Off Topic – For Tony Cooper

Quit raining on Tony Pooper’s parade!

"Bill Newton" wrote in message

Tony Cooper" wrote >

I admire you for trying, but you really shouldn’t use words you don’t understand. "Voided" would not be a malapropism because it was not an inadvertent misuse.

snip ………….

Straight from the dictionary ……… scuse me smiling :-))
Back to school Tony. Using the word ‘Voided’ instead of ‘Voivod’ is indeed a malapropism. In your case you are knowingly using a malapropism in an effort to belittle ‘Voivod’……… or do you perhaps believe that one can’t knowingly employ the use of a malapropism?

Sadly it does appear that I’ve overestimated your comprehension level. Please read the following very slowly and try to grasp what I’m saying: ‘kay ?

I stated:

‘ It can be that you’re about as sharp as a sausage…………..unless

you

intended the Voivod malapropism :-)’

Note the use of the word ‘unless’ ……. Get it? ……..that means that

if

you really did intend to use the word ‘Voided’ then I wouldn’t regard you as being as sharp as a sausage. Right? You NOW tell me that did intend to use the word ‘Voided’. OK….My part of the deal: I no longer regard you

as

being as sharp as a sausage. In fact I now regard you as being sharper

than

a sausage. OK? ;-))

However it remains just as I explained previously, you’re in need of some tuition in how to communicate effectively and comprehend incoming Mail.
For starters please carefully re-read the postal exchanges we’ve had and you’ll come to understand just why the words ‘malapropism’ and ‘non sequitur’
are appropriate.

Know what I mean?

Bill Newton.

On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 17:58:24 +0000 (UTC), "Bill Newton" wrote:

Tony Cooper" wrote >

I admire you for trying, but you really shouldn’t use words you don’t understand. "Voided" would not be a malapropism because it was not an inadvertent misuse.

snip ………….

Straight from the dictionary ……… scuse me smiling :-))
Back to school Tony. Using the word ‘Voided’ instead of ‘Voivod’ is indeed a malapropism. In your case you are knowingly using a malapropism in an effort to belittle ‘Voivod’……… or do you perhaps believe that one can’t knowingly employ the use of a malapropism?

Knowingly using a malapropism is like planning your own surprise party. A malapropism has to be inadvertent through ignorance or misunderstanding of a word. Changing Vovoid’s name to Voided is no more than a play on words, and a minor play at that. Even the inadvertent use of "Voided" for "Voivoid" may be just a mondegreen and not a malapropism if the person using "Voided" thinks he’s using the word he saw or heard.

However it remains just as I explained previously, you’re in need of some tuition in how to communicate effectively and comprehend incoming Mail.

C’mon over to my usual newsgroup – alt.usage.english – and see if you can keep up. Bring your question about Mr Sheridan’s character. A tip, though, don’t bring your emoticons and all caps; we think that a bit AOLish.

For starters please carefully re-read the postal exchanges we’ve had and you’ll come to understand just why the words ‘malapropism’ and ‘non sequitur’
are appropriate.

We haven’t had any "postal" or "mail" exchanges that I know about. That is, unless you’re that Asian person with the anatomically correct photos who keeps filling my mailbox. No exchange there, though, since I haven’t replied.

The "put your mind in motion" *did* follow since Voided was a play on a name and "motion" was a play on another name. "Non sequitur" is only used to mean "it does not follow". It does not describe a very weak joke.

Know what I mean?

Wink, wink.

—

Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL

"Tony Cooper" wrote in message

Knowingly using a malapropism is like planning your own surprise party. A malapropism has to be inadvertent through ignorance or misunderstanding of a word. Changing Vovoid’s name to Voided

I believe you meant to write ‘Voivod’s’ not ‘Vovoid’s’ Is this a malapropism through ignorance on your part, or can I expect an invite to the next surprise party you organise for yourself?

Even the inadvertent use of "Voided" for "Voivoid" may be just a mondegreen

I believe you meant ‘Voivod’ not Voivoid …….. You must be tired:-)

In any event I don’t believe it could be termed a mondegreen. A mondegreen if I recall correctly from my old English teacher, is something that is mis-heard. Usually from somebody making a statement or perhaps singing a song. As a personal example, I recall from way back that Dusty Springfield made a record entitled ‘You don’t have to say you love me’ The first few times I heard this song I was convinced that one line went ‘ you don’t have to say you love me, lust is just as grand’ I later discovered that the real line went ‘ You don’t have to say you love me, just be close at hand. Now that’s my understanding of a mondegreen. Yours?

C’mon over to my usual newsgroup – alt.usage.english – and see if

you can keep up.

Thanks for the invitation to alt.usage.english but to be honest I’m not particularly interested in politically correct English, probably because I’m very average with it. That’s why I’m surprised that you hang out there because I guess many of those Guys are really smart. I’d be very surprised if you were able to keep up with them, but if you do perhaps they aren’t as smart as I think. Maybe I ‘should’ pay a visit some time.

We haven’t had any "postal" or "mail" exchanges that I know about.

Sigh …………Call our exchanges what you will.

