Wordsmith.org
Posted By: Zed quick quip - 09/02/04 11:48 PM
My calendar yesterday had a New Yorker cartoon of an annoyed man in a restaurant saying to the waiter "I'll have the misspelled 'Ceasar' salad and the improperly hyphenated veal osso-buco."

Posted By: Shellb Re: quick quip - 09/03/04 12:06 AM
Whilst dining at the local tavern I mentioned that they had spelt espresso incorrectly. They had 'expresso' (perhaps the idea was to serve it quickly.) I was amused however when the next week i noted they had corrected the mistake. The board now reads "esspresso'. Hate to see them try cupachinno.

Posted By: belMarduk Re: quick quip - 09/03/04 12:09 AM
I know how he feels. There is a new store near my office that calls itself Drum Bazar in big red letters. I have this great need to bring a paintbrush and red paint, and add the missing A.

Posted By: Faldage Re: quick quip - 09/03/04 11:11 AM
Then there was the printed sign at the local PO that had the word 'seperate' corrected, uncorrected, corrected, and uncorrected through about 3 or 4 penciled-in cycles.

Posted By: grapho Re: quick quip - 09/03/04 12:05 PM
3 penciled-in cycles

Well, at least they had the good sense to use a pencil, Faldage.

BTW any Paris Hilton wannabe knows "expresso" is something you sip, but never spell.

Posted By: Owlbow Re: quick quip - 09/03/04 12:30 PM
In the early ‘70s my friend and I auditioned for a “wandering minstrels” job at a Mexican restaurant. We got the job and were asked the name of our duo. We hadn’t a name, but after a moment’s thought we can up with “The Elixirs”, knowing the effect that their food had on the hapless diners. When we came to play a day or so later, we saw the little marquee displaying: “Tonight The Ixlers”, and so instantly became the only surviving descendants of that brand new lost ancient civilization.

Posted By: belMarduk Re: quick quip - 09/03/04 12:34 PM
corrected...3 or 4 penciled-in cycles.


Oooooo, hubby hates it when I do that. But, but, sometimes, it's just so grating when you see a glaring error taunting you.


Posted By: grapho Re: quick quip - 09/03/04 12:42 PM
it's just so grating when you see a glaring error taunting you.

There is nothing so taunting as a grating error glaring you in the eye, belMar. Unless, of course, it's a glaring taunt which is error free. That would really grate.

Posted By: AnnaStrophic Re: The Ixlers - 09/03/04 03:48 PM
and so instantly became the only surviving descendants of that brand new lost ancient civilization.

¡!

Posted By: Faldage Re: quick quip - 09/03/04 10:38 PM
There was another one on the time sheet for the Friends of the Library volunteer book sorters that went through several oscillations of 'fewer than n hours' and 'less than n hours' until I declared that we were measuring time, not counting hours.

Posted By: Shellb Re: quick quip - 09/04/04 12:41 AM
After being called a Paris Hilton wanna-be twice in the last 24 hours I think i may take my Louis Vuitton bag back to my hotel and scull some Moet. Perhaps I'll need grapho wisdom to give me directions. Lord knows I'm not smart enough to work it out myself.

Posted By: grapho Re: quick quip - 09/04/04 02:36 AM
After being called a Paris Hilton wanna-be twice in the last 24 hours

I never suggested that you were a Paris Hilton wannabe, Shelb.

I'm sure you could find your own way back to the hotel to scull some Moet. And maybe some T. S. Eliot as well.

Posted By: Capfka Re: quick quip - 09/05/04 09:07 PM
The word "accommodation" is my favourite. Every tourist area I go into, I watch for it mis-spelled on signs. Stayed in a B&B in Zild once where it had been spelled as "Acomodation", and told them about it. Went past the same place a few months later and saw that they had "corrected" it to "Acommmodation". Right number of letters, and therefore ....

Posted By: belMarduk Re: quick quip - 09/06/04 06:59 PM
>>Acommmodation



Doesn't it just make you sigh...and wish you had enough loot to buy them a dictionary and say, "Here. Use it."

Posted By: Wordwind Re: Acommmodation - 09/06/04 07:50 PM
That's one worth photographing.

Posted By: Coffeebean Re: The Ixlers - 09/06/04 11:16 PM
In reply to:

and so instantly became the only surviving descendants of that brand new lost ancient civilization.


