Discussion Forum (Archived)
Guest
Knew you'd look! Spotted in The New Yorker this week.
I thought this was going to be about Miso soup. I was wondering about the odd spelling. Cartoonbank.com is great. My wife gifted one to me for my office years ago. I love it.
Try also searching cartoonbank.com using: punctuation; spelling; usage; slang. All great Nrw Yorker cartoons. Some are suitable as a gift for a cohost.
I suspect that English professors do all sorts of scandalously dirty things with their grammar in the throes of passion, such as shouting out "Who do you love, baby?" rather than "Whom do you love, baby?"
Anyway, how many of you assume that it is the woman speaking in the cartoon, rather than the man? And why do you make that assumption?
Or do you think that's her O-face?
I thought she looked like Susan Boyle singing I Dreamed A Dream.
Anyway, speaking of O-faces, I recall an interesting “documentary†of sorts which featured maybe 16 different women's O-faces - and only their faces. But I always wondered: If you know that your face is being filmed, aren't you going to ham it up a little more than usual? Just like if you observe the particles that make up atoms, they change their behavior?
See what you started, Martha? Someone is going to report these posts.
Actually, the editorial note SAYS it is the woman speaking, but I agree it is really ambiguous. His mouth is also open, but he could simply be panting. She is looking at him with contempt, but that could be the look of the speaker or the victim. I wonder if we could contact Zachary Kanin to ask his intent. But any literary critic will tell you that the intent of the author is secondary, as the work takes on a life of its own, and is subject to interpretation and speculation in areas unintentional.
I think Martha may just have discovered a socio-grammatical litmus test.
Here are some more that relate to various other discussions of late ….
Pronoun and Apostrophe
Subjunctive Mood (Oh, would that it were that simple!)
Latin Today I decline nouns and comment.
Actually, the editorial note SAYS it is the woman speaking
So it does. I didn't notice the note. I can't tell she is angry from the way her face is drawn, though she does have a bit of a "Dick Cheney" sneer on her lips. Also, she is holding him rather affectionately with her hands, which I wouldn't expect from an angry person. But you know what they say: men are from Mars and women are from Venus. We're analyzing this cartoon six ways from Sunday, aren't we?
I wonder if Zachary Kanin would be pleased or appalled.
I further wonder what dirty talk violated rules of grammar. I'm not accustomed to complete sentences in such a context. Was it subject-verb alignment? Was it relative pronoun agreement? Verb tense alignment? Punctuation is happily out of the question. I hope it was not pronoun gender! Picture Michael Scott saying "That's what HE said!"
Now you have me wondering about deaf people in bed: Do they use sign language to "talk dirty"? Doing so would require the use of at least one hand, which otherwise might be useful for other things. And does sign language have its own rules for grammar? I would imagine that it is much looser, for the sake of efficiency.
And does sign language have its own rules for grammar? I would imagine that it is much looser, for the sake of efficiency.
American Sign Language (ASL) has its own rich grammar and syntax. In addition to some brief study of my own, I have had the privilege of auditing lectures by linguists who have made extensive studies of ASL.
My personal observation is that there are many similarities between ASL and Chinese! If there is any merit to my observation, I doubt that I am the first one to make it.
I would not call ASL's grammar “looser,†but it is pretty much totally uninflected — with a notable exception mentioned below. (Here it is very important to understand that there is a distinction between ASL, the language used within the deaf community, and signed English, the language used when translating from English.) Signed English is much more reflective of the grammar and syntax of English itself.
In ASL there are some verbs that allow for the verb subject and object to be incorporated and modify the verb sign slightly, allowing the signer to omit subject and object pronouns — these are one class of common verbs that are considered “inflecting.â€
I would not call ASL's grammar “looser,†but it is pretty much totally uninflected . . . allowing the signer to omit subject and object pronouns
That is consistent with what I meant by looser, as opposed to meaning inconsistent or sloppy. Omitting unnecessary subject and object pronouns, for example, creates that efficiency I was referring to. People who don't have to sign aren't as concerned about efficiency, and can therefore afford to be more concerned about "tighter" grammar rules that add little or nothing to meaning. With ASL I'm guessing it's mostly about getting information across as efficiently as possible. In other words, with ASL, efficiency comes first and grammar follows, which is not necessarily the case with "normal" language.
It's interesting what you say about the similarities between ASL and Chinese. Might that be reflective of some sort of "efficiency" in the Chinese language?
Perhaps the greatest "efficiency" comes from synchronicity. Spoken and written languages are largely linear. The visual nature of ASL allows for various concurrant morphemes. The sign, hand placement, hand motion, mouth, and eyes all play a formal role at the same time. These can indicate, for example, subordination and various sophisticated grammatical constructs, without having separate "words" to introduce and end the construct.
I will have to search for one specifically intended to show these things, but in the meantime, here is a great video that demonstrates some of these things. Pay attention to raised eyebrows and a kind of mouth grimace, as well as the sign positioning and movement.
By the way, this thread has gone quite far afield, has it not?
I found some illustrative photographs in this online book:
Page 54
Head tilt and eye gaze can also be very important indicators of the verb's subject and object (respectively). This is especially important when discussing two third persons. A temporary location may be assigned to each (for only two, one on the right, one on the left) and when the verb is signed the head is simultaneously tilted to the side of the subject, and the eyes look to the side of the object.
Well, that "deaf ninja" certainly uses a multitude of facial expressions. I doubt that the notoriously facile actor Jim Carrey could do any better. My goodness, if every subtle change in his facial movements signifies something to do with grammar or syntax, it would take an enormous amount of practice to listen and speak fluently in ASL! I don't think you need to search for another link; the one you provided is quite sufficient!
And regarding how far afield we've gone, we couldn't very well have stayed on Martha's topic without violating FCC regulations. 
Martha Barnette
Grant Barrett
Grant Barrett
1 Guest(s)