- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Crazy stat, I Love Lucy vs 90210
Posted on 1/27/26 at 11:26 pm
Posted on 1/27/26 at 11:26 pm
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. Makes me realize that the "oldies" on Nick at Night were way less old than I thought as a kid. When I was little I thought of them as ancient but they were literally just one generation before.
6
Posted on 1/27/26 at 11:38 pm to StansberryRules
So there’s the concept around linguistics that additional mediums other than speech lock is more and more into a stagnant society.
Just as a base concept, language doesn’t have a chance to adopt and grow. You see in non-literary societies that languages change extremely extremely quickly. Over two generations there will be significant changes to vocabulary.
We’ve been on the same English language since the 1600s…
I can’t help but feel like internet and tv has locked us into the place of early 2000s culture in perpetuity and it’s going to be hell to pull ourselves out
Just as a base concept, language doesn’t have a chance to adopt and grow. You see in non-literary societies that languages change extremely extremely quickly. Over two generations there will be significant changes to vocabulary.
We’ve been on the same English language since the 1600s…
I can’t help but feel like internet and tv has locked us into the place of early 2000s culture in perpetuity and it’s going to be hell to pull ourselves out
Posted on 1/27/26 at 11:42 pm to StansberryRules
quote:ILL - 1951
Beverly Hills 90210 is as old now as I Love Lucy was when 90210 first premiered on TV
90210 - 1990
Posted on 1/28/26 at 12:10 am to athenslife101
quote:
I can’t help but feel like internet and tv has locked us into the place of early 2000s culture in perpetuity and it’s going to be hell to pull ourselves out
The Internet and social media has led to a mass homogenisation of everything. I no longer "feel" different eras like I used to. Feels like trends burn out much faster, nothing has a chance to stick culturally so it all feels the same.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 1:12 am to athenslife101
quote:
additional mediums other than speech lock is more and more into a stagnant society.
I’m intrigued, even though I don’t yet fully understand what you’re talking about.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 2:42 am to meeple
Language evolves. It’s relatively fairly straight forward and scientific to see how language evolves over time. They’ve run lingual models to show for example how French will change from say, 1100 to 1500 and been accurate. There’s certain things we as humans always try to do in speech to cut corners. We shorten, cut, blurt out words instead of fully pronouncing them so over time, those words become more efficient to the way most people want to say them.
When literacy became wide spread with the printing press, major languages got locked in stone. That shortening, that optimization of words was now not grammatically correct. To read, everyone has to have the same basic understanding of the language, otherwise it’s gibberish.
Go look at medieval writings as an example. You’d have like 40 different ways to misspell the same word. And that’s actually made historians work a lot harder.
shite, there’s even a story where a bunch of Roman obsessed London linguistics started adding all sorts of unnatural rules to the English language because they saw Latin as the most important language and wanted to move towards that model. Thing is, those rules that they implemented have nothing to do with English which is a Germanic language lest you forget.
We’re still stuck with those rules 200 years later from a ln official grammatically correct speaking. Thing is, it isn’t efficient and you see in local communities all the time in rural places that “don’t speak well” that are naturally going back towards how English had naturally evolved
When literacy became wide spread with the printing press, major languages got locked in stone. That shortening, that optimization of words was now not grammatically correct. To read, everyone has to have the same basic understanding of the language, otherwise it’s gibberish.
Go look at medieval writings as an example. You’d have like 40 different ways to misspell the same word. And that’s actually made historians work a lot harder.
shite, there’s even a story where a bunch of Roman obsessed London linguistics started adding all sorts of unnatural rules to the English language because they saw Latin as the most important language and wanted to move towards that model. Thing is, those rules that they implemented have nothing to do with English which is a Germanic language lest you forget.
We’re still stuck with those rules 200 years later from a ln official grammatically correct speaking. Thing is, it isn’t efficient and you see in local communities all the time in rural places that “don’t speak well” that are naturally going back towards how English had naturally evolved
This post was edited on 1/28/26 at 2:47 am
Posted on 1/28/26 at 4:45 am to athenslife101
In the real world, I've noticed a lack of interest in or knowledge of things prior to the 1990's by kids growing up from that era. The post WW2 era, the 50's were heavily infused with those born even in the 60's and 70's, via reruns and cartoon references. Kids of that era just had a better understanding of history.
I think the rise of the internet had a hand in that.
Also, Nick at Night is how I got introduced to 50's and 60's TV, like The Patty Duke Show., which aired well before my time.
I think the rise of the internet had a hand in that.
Also, Nick at Night is how I got introduced to 50's and 60's TV, like The Patty Duke Show., which aired well before my time.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 6:45 am to StansberryRules
Here's a fun one:
Star Trek turns 60 this year. Star Trek premiered 63 years after Orville and Wilbur Wright first flew.
:letthatsinkin:
Star Trek turns 60 this year. Star Trek premiered 63 years after Orville and Wilbur Wright first flew.
