Cranky grammar lessons: a sporadic series
Oct. 11th, 2011 11:15 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ginny_tNever mind. It got rambly, and there was an ode to tea, and then there was a question, and my head hurts, and I'M ON VACATION AND STILL SICK AND THIS SUCKS!
Just remember: nouns are nouns and verbs are verbs, and they work so very well together, and sure you can verb a noun, but that weirds language. (In other words, no, happiness is a noun, not a verb. You can say Epictetus said it was a verb, but the only reference I can find to that is a "reinterpreted by" on Twitter, and that ain't contemporary, and that sure as shootin' doesn't give your bullshit meme of wrongness any legitimacy. And that sucks, because I was in the middle of reading a post about being kind to your body with food, a thing I need to work on, and that ambushed me, and there was a 15-minute interruption for a rant that got deleted for being rambly and off-topic and …)
My head hurts. *whine* (At least I don't seem to be feverish. Maybe.)
Wait, there was another thing! When you're defining something, you should define it using an equivalent grammatical unit. IOW, nouns should be defined by nouns and noun phrases, verbs should be defined by verbs and verb phrases. So to say "True happiness is a verb. It is the ongoing, dynamic performance of worthy deeds" is to be not only wrongsauce, it is to define a noun you're claiming isn't a noun by a noun phrase, thus undermining your argument doubly. *nodnod*
[Also, I didn't proofread this because did I mention my head hurts? So maybe there's a grammatical error easter egg for the finding.]
Just remember: nouns are nouns and verbs are verbs, and they work so very well together, and sure you can verb a noun, but that weirds language. (In other words, no, happiness is a noun, not a verb. You can say Epictetus said it was a verb, but the only reference I can find to that is a "reinterpreted by" on Twitter, and that ain't contemporary, and that sure as shootin' doesn't give your bullshit meme of wrongness any legitimacy. And that sucks, because I was in the middle of reading a post about being kind to your body with food, a thing I need to work on, and that ambushed me, and there was a 15-minute interruption for a rant that got deleted for being rambly and off-topic and …)
My head hurts. *whine* (At least I don't seem to be feverish. Maybe.)
Wait, there was another thing! When you're defining something, you should define it using an equivalent grammatical unit. IOW, nouns should be defined by nouns and noun phrases, verbs should be defined by verbs and verb phrases. So to say "True happiness is a verb. It is the ongoing, dynamic performance of worthy deeds" is to be not only wrongsauce, it is to define a noun you're claiming isn't a noun by a noun phrase, thus undermining your argument doubly. *nodnod*
[Also, I didn't proofread this because did I mention my head hurts? So maybe there's a grammatical error easter egg for the finding.]
no subject
Date: 2012-01-12 06:44 pm (UTC)I took from it that happiness is supposed to result from the ongoing dynamic performance of worthy deeds.
I didn't literally take it to mean that a noun is a verb. More like a metaphor.
The quote was pulled from a modern reinterpretation of Epictetus, yes.
-I'm not signed in, but this is Michelle
no subject
Date: 2012-01-13 06:47 pm (UTC)I get that it's a metaphor, but I don't think it's a terribly good one. Also, grammar is my livelihood and passion. It pains me to see something that is so poorly understood (some university students don't know what the subject of a sentence is!) subverted for a failed attempt at cleverness.
Also, I take issue with putting such a modern spin on Epictus. It seems to give legitimacy to this fallacy, and I find that especially pernicious.
[edited because my sentence failed]