Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : SI Grammar and Spelling Lab -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (1731)	1/16/1999 6:20:00 PM
From: Anaxagoras	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4710

Re: 'ironic' Yes, that has been mentioned, and indeed, I think it was you who did so. :-) And once the word 'ironic' is misused, it isn't long before 'sardonic' and 'sarcastic' are similarly abused. <<I am going with this simpler rule of yours, which I found easily: To use a word, just use it. To mention it, enclose it in single quotes.>> Yes, it is perhaps similar, but it's also a different rule. The Nile is longer than The Niagara. A contrived example, but one drawn to make a point. You can imagine a disagreement over the truth of the above statement prior to a use-mention convention. However, once the use-mention convention is adopted, the problem easily resolves itself. 'The Nile' is longer than 'The Niagara'. False, since the first mentioned expression is 8 characters in length (space counted) whereas the second is 11 characters in length. The Nile is longer than The Niagara. True, for the first river is much longer than the second. The other distinction you observed regarding double quotes is involved in discussions of the traditional semiotic triangle which illustrates the three way relation existing among an expression (i.e. a string of characters), its meaning (often taken to be a concept), and its extension. Taking the simplest of cases, 'dog', 'Hund', and 'chien' (note the single quotes)are three different expressions from three different languages, and each expresses the same concept, namely "dog" (see the double quotes?). I can think about the concept "dog" without there being a furry, happy, tail-wagging mammal in my presence. Furthermore, each of the three expressions has the same extension, one member of which is my dog (no quotes) which I feed every night, walk around the block, etc. Believe it or not, these distinctions are extraordinarily useful for getting your head on straight when discussing certain issues. There are other related distinctions that are just as useful, although seemingly trivial on the surface, e.g. type/token. But I wouldn't worry about these things on the boards. Heck, I sound like a pedant even on this thread, of all places! BTW, be aware that double quotes are used for many purposes. In addition to their use for making names of concepts, they are of course also used in direct quotation. And don't forget about "sneer" quotes. When used in this latter capacity they often replace the derisive use of the expression 'so-called'. His "yacht" was little more than a skiff. His so-called yacht was little more than a skiff. Anaxagoras

To: E who wrote (1731)	1/17/1999 9:04:00 AM
From: Anaxagoras	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4710

Hi E. Another thought or two on 'irony'.... After our discussion yesterday I gave a little more thought to this word. The stock example I've used in the past to nail down one of its meanings is the outbreak of a fire in a fire house. Anyway, most nights when I put my older daughter down to sleep (age two) I recite poems that occur to me- the sound is at least soothing even if the meaning is unclear to a toddler. Last night I was midway through Lincoln's "Gettysburg Address" when I stumbled upon one of the best examples ever: "The world will little note nor long remember what we say here...." Ha! Now that's ironic! Well, after chuckling to myself and getting my child off to sleep I trotted over to the OED. 'Irony' is actually a tricky word, I find. I've had to consult a dictionary on many occasions for its proper use. The OED recognizes three different "semantic categories" for the word. The examples I gave above are appropriate to the second listed meaning, and that's almost always how I use the expression. The third OED listing focuses on Socratic irony. But the reason I'm mentioning the dictionary at all is for a witty explanation of the word found under the first listing for "A figure of speech in which the intended meaning is the opposite of that expressed by the words used": 1656 E. Reyner Rules Govt. Tongue 227 An Irony is a nipping jeast, or a speech that hath the honey of pleasantnesse in its mouth, and a sting of rebuke in its taile. Ahhhhh.... :-) Anaxagoras