The truly lazy person's " until " is not " 'til ", it's " til ". Not only can we
conserve our valuable energies by not typing the apostrophe; we can
effortlessly enjoy the thrashing about of energetic fools as they busy
themselves with incorrectly correcting the uncorrectable.
As per the original topic:
`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
"Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!"
He took his vorpal sword in hand:
Long time the manxome foe he sought --
So rested he by the Tumtum tree,
And stood awhile in thought.
And, as in uffish thought he stood,
The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame,
Came whiffling through the tulgey wood,
And burbled as it came!
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back.
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.
`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
a brightly colored fungus that grows in bark inclusions
(01-01-2015, 07:06 AM)rayheinrich Wrote: The truly lazy person's " until " is not " 'til ", it's " til ". Not only can we
conserve our valuable energies by not typing the apostrophe; we can
effortlessly enjoy the thrashing about of energetic fools as they busy
themselves with incorrectly correcting the uncorrectable.
or we could confound the pretentious by correc'''ting the,m per...petually. Think mcf...............ly, t''''''''''''''hink!
“[Poetry] does not serve the State or the Church or the pig-pen, who have other concerns. It serves no established pig-pen-power. The use of [poetry] is to sadden. A [poetry] that upsets no one, that annoys no one, is not a [poetry]. It is useful for harming stupidity, for turning stupidity into something shameful.”
Ray, instead of " uncorrectable," shouldn't that be "non-correctable?"
Ah, I love when people try and pick the fly shit out of the pepper. endless hours of excremental entertainment that.
The thing is that Dodgson's nonsense verse was not only done extremely well, and in the context of the book, but was basically a one off. It was funny when he did it, but generally becomes less so when others attempt it. This is especially true when in the hands of those who have no idea of its purpose to begin with. The genius of Dodgson's poem is that, although complete nonsense, it sounds close enough to making sense that the reader is fooled into thinking it does have meaning, and mistaking it for a conundrum rather than pure nonsense.
In terms of the topic Dodgson never meant to communicate anymore than what he does. That there is a "Jabberwock". That a boy leaves home to kill it. That the boy does in fact kill it with his "vorpal" blade. That the boy is praised by his father when he returns, and that the word "Mimsy" would much later become the title to a SciFi film, that was loosely based on the character of Alice and erroneously making a connection to Dodgson's attack on the "New Mathematics" as a mathematical statement to be used as a premiss in the movie; poetic license I suppose. Dodgson's fiction is as it is somewhat to the extent as Gulliver's Travels, they both hide a negative commentary against an entity that could hurt them or in Dodgson's case, keep him from ever seeing the printing press. While Swift's work can be correctly call satire, Dodgson's is harder to label the same as, as it is buried much deeper. This is seen in the fact that Swift's work is nearly immediately seen by any educated reader for what it is, it simply retains plausible deniable. In Dodgson's case the same reader as the above would never suspect that there was a deeper and darker story unfolding beneath the surface one. Thus "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" has never been refereed to as a satire.
There are at least two reasons why Ray may have brought this up in connection to the original topic, I have no way to know what the intent might be so I will not comment on that. However, it is a good poem to juxtapose against the poems we were originally discussing.
Certainly Dodgson's poem does not fall into the same category as those we have been discussing. One of the primary differences is no one will mistake the poem, due to the use of nonsense words, as being other than what it is, nor will they accept the blame of non-understanding as a failure within themselves. I look forward to Ray's exposition.
Dale
How long after picking up the brush, the first masterpiece?
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.
My exposition will consist of a wrought iron structure clad in self-cleaning
hydrophilic glass containing billions of non-correctable corrections in
diverse colors, flavors, and metaphors each bearing an abiding faith
in false causality.
a brightly colored fungus that grows in bark inclusions
Oooh can I have one for next Christmas? That would go really well in my non-existent existential victory garden that I planted in WWII at the end of the war in my back yard while I was still over seas working with the French underground (that's where I developed acrophobia, being underground all the time). "You can't can't really be two places at once when you're not anywhere at all." Firesign Theatre - "The Further Adventures of Nick Dangers" Lifted without credit from somewhere in Plato's dialogues according to the "Histories" of Hardicacus.
Ray went to Heinreach town
where rich Allie Baster lay on the ground.
He bumped her and humped and
finally he dumped her
when he found to the earth she was bound.
He said, barely concealing his mirth,
I'm not into fucking Mother Earth!
dale
How long after picking up the brush, the first masterpiece?
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.
