|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
I was not so much thinking nostalgically as I was attempting to suggest a place to start. I haven't done a Search on the word irony, but I feel sure that several dozen listings would come up; and out of all of those--if my memory is correct--it was somewhere in the earlier ones rather than the later ones where many of the Brit-speakers tried valiantly to explain the concept to us irony-poor US'n's. aorto had said, unless I seriously misinterpreted the post, that he (?) would like to have more understanding of irony and that there didn't seem to be a need to look further than here. Somewhere in all those listings, there actually is some explanation, and I was trying to offer a suggestion that might save a little time.
This is not the first time this has happened, she said by way of explanation for the following sounding perhaps more harsh than one instance would warrant: one thing I get tired of here is people assuming they know my motivations and then announcing them as fact. You can check with me; you can post or tell me that you think I'm thinking thus-and-so; but please don't state assumptions about me as fact. And I am not referring to teasing; that's fine.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385 |
please don't state assumptions about me as fact
Sorry, Jackie, it wasn't you personally I thinking of. I wasn't around for a lot of the past so, no doubt, there is a lot more in the archives than I know about.
It's just that themilum had delivered up one of his best posts in a long time [well, at least in a day or two] and I thought his "Definition #1" was deserving of more notice that a longing for past wisdom. As you explained, you intended no slight.
Sometimes we interpret stuff as tho it were all occurring in real time, like a natural conversation, but, of course, long lapses can occur between posts and sometimes a poster is not even responding to the last thing that was said.
Sorry, Jackie.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
it would help me (and perhaps other here?) if i knew who WE is.
is WE the collective of independant thinkers who sometimes post here?
if so, why does one person, consistantly post about US --as if that one poster was a spokeperson for MY thoughts, (and jackies's thoughts, etc.)
why do they consistantly think it is Their responsibility to be the spokeperson for the collective? (or did i miss the day when one person became the lord almight of this group?)
a real problem i have with WE is, well the idea that WE --the odd, collection of sometimes frequent, and some times infrequent posters could collectively agree on anything!
HELL we can't agree on what is a word, and what isn't --even though they(words) are discussed to death!
Of course, it could be my misreading of the imperial WE.
it could be one poster, who posts under various names and aliases, is speaking of their personal, collective selves. they might be WE because the poster has multiple personalities, or the poster is a conduit for all the voices in his head that are clammmoring to get heard. if that is the case, it should be clarified.
As i said in the first line of this post, it's certainly not clear to me who WE are!
Perhaps what is needed is a thread on personal pronouns..
I speak for myself,
You speak for yourself, and collectively WE can come to an understanding of the uses of personal pronouns.
of course, my understanding (in the end) might not be the same as yours and we might never totally agree about the use of WE. but it still might be educating.
that is what I think.
I too, also dislike when presumptions are made about me, or the general statements are made about groups (and yes, we are a group)that i am part of, be they good or bad.
i am not smart--as group--i am smart or not on my own.
and my spelling (or lack there off) is my problem, not the groups. and my memory is excellent (or suffering from a senior moment) but it is mine, not the groups.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385 |
who WE is
"We" is just us fallible humans in general, Of Troy, the universal "we"; all of us, without exception, including me. Maybe, especially me. :)
That's why I apologized to Jackie, Of Troy. I didn't apologize for "we". I just apologized for me.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
[context, context]
Perhaps we can all agree about that.
if there's one thing we've learned here over the years, it's this: WE can never agree about ANYTHING. (isn't this a YART? didn't we attempt to come up with a term to refer to ourselves other than "AWADtalkers"? didn't someone suggest an initialism that developed out of "Anything You Like Except Unanimous"? didn't some think this was absolutely brilliant, while others hated it?!
sorry to rehash ancient history, but we are old, ya know.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
wwh remembers, and still seethes..
and didn't I get really [rankled] when
I asked [xxx] what it meant, and [xxx] told me to look
it up. I spent two hours going over old posts, and
when I finally figured out what it meant, I didn't
think it was worth the trouble it took.
and [xxx] probably told bill YCLIU. : )
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
i think part of the reason for a continued failure to reach argreement (on almost any subject) is that i don't see us as a collective.