The "put your mind in motion" *did* follow since Voided was a play on a name and "motion" was a play on another name. "Non sequitur" is only used to mean "it does not follow". It does not describe a very weak joke.

Sounds to me as though you’re trying to convince yourself. But I sense that you are starting to agree with me. The last two sentences in your comment above are accurate. Now convince your self that your response wasn’t even close to being a joke of any description…………..then you will accept that your response was in fact a non sequitur.

You do know what I mean ……… don’t you?

Bill Newton

On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 14:48:48 +0000 (UTC), "Bill Newton" wrote:

"Tony Cooper" wrote in message

Knowingly using a malapropism is like planning your own surprise party. A malapropism has to be inadvertent through ignorance or misunderstanding of a word. Changing Vovoid’s name to Voided

I believe you meant to write ‘Voivod’s’ not ‘Vovoid’s’ Is this a malapropism through ignorance on your part, or can I expect an invite to the next surprise party you organise for yourself?

Even the inadvertent use of "Voided" for "Voivoid" may be just a mondegreen

I believe you meant ‘Voivod’ not Voivoid …….. You must be tired:-)

Ignorance and lack of interest. I can’t be bothered to look up the correct spelling of his name. The correct spelling of the name, like the poster, is inconsequential.

In any event I don’t believe it could be termed a mondegreen. A mondegreen if I recall correctly from my old English teacher, is something that is mis-heard. Usually from somebody making a statement or perhaps singing a song. As a personal example, I recall from way back that Dusty Springfield made a record entitled ‘You don’t have to say you love me’ The first few times I heard this song I was convinced that one line went ‘ you don’t have to say you love me, lust is just as grand’ I later discovered that the real line went ‘ You don’t have to say you love me, just be close at hand. Now that’s my understanding of a mondegreen. Yours?

Exactly as I wrote in the part you snipped: "Even the inadvertent use of "Voided" for "Voivoid" may be just a mondegreen and not a malapropism if the person using "Voided" thinks he’s using the word he saw or heard."

It’s not necessary to hear the word incorrectly. You can hear or see it incorrectly.

C’mon over to my usual newsgroup – alt.usage.english – and see if

you can keep up.

Thanks for the invitation to alt.usage.english but to be honest I’m not particularly interested in politically correct English, probably because I’m very average with it.

We discuss words and terms – among other things – and politely set people straight who misuse words or terms or don’t know how to use particular words or terms. For example, we’d point out the difference between "correct" English and "politically correct" English to those that tend to fling phrases about that they don’t really understand.

That’s why I’m surprised that you
hang out there because I guess many of those Guys are really smart. I’d be very surprised if you were able to keep up with them, but if you do perhaps they aren’t as smart as I think.

Every bell curve has low points.

Maybe I ‘should’ pay a visit some time.

We can always go lower. If nothing else, it would move me up the curve.

We haven’t had any "postal" or "mail" exchanges that I know about.

Sigh …………Call our exchanges what you will.

The "put your mind in motion" *did* follow since Voided was a play on a name and "motion" was a play on another name. "Non sequitur" is only used to mean "it does not follow". It does not describe a very weak joke.

Sounds to me as though you’re trying to convince yourself. But I sense that you are starting to agree with me. The last two sentences in your comment above are accurate. Now convince your self that your response wasn’t even close to being a joke of any description…………..then you will accept that your response was in fact a non sequitur.

Every once in a while someone comes into the group with a "if it’s not this. it must be that" mentality. They’re fun to play with, but seldom salvageable.

—

Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL

"Tony Cooper" wrote in message >

You wrote:
ignorance and lack of interest. I can’t be bothered to look up the correct spelling of his name. The correct spelling of the name, like the poster, is inconsequential.

I wrote:
Such a tired response …………Looks like game over.

I wrote:
In any event I don’t believe it could be termed a mondegreen. A mondegreen if I recall correctly from my old English teacher, is something that is mis-heard. Usually from somebody making a statement or perhaps singing a song. As a personal example, I recall from way back that Dusty Springfield made a record entitled ‘You don’t have to say you love me’ The first few times I heard this song I was convinced that one line went ‘ you don’t have to say you love me, lust is just as grand’ I later discovered that the real line went ‘ You don’t have to say you love me, just be close at hand. Now that’s my understanding of a mondegreen. Yours?

You didn’t even answer this.

You wrote:
It’s not necessary to hear the word (mondegreen) incorrectly. You can hear or see it incorrectly.

I wrote:
You need to hear a mondegreen, I explained as above. You didn’t respond despite me asking you to.

You Wrote:
We discuss words and terms – among other things – and politely set people straight who misuse words or terms or don’t know how to use particular words or terms.

I wrote:
Physician heal thyself’

I wrote:
You fell apart Tony, after beginning quite brightly, you fell apart. I thought you were made of sterner stuff.

End it now.

Bill Newton

Y’know, I have no idea how this argument started, but it’s absolutely smashing. The insults are as strong as is necessary to maintain an emotional distance from each other and continue to fuel the argument, but never more. The replies are thorough, interesting, imaginative and articulate.

