| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Shroob
Joined: 02 Aug 2010
Posts: 1339
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 5:22 pm Post subject: Language - by Stephen Fry - your thoughts? |
 |
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7E-aoXLZGY
I understand that language is always evolving but I'm one of those people that feel a tinge of sadness when I see, '5 items or less' or incorrect apostrophes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
DebMer
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Posts: 232
Location: Southern California
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 5:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Whether it's a flaw or a virtue in me, I don't think I'll ever grow out of wanting people to speak and write well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fluffyhamster
Joined: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 3292
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 6:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Much as I like some of Stephen Fry's travel and documentary programmes, when he got to the 'none of them are' bit I recalled a QI clip where he took Alan Davies to task over just such a usage. Unfortunately I couldn't find that clip, but I did find the following, which I'm inclined to agree with (Google "Fry is a hypocrite: on one episode of QI Alan Davies" to see where the quote's been posted. I've added some single speech marks later in the quote to make what Fry said easier to process):
| Quote: |
| Fry is a hypocrite: on one episode of QI Alan Davies was talking about something and said: ''none of them work,'' to which Fry responded: ''none of them works. None is 'not one'. You can't have 'not one of them work'.'' This whole video is just a testament to the pomposity of Fry's ego. Far too in love with the sound of his own manufactured voice (Norfolk folk don't speak with RP without imitation). |
Basically, I rarely if ever find what people like Fry, Humphrys, or even Truss (to allude to the other language commentators that he mentions) have to say about language that interesting. They aren't linguists, and it shows. About as deep as a puddle, and as wide as a trickle of a stream.
More on that QI clip here (and scroll down for a further Language Log discussion):
http://forums.eslcafe.com/teacher/viewtopic.php?p=37431#37431
. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kpjf
Joined: 18 Jan 2012
Posts: 385
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2013 10:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| fluffyhamster wrote: |
Much as I like some of Stephen Fry's travel and documentary programmes, when he got to the 'none of them are' bit I recalled a QI clip where he took Alan Davies to task over just such a usage. Unfortunately I couldn't find that clip, but I did find the following, which I'm inclined to agree with (Google "Fry is a hypocrite: on one episode of QI Alan Davies" to see where the quote's been posted. I've added some single speech marks later in the quote to make what Fry said easier to process):
|
In all fairness he mentions this "none of these are of importance" comment, obviously in reference to that incident and says the old pedantic him would have insisted on "none of them is of importance". He says he's glad he has outgrown that silly approach to language. So, he's accepting that he was being pedantic before. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sashadroogie
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 11061
Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2013 12:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fry's TV series 'Fry's Planet Word' is fairly entertaining. Yet many of his ideas are just, erm.. plain wrong. Not much depth, as has been said. Still, it is only a popular science TV doc, and isn't bad as such. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fluffyhamster
Joined: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 3292
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2013 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kpjf wrote: |
| fluffyhamster wrote: |
Much as I like some of Stephen Fry's travel and documentary programmes, when he got to the 'none of them are' bit I recalled a QI clip where he took Alan Davies to task over just such a usage. Unfortunately I couldn't find that clip, but I did find the following, which I'm inclined to agree with (Google "Fry is a hypocrite: on one episode of QI Alan Davies" to see where the quote's been posted. I've added some single speech marks later in the quote to make what Fry said easier to process):
|
In all fairness he mentions this "none of these are of importance" comment, obviously in reference to that incident and says the old pedantic him would have insisted on "none of them is of importance". He says he's glad he has outgrown that silly approach to language. So, he's accepting that he was being pedantic before. |
Yes, and I had listened carefully to the whole context. I don't think it's too unfair to say that people with previously half-formed/-baked opinions (and let's remember that QI clip is not that long ago, hardly from his callow youth) rather disqualify themselves from being taken as serious commentators "later" (I prefer those who exhibit serious learning to mere surface affectations and wordspinning). I'll listen with interest to what Fry has to say about a host of things, but I'm afraid on language matters, I don't think he's saying much, at least not in the clip that Shroob posted.