(01-01-2015, 07:06 AM)rayheinrich Wrote: The truly lazy person's " until " is not " 'til ", it's " til ". Not only can we
conserve our valuable energies by not typing the apostrophe; we can
effortlessly enjoy the thrashing about of energetic fools as they busy
themselves with incorrectly correcting the uncorrectable.
probably true, but I like to follow the contraction conventions set by can't, don't and won't.
I think I read a line in someone's poem once that was something like:
the man worked till the earth was raw
which made me think
"till the earth was raw" - that is terrible grammar
when he meant "'til the earth was raw"
I think you can see the difficulty of my situation.
(01-02-2015, 04:53 AM)Erthona Wrote: Oooh can I have one for next Christmas? That would go really well in my non-existent existential victory garden that I planted in WWII at the end of the war in my back yard while I was still over seas working with the French underground (that's where I developed acrophobia, being underground all the time). "You can't can't really be two places at once when you're not anywhere at all." Firesign Theatre - "The Further Adventures of Nick Dangers" Lifted without credit from somewhere in Plato's dialogues according to the "Histories" of Hardicacus.
Ray went to Heinreach town
where rich Allie Baster lay on the ground.
He bumped her and humped and
finally he dumped her
when he found to the earth she was bound.
He said, barely concealing his mirth,
I'm not into fucking Mother Earth!
dale
Santa (who CAN be in two places at once) tells me he'll give you one next xmas, but
only on the condition that you stop quoting "Firesign (heavy on the thirty weight ma) Theatre".
"That would go really well in my non-existent existential victory garden
that I planted in WWII at the end of the war in my back yard" <- Indeed!
(01-02-2015, 04:58 AM)milo Wrote: probably true, but I like to follow the contraction conventions set by can't, don't and won't.
I think I read a line in someone's poem once that was something like:
the man worked till the earth was raw
which made me think
"till the earth was raw" - that is terrible grammar
when he meant "'til the earth was raw"
I think you can see the difficulty of my situation.
In truth, I'm not lazy enough to leave that apostrophe out either.
And as for 'till', yes, I try to avoid homonyms as they add confusion and
lend themselves too easily to doggerel:
He'll till the earth, his plow the devil's claw;
He'll till the earth, he'll till it till it's raw.
He'll till the earth, he'll till it to its core;
He'll till the earth till it will till no more.
a brightly colored fungus that grows in bark inclusions
Actually I was hoping from the head like Athena, but I guess even the hind-quarters of a god are fairly good. I just hope Hera doesn't get jealous and throw me off of mount Olympus like she did with Hephaestus. Hmm, I've never had ichor for blood before. I hear one bleeds gold.
Thanks Ray.
dale
How long after picking up the brush, the first masterpiece?
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.
(01-02-2015, 11:46 AM)Erthona Wrote: Actually I was hoping from the head like Athena, but I guess even the hind-quarters of a god are fairly good. I just hope Hera doesn't get jealous and throw me off of mount Olympus like she did with Hephaestus. Hmm, I've never had ichor for blood before. I hear one bleeds gold.
Thanks Ray.
dale
How about springing from the sea foam that formed around the severed genitals of Uranus?
(You can take Aphrodite out of Greece, but you can't take the grease out of Aphrodite.)
a brightly colored fungus that grows in bark inclusions
"How about springing from the sea foam that formed around the severed genitals of Uranus?" How can your anus have genitals?
Well no matter how you slice it, sex is just a messy operation
"(You can take Aphrodite out of Greece, but you can't take the grease out of Aphrodite.) "
So true. Despite common perception, it is more accurate to say that Aphrodite inflicts love on a person for her amusement, rather than grants it for a person's benefit.
dale
How long after picking up the brush, the first masterpiece?
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.
(01-03-2015, 01:06 AM)Erthona Wrote: "How about springing from the sea foam that formed around the severed genitals of Uranus?" How can your anus have genitals?
When they're someone else's.
(01-03-2015, 01:06 AM)Erthona Wrote: Well no matter how you slice it, sex is just a messy operation
Slicing is particularly messy when it involves genitals. (Or so I've been told.)
(01-03-2015, 01:06 AM)Erthona Wrote: Despite common perception, it is more accurate to say that Aphrodite inflicts love on a person for her amusement,
rather than grants it for a person's benefit.
All my lovers, it seems, sprang fully-formed from her pubis.
(01-03-2015, 01:06 AM)Erthona Wrote: You seem to have attributed a comment to me without prior authorization. This isn't at all (or even partially) ethical.
The least you could do, considering the circumstances, is incorporate an erudite remark, tinged, as always,
with my impeccable wit. Though, considering the preceding sentence, I'm more than willing to settle for fawning adoration.
