Brute?" from Shakespeare's Julius Caesar.

A decade after selling Too Faced to Estée Lauder, co-founder Jerrod Blandino has lately been chirping about the brand’s post-acquisition fate. Does the guy have a point?

I was struck yesterday by the term Melt-Up in a story about the stock market: "Tech Melt-Up Drives $3.5T Nasdaq 100 Gain in Four Days", Bloomberg 8/5/2026:

A dramatic turnaround in technology stocks has powered a $3.5 trillion increase in the Nasdaq 100’s market capitalization in just four days, driven by strong earnings that have emboldened investors about the AI outlook. The tech benchmark has jumped 9.3% over this period, its sharpest rally since April 2025.

This morning's question:

I'm an ESL textbook editor in Korea, and a grammar dispute has come down to one question: is "What do you say that we get together tonight?" grammatical, with "that" included (vs. the more common zero-complementizer "What do you say we…")?

My understanding is "that" is simply optional here, not ungrammatical.

Email from JK:

My daughter remarked that on several occasions recently she has heard presumably college-educated people use the word “I’s”, in a sentence like "I just picked up Margaret and I’s cat from the vet."

I'm guessing the reason for this jarring (to me) usage is that the sentence could be more logically parsed as

I just picked up Margaret and (my cat) from the vet  than as
I just picked up (Margaret and my) cat from the vet.

The brain turns to I just picked up Margaret and I’s cat from the vet as a solution because because Margaret and I is a strong connection like my cat, and it's encountered first in the sentence.

So it's parsed as I just picked up (Margaret and I)’s cat from the vet.

That sounds awful, but is it acceptable usage (obligatory SMBC reference)?

According to a recent BoingBoing segment,

Ballots for a special election in England's Clacton-by-Sea are the longest ever produced in U.K. electoral history despite¹ only one major party contesting the race.

The footnote:

1. This is the journalist's despite, wherein the word implies disregard when there is in fact a blatant causal relationship.

I've recently wrestled several times with similarly frustrating Gmail searches, for recent tickets and the like:

Impossible to put into words how useless Gmail search is. No wait, these guys did it!

[image or embed]

— Alex Selby-Boothroyd (@alexselbyb.bsky.social) July 28, 2026 at 2:22 PM

I get the impression that these problems have multiplied since Gemini started helping out in Gmail, but I might be wrong.

Randoh Sallihall at unscramblerer.com sent an email offering his company's 2026 study of "America's most searched words" — what he sent is presented verbatim below.

In a July 23 Memorandum Decision from the Court of Appeals of Indiana (noted by Robert Freund and 404 Media), Judge Jeffrey L. Marchal complains that

The Transcript contains various types of errors. There are numerous typos that change the meaning of the testimony, question, or objection. See, e.g., Tr. Vol. II at137:18, 144:10, 147:10; Tr. Vol. III at 6:13. In some instances, witnesses’ and trial attorneys’ names are reported incorrectly. Tr. Vol. II at 220:5; Tr. Vol. III at 142:15–20, 143:15, 162:4–5. At one point in the Transcript, a motion, presumably made by the State, is attributed to the trial court. Tr. Vol. II at 107–08. At another point, an objection, presumably made by Williams, is attributed to the Bailiff. Tr. Vol. II at 177:15. At yet another point, the State’s closing argument is attributed to the trial court. Tr. Vol. III at 228:1. […]

Based upon the types of errors reviewed, it appears that generative artificial intelligence may have assisted with the preparation of this transcript. While AI can improve efficiency and be a productive tool for many professionals, it is incumbent upon those using such systems to proofread and ensure the accuracy of the generated product.