Editing 2390: Linguists
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 10: | Line 10: | ||
Ponytail hears the cries of an unidentified person who has become trapped in a hole. She rushes over, but rather than helping the person out, she instead asks whether the trapped person's chosen phrasing for their predicament – "fell down a hole" – is equivalent to "fell in a hole." | Ponytail hears the cries of an unidentified person who has become trapped in a hole. She rushes over, but rather than helping the person out, she instead asks whether the trapped person's chosen phrasing for their predicament – "fell down a hole" – is equivalent to "fell in a hole." | ||
− | To most people, the phrases "fell down a hole" and "fell in a hole" are paraphrases. To other people | + | To most people, the phrases "fell down a hole" and "fell in a hole" are paraphrases. To other people however, the two sentences have a subtle difference that implies slightly different things; for example, whether one has fully or only partially fallen down/in the hole, how big the hole is, or whether the person has exited out of the hole yet at the time of speaking (see the paragraph on the title text below). Ponytail is thus asking whether the person chose to use 'down' over 'in' for those reasons. In either case, the joke here is that this is probably not the best time for Ponytail to ask. |
− | In the caption, Randall comments on the stereotype that linguists are obnoxious elitists who only love telling people how wrong they are ("{{w|Linguistic prescription|Grammar Nazi}}s"). | + | In the caption, Randall comments on the stereotype that linguists are obnoxious elitists who only love telling people how wrong they are ("{{w|Linguistic prescription|Grammar Nazi}}s"). He claims the truth is much worse, that linguists' desire to extract exact meaning from phrases is done with the best of intentions. He also claims that this is worse than if they were pedants browbeating their audience, possibly because a pedant could prioritize the elements of a situation better than Ponytail is doing here, or possibly referencing [[2421: Tower of Babel]]. |
This is similar to the viewpoint dedicated to scientists in comic [[877: Beauty]], as in studying that field seems to be a cold and sad way to analyze the thing, but instead is an extreme form of child-like awe and inspiration. | This is similar to the viewpoint dedicated to scientists in comic [[877: Beauty]], as in studying that field seems to be a cold and sad way to analyze the thing, but instead is an extreme form of child-like awe and inspiration. | ||
− | The title text sees Ponytail asking the person whether their answer is dependent on the current situation, or in technical terms, {{w|tense-aspect-mood}}. As noted above some people see the difference between 'fell down' and 'fell in' as | + | The title text sees Ponytail asking the person whether their answer is dependent on the current situation, or in technical terms, {{w|tense-aspect-mood}}. As noted above some people see the difference between 'fell down' and 'fell in' as whether the sentence still holds true at the time of speaking; this is called the {{w|perfective aspect}}. There are other variations, such as recent vs. remote past: "I ''just'' fell down a hole"; {{w|Perfect_(grammar)|the perfect}} (not to be confused with the first one - note the lack of ''-ive''): "I fell down a hole, and it has consequences relevant to our conversation"; {{w|Habitual_aspect|habitual}}: "I had previously fallen down a(nother?) hole, and I have fallen down this hole now", all of which can influence one to choose 'down' over 'in' or vice versa. |
The last sentence “assuming you get out” drives home the point that Ponytail is concerning herself with linguistic matters over practical ones. Ponytail’s use of “assuming” rather than “when” suggests that Ponytail doesn’t have a plan to get the person out, or that she has a plan but isn’t confident in its success. The former interpretation, that Ponytail is thinking of the person getting out as abstract and unconnected with her, is funnier and more consistent with Ponytail’s actions so far. | The last sentence “assuming you get out” drives home the point that Ponytail is concerning herself with linguistic matters over practical ones. Ponytail’s use of “assuming” rather than “when” suggests that Ponytail doesn’t have a plan to get the person out, or that she has a plan but isn’t confident in its success. The former interpretation, that Ponytail is thinking of the person getting out as abstract and unconnected with her, is funnier and more consistent with Ponytail’s actions so far. |