Absolutely marvellous. 10 out of 10. Best I’ve seen on usenet, actually.

CB

"Bill Newton" wrote in message

Tony Cooper" wrote >

I admire you for trying, but you really shouldn’t use words you don’t understand. "Voided" would not be a malapropism because it was not an inadvertent misuse.

snip ………….

Straight from the dictionary ……… scuse me smiling :-))
Back to school Tony. Using the word ‘Voided’ instead of ‘Voivod’ is indeed a malapropism. In your case you are knowingly using a malapropism in an effort to belittle ‘Voivod’……… or do you perhaps believe that one can’t knowingly employ the use of a malapropism?

Sadly it does appear that I’ve overestimated your comprehension level. Please read the following very slowly and try to grasp what I’m saying: ‘kay ?

I stated:

‘ It can be that you’re about as sharp as a sausage…………..unless

you

intended the Voivod malapropism :-)’

Note the use of the word ‘unless’ ……. Get it? ……..that means that

if

you really did intend to use the word ‘Voided’ then I wouldn’t regard you as being as sharp as a sausage. Right? You NOW tell me that did intend to use the word ‘Voided’. OK….My part of the deal: I no longer regard you

as

being as sharp as a sausage. In fact I now regard you as being sharper

than

a sausage. OK? ;-))

However it remains just as I explained previously, you’re in need of some tuition in how to communicate effectively and comprehend incoming Mail.
For starters please carefully re-read the postal exchanges we’ve had and you’ll come to understand just why the words ‘malapropism’ and ‘non sequitur’
are appropriate.

Know what I mean?

Bill Newton.

Thank you for your comments Captain. Kind words and very well put.

I must confess I’m surprised that ‘anybody’ chose to follow the exchange between myself and Tony Cooper. It was quite a pedantic exchange and I believed it would not be of interest to many in the group. So much so that I actually moved it from the original thread, ‘Resizing Photo Question’ (Which is where Tony and I originally clashed) and renamed it ‘Off Topic’ for the obvious reason.

I’m glad you enjoyed it.

Regards.

Bill Newton.

"Captain Blammo" wrote in message

Y’know, I have no idea how this argument started, but it’s absolutely smashing. The insults are as strong as is necessary to maintain an emotional
distance from each other and continue to fuel the argument, but never more.
The replies are thorough, interesting, imaginative and articulate.
Absolutely marvellous. 10 out of 10. Best I’ve seen on usenet, actually.
CB

On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 10:56:14 +0000 (UTC), "Bill Newton" wrote:

Thank you for your comments Captain. Kind words and very well put.
I must confess I’m surprised that ‘anybody’ chose to follow the exchange between myself and Tony Cooper. It was quite a pedantic exchange and I believed it would not be of interest to many in the group. So much so that I actually moved it from the original thread, ‘Resizing Photo Question’ (Which is where Tony and I originally clashed) and renamed it ‘Off Topic’ for the obvious reason.

I decided to drop out of this discussion out of kindness to the horse’s earthly remains. However, I was reading my regular newsgroup today and the following was said in a post:

"I have the same problem with malapropisms as a category. As I understand it, in order to qualify as such it’s not enough for, say, "elocution" to be replaced with "elucidation": the speaker has to be attempting (and failing) to be grandiloquent, and is required to be oblivious of the comic effect which results. That is, if the substitution doesn’t have that intent and effect — if it was just a slip, or an attempt at humour, or some sort of dyslexic function — it’s not a malapropism, it’s something else."

The above was part of thread on eggcorns, and the malapropism hadn’t been mentioned by anyone. I mention it here because of the synchronicity.

I think the poster cited above has summed up the malapropism very nicely. That’s why "Voided" could not be considered a malapropism.

—

Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL

"Tony Cooper" wrote in message

On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 10:56:14 +0000 (UTC), "Bill Newton" wrote:

Thank you for your comments Captain. Kind words and very well put.
I must confess I’m surprised that ‘anybody’ chose to follow the exchange between myself and Tony Cooper. It was quite a pedantic exchange and I believed it would not be of interest to many in the group. So much so

that I

actually moved it from the original thread, ‘Resizing Photo Question’

(Which

is where Tony and I originally clashed) and renamed it ‘Off Topic’ for

the

obvious reason.

I decided to drop out of this discussion out of kindness to the horse’s earthly remains. However, I was reading my regular newsgroup today and the following was said in a post:

"I have the same problem with malapropisms as a category. As I understand it, in order to qualify as such it’s not enough for, say, "elocution" to be replaced with "elucidation": the speaker has to be attempting (and failing) to be grandiloquent, and is required to be oblivious of the comic effect which results. That is, if the substitution doesn’t have that intent and effect — if it was just a slip, or an attempt at humour, or some sort of dyslexic function — it’s not a malapropism, it’s something else."
The above was part of thread on eggcorns, and the malapropism hadn’t been mentioned by anyone. I mention it here because of the synchronicity.

I think the poster cited above has summed up the malapropism very nicely. That’s why "Voided" could not be considered a malapropism. Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL

Face it, Tony Orlando
You can’t let gooooooooo.