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

>> I loathe opera - to me it's just silly. Is that denial, do you think? <<

No.


Hmmm, perhaps I should have qualified that my newfound joy in experiencing classical music does not yet include opera. To date my acoustic absorption is limited to instrumental music.

Some primitive part of my brain still finds the things that opera and other classical vocal forms do to the human voice too disturbing.
Eskimo (no apology ) throat music leaves me gagging empathetically until tears run down my cheeks. Large women shouting the odds in Italian above high C has a similar effect. I vibrate like fine crystal and shatter.


~jwf~

Adelaide "*Some* classical music is ignore-inducing, I find - and I loathe opera - to me it's just silly. Is that denial, do you think?"

Unscientifically, that is to say, in my experience, all unfamiliar music sounds featureless. Those who don't know Mozart can only hear the same frilly cadence over and over again. When my son was twelve or so we let him play his Status Quo tape in the car on long journeys, and for the first several hundred miles all we (his parents) could hear was "tiss tiss" from the cymbals. After that it gradually swam into focus, and we are now big(ish) fans.

fyi - 'barm' is a solution of fermented grain - the 'wort' in beer or 'sponge' in bread (I know this because I bake bread). A 'barm cake' is a particular kind of roll peculiar to Lancashire. Yeasty, open texture, flat-ish and misshapen, and with a pale, crunch, dry, floured crust. Think of it as 'Lancashire Ciabbatta'.

I'm considering an Entry re. Coronation Street. I think it's of an entirely different class to any other soap. Its roots go back to English music hall and repertory theatre. It was created by the wonderful Tony Warren, a 'theatrical' and favourite of Noel Coward, who was 'out' in early 60's Manchester. It still retains much of its knowing campness, and specialises in its comic turn characters and couples. There was a wonderful scene a couple of months ago, featuring the great John Savident (cineastes may remember him from 'A Clockwork Orange'. He was recently in the tabloids after being knifed in his own flat by a rent boy. He plays a character closely modelled on Foghorn Leghorn - I say, closely modelled...) Anyway, his character, Fred Elliott, is a butcher. His toddler grandson was taken into his shop. Fred appears, grinning from ear to ear, but in a bloody apron and brandishing a huge meat cleaver and says 'Ello, babbee!'

'I find that listening to Bach is like being tapped repeatedly on the forehead with a teaspoon.' Cassandra Mortmain in 'I Capture The Castle' by Dodie Smith

Back to language....Lord Melvyn of Buttermere was talking about rhetoric on R4 this am. I only caught the first minute, but it got me thinking more about the ways that speech affects thought. We don't have to go as far as Sapir-Whorff to see that the *way* something is said influences the hearer. Examples:

Obviously, a well-structured argument, in simple language, is more effective than a rambling speech that drones on and one presenting a series of muddled and intertwined points in big long words using subordinate clauses and passive verbs. This, I guess, is what classical rhetoric is about. I've occasionally had to teach younger colleagues how to write properly. I encourage them to use short sentences, not to be afraid of writing like they speak, and to only write sentences that they could translate into GCSE French and back.

Sometimes the words or constructions a speaker uses lead us to judgements about their personality and make us more or less receptive to their message. For example, we've already talked about derogatory terms for ethnicity (their use doesn't *necessarily* imply racism - at best they show that the speaker must be wilfully ignorant of modern mores). Another example: if a man were to say to a woman 'I have increasingly begun to harbour deep emotions and physical feelings towards you', she would be well within her rights to think 'Why can't the emotionally stilted p---k not just say 'I love you' '

One word might place an idea in a slightly different mental space than another. Example: In the UK, devious political shenanigans have been known, since the 90's, as 'sleaze'. Yet when we refer to, say, bribe taking by a third-world politician, we call exactly the same thing for what it is: 'corruption'.

Edward. Re <>:

Are you sure?

I NEVER listen to what a man says, only to what he does.

There are exceptions to this rule:

1) when the man is acting in a professional capacity toward me (carpenter, pharmacist, and so on);

2) when the man is saying 'leave me alone' or some other form of growling;

3) when the man is sick;

4) when the man is watching any kind of ball game.

God help me if I ever fall for a grumpy, arthritic, rugby-watching timberframer. Ani.

PS: Point 4 by the way has much hidden meaning. It usually means that I can take unfair advantage. D-oh! (blink blink)

My! What hideous gender stereotyping! I, for one, don't even *like* sports!

Spoken like a true bonobo. Your species is famed for ball games.

Edward de Lateralthinkbo: You might consult A759639 "'Coronation Street' - the Soap Opera" for ideas

Phew! That relieves me of a burden. It looks good! At first glance I didn't notice mention of the Elsie Tanner/ Tony Blair connection (only two degrees of Kevin Bacon there)

I have three degrees of Kevin Bacon with the poodle, in two separate ways: My mum used to go into chip shop where Cherie's mum worked, and the woman who looked after my children is the elder sister of prominent Lord who was in chambers with the Blair (damn! I've all but name dropped there!)

But I digress......

As you wish:

"For example, we forget that a 'file' is really a line of soldiers and that 'fascinating' refers to an erect penis. How terribly uneducated of us! But that's what language does - does it not? Or should I have used the common English (but not Scots) mistake, 'doesn't', there?"

And (is it OK if I start a sentence with 'and'?) 'scintillating' means flashing on and off while 'sophisticated' means fiddled about with. "You look really sophisticated in that scintillating dress my dear."

There has to be some agreed dividing line. Evolution in language is one thing but revolution threatens a breakdown in what language is for: communication. If I can't see past your txtspk bcos I cnt c wot ur on abt then we risk a serious misunderstanding, divvent wa?