Did they introduce you as "a friend of Mayan?"

Posted By: TEd Remington "a friend of Mayan?" - 09/07/04 11:28 AM
Aztec writers like me know, only when the Inca's dried on the contract. I know this isn't Apache on my usual quickness with a pun, and I Hopi am awake enough so I Navaho the same ground twice. Otherwise I'd be up a Creek.

I wanted to write a letter to a politician and a Chickisaw at the store encouraged me. Zuni'll be able to write to Menominee, or else these puns will Puyallup untill my mind is Choctaw up.



Posted By: Sparteye Re: "a friend of Mayan?" - 09/07/04 04:09 PM
Ugh.

Posted By: TEd Remington Ugh - 09/07/04 04:12 PM
I'm still chuckling!

Posted By: Coffeebean Re: Ugh - 09/13/04 05:07 PM
TEd, when it comes to puns....

YUROK!

Posted By: Zed Re: another one - 09/13/04 11:16 PM
Just read the following exchange in a comic:

"Sugar is the only "su" word with the "sh" sound!"
"Oh, yeah?"
"Yeah."
"Are you sure?"
"I'm sure."

Unfortunately I had to read it twice to catch it, but it has been a long day.

Posted By: Jomama Re: another one - 09/14/04 03:02 AM
Reminds me of the English prof telling his class,
"In English, a double negative makes a positive, but a double positive does not make a negative."
From the back row--"Yeah, right."

Posted By: jheem Re: another one - 09/14/04 02:25 PM
Reminds me of the English prof telling his class

The professor was one of philosophy, his name was J L Austin (1911-60), and he was delivering a talk in the US at Columbia. The man in the back row was Sidney Morgenbesser (1921-2004), and he just died recently. Even funnier when you know who said it first ... I've usually heard it as "Yeah, yeah".

http://www.crookedtimber.org/archives/002271.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_Morgenbesser
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._L._Austin

Austin's book, How to do Things with Words, is a classic and quite easy to read. It deals with speech acts, and influenced John Searle in his work on same.

Posted By: AnnaStrophic Re: another one - 09/14/04 02:36 PM
That's great, jheem! You're a veritable Cecil; nay, a veritable Snopes! I'd always thought it was a made-up story to illustrate a point. Thanks.

Posted By: themgmt Re: "a friend of Mayan?" - 09/15/04 01:40 AM
these puns will Puyallup until my mind is Choctaw up

Now I know why native americans often say:

"The only good Indian pun is a dead Indian pun."


Posted By: Jomama Re: another one - 09/15/04 05:01 AM
Wow, jheem! What a neat thing to know! I, too, would never have been sure the story wasn't just a story.
The "Yeah, right" in the version I read would be an update to current slang. Either phrase works.

Posted By: wofahulicodoc attributions are always suspect - 09/16/04 10:29 AM
"...a moment of dubiety about the “double positive” tale (despite having passed it along myself)...I’ve seen the hapless speaker described as variously Austin, a law professor, and a hapless graduate student..." -- from your Crookedtimber URL above

When I heard the story the speaker was supposed to have been Isaac Asimov. FWIW.
Posted By: jheem Re: attributions are always suspect - 09/16/04 01:13 PM
attributions are always suspect

Yes, they are. As are all assertions, or texts. It's just that so many people say this about Morgenbesser that I thought I'd mention it. It's like the fire-poker-shaking incident between Austin and Wittgenstein, obscure but tantalizing. Of course, eye witnesses to that event abound. But if the Morgenbesser event has crossed over into folklore, doesn't invalidate it. OTOH, because it's attached to famous names doesn't validate it either. Ah, well.

Posted By: tsuwm Re: attributions are always suspect - 09/16/04 02:12 PM
yes; and wasn't the fire-poker-shaking incident between *Popper and Wittgenstein?!

Posted By: jheem Re: attributions are always suspect - 09/16/04 02:41 PM
and wasn't the fire-poker-shaking incident between *Popper and Wittgenstein?!

Yes, it was. Right you are. I get Popper and Austin mixed up. (Their senses of humor confused me here.) And Ludwig was the one brandishing said poker.

Posted By: Zed Re: attributions are always suspect - 09/27/04 11:31 PM
The Ludwig with the bad wig has the pellet with the poison,
and the Popper with the poker has the brew that is true.

Affectionate apologies to Danny Kaye.

© Wordsmith.org