Words apparently unnecessary. Most people get them all wrong.
I recently submitted a post detailing just a few random things and people that cause me some level of...consternation. My therapist upon reading said diatribe (I was able to talk her down from manifesto.) suggested I might find higher level of inner peace (Can something be higher and inner you ask? Damn right, you've not seen some of my conquests if you don't believe it.) if I were to express my frustrations with the world around me in a more...shall we say genteel manner. (She talked me down from provincial.)
With that in mind, I've decided to use my talents as a wordsmith to express the disturbing trend in today's American lexicon. It would seem in today's day and age, many Americans, regardless of educational background, lack a firm grasp of syntax, or tagmemics as it were.
Let's begin with an easy one for all of us to comprehend. This has less to do with sentence structure and more to do with a matter of agreement. Imagine if you will:
You are sitting in a cafe, or bistro, perhaps even a luncheonette. Across the cloister you catch the gaze of a fellow solitary java dipsomaniac. Wayward glances are exchanged, making them no longer wayward, but rather resolute. You rise from you formica emblazoned place of respite and saunter across the way, with an almost furtive or clandestine look upon your visage. This however, is no walk of happenstance. You gait has purpose. You are a man/woman in search of conviviality.
The requisite small talk is engaged upon. You find him/her both winsome and mesmeric. Plans are made for a future, more formalized rendezvous. Now the only imperative is to collect a means of contacting your inamorata/inamorato to be. Ah, yes, now is the time for the exchange of telephone numbers.
Are you following me here boys and girls? You've met the future love your life, or love of your near future, and all that stands between you and she/he is recitation of just seven little numerals. I believe love is that answer. I believe love will find a way. (Please credit whichever tawdry act from the 1990's spewed that little piece of original mastery.)
Notice in the paragraphs preceding I mentioned an exchange of either numbers or numerals, which are in fact the same thing. One of my former contact numbers went as follows: 808-6014. How might you go about verbalizing this particular sequence? I'll venture to postulate one of those ZEROES becomes pronounced as "oh." OH! Really! I'm sorry I realize some companies do express their contact numbers with words, but I firmly aver said notion comes from the realization most patrons of 1-800-ASK-4-ASS generate less brain activity than the local produce section. OH!
Even worse is when one will transpose an "oh" for a "zero" in one instance, but then neglect to do so in another. Imagine my surprise if you were to read my phone number to me as eight-zero-eight-six-OH-one-four. I desire to go apoplectic when such things occur. And by apoplectic I mean torpid. And by torpid I mean inert. And by inert I mean numb. And by numb I mean if you don't even know what numb means you can probably just imagine yourself as the ideal definition.
Now as an English major I would imagine many of you might be led to believe I have a problem with the whole who/whom thing. You would be right, I have a major problem with that, but your pea-sized intellects are incapable of ever grasping the concept, so let's move on to something I just may be able to ease on through the protruding forehead of your substantial skull.
Imagine if you will: You open your wallet. Your currency scabbard contains a ten dollar bill, a five dollar bill and two one dollar bills. This leaves you with a sum of 17 dollars in your wallet. Trust me. How might you express the amount of money contained in your wallet, in relation to the rather arbitrary figure of 15 dollars? Would you say you have "over" 15 dollars? Or would you in fact express yourself correctly?
One does not have "over" 15 dollars. One has "MORE THAN" 15 dollars. "More than" expresses a relative amount. "Over" expresses a relative locale. Now, if one were in an airplane and flying from New York to Los Angeles, then it would be appropriate to say, "more than" 15 dollars "over the United States." But really now, who would ever feel the foolish urge to say a thing such as that?
This rule applies to any situation in which one thing is being described in relation to another. One can be older than a given age. For instance, tavern patrons in these "United" States need by older than the age of 21 years. No one I have ever met in my entire life on this rock is "over" 21 years of age. One can be "more than" 21 years of age. I've no botheration with that at all.
Now as an English major there are some phenomenon within the American lexicon which give me a small measure of pleasure. You see as a student of literature, I appreciate, at times, the notion of artistic liberty. Take for example the novel Requiem for a Dream as penned by Hubert Selby, Jr. The novel contains little to no punctuation. There are no chapters, nor quotation marks. Sentences will seem to run and run nearly without end. The end result is an effect which further illustrates the frenetic lives his characters are leading on their roller coaster ride into hell.
I also enjoy the American mass media idea of creating new words. Who amongst us has never used the term "Bennifer?" Or better yet, "Afghanistanimation?"
So you see, dear readers, I am not one of those stodgy grammar practitioners, ever ready to swat a wrist with a ruler the first time "irony" is misused. For it really is like "ten thousand spoons, finding out she's twelve." Huh? Oh...never mind. Or would that be zero...never mind?
You know, that is interesting. For those among you who may find my zero/oh argument to be a little on the nitpicking side of things, I challenge to spell aloud words, only inserting "zero" for every other "oh." When you realize just how ridiculous you sound doing so, you'll understand where I'm coming from.
I mean, taken literally, if someone were to tell me there is an "oh" in there telephone number, I might naturally assume they mean it to be a 6. "Oh" is the same as 6 on a telephone.
In an unrelated subject. I have another problem. I really hate it when formerly great bands remain on tour with completely different lineups, but use their original band name as if it's the same act. Mike Love, why in the name of Jehovah do you feel it proper to tour under the name Beach Boys? And I'm sorry, but every damned one of the Temptations is dead. There are no more Temptations. And yet, every casino along the Mississippi River has at one time or another in the recent past advertised a concert from the Temptations.
Oh and by the way, one of my readers still has my copy of Requiem for a Dream. I'm speaking of the book here, rather than the film, which is also excellent.
