Editing Talk:2008: Irony Definition
Please sign your posts with ~~~~ |
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 48: | Line 48: | ||
::::::It's no problem at at all! The page badly needed a cleanup, and I had some time to kill. We're all just here to make the wiki better. ^_^ | ::::::It's no problem at at all! The page badly needed a cleanup, and I had some time to kill. We're all just here to make the wiki better. ^_^ | ||
::::::But yes, I really do have to disagree with your interpretation of the title text. It's contingent on an odd use of the word "glare" and an even more odd usage (and misspelling/mispronunciation) of the word "iconic". I know you're not a native English speaker, but nobody I know who is one would ''ever'' say that someone glaring at them "makes me feel really iconic". Take the [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/iconic Webster's definition of "iconic"]. None of these definitions are things that someone you know and are on a walk and in conversation with would feel if you glared at them. And again, how would this even continue the joke? I think your interpretation is oddly convoluted; it's certainly not something I would have ever thought of upon reading it, and I don't think most editors here would have, either. | ::::::But yes, I really do have to disagree with your interpretation of the title text. It's contingent on an odd use of the word "glare" and an even more odd usage (and misspelling/mispronunciation) of the word "iconic". I know you're not a native English speaker, but nobody I know who is one would ''ever'' say that someone glaring at them "makes me feel really iconic". Take the [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/iconic Webster's definition of "iconic"]. None of these definitions are things that someone you know and are on a walk and in conversation with would feel if you glared at them. And again, how would this even continue the joke? I think your interpretation is oddly convoluted; it's certainly not something I would have ever thought of upon reading it, and I don't think most editors here would have, either. | ||
β | ::::::On the other hand, the interpretation that it is Black Hat speaking makes more sense because (1) it continues the joke that was made in the comic, (2) it is within character for Black Hat to continue pestering Cueball by misusing the word "ironic", (3) it better fits the definition of the word "glare" (as Cueball is shown to be angry, and BH is not), (4) the only odd word usage involved is that of the word "ironic", which, again, continues the established joke and is thus expected, and (5) the only real potential problem with it is easily resolved. It is true that Cueball appears to be in front of Black Hat, which would make it odd for him to | + | ::::::On the other hand, the interpretation that it is Black Hat speaking makes more sense because (1) it continues the joke that was made in the comic, (2) it is within character for Black Hat to continue pestering Cueball by misusing the word "ironic", (3) it better fits the definition of the word "glare" (as Cueball is shown to be angry, and BH is not), (4) the only odd word usage involved is that of the word "ironic", which, again, continues the established joke and is thus expected, and (5) the only real potential problem with it is easily resolved. It is true that Cueball appears to be in front of Black Hat, which would make it odd for him to looking at him. But I offered 3 possibilities above that resolve this (Black Hat could have walked ahead, it could simply be an angled shot of them walking side-by-side, Cueball could have looked back at BH), none of which are particularly unparsimonious or unlikely. |
::::::If we could get another editor to chime in, that would probably helpful.<br>--[[User:Sensorfire|Sensorfire]] ([[User talk:Sensorfire|talk]]) 20:34, 12 October 2018 (UTC) | ::::::If we could get another editor to chime in, that would probably helpful.<br>--[[User:Sensorfire|Sensorfire]] ([[User talk:Sensorfire|talk]]) 20:34, 12 October 2018 (UTC) | ||
:::::::I'm not sure I qualify as another editor, since I just made my account to reply to this thread. Maybe I will do some good editing in the future. But I am a native english speaker, and I have to agree with Sensorfire: no one would use the word "iconic" the way Dgbrt has described. I would have have made this assumption in reading the comic and don't think anyone else I know would have made this assumption either, because it's not a normal usage of english. I ''do'' think people would use the word "ironic" the way Black Hat did (and mean to say "ironic"), as people use this word in all sorts of ways to mean all sorts of things, including to pester people who struggle with other people using words incorrectly, as it seems Black Hat is doing here.<br>--[[User:Fivestones|Fivestones]] ([[User talk:Fivestones|talk]]) 16:26, 13 October 2018 (UTC) | :::::::I'm not sure I qualify as another editor, since I just made my account to reply to this thread. Maybe I will do some good editing in the future. But I am a native english speaker, and I have to agree with Sensorfire: no one would use the word "iconic" the way Dgbrt has described. I would have have made this assumption in reading the comic and don't think anyone else I know would have made this assumption either, because it's not a normal usage of english. I ''do'' think people would use the word "ironic" the way Black Hat did (and mean to say "ironic"), as people use this word in all sorts of ways to mean all sorts of things, including to pester people who struggle with other people using words incorrectly, as it seems Black Hat is doing here.<br>--[[User:Fivestones|Fivestones]] ([[User talk:Fivestones|talk]]) 16:26, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |