love

Author Topic: Words and Grammar and Stuff  (Read 126309 times)

St. Martin the Bald

  • Lurker
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 11205
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #230 on: January 12, 2009, 09:02:56 AM »
You been to them picture shows?
Hey, nice marmot!

edgar00

  • 00 Agent
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *
  • Posts: 12131
  • corndogs are better than Die Another Day
    • Between The Seats
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #231 on: January 12, 2009, 09:13:08 AM »
I'm done with the cooking now.
-Le Chiffre: You changed your shirt, Mr Bond. I hope our little game isn't causing you to perspire.

-James Bond: A little. But I won't consider myself to be in trouble until I start weeping blood.

https://twitter.com/Betweentheseats
http://crabkeyheadquarters.wordpress.com/

alexarch

  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 6995
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #232 on: January 12, 2009, 10:00:32 AM »
You been to them picture shows?
And I done seed one o'them television boxes in the Walmarts.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2009, 10:05:49 AM by alexarch »

skjerva

  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 9448
  • I'm your audience.
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #233 on: January 12, 2009, 10:46:48 AM »

I think it's telling that skjerva started this whole nonsense, and he refuses to use "watch" or "see" to describe the process of viewing a movie, instead insisting on "experienced" or "done".  There seems to be a very real split between people who judge their matchups as films, and people who judge their matchups as experiences.  Neither approach is wrong, but one can be argued with and one can't.


but films must be experienced - they do not exist as objects unto themselves with any meaning, we instill meaning into them.  why i use 'experience' or 'do' is to resist the easy and reductive "see" or "watch" - movies are also heard, and they can create real emotional response, they can be felt.  imagine many of your favorite films with a completely different sound design, there is a good chance they might no longer be your favorites.  imagine your favorite films edited differently so that emotional and/or intellectual charges are not had, there is a good chance they might no longer be your favorites.

films are always so much more than merely seen and watched

I would agree with you, however the shorthand of seen and watched is not only part of the lingo of our peoples, but a way for everybody to understand what is going on. If you say to somebody not in the know that you "did" Pulp Fiction they might assume that you wrote it or directed it or starred in it. Seen and watched are just taking the physical level of film as a primarily visual medium and using that to indicate the experience. We all know that film is more than just looking, but we also know that when we say "see" we really mean experience.

but we create our worlds by the language we use.  my not falling into the lazy habit of saying or writing that i "saw" or "watched" a movie is part of de-emphasizing the visual.  is it possible that we rely less on visual cues as we live our lives?  of course it is.  but, i believe part of that is discontinuing the reification of vision as ordering our daily lives, this means changing habits of language use, too.  think of how easy it is to come to (mis)understandings of others by quick visual cues.  what if we paused on the visual just long enough to listen or feel?  i'd imagine that might be a good thing.  my language choices are the same kind of pausing

it seems hard to believe that someone wouldn't understand what "i did pulp fiction" means, especially as it is likely only to be uttered in the context of our familiarity with the film, tarantino, or the like.  if uttered out of context, it is likely that the phrase is trying to do something other than convey basic information

but films must be experienced - they do not exist as objects unto themselves with any meaning, we instill meaning into them.  why i use 'experience' or 'do' is to resist the easy and reductive "see" or "watch" - movies are also heard, and they can create real emotional response, they can be felt.  imagine many of your favorite films with a completely different sound design, there is a good chance they might no longer be your favorites.  imagine your favorite films edited differently so that emotional and/or intellectual charges are not had, there is a good chance they might no longer be your favorites.

films are always so much more than merely seen and watched

I know why you do it.  I just find it incredibly grating, grammatically.

maybe you will mellow someday, and/or others will take it up and you will realize how antiquated you have become :)

While I've read and understand why you use "do" or "did" or "done" rather than "see" or "saw," skjerva, "did" actually does grate on me as well, though perhaps for different reasons than sdedalus gives - my complaint is something closer to what Junior is saying. I'm fine with your saying you've "experienced" or "experience" a film - that makes sense to me linguistically because, certainly as everyone agrees, a film is more than the sum of its visual parts and I do appreciate your playing with language, your challenging yourself to say what you mean, to keep language fresh.