I purchased a new t-shirt on the internet last week and its debut was made last night. It reads as follows: "Ever heard of a nice piece of Elephant? I think not. Vote Democrat!"
Until next time faithful readers, I leave you with these words of wisdom.
"License and registration....chicken fucker!"
With that in mind, I've decided to use my talents as a wordsmith to express the disturbing trend in today's American lexicon. It would seem in today's day and age, many Americans, regardless of educational background, lack a firm grasp of syntax, or tagmemics as it were.
Let's begin with an easy one for all of us to comprehend. This has less to do with sentence structure and more to do with a matter of agreement. Imagine if you will:
You are sitting in a cafe, or bistro, perhaps even a luncheonette. Across the cloister you catch the gaze of a fellow solitary java dipsomaniac. Wayward glances are exchanged, making them no longer wayward, but rather resolute. You rise from you formica emblazoned place of respite and saunter across the way, with an almost furtive or clandestine look upon your visage. This however, is no walk of happenstance. You gait has purpose. You are a man/woman in search of conviviality.
The requisite small talk is engaged upon. You find him/her both winsome and mesmeric. Plans are made for a future, more formalized rendezvous. Now the only imperative is to collect a means of contacting your inamorata/inamorato to be. Ah, yes, now is the time for the exchange of telephone numbers.
Are you following me here boys and girls? You've met the future love your life, or love of your near future, and all that stands between you and she/he is recitation of just seven little numerals. I believe love is that answer. I believe love will find a way. (Please credit whichever tawdry act from the 1990's spewed that little piece of original mastery.)
Notice in the paragraphs preceding I mentioned an exchange of either numbers or numerals, which are in fact the same thing. One of my former contact numbers went as follows: 808-6014. How might you go about verbalizing this particular sequence? I'll venture to postulate one of those ZEROES becomes pronounced as "oh." OH! Really! I'm sorry I realize some companies do express their contact numbers with words, but I firmly aver said notion comes from the realization most patrons of 1-800-ASK-4-ASS generate less brain activity than the local produce section. OH!
Even worse is when one will transpose an "oh" for a "zero" in one instance, but then neglect to do so in another. Imagine my surprise if you were to read my phone number to me as eight-zero-eight-six-OH-one-four. I desire to go apoplectic when such things occur. And by apoplectic I mean torpid. And by torpid I mean inert. And by inert I mean numb. And by numb I mean if you don't even know what numb means you can probably just imagine yourself as the ideal definition.
Now as an English major I would imagine many of you might be led to believe I have a problem with the whole who/whom thing. You would be right, I have a major problem with that, but your pea-sized intellects are incapable of ever grasping the concept, so let's move on to something I just may be able to ease on through the protruding forehead of your substantial skull.
Imagine if you will: You open your wallet. Your currency scabbard contains a ten dollar bill, a five dollar bill and two one dollar bills. This leaves you with a sum of 17 dollars in your wallet. Trust me. How might you express the amount of money contained in your wallet, in relation to the rather arbitrary figure of 15 dollars? Would you say you have "over" 15 dollars? Or would you in fact express yourself correctly?
One does not have "over" 15 dollars. One has "MORE THAN" 15 dollars. "More than" expresses a relative amount. "Over" expresses a relative locale. Now, if one were in an airplane and flying from New York to Los Angeles, then it would be appropriate to say, "more than" 15 dollars "over the United States." But really now, who would ever feel the foolish urge to say a thing such as that?
This rule applies to any situation in which one thing is being described in relation to another. One can be older than a given age. For instance, tavern patrons in these "United" States need by older than the age of 21 years. No one I have ever met in my entire life on this rock is "over" 21 years of age. One can be "more than" 21 years of age. I've no botheration with that at all.
Now as an English major there are some phenomenon within the American lexicon which give me a small measure of pleasure. You see as a student of literature, I appreciate, at times, the notion of artistic liberty. Take for example the novel Requiem for a Dream as penned by Hubert Selby, Jr. The novel contains little to no punctuation. There are no chapters, nor quotation marks. Sentences will seem to run and run nearly without end. The end result is an effect which further illustrates the frenetic lives his characters are leading on their roller coaster ride into hell.
I also enjoy the American mass media idea of creating new words. Who amongst us has never used the term "Bennifer?" Or better yet, "Afghanistanimation?"
So you see, dear readers, I am not one of those stodgy grammar practitioners, ever ready to swat a wrist with a ruler the first time "irony" is misused. For it really is like "ten thousand spoons, finding out she's twelve." Huh? Oh...never mind. Or would that be zero...never mind?
You know, that is interesting. For those among you who may find my zero/oh argument to be a little on the nitpicking side of things, I challenge to spell aloud words, only inserting "zero" for every other "oh." When you realize just how ridiculous you sound doing so, you'll understand where I'm coming from.
I mean, taken literally, if someone were to tell me there is an "oh" in there telephone number, I might naturally assume they mean it to be a 6. "Oh" is the same as 6 on a telephone.
In an unrelated subject. I have another problem. I really hate it when formerly great bands remain on tour with completely different lineups, but use their original band name as if it's the same act. Mike Love, why in the name of Jehovah do you feel it proper to tour under the name Beach Boys? And I'm sorry, but every damned one of the Temptations is dead. There are no more Temptations. And yet, every casino along the Mississippi River has at one time or another in the recent past advertised a concert from the Temptations.
Oh and by the way, one of my readers still has my copy of Requiem for a Dream. I'm speaking of the book here, rather than the film, which is also excellent.
I purchased a new t-shirt on the internet last week and its debut was made last night. It reads as follows: "Ever heard of a nice piece of Elephant? I think not. Vote Democrat!"
Until next time faithful readers, I leave you with these words of wisdom.
"License and registration....chicken fucker!"
posted by The Crazy Leftist at 8:02 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home