IronMan
|
Re: as a complete aside
Sep 06, 2002, 15:17
|
>God I have far too much time on my hands at the
>moment.
But I thought you'd be too busy working!
<runs for cover>
:-)
|
necropolist
|
Re: as a complete aside
Sep 06, 2002, 15:22
|
of course i am!!
i am just doing so in an incredibly creative manner!!!!
|
FourWinds
|
Re: skills n creativeness
Sep 06, 2002, 15:28
|
|
I must admit to not wanting to argue with that point!
|
FourWinds
|
'True' meanings of words
Sep 06, 2002, 15:42
|
This is how I look at it.
We have lots of words for moving. Run, walk, jog (a newish one adapted from somewhere else), skip, trot, canter, sprint etc.
All these mean different things. And are not interchangable. Was Linford Christie a sprinter or a jogger?
Likewise we have lots of words for making things. Make, create, manufacture, produce, build, model etc.
It is my belief that these words are not 'truly' interchangable. Manufacturing, for example, was adopted and popularised in the 1800's to describe what happened in factories. They adopted this word (which derives directly from "makes from metal") because other words did not describe the new processes properly. When this was done 'manufacturing' was a good thing, because it was going to revolutionise our lives, but now it is a bad thing that is destroying the planet and so 'nicer' words are being associated with it.
However, the dictionary does give the word 'manufacture' several meanings, one of which is to "concoct or invent, fabricate: manufacture an excuse", but that is a more colloquial or poetic use of the word.
I am just for purity of language, not from any fascitic view point, but purely from a plain speech point of view. When words are used 'poetically' then surely they are being used for the purpose of mis-information and to make things look rosier than they are.
Our discussion here is about an essentially trivial thing but the principles go a lot further.
I do concede a certain amount of creativity (using your definition) in most jobs, as you say it is a fundamental part of being human.
|
FourWinds
|
Re: as a complete aside
Sep 06, 2002, 15:45
|
I was thinking along similar lines myself. This thread has gone off on an amazing tangent and opened up a great little discussion.
Three cheers for thread diversion/perversion [delete as appropriate]
|
necropolist
|
Re: 'True' meanings of words
Sep 06, 2002, 16:21
|
I don’t think that any two words are truly synonymous, I’m deffo with you there. Whilst there are times when one word can be substituted for another appropriately, it is no way the case that one word could be so subbed all the time.
Where I would disagree is about the ‘poetic’ use of words. Three examples: homosexual; gay; queer.
Which of these is ‘true’? Should we stick to homosexual cos it is the (most) original of the three? Do you object to people of that sexual persuasion ‘appropriating’ the word gay, and stopping it being used in its original (well, probably not original, but previous) sense?
I often (but by no means always) like the poetic use of words. It often conveys a deeper AND TRUER sense of the word/phrase whatever. In the example you gave, I think that’s a fine use of a word. It gives the clear impression that it completely made up, gone thru a process rather than being ‘evolved’ or natural in any way.
Language is about conveying meaning. And meanings change as society changes. So the words we use change. I don’t think it is possible to stop that process of change, or think its particularly desirable.
|
FourWinds
|
Re: 'True' meanings of words
Sep 06, 2002, 16:41
|
Perhaps the alteration of a word's meaning changes society and not the other way around.
I think this is certainly true in some cases.
As I have said above I truly admire the poets in our society and do not wish to ban the poetic use of words. But use of poetics in a debating forum is, I think, undesirable - it's more important to be precise than pretty. That's why I end up being pedantic all the time. Sorry if it annoys.
In a debating situation I take people's words 'as is' and do not try to interpret them, which you have to do with poetic use. If I decide to interpret another's words then I am not hearing what they have to say, I am hearing what I would (or would not) like them to say. I am hearing what I think they said and not what the actually meant to say.
Mind you I always hated analysing poetry at school. I used to have shouting matches with my English teachers about it. Don't analyse it! You'll kill it! Enjoy it!
|
necropolist
|
Re: 'True' meanings of words
Sep 06, 2002, 17:05
|
shit man i am the last person in th world who has any right to have a go at someone for bieing a bit pedantic! or 'precise' as i like to put it. you weren't on the rail on thing when we had a, uhhh, discussion abou the phrase 'common era' were you?
i agree with a lot of what you're saying, but then you say when you're debating you ar taking people's words 'as is', and don't interpret them. but you do, its unavoidable. you must roughly assume that people use words in the same way you use them yourself, but then there are times when that clearly isnt the case, or when words are utterly ambiguous, so you must interpret them, or you can't understand what is being said. yes of course we must strive for clarity at all times, but ecveryone in reality has there own 'private language' and we cannot hope to exactly understand what anyonme means by their use of any word.
as for does society change language, or language change society.....well i'd make a break with wittgenstein here (who's theories i am nicking in the above commnet). i think it's what they call (gulp) a dialectic, that is to say each influences each other, and reflects trhemselves back upon the other. so a sexist society invents a sexist language, and that language then helps to perpetuate that sexism. but it seems apparent to me that the sexism came first. when it was decided that the word 'man' should be used as a shorthand for human beings of both sexes, i doubt very much that it was a non-sexist world, which only became corrupted through that. But that usage undoubtedly does help to reinforce sexist thoughts and ideas.
right, its late enough now, think it's time for me to feck off home (hurrah, elvis costello tonight). having done nearly 45 minutes worth of the stuff i'm actually paid for, a big bad thanks to all contributors here who have made the last couple of days interesting and thought provoking.
cheers, its been good"!
|
stray
|
Re: 'True' meanings of words
Sep 06, 2002, 19:36
|
|
'Language is a virus' Check out William Burroughs on these things, esp. The ticket that exploded.
|
caergog
|
|
couldn't resist!
congratulations on reaching 100 (not from the queen!)
love carolinexx
|
