In the AA "Big Book" on page 25 P.3 there is a line that states," The central fact of our lives today is the absolute certainty that our Creator has entered into our hearts and lives in a way that is indeed miraculous."

Is the word "lives" as it is used here, a noun or a verb?

i assume you mean the second appearance of 'lives'. my inclination would be toward reading it as a noun, though it sounds horribly redundant. the sentence would read easier in my mind if they were to replace the first 'lives' with 'existence'.

it'll be interesting to see what everyone else has to say; thanks for a thought-provoking question, and welcome a-Board, harrysiegel!

harrysiegel -- I read your post this morning while still working on my first sip of coffee and I can't vouch I was there at the time. For what it's worth, on first scan, I read the second instance as a verb despite the offbeat meaning. In my haze of last night's toasts, I was so comfortable with that reading that I had a hard time understanding your question. But I think Bridge is right and right again that the redundancy is the wrench in the works. Existence would scan more easily but, at a step removed from the knitty gritty, I don't think it would say what the good AA intended.

Welcome to the rabble, may your days aboard be ever clear and tranquil. &

IP

Welcome to you, harrysiegel, and to all the others to whom I was too rushed to personalize a welcome.

It's a noun. Has to be. Though it does make sense as a verb, the phrase about the Creator "entering our hearts and our lives" is very common, and I think that's the usage here. The next sentence, unfortunately, isn't helpful:
"He has commenced to accomplish those things for us which we could never do by ourselves." One doesn't, as a rule,
speak of the Creator "living", as in living what for us are normal life experiences. He does not *live* (our lives), I don't think, as would be the meaning if the word in your quote were intended as a verb. (As opposed to saying he can live IN our lives, that is.)

If it were intended as a verb, I think there would have been a comma after hearts: "...our Creator has entered into our hearts, and lives in a way that is indeed miraculous."

And his editor should have changed it to "lives and hearts" to avoid ambiguity.

And his editor should have changed it to "lives and hearts" to avoid ambiguity.

And to point out that lives can be heartless.

And the quotation is entirely too optimistic. I wish I could see more evidence that the Creator is doing something to abate the prevalence of hate and cruelty in so many people.

I read "lives" as a noun initially, and upon re-reading it several times still believe that the writer intended it as a noun.

This is an excellent example of ambiguous writing, which we see all too often when construing statutes. Ah well, it keeps counsel fully employed...

Ahhh, Dr. Bill : I prefer to believe that God does good; it is Man that does wrong.
wow

I prefer to believe that God does good; it is Man that does wrong.

That is precisely how Augustine answered the threat of Gnosticism: if *man* is the source of evil, God is pure good.

What a sweet lot you-all are. Now, this jaded old cynic took one look at the post and said to isself: "another git posting religious stuff in a vain belief that merely saying the words has some sort of convertative meaning.." I am convinced there are hoards of simple-minded souls out there with the same attitude to web boards that the Gideon Fellowship has to sad motel rooms.

Now, I will stand here to be shot down. But don't hold your breath for this poster's name to appear again....

"Now, I will stand here to be shot down. But don't hold your breath for this poster's name to appear again...."

Dear Mav,

I'd love to shoot you down, but I'm sure I know what you're talking about. Who's lost*, me or you? :)

(*and just to beat you to it, 'lost the meaning' not 'lost the Way.' :) )

IP

"another git posting religious stuff in a vain belief that merely saying the words has some sort of convertative meaning.."

Sorry to raise your hackles, maverick.
It was not my intention.
I posted as "I prefer to believe" with no intent to convert anyone.
I also prefer to believe that "if you ain't tried it, don't knock it."
I also prefer to accede to the verity of a saying dear old Grandad had :

"There's so much bad in the best of us,
And so much good in the worst of us,
It ill behoves any of us to speak ill of the rest of us."
wow

Jackie, I hate to be the comma police that hauls you in, but you can't put a comma there. What you've made is an egregious sentence fragment, and the post-comma conjunction implies that there are two wholly realized thoughts that are being linked together. Hmmm... I'm not saying this well at all. My 8th grade English teacher shamed me publicly by calling me "comma happy", and she made me learn all the arcania of comma-radery (or maybe it was comma-nism). The only way a comma would be grammatically correct is if there were a subject on the other side of the conjunction, a la: "...our Creator has entered into our hearts, and She lives in a way..." Gratuitous feminism alert

I'm fully in accordance with your analysis, though J. It was only through your keen observation that I was swayed ~ I initially was completely convinced it had to be a verb!

hackles

Please don't misunderstand my somewhat elided meaning here, wow. It is not the poster's stance/interest/view on matters religious that even interests me. What the word 'git' related to was the supposition that this was the flying post syndrome - drop a commercial message into an essentially 'private' conversation. It's that I REALLY object to - not whether it is dogfood or godfood that is being advertised

It's the intellectual contempt that raises my hackles. I have little but respect for anyone else's views of what makes this world bearable, howsoever those views may differ to my own. I have nothing but love for an honest view expressed with probity.

Gratuitous feminism

tautology alert!

I agree that it's a noun; but, it certainly could be a verb. Interestingly, if it were a verb, its pronunciation would change from long 'i' to short (how many other words do this? -- a challenge to everyone). As to its ambiguity, I disagree with those who sound disapproving; the ambiguity may have been intentional, and it adds interest to a statement which is otherwise very commonplace almost to the point of being banal.

it's open to personal interpretation, like most "big book" statements; and as byb hints, when read aloud we're at the mercy of the reader.

Hi,

Believe me I was not trying to sneak one in for the Lord. I am trying to settle an argument over this phrase "hearts and lives" that has been going on within my AA group for some time. I believe that the word " lives" here is used as a noun. It's a tough ambiguous sentence I know, but I'm looking for the best use of the word. I want to thank you all for responding. HS

HEY MAV........... pbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbt

(way to go, mav, you flushed him ; )

From a notorious comma criminal.

You can't count on the Great Unwashed using commas in any rational fashion.

Thanks, b96 for >HEY MAV........... pbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbt

I second that!

And as for the Great Unwashed vis a vis comma usage, I know, I know... but I like to throw in a little worthless academia when I can. Otherwise, why bother paying off my student loans?

boyoungbalt suggested that the ambiguity may have been intentional. there's a word for this (of course!):

equivoque (n.) - an ambiguous statement or passage, often intentionally evasive or phrased to have two possible interpretations

After my glib comma criminal comment I have looked this over in some more depth and see no problem with a comma in the suggested spot if lives is to be taken as a verb and if one is using rhetorical punctuation. If one is using grammatical punctuation I'm still not sure that a comma would be out of place, if only to resolve the potential ambiguity.

My initial reaction was even more glib than my comma criminal post; the simple answer YES

Faldage says, "... the simple answer YES"

I agree, it could be read both ways. If it was written that way on purpose, bravo to the writer. It's my understanding the big book was written to be non-denominational, to attract a larger group of people it's less specific, allowing individuals the opportunity to fit their personal beliefs inside it's teachings. You are at the mercy of your own interpretation.
That's if we're going to believe it was done on purpose and not assume it's faulty craftsmanship.

ladymoon agree(s), it could be read both ways

Unfortunately I wasn't even being that deep. I was referring to the first instance of lives as being a noun and the second a verb.

That's if we're going to believe it was done on purpose and not assume it's faulty craftsmanship.

a) What's all this authorial priviledge? we don't even give Him that kind of say so.

b) find the missing comma *here*.

c) re: "b") above, fine one to talk are I, huh?

:) :) :) glad to meet you!!!

harrysiegal, I offer you my most 'umble apologies! I hope we see more interesting posts from you in future...

I've come in at midnight *just to do that, too

equivoque (n.) - an ambiguous statement or passage, often intentionally evasive or phrased to have two possible interpretations

Do you ever use the expressions "sans équivoque" in English? This is quite common in French to mean not ambiguous at all. YET, we never use the word équivoque alone.

I've never used "equivoque" or "sans equivoque," but then, I have no French. I think the usage you just pointed out is the equivalent of the common use of "without question" to indicate that something is obvious, while "with question" is never used.

Man, am I glad that I didn't get involved in this one!

Man, am I glad that I didn't get involved in this one!

Poulet, sans équivoque!

M. Quordlepleen, tu as fait un "bon mot", sans équivoque.

there you guys go again, ignoring pleas to keep it in English. kann ich den vorsteher sprechen?

Tschja! Hanni do' glaubt du warscht!

there you guys go again, ignoring pleas to keep it in English

Tsuwm, clearly you are not addressing me with this statement, but I shall try to take it to heart nonetheless.
But I will add that all the in-depth dissertations on Latin
declinations (and about German) approximately decimate my interest in reading the thread. It's all Greek
to me!

Believe me I was not trying to sneak one in for the Lord.

Thanks, Harry. I don't believe in Hell, but for spammers I find myself wishing there were one, and it's nice to know that my favourable interpretation of your post was correct. The "hearts and lives" phrase was interesting, and I wonder how many sentences could be constructed with similar ambiguity. I shall go and ask my cat (obscure Hitch-Hikers' Guide reference)

I have never heard equivoque but have heard and used equivocate-- Which of course just refers to some one who is using equivacal language--.

(typically me-- being true irish, when you ask me what seems to be a Yes or No question--my answer is often "well, Yes and No" )