"Kill Switch" Miasma

[distressed_romeo]

The sheer fact that he would drive people to look up the meaning of his posts would increase sales of dictionaries, hence the endorsement.

Although given that most of the words he's throwing in are being used totally out of context, it would probably provoke the same sort of reaction amongst hardcore grammar-nazis that flash-in-the-pan metalcore bands receiving ESP or Ibanez signature models does amongst guitarists...

 

[Drew]

This thread has gotten three times cooler in the last 24 hours.

 

[Regor]

1.) Your example is actually more one of lexicon than grammar.

I prefer t.c. electronics myself.

 

[Metahedron]

If the communication was unacceptable you need not have replied at all. It is definitely humor, and many of you chose to become average YouTube viewers in its wake. You may mock what you feel a criminal use of language all that you please, much of the reality is that I'll bother all the lesser to concern myself.

I will not say it again.

 

[NegaTiveXero]

Here's something we can all understand:

You're a wanker.


I kid. I kid.



Or do I?

Okay.

 

[jtm45]

much of the reality is that I'll bother all the lesser to concern myself.

If this is the way you use grammar then sticking to three letter (or less)words would probably be a good move for you.

 

[Metahedron]

If this is the way you use grammar then sticking to three letter (or less)words would probably be a good move for you.

Your failure to understand abstract language only further supports the irresponsible prejudices I have for you.

More to the point: "silence is golden."

 

[NegaTiveXero]

Wow, I don't even have anything to add to that.

 

[Metahedron]

Wow, I don't even have anything to add to that.

I am genuinely curious; why did you?

 

[NegaTiveXero]

I am genuinely curious; why did you?

I didn't dumbass. I made an entirely separate thought that can stand on it's own. I didn't add to your comment.

Learn to use complex thought and not a bunch of hollow words that you probably can barely grasp.

Roar.

 

[distressed_romeo]

Your failure to understand abstract language only further supports the irresponsible prejudices I have for you.

More to the point: "silence is golden."

Look buddy, Allen Ginsberg writes 'abstract language', and frankly, just that last post proves that you're not in that league. If you're going to post crap like this, expect people to respond in kind.

Humor, pretentious and unfunny as it may be in this case, is one thing, but if you're going to throw a hissy fit when people respond to it, your stay here won't be very long.

 

[Metal Ken]

Your failure to understand abstract language only further supports the irresponsible prejudices I have for you.

Irresponsible:
Lacking a sense of responsibility; unreliable or untrustworthy.
(american heritage dictionary)

are you saying, then that your prejudice is lacking reliability and is untrustworthy?

 

[NegaTiveXero]

BAM!

So, uh, Ken, do I give you positive or negative rep?

 

[jtm45]

Nicely summed up Ken!
The guy's basically just a shit-talker.

 

[Toshiro]

YMore to the point: "silence is golden."

....and duct tape is silver.

 

[Metahedron]

Irresponsible:
Lacking a sense of responsibility; unreliable or untrustworthy.
(american heritage dictionary)

are you saying, then that your prejudice is lacking reliability and is untrustworthy?

indeed, its cruel
It should be understood that most, if not all, prejudices are irresponsible.

I choose my words with comprehension and knowledge; perhaps I do so superfluously or in a way that is controversial to interpreters, but I am not incompetent.

After all, I just wanted some information.

 

[distressed_romeo]

indeed, its cruel
It should be understood that most, if not all, prejudices are irresponsible.

Thanks, I think that was the point of the post...

By the way...

Its = belonging to 'it'
It's = 'it is'

 

[Metal Ken]

indeed, its cruel
It should be understood that most, if not all, prejudices are irresponsible.

I choose my words with comprehension and knowledge; perhaps I do so superfluously or in a way that is controversial to interpreters, but I am not incompetent.

i never said anything about cruelty. What i was getting at is the wording of your phrase there kinda destroyed your credibility by accepting the notion that your act is morally unsound.

 

[Naren]

1.) Your example is actually more one of lexicon than grammar.

2.) Actually, that's a WAY touchier subject than you probably think it is, Naren. No one really considers the political orientation of a dictionary - I mean, even saying it sounds kind of dumb - but it's actually a surprisingly important debate, the difference between treating grammar as prescriptive (grammar is a set of arbitrary laws that are dictated and people who wish to use proper grammar must follow them) and descritpive (grammar is the science of determining colloquially accepted word useages and constructions, and codifying what IS being used). For an interesting read about something I absolutely guarantee you've never given more than a passing thought to, look for an essay by David Foster Wallace called "Authority and the American Usage," available if nothing else in his collection, "Consider the Lobster." Not only is the guy a brilliant writer, but he grew up with a prescriptive grammar nazi of a mother and has kind of a personal background in the subject matter, which makes it somewhat interesting.

Either way, a pure prescriptive or pure descriptive interpretation of grammar is obviously not possible - in the first case because language would quickly self-destruct since there would be no reason to "learn" something that by definition (a term I use ironically at best, given the subject matter) follows useage and not vice versa, and in the second because language DOES evolve over time, and Chaucer and I would have a very hard time communicating if he and I were to ever cross paths. And that's not just because he's dead.

Yeah, I know the difference between lexicon and grammar. I studied Linguistics in college (double language major). I just couldn't think of a grammar example, so I threw out a lexicon example.

The problem were prescriptive grammarians is that they want everything to be fixed and don't want words to change meaning or usage. In fact, the first dictionary was written because someone didn't like that words kept changing meaning and had different meanings from region to region. He thought, "I'll lock all these meanings in place... There. It's published. Now it can't change anymore."

Granted, there has to be some degree of prescriptive grammar, but lexicographers should realize that words change their grammatic usage and their definition. One example in Japanese would be the word "zenzen" which traditionally means "not at all" (only in the negative), but recently a lot of people use it in the positive form as well (ex. "zenzen heiki" - "absolutely fine"), but most lexicographers refuse to recognize this new usage.

Anyway, we seem to be getting off subject.

 

[distressed_romeo]

indeed, its cruel
It should be understood that most, if not all, prejudices are irresponsible.

I choose my words with comprehension and knowledge; perhaps I do so superfluously or in a way that is controversial to interpreters, but I am not incompetent.

After all, I just wanted some information.

...And quite a few people here were prepared to offer it. If you're prepared to start an interesting discussion here (which the original question was), then why do you feel the need to lace your posts with all this ridiculous posturing?

Frankly, having read through all your posts, the way you choose your words displays very little 'comprehension and knowledge'. There are several people on this board (including Drew and myself) who either have, or are in the process of, studying English at degree level, so don't even bother trying this stuff with us...

Besides, if you have a quick perusal of the site rules, I'm pretty sure there's something about making sure posts stay readable as much as possible...

Anyway, we seem to be getting off subject.

Understatement of the century...