h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Sorry it grates...but it does have a long literary pedigree. I'm racking my brain to think of examples...I've a vague memory that Chaucer used it some of the time.

On the "What IS happening..." thing in newsprogrammes on TV:

If they know it is happening, they must have known it was going to happen in the first place, just to be able to cart all the crews and camera's and stuff there. It would've been nice of them to give all people concerned a heads-up about it...

This is a reply to Recumbentman's Post 10557, which I've only just read. And haven't read any of the backlog in between, so please excuse what is most probably now an utter non sequitur.

This translation of Wittgenstein is, in the present day usage of the verb "leerlaufen" unique, in that the translation obviously expresses what Wittgenstein is trying to say, whereas W himself used the wrong word in the original German.

My view may be confused by the very recent spelling reform which re-defines which words are written together and which not. I shall try and clear my mind of this contamination and comment as follows:

Thus: leer laufen and leerlaufen have two separate meanings. Or had, under the old rules. Which applied two years ago and applied in the 1940s and which I and everyone in Germany over the age of about 15 still use.

So I will stick to the old meanings. And I will consult my husband, although I am not in any doubt of my knowledge and interpretataion of the fine/finer/finest points of German. (It's the only thing I *can* do)

Leer laufen is practically a verb with adverb. To run whilst empty.

Leerlaufen is to run empty - as described above (way above!) - all the contents are running out.

Perhaps with motor vehicles in the 1940s the use of the verb was slightly different, which is not unlikely. On the other hand, Wittgenstein may not have driven himself and was not completely familiar with the usage, which is unlikely, because the concept must have been fairly actively present in his mind for him to use the metaphor at all.

More when I've tracked hubby down. I think he's in the woodshed. (A word which always reminds me of Under Milk Wood)

>>I think he's in the woodshed. (A word which always reminds me of Under Milk Wood)

It reminds me more of 'Cold Comfort Farm' by Stella Gibbons. The old matriarch '...saw something nasty in the woodshed'.

Have asked hubby. He agrees with me, up to a point. But he does say that Wittgenstein's usage is possible, albeit a rare one. So we can drop the point.

Returning to the thorny subject of plurals...

Yesterday, while shopping at my local Chinese cash-and-carry, I noticed that one of their freezer cabinets contained 'Pigs' Uteri'

I was suddenly reminded of the episode in John Steinbeck's 'East of Eden' in which Chinese sages hear an biblical quotation thet they don't understand, so they embark upon a decades-long study of Hebrew, Greek and Latin.

I wonder how one cooks a pig's womb?

>> I wonder how one cooks a pig's womb? <<

Aye, 'tis hard to conceive such a thing.

~jwf~

hi guys new to the site just thought id throw my 2 cents in.... different job same responsibility... how bout typical? nah just kidding... lateral movement.... hitting the ceiling... ill try to think of some others

Hi odinsson! You were actually replying to a question that DJ posted over four years ago. If you look carefully you'll see that there have been another 10,500 comments in this conversation since then!

But don't yet h2g2's criminaly poor usability put you off. New members are often forced into 'mistakes'. Don't feel embarassed if these are pointed out by the clique of long-term members

no problem i realized i had done this after posting and the page it brought up wasn't the one i had been looking at before lol i got it worked out now... thanks for correction though... silly me

Welcome anyway, odinsson. We've discussed so many things here that we can't remember them all, and no-one is going to read 10,000 postings of backlog, so feel free to talk on any topic at all, as long as it relates to British English.

Although I am quite aware that the use of the present tense is *supposed* to create tension in a story, literally a sense of "immediacy", I find it disconcerting, too. And in modern usage, unconvincing; at worst: confusing. It's probably one rule we could drop, as it no longer has the desired effect.

I'm sure more than one of us has had their knuckles rapped by a French or English teacher for changing tenses in midstream in narrative prose.

Funnily enough, the colloquial use is still acceptable. "..I was minding me own business and quietly nipping at me beer, keeping meself to meself like, when me chair got kicked by someone and nudges the bloke behind me. I said "sorry, mate" and he turns round and punches me right in the fizzog"

Speaking of tenses and such - looking for a general opinion here - am in the midst of a composition and thinking of using first person for some of the more intimate "memory sequences". First person has almost always put me off though - I find it difficult to read for an entire story - but I wonder if this is a personal prejudice or if there's something about pieces in "first person" that is generally diconcerting.

What do you think?


Kosh

I think that first person stories can feel more intimate - third person can be a bit remote unless there is a clear protagonist who is 'centre stage' nearly all the time.

With first person however, you know that they survive to tell the tale & that the account is being given with hindsight, whereas third person may be less predictable.

Using first person as you have suggested sounds fine.

>> Don't feel embarassed if these are pointed out by the clique of long-term members...<<

But also be aware that the same stingy and evil sense of 'economy' - that wants us all to limit emails and postings to a single subject - can also infect long time internet users, causing them to abbreviate and become laconic. It causes them to fail in providing full and helpful disclosure when offering up their own terse answers to cyberlife's ongoing questions.

For the record, odinsson's posting is not an error. Especially not in intention. It is his positive response to a previous posting no matter how old the posting might be. It is actually quite a common phenom and has its own name around here. It's called a 'Post 21' and often these are more welcome than the ongoing treacle that some threads can dissolve into. Present company excepted and accepted, of course.

Sadly, instead of re-opening previously entertaining topics this sort of thing is often willfully misunderstood and the poster may feel mistreated by sophomoric researchers who think they know better but never say how or why. And of course the subject gets dropped with no one willing to admit they too might like to re-examine previously considered questions. It's as if there is some imperative to move on and never chew a cabbage twice.

Baked fresh daily,

~jwf~

You've got a point there, ~jwf~, but be fair, no one made a derogatory comment. You do say that we don't do that here, but then you did imply slightly that he had been put down. The new guy is quite welcome to join in, but I suspect this will turn out to be another nighthoover.

I think it's a matter of personal taste, Koshana. My son hates stories that are written in the first person, but I don't mind - it can be just right for some stories...

I am reading one of Lindsey Davis' Falco novels (set in Ancient Rome - well, the current one is set in Londinium) and they're first person and absolutely brilliant!