|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 18
stranger
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 18 |
Why cannot existence--"to be"--alone suffice as a sentence predicate? I find it logical enough.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
When it is used it is generally with an implied predicate, e.g.: Who's going to the park with me?
I am. Logical it might be but all by itself it seems a little bare and doesn't satisfy the demands of the Ding-an-sich English as opposed to the English imagined by those who would veto the common use if it doesn't match their idealized image of what it should be..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
What about something like, "Mankind's purpose is to be (live/exist)"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,027
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,027 |
Because people nowadays refuse to be succinct like Descartes with his cogito ergo sum - or by the way, Shakespeare's to be or not to be..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
What about something like, "Mankind's purpose is to be (live/exist)"? Even there, to be is acting as the predicate of the is.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 631
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 631 |
Chesterton's writings consistently displayed wit and a sense of humour. He employed paradox, while making serious comments on the world, government, politics, economics, philosophy, theology and many other topics. When The Times invited several eminent authors to write essays on the theme "What's Wrong with the World?" Chesterton's contribution took the form of a letter:
Dear Sirs,
I am.
Sincerely yours,
G. K. Chesterton
Last edited by Hydra; 07/12/07 01:43 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
Given the context, this is not a simple "I am." It fits more in the category of my original comment as a statement with an implied predicate. Given Chesterton's wit it can also be seen as a reference to the standard form of the letter sign-off, e.g., I remain, Sincerely yours Faldage of Fong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Faldage, I disagree.
In the first case, "I am." has the implied predicate "going to park with you."
In the GKC case, "I am" is short for "I exist." Of course he's saying more than that. Seems clear he was commenting on the experiences of alienation, subjugation, and depersonalization induced by the industrial revolution - the same experiences that provoked the dystopic "Metropolis."
"I AM!" or "I EXIST!" or "*I* exist!" "I am a person, dammit, an individual - not an automaton, not a group of holes punched on a Hollerith card, or a cog in the grand machine, but a human being!"
In this case, I see the implied paragraph, but I don't see the implied predicate.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,027
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,027 |
It fits more in the category of my original comment as a statement with an implied predicate. Sorry, but I think you are way out on a limb this time 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 120
member
|
|
member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 120 |
In response to what's wrong with the world, he declares he exists? That doesn't follow either his sense of humor or logic. I've always read that as a response--What's wrong with the world? I am. Similar to saying "I'm the guy/gal your mother warned you about." That's more in keeping with his wry wit.
Last edited by Maven; 07/12/07 02:40 PM.
tempus edax rerum
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,809
Members9,187
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
982
guests, and
1
robot. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