:letthatsinkin:
Posted on 1/28/26 at 7:04 am to athenslife101
quote:
Language evolves. It’s relatively fairly straight forward and scientific to see how language evolves over time. They’ve run lingual models to show for example how French will change from say, 1100 to 1500 and been accurate. There’s certain things we as humans always try to do in speech to cut corners. We shorten, cut, blurt out words instead of fully pronouncing them so over time, those words become more efficient to the way most people want to say them. When literacy became wide spread with the printing press, major languages got locked in stone. That shortening, that optimization of words was now not grammatically correct. To read, everyone has to have the same basic understanding of the language, otherwise it’s gibberish. Go look at medieval writings as an example. You’d have like 40 different ways to misspell the same word. And that’s actually made historians work a lot harder. shite, there’s even a story where a bunch of Roman obsessed London linguistics started adding all sorts of unnatural rules to the English language because they saw Latin as the most important language and wanted to move towards that model. Thing is, those rules that they implemented have nothing to do with English which is a Germanic language lest you forget. We’re still stuck with those rules 200 years later from a ln official grammatically correct speaking. Thing is, it isn’t efficient and you see in local communities all the time in rural places that “don’t speak well” that are naturally going back towards how English had naturally evolved
Posted on 1/28/26 at 7:41 am to StansberryRules
quote:
The Internet and social media has led to a mass homogenisation of everything. I no longer "feel" different eras like I used to. Feels like trends burn out much faster, nothing has a chance to stick culturally so it all feels the same.
I've seen this discussed a lot in terms of music, especially popular music. If I mention a genre like "disco" or "grunge" you likely think of it in terms of a certain period of time as each of those styles are distinctly different. Along with that, the styles basically evolve from one another. Doo-wop became R&B, rock and pop, some of which split to things like metal and disco. Disco and pop changed to become euro-pop which eventually moved back to pop while rock spawned "hair bands" and then grunge while R&B became rap which spawned gangsta rap.
With all of that there were tons of other genres like death metal, the hippie ballads of the late 60s and 70s, dance, punk, etc as well as distinctive genres which began before the 50s.
Today, what new genre is there? fricking mumble rap? Whatever is that bastard child of pop and country?
Posted on 1/28/26 at 7:54 am to StansberryRules
I do recall when I was younger, being sometimes in awe of looking at the copyright dates to episodes of things like "I Love Lucy," "Life of Riley," "Lone Ranger" and such, and realizing they were over twenty years old. A tv-show that was 20 years old? Ancient times. So distinctively distant, in terms of visuals and culture, yet still so close in other ways.
Nowadays, if I see a tv-episode of something from 20 years ago, I wouldn't even be cognizant of it being dated. For example, if I run across something like one of those omnipresent "Law and Order" or "CSI" reruns, I honestly couldn't tell whether it was from 1997, 2007, or 2017, or even last year.
Nowadays, if I see a tv-episode of something from 20 years ago, I wouldn't even be cognizant of it being dated. For example, if I run across something like one of those omnipresent "Law and Order" or "CSI" reruns, I honestly couldn't tell whether it was from 1997, 2007, or 2017, or even last year.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 8:34 am to SouthEasternKaiju
quote:
In the real world, I've noticed a lack of interest in or knowledge of things prior to the 1990's by kids growing up from that era. The post WW2 era, the 50's were heavily infused with those born even in the 60's and 70's, via reruns and cartoon references. Kids of that era just had a better understanding of history.
I think the rise of the internet had a hand in that.
Also, Nick at Night is how I got introduced to 50's and 60's TV, like The Patty Duke Show., which aired well before my time.
Agreed. The easy accessibility of infinite "new" stuff has destroyed consistent exposure to old stuff.
I don't think kids these days stumble across old shows and movies the same as we did. There's too much "content", bad signal to noise ratio
Posted on 1/28/26 at 8:52 am to StansberryRules
This turned into a really interesting thread
Posted on 1/28/26 at 9:27 am to athenslife101
quote:So, I’ll never make fetch happen?
additional mediums other than speech lock is more and more into a stagnant society.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 11:44 am to Kafka
quote:
Beverly Hills 90210 is as old now as I Love Lucy was when 90210 first premiered on TV
quote:
ILL - 1951
90210 - 1990
So this tweeted stat is a lie. Got it.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 11:48 am to Bard
quote:
new genre
Rehashing old stuff via mashups and AI, with varying levels of quality.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 12:46 pm to StansberryRules
This makes perfect sense though. 90210 feels like it was a hundred years ago.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 1:20 pm to CocomoLSU
quote:
ILL - 1951
90210 - 1990
quote:
So this tweeted stat is a lie. Got it.
90210 premiered 36 years ago. 36 years before that, I Love Lucy was in the middle of its run.
So I guess it just depends on your point of view.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News