Well, as you can see, we seem to have come full circle (albeit on a somewhat raggedly elliptical path)
and arrived at the very focal point of our original topic. While this might be considered odd happenstance
when performed by persons of lesser intellect; for us, it can only be attributed to inconceivably dexterous
analytical coherence.
We can but state: Quod erat demonstrandum.
As sincerely as ever,
Ray
a brightly colored fungus that grows in bark inclusions
(01-01-2015, 07:06 AM)rayheinrich Wrote: The truly lazy person's " until " is not " 'til ", it's " til ". Not only can we
conserve our valuable energies by not typing the apostrophe; we can
effortlessly enjoy the thrashing about of energetic fools as they busy
themselves with incorrectly correcting the uncorrectable.
probably true, but I like to follow the contraction conventions set by can't, don't and won't.
I think I read a line in someone's poem once that was something like:
the man worked till the earth was raw
which made me think
"till the earth was raw" - that is terrible grammar
when he meant "'til the earth was raw"
I think you can see the difficulty of my situation.
Milo, I know you don't like Merriam-Webster's authority, but till, til and 'til are all acceptable contractions of until.
My new watercolor: 'Nightmare After Christmas'/Chris
(01-01-2015, 07:06 AM)rayheinrich Wrote: The truly lazy person's " until " is not " 'til ", it's " til ". Not only can we
conserve our valuable energies by not typing the apostrophe; we can
effortlessly enjoy the thrashing about of energetic fools as they busy
themselves with incorrectly correcting the uncorrectable.
probably true, but I like to follow the contraction conventions set by can't, don't and won't.
I think I read a line in someone's poem once that was something like:
the man worked till the earth was raw
which made me think
"till the earth was raw" - that is terrible grammar
when he meant "'til the earth was raw"
I think you can see the difficulty of my situation.
Milo, I know you don't like Merriam-Webster's authority, but till, til and 'til are all acceptable contractions of until.
To be clearer: Milo wasn't saying they weren't acceptable to an appreciable segment of
the great unwashed, he was expressing his own personal preferences (and ones that,
possessing superior linguistic sensibilities as well, I agree with).
But, as one possessing superior linguistic sensibilities, I can't help but point out that " till " is not
a contraction of "until". " Till* " is its very own word, predates "until" by a few hundred years, and is
quite probably the word from which "until" descended.
As sincere as ever,
Ray
*And, as I've said previously:
And as for 'till', yes, I try to avoid homonyms as they add confusion and
lend themselves too easily to doggerel:
He'll till the earth, his plow the devil's claw;
He'll till the earth, he'll till it till it's raw.
He'll till the earth, he'll till it to its core;
He'll till the earth till it will till no more.
a brightly colored fungus that grows in bark inclusions
(01-02-2015, 04:58 AM)milo Wrote: probably true, but I like to follow the contraction conventions set by can't, don't and won't.
I think I read a line in someone's poem once that was something like:
the man worked till the earth was raw
which made me think
"till the earth was raw" - that is terrible grammar
when he meant "'til the earth was raw"
I think you can see the difficulty of my situation.
Milo, I know you don't like Merriam-Webster's authority, but till, til and 'til are all acceptable contractions of until.
To be clearer: Milo wasn't saying they weren't acceptable to an appreciable segment of
the great unwashed, he was expressing his own personal preferences (and ones that,
possessing superior linguistic sensibilities as well, I agree with).
But, as one possessing superior linguistic sensibilities, I can't help but point out that " till " is not
a contraction of "until". " Till* " is its very own word, predates "until" by a few hundred years, and is
quite probably the word from which "until" descended.
As sincere as ever,
Ray
*And, as I've said previously:
And as for 'till', yes, I try to avoid homonyms as they add confusion and
lend themselves too easily to doggerel:
He'll till the earth, his plow the devil's claw;
He'll till the earth, he'll till it till it's raw.
He'll till the earth, he'll till it to its core;
He'll till the earth till it will till no more.
I will be replacing the 'till' that I just used in a poem draft with 'til' to go with the flow then. Thanks Ray and Milo!
My new watercolor: 'Nightmare After Christmas'/Chris
(01-06-2015, 12:22 AM)ChristopherSea Wrote: Milo, I know you don't like Merriam-Webster's authority, but till, til and 'til are all acceptable contractions of until.
To be clearer: Milo wasn't saying they weren't acceptable to an appreciable segment of
the great unwashed, he was expressing his own personal preferences (and ones that,
possessing superior linguistic sensibilities as well, I agree with).
But, as one possessing superior linguistic sensibilities, I can't help but point out that " till " is not
a contraction of "until". " Till* " is its very own word, predates "until" by a few hundred years, and is
quite probably the word from which "until" descended.
