Editing 1108: Cautionary Ghost
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| title = Cautionary Ghost | | title = Cautionary Ghost | ||
| image = cautionary_ghost.png | | image = cautionary_ghost.png | ||
+ | | imagesize = | ||
| titletext = But then the Ghost of Subjunctive Past showed up and told me to stay strong on 'if it were'. | | titletext = But then the Ghost of Subjunctive Past showed up and told me to stay strong on 'if it were'. | ||
}} | }} | ||
==Explanation== | ==Explanation== | ||
− | + | The usage of a ghost from the past or future to deliver a message in fiction was most famously used in {{w|Charles Dickens}}'s ''{{w|A Christmas Carol}}'', in which the main character is visited upon by the ghosts of past, present and future during his sleep to show him the negative effects of his selfish and uncharitable behaviour. | |
− | + | This comic is a comment on the futility of arguing over trivial matters, such as the usage of the word "literally" to mean "figuratively, with great emphasis" as mentioned in the comic. It also references {{xkcd|725}}([[725: Literally|explanation]]). In this comic, a man is presented an idyllic scene of the future, then is shown an identical scene and told that it is the future if he gives up arguing over the incorrect use of the word "literally". The comparison is meant to demonstrate that the argument will have no meaningful effect on the world, and suggest that the man stop wasting time on the argument. | |
− | The ghost | + | The title text is a reversal on this, indicating that the man met a second ghost who encouraged him to continue with his argument against an equally trivial language issue: the misuse of the phrase "if it were". '{{w|English subjunctive|Subjunctive}}' is a verbal mood in English that is used when expressing "necessity, desire, purpose, suggestion and similar ideas, or a counterfactual condition". 'Subjunctive past tense' is most commonly used in a counterfactual condition - when discussing what would have happened under different circumstances, such as in the case of "if it were". The prescribed usage is something like "I wouldn't have been late if it were Tuesday today." Many people would say "I wouldn't have been late if it was Tuesday today", which while sounding fine, violates some prescriptive rules of grammatical correctness. As a result, "if it were" has been falling out of use in favor of "if it was", and thus the subjunctive form in this example is near extinction. [http://sesquiotic.wordpress.com/2009/05/12/if-i-were-using-the-subjunctive/ here] is a blog post on the subject. |
− | + | The comic appears to be sarcasm of the comic strips [http://www.explosm.net/comics/2923/ Cyanide & Happiness] and [http://www.theoatmeal.com/comics/literally Oatmeal], which have commented upon using the word Literally. | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
==Transcript== | ==Transcript== | ||
− | :[ | + | :[Man sitting in bed is facing a ghost.] |
− | : | + | :Ghost: ''Ooooooooooooooooo'' |
:Man: A ghost!? | :Man: A ghost!? | ||
− | : | + | :Ghost: I bring a '''cautionary vision''' of things to come! |
− | + | :[Cut to scene with two houses, a plane, a tree and a standing couple.] | |
− | : | + | :Ghost: This is the future: |
− | :[ | + | :[Cut to scene with two houses, a plane, a tree and a standing couple.] |
− | + | :Ghost: And '''this''' is the future if you give up the fight over the word "literally": | |
− | : | + | :[Cut back to man sitting in bed with ghost] |
− | :[ | ||
− | |||
− | |||
:Man: They looked exactly the same. | :Man: They looked exactly the same. | ||
− | : | + | :Ghost: ''Oooooooooooooooo'' |
:Man: Ok, I get it. | :Man: Ok, I get it. | ||
− | : | + | :Ghost: Seriously, this is ''duuuuumb''. |
− | {{comic discussion}} | + | {{comic discussion}} |
− | + | <!-- Include any categories below this line--> | |
− |