Oh, and the Scots don't use 'doesn't' because they prefer to name that well known cartoon and film-maker; Disney.



F

(note to others: we're continuing a discussion on language change started elsewhere)

Oh, certainly, Mr Hundred-and-Twentieth-of-a-Cable. Nobody is suggesting that we go about changing language wilfully and willy-nilly. However - people DO use 'data' in the singular in their everyday lives. Are you saying
a) you can't understand them when they do,
b) It's against some official, pre-ordained rulebook (which I'd like to see, if it exists. Neither the OED nor Fowler's have yet been enacted by Parliament) or
c) that it's not to your personal taste?

In actual fact, a 'standard' usage is only and can only be either the lingua franca of the majority or the exclusionary dialect of an elite (in the 'power' sense, not implying the cleverest people).

By the way, though - Yes, disnae and doesnae and wouldnae etc. - but when used in a 'n'est-ce pas?' sense, it's generally 'does he not?', 'are you not?' etc. My wife (bless her) can never quite get the hang of the old 'Wooden Car' joke. '....wooden wheels, wooden engine - wouldnae go!'

'He's got that bone and kidney disease. He's bone idle and kidney be bothered!'.

F

>> it got me thinking more about the ways that speech affects thought

One of the central tenets of NLP (Neurolinguistic Programming) is that people do say exactly what they mean. The tricky thing is to listen for it. Freud got there first of course. One of my major relationships began because of a freudian slip ("I am going to lay you and leave you" - well, what *was* a girl to do...! )

Simple example: The other day I found myself saying 'I would really have to hate my body to do that kind of exercise'. What my conscious mind meant was that I do not currently feel sufficiently dissatisfied with my overall shape to feel the need to go to the gym; but there is an underlying message from the subconscious, that I see gym-style exercise as punishment, and that I have no desire to bully or punish my body. People tell you what they think *all the time*.


>> more effective than a rambling speech that drones on and one presenting a series of muddled and intertwined points in big long words using subordinate clauses and passive verbs

A site which generates post modernist academic writing at the click of a button: http://www.elsewhere.org/cgi-bin/postmodern/ - Go play!


>> 'fascinating' refers to an erect penis

*Does* it? My Chambers implies it has a connection with fascinare - to charm or bewitch.

Ben

Fascinating what Fathom says about fascination; the Shorter Ox hasn't heard of that, keeps blathering on about serpents hypnotising their prey, and derives the word from Latin fascinum, a spell, witchcraft.

I saw a wooden bicycle for sale in a Copenhagen bike shop last June, and it *would* go, but you had to pay them a lot of money first.

There's a minor flaw in your argument, B: NLP is a load of b------s cobbled together from a few pseudo-scientific facts.

Fascinating: When a Roman boy of noble birth came of age, he was presented with a 'bulla' - a small leather purse to be hunf around the neck. Inside this purse was a 'fascinum' - a small replica of his erect penis (presumably supplied by a rather suspect sculptor). Over time, fascinum came to mean charm--> charming (as in 'holds the attention. As in snakes) --> fascinating.

How many Freudians dies it take to change a lightbulb? Two. One to hold the ladder and one to hold the penis - No!...mother - No!...ladder!!!

http://www.sataniclust.com/04_10/tld_book_mindofitsown.htm well whaddaya know. But which came first, the amulet or the charm-sense? I have heard somewhere that the word "charm" once meant to cast a spell on someone which persuaded them that their wedding tackle had vanished. Charming!

But NLP is not all bollox. "Frogs Into Princes" is one of the best books I've read for dealing with (e.g.) the different layers of meaning, and how to navigate without confusing them.

A slightly different theory to the one quoted by Edward (apologies to Fathom) from the book "A Mind of its Own":

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/secondary/SMIGRA*/Bulla.html describes the bulla as an ornament (sometimes made of gold plate) separate from the fascinum:

"FASCINUM. (baskani/a), fascination, enchantment. The belief that some persons had the power of injuring others by their looks, was as prevalent among the Greeks and Romans as it is among the superstitious in modern times. The o)fqalmo\j ba/skanoj, or evil eye, is frequently mentioned by ancient writers . . Various amulets were used to avert the influence of the evil eye. The most common of these appears to have been the phallus, called by the Romans fascinum, which was hung round the necks of children"

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/secondary/SMIGRA*/Fascinum.html

The inference I take from that site is that the fascinum was something to guard *against* fascination by the evil eye. The wretched gobbledygook "o)fqalmo\j" must be an attempt to reproduce the Greek for "fascinum" -- the o) must be a phi. I tried changing the encoding for the page but it remained the same.

o)fqalmo\j looks like 'ophthalmoi' which I presume is something to do with eyes.

Excellent perspicacity, Gnomon. So does fascinum mean the same -- is it an ophthalmic thing? "Face" comes from facia, meaning visible form, appearance, aspect and so on, from fac- "appear, shine". I'm now willing to bet that fascinum = amulet is a secondary, not primary meaning.

>> ..knifed in his own flat by a rent boy... Fred Elliott...appears, grinning from ear to ear, but in a bloody apron and brandishing a huge meat cleaver and says 'Ello, babbee!' <<


Don't think I've seen that episode yet.

[Here in Canada we're now 8 months behind thanks to the Olympics preempting everything for three weeks. We've only recently seen the Xmas and New Years shows over here and Rita has just smacked the kid living with Les Battersby.]

But I simply have to ask which Fred Elliott event came first. The real life stabbing or the gory Corrie scene? Y'see, I'm working on a general theory of the relativity between art and life and which is more likely to imitate t'other.


~jwf~