As sincere as ever,
Ray
*And, as I've said previously:
And as for 'till', yes, I try to avoid homonyms as they add confusion and
lend themselves too easily to doggerel:
He'll till the earth, his plow the devil's claw;
He'll till the earth, he'll till it till it's raw.
He'll till the earth, he'll till it to its core;
He'll till the earth till it will till no more.
I will be replacing the 'till' that I just used in a poem draft with 'til' to go with the flow then. Thanks Ray and Milo!
I read a line in a poem yesterday something like:
"we will . . . blah blah blah . . till the sun . . "
and i couldn't help thinking, "till the sun? It's a little warm up there for farming"
But there is a word 'till'! it is pronounced and means exactly the the same as the contraction ''til'! Reading this thread I feel like I must be going fucking insane. It defies reason for no end to use 'til instead of till, unless the person using 'til was unaware of the coomplete word till and that it predates the word until; for, no one could reasonably choose a contraction of a word for which there is a complete word that means and is pronounced the same way, SURELY! And no one who knows anything about how to speak english would pronounce 'til any sharper or quicker than till! (it is an subjective idiosyncrasy).
On the more general point, language is for communication, it is true (is it true? [or troo, t'wit-t'woo?]) and if one wants to be clear then surely using a word that is based on a personal preference of pronunciation works against that principle (a principle that either I am arguing for or against, you decide). It may be fine if the piece as a whole is going for a colloquial sentiment (aw'righ' gov, aas it goin'?), but what you wrote didn't strike me as particularly colloquial in nature; but clarity is king!
But everyone knows what 'til means! true, but you say you used it for a specific reason, a reason that few, if any, would say means much at all, due to the fact that 'til is pronounced the same as till.
And as before, I am not saying (as I previously did) that this is grammatically wrong, or against any rules etc. It just doesn't seem to make any practical sense.
We had this joke in the philosophy department that we would pronounce Descartes DeS-CarT-Es as the undergraduates did; should a poem that treated Descartes as a 3 syllable word rather than a 2 syllable word be acceptable? Maybe. But what good does it do?
Til's my sea'd
till my seed is tilled
I'll ate past nine
'til my belly's filled
I never said anything other than using 'til was my preference. To make an absolute statement that no one pronounces 'til more sharply than till is a statement that is difficult to support, and only shows your own preference, not that there is any agreement in the absolutes on the subject. I would suggest that preference is developed from the reading material one has read growing up, and so it is by simple chance that one comes to the preference of one over the other. However, as I also said, it is only in certain situations that I prefer "'til" over "till," one as milo has pointed is when "till" might be confused with plowing when that was not the intention. I have some other reason which I have discussed, but I have also stated those as purely personal preference. I think you are completely reaching and appealing to no set precedent to say because one word has been in usage longer than another it should be preferred: what an altogether silly notion. I think had you not been in such a hurry to "score points" you would have realised how completely obtuse such a statement is, as I know you are not a dull fellow (and I do mean that sincerely. I know, sometimes it is difficult to tell when I am being serious or not, or so I've been told ).
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chris wrote: "I will be replacing the 'till' that I just used in a poem draft with 'til' to go with the flow then. Thanks Ray and Milo! "
Chris, you are aware that "'til" is not a nautical term. "'til' to go with the flow"
Dale
I can't believe this silly thing is still going on. It of course has nothing to do with the original topic, not that it matters.
How long after picking up the brush, the first masterpiece?
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.
Oh, silly things are amusing, and long live the silly debate about 'til and till
You are right, of course, that just because a word was first chronologically, doesn't make it any better than its usurper. I mean, if that were the case I would be suggesting 'until' is a poor choice of words, too. the whole 'predates' thing can be scratched from my argument (to a certain degree, only because I really struggle writing and to go into it would be painful and boring and fruitless). But the rest stands, i.e. there is a perfectly good word with a capital W that is in a general linguistic sense pronounced exactly the same way as the word 'til which is a contraction (and an unnecessary contraction, given there is a WORD that is in a general linguistic sense pronounced exactly the same way as the contraction). I suppose my argument is if you know better, then why use 'til? I can understand why someone who didn't know would use 'til. But I do not understand this 'personal preference' thing based on a subjective pronunciation. And the argument 'who knows how people pronounce things' or whatnot, is the language equivalent to the pub-philosophy question 'yeah, but how do you know you're not dreaming?'
The fact is, I am sure that few, if anyone, reads 'til any differently than till, and the only effective difference I can see in using it is that those who do know better will think it is an error in education. It could be a rebellion, I like that.
Oh, and the 'confusion' argument about till is ridiculous
and in the words of the great Bertrand Russell "stop arguing with me, I am write."