(THAT IS MY OPINION--notice i didn't presume others see things the same way)
i have met some (30%? 40%?) percent of the the current (by current, i mean people who have posted comments in the past 30 days) posters.
I didn't meet a group, i met individuals.
some i liked before for i met them, and i continued to like them afterwards.
some, didn't much care for, and didn't interact with except nominally. and after i met them, that remained unchanged.
some i liked until it met them, and then.. what i thought chatty or fun, came across in person as shallow, or hurtful.. and i began to disliked them
others, who came across as mean, or harsh, in person, became, wonderful, witty, sharp, but not biting wits.. (and me, being me, i managed to blurt out just how i had previously thought about them.--but as i said, they were witty, and of a much better nature than their online post had lead me to believe, and they laughed--both at my thoughts, and my clumsy blurting out of the truth, and at themselves! and i liked them even more!
but i still don't consider myself as a member of some sort of group, just because i have broken bread with some of the posters.
of the small percentage of users i met,
WE are
YOUNG
OLD
FAT
THIN
PRETTY
Posses a face only a mother could love
we are
educated
ignorant
nice people
horrid neighboors
we are
married
single
divorced
gay
straight
childless
parents
urban
rural
suburban
rich
poor
middle class
american (from both the US and canada)
europeans-- mostly UK, but by no means exclusively)
Other nationalities (oceania, mostly)
we are
starting careers
retired
unemployed
self employed
changing careers
mindless work grunges
teachers
blue collar workers
college professors
high school drop outs
high school students
i am some of those things, but not all of them. i don't see myself as having a shared collective quality or a collective set of shared values. about the only thing i have consistantly in common with other posters to AWAD, is, i too post comments at this place.
i don't see myself as part of group here, i come here for me. (its so very nice of all of you to show up and help to educate and entertain me!) i don't come here to be part of a group. i can (and do) join clubs if i want a group experience.
and i personally dislike post after post that make comments about what WE do here, or what WE think, or how WE behave.
i feel like someone it attempting to pidgeon hole me into a group, (and i am not a member of group here) and to be the spokeperson for the group--and i am quite capable of being a spokeperson for myself, thank you very much!
and every time someone does that to ME. I DISLIKE IT, and by extention the person who did it.
yes, i am a bit self centered. but that's ME.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529 |
Well...that was certainly refreshing. Of troy is obviously a strong woman who does not mince words but blurts out her opinions without an abundance of tact. Quite refreshing; but excuse me, of troy, when next week me and the Ladies of Awad gather at Miss Mammy's Tearoom and Gift Shop for our monthly brunch and tidbits you will, of course, quite understand if I don't invite you. Miss Mammy's tearoom, you see, is a place where literary small talk with a touch of snip is the bauavdree du jour and it is no place to recite ee cummings wonderful poem "The Boys I mean Are Not Refined". Maybe me and you can get together this football season and watch the Patriots beat up on the damn New York Jets. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
d'oh, i hate football and even i know its the patriots Vs the Phili's Eagles.
what do you take me for? some ignoramus?
an ignoramus--person who ignores everyone and thing around them while they watch football!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
Dr Bill corrected my *made up defination of an ignoramus..
it was original a legal term, and then used to decribe lawyers, i apologies to football fans everywhere..
from Dr Bill:
It was so long ago that I looked this
word up that I had forgotten how 'we don't know'
got to mean 'a stupid person'.
ignoramus
1577, Anglo-Fr. legal term, from L. ignoramus "we do not know," first person present indicative of ignorare "not to know" (see ignore). The legal term was one a grand jury could write on a bill when it considered the prosecution's evidence insufficient.
Sense of "ignorant person" came from the title role of George Ruggle's 1615 play satirizing the ignorance of common lawyers
*i didn't think any one would take my defination seriously!
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,412
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
907
guests, and
3
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