What bothers me, particularly, about saying "I did [a film]," is that "did" implies/means completion, it implies that you don't need to see/experience a film again, it's "done." And I know you don't mean that. Anyone who loves films watches and re-watches the same ones and can see and feel different things every time - we often say around here, "I need to re-visit that film - it's been a while since I've seen it" because we acknowledge that life experiences or more film knowledge or age or a community or whatever can change a film for us. Thus, when you say "I've done a film," you seem to be saying you're finished with it - but again, I know you can't mean that, so the "done" just feels a bit like sloppy use of language. You know? To go back to the phrase "revisit a film," I do love that and what the word "revisit" implies. A visit is often associated with a person (or a place), and the implication is that you don't exhaust the depths of a person in the time you're with that person - you engage in conversation, you discover, you enjoy (or maybe you don't enjoy) - in any case, I like to think of a film - a good film - as a kind of being, a being that isn't exhausted with the one visit, but it's a kind of living thing you return to again and again and you see or feel or hear something new each time. I wouldn't like to say I've "done" Barcelona just because I was there for a couple of weeks - I've seen and experienced parts of it, but I've certainly not "done" it - saying so would smack of an appalling kind of arrogance, don't you think? I don't think of you as being arrogant when you say you've "done" a film but only because I feel you can't really mean "done." Does that make sense at all?

One other side note about "do" and "done" - I also have negative associations with the word as a woman. I can't get away from the word as it's associated with the sort of crass and humiliating and degrading way some men discuss women, that is, in reference to a sexual experience they've had or want to have with a particular woman. And again, I know you don't mean "do" or "done" in that way when you speak of a film, but the use of it grates on me because of the associations I have with the word. I agree with you - language changes and language changes experience - and maybe your using "do" or "done" can change my associations with the word - but at the moment it still has a negative weight that grates on me.



excellent points all.  while to say "i did" or "am going to do" a film does not imply the same kind of finality as having "done" one, the association with the objectification of women certainly marks them - i'm through with do, back to experiencing :)

But I wish the public could, in the midst of its pleasures, see how blatantly it is being spoon-fed, and ask for slightly better dreams. 
                        - Iris Barry from "The Public's Pleasure" (1926)

oneaprilday

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 13746
  • "What we see and what we seem are but a dream."
    • A Journal of Film
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #234 on: January 12, 2009, 05:36:38 PM »
excellent points all.  while to say "i did" or "am going to do" a film does not imply the same kind of finality as having "done" one, the association with the objectification of women certainly marks them - i'm through with do, back to experiencing :)

I'm cool with "experiencing."  :)


That is an excellent and well thought out post, oad. And not just because I agree with it! Though I'm sure that helps. Perhaps my usage of an exclamation point instead of a comma is also annoying! Though I keep on doing it.

Exclama!tion points!! are fu!n!  :)



worm@work

  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 7445
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #235 on: February 02, 2009, 01:27:49 PM »
I've always been under the impression that biennially means once every other year and that biannually (like semiannually) means twice in one year. Now, someone just showed me that as per dictionary.com, biannual could mean either of these!
It cites The Random House Dictionary and The American Heritage Dictionary as sources. Have I been wrong all along :(?

oneaprilday

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 13746
  • "What we see and what we seem are but a dream."
    • A Journal of Film
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #236 on: February 02, 2009, 01:45:43 PM »
I've always been under the impression that biennially means once every other year and that biannually (like semiannually) means twice in one year. Now, someone just showed me that as per dictionary.com, biannual could mean either of these!
It cites The Random House Dictionary and The American Heritage Dictionary as sources. Have I been wrong all along :(?

My Compact OED says that biennially means once every two years (as you thought) and biannually means half-yearly (or twice a year - again, as you thought). Those are the only definitions offered.

My dictionary is a 1985 printing, so I wonder if with the dynamic nature of language, biannual as evolved to mean more than its original meaning?


jbissell

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10915
  • What's up, hot dog?
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #237 on: February 02, 2009, 01:50:55 PM »
Either way, Bicentennial Man is awful.

St. Martin the Bald

  • Lurker
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 11205
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #238 on: February 02, 2009, 02:14:44 PM »
Either way, Bicentennial Man is awful.

Whoa - you actually watched it?
Hey, nice marmot!

alexarch

  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 6995
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #239 on: February 02, 2009, 02:24:14 PM »
I've always been under the impression that biennially means once every other year and that biannually (like semiannually) means twice in one year. Now, someone just showed me that as per dictionary.com, biannual could mean either of these!
It cites The Random House Dictionary and The American Heritage Dictionary as sources. Have I been wrong all along :(?

My Compact OED says that biennially means once every two years (as you thought) and biannually means half-yearly (or twice a year - again, as you thought). Those are the only definitions offered.

My dictionary is a 1985 printing, so I wonder if with the dynamic nature of language, biannual as evolved to mean more than its original meaning?


I always thought that biannual meant "every two years" and semi-annual meant "every six months." And biennially was just a dumb word that no one should use.

 

love