Or to put it another way: I find I can only take stuff like QI in small doses, as sometimes Fry's voice rather dominates the proceedings. And I don't find him rattling off a few well-known shibboleths and handwaving about "language" too convincing. The main point though is that there is something intellectually flaky about going from quasi-pedant obediently trotting out the no-no's as if that's clever (still, maybe some producer was screaming into his earpiece to say that stuff, to make "good TV"...as if he couldn't've refused even himself) to becoming laid-back saviour of the everyday perfectly-well-educated-enough person's usage. I much prefer to see him wandering around amiably in America or falling off gangplanks and breaking his arm whilst transporting Amazonian manatees. Perhaps the show that Sasha mentions is as he says worth a try though. I just wonder if we are seduced by the posh somewhat eloquent take-me-seriously tones is all. He's essentially an actor when it comes to speech and language. Maybe a more informed actor than most, but definitely no linguist. I think I'll stick to LL LOL.
Last edited by fluffyhamster on Tue Jul 02, 2013 1:44 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MotherF
Joined: 07 Jun 2010
Posts: 1450
Location: 17�48'N 97�46'W
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2013 6:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with his opinions in the clip.
I prefer to focus on what people are saying, rather than how they are saying it, so as long as their intent is clear, I will over look errors. I also think it's very important to keep in mind that usage changes over time, but not all at once. There is followed by a plural is an excellent example of a change that is happening right now and we gain nothing by bemoaning it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sashadroogie
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 11061
Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2013 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Except for the chance to express how PEEVED we are! 
I like a good peeve, I do... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iain
Joined: 09 May 2007
Posts: 15
Location: northern italy
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2013 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The idea of language and clothes is something I like.
Wearing old jeans at a job interview is comparable to not using capital letters in a letter of application.
I sometimes tell students who feel overly respectful of grammar that 'difficult' grammar is like the dinner suit in the wardrobe. You hardly ever need it but there are some occasions when it's simply the right thing to use. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MotherF
Joined: 07 Jun 2010
Posts: 1450
Location: 17�48'N 97�46'W
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kpjf
Joined: 18 Jan 2012
Posts: 385
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| fluffyhamster wrote: |
The main point though is that there is something intellectually flaky about going from quasi-pedant obediently trotting out the no-no's as if that's clever (still, maybe some producer was screaming into his earpiece to say that stuff, to make "good TV"...as if he couldn't've refused even himself) to becoming laid-back saviour of the everyday perfectly-well-educated-enough person's usage.
|
Fluffyhamster, maybe that's due to his bipolar disorder. Not defending him, just saying!
| MotherF wrote: |
You should see Facebook Spanish.  |
Do you mean how badly some of them speak the language? Care to elaborate?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MotherF
Joined: 07 Jun 2010
Posts: 1450
Location: 17�48'N 97�46'W
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MotherF wrote: |
You should see Facebook Spanish. |
| Quote: |
Do you mean how badly some of them speak the language? Care to elaborate? |
Ntooncees kIeres sAAAver como esciven los chAAAVoOos K usan Feis en MEXICOOO??? AAAndAle BOY a escivir cooomooo eeEeyooos aber siIi pUUeEdes leier eeeEstooooo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kpjf
Joined: 18 Jan 2012
Posts: 385
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 04, 2013 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MotherF wrote: |
Ntooncees kIeres sAAAver como esciven los chAAAVoOos K usan Feis en MEXICOOO??? AAAndAle BOY a escivir cooomooo eeEeyooos aber siIi pUUeEdes leier eeeEstooooo. |
It hurts my eyes seeing someone writing so badly in their native tongue. Yes I read it and understood it all. You wrote "You wanna know how guys (or girls) use Facebook in Mexico? Hey, I'm gonna write like them; let's see if you can read this." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
