Re: Psychiatric discourse on the correct use of 'up'

Kdot wrote:

hey all. Sorry to wade into this. Here's some interesting data.

Note: Germanic languages take prepositions on their native verbs. They generally don't on borrowed Latin verbs.
examples:
Eng: Bob climbed up
Lat: Bob ascended
Eng: Bob climbed down (Remember this beastie from another thread?)
Lat: Bob descended

This is part of a general debate French speakers have learning English:
Bob walked across the street
Bob traversait la rue
In Romance languages you just cross the street. It's hard to understand why in English you have to cross-across the street.

Back to the point. Stolen verbs in English don't need prepositions. "Stood" is not stolen. Ergo it takes the preposition.
That said, "Bob crossed the street" has worked its way into the language illegally. If English had language police, this use would have been banned 100 years ago, and the language would still look like Elizabethan times.

Consider: "Bob crossed the street"
By default, middle English speakers would ask: Crossed with what?
Modern English speaker: Crossed intransitively, of course.

In German you can't simply say "to go the street" but rather übergehen die Straße -- Helmut geht über die Straße. Old English words like "go" (gān) and "stand" (standan) like Modern English have context given to them by use with prepositions or adverbs because the words being so ancient have several shades of meaning, and stand up will have a different meaning than stand down even to the extent of having totally different but not opposite meanings.  Bob crossed the street is a slippery hybrid abbreviation ("illegal")  for Bob goes across the street because literally Bob would be making the sign of the crucifix, or an "x" over or on the street.  Words and phrases that morph into less precise meaning is illegal (against institutions of culture) in the sense that we should not give in to deconstructionist mindset when communicating or engage ourselves in NewSpeak that deliberately obfuscates by blurring and obliterating meaning {see: George Orwell).

Re: Psychiatric discourse on the correct use of 'up'

Thanks to the hilarious comments, I’ve concluded that y’all are a bunch of real stand up comics.  Much appreciated.

28 (edited by Temple Wang 2018-12-30 23:14:10)

Re: Psychiatric discourse on the correct use of 'up'

Charles_F_Bell wrote:
Kdot wrote:

hey all. Sorry to wade into this. Here's some interesting data.

Note: Germanic languages take prepositions on their native verbs. They generally don't on borrowed Latin verbs.
examples:
Eng: Bob climbed up
Lat: Bob ascended
Eng: Bob climbed down (Remember this beastie from another thread?)
Lat: Bob descended

This is part of a general debate French speakers have learning English:
Bob walked across the street
Bob traversait la rue
In Romance languages you just cross the street. It's hard to understand why in English you have to cross-across the street.

Back to the point. Stolen verbs in English don't need prepositions. "Stood" is not stolen. Ergo it takes the preposition.
That said, "Bob crossed the street" has worked its way into the language illegally. If English had language police, this use would have been banned 100 years ago, and the language would still look like Elizabethan times.

Consider: "Bob crossed the street"
By default, middle English speakers would ask: Crossed with what?
Modern English speaker: Crossed intransitively, of course.

In German you can't simply say "to go the street" but rather übergehen die Straße -- Helmut geht über die Straße. Old English words like "go" (gān) and "stand" (standan) like Modern English have context given to them by use with prepositions or adverbs because the words being so ancient have several shades of meaning, and stand up will have a different meaning than stand down even to the extent of having totally different but not opposite meanings.  Bob crossed the street is a slippery hybrid abbreviation ("illegal")  for Bob goes across the street because literally Bob would be making the sign of the crucifix, or an "x" over or on the street.  Words and phrases that morph into less precise meaning is illegal (against institutions of culture) in the sense that we should not give in to deconstructionist mindset when communicating or engage ourselves in NewSpeak that deliberately obfuscates by blurring and obliterating meaning {see: George Orwell).

Oh, goody!  TNBW’s streaming “Battle of the Language Pedants” again, staring fan favorite, Pulitzer Prize winning author of (seriously, I shit you not) “Examination of Serious Coincidence Through Dialogue with The Dark Prevailer, Part 24,“ and humorist extraordinaire——*drum roll*——Charles Eff Bell!!!
Hurry, Bob, grab the Jiffy Pop!
...Bob?
http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1733817/images/o-SNORING-REMEDIES-facebook.jpg

Re: Psychiatric discourse on the correct use of 'up'

Clairedeplume wrote:

Thanks to the hilarious comments, I’ve concluded that y’all are a bunch of real stand up comics.  Much appreciated.

...real stand comics (no 'up')

Re: Psychiatric discourse on the correct use of 'up'

Temple Wang wrote:

Oh, goody!  TNBW’s streaming “Battle of the Language Pedants” again, staring fan favorite, Pulitzer Prize winning author of (seriously, I shit you not) “Examination of Serious Coincidence Through Dialogue with The Dark Prevailer, Part 24,“ and humorist extraordinaire——*drum roll*——Charles Eff Bell!!!

A blurb for my profile page. I'd say thank you, but no.

31 (edited by Temple Wang 2018-12-31 00:00:54)

Re: Psychiatric discourse on the correct use of 'up'

Charles_F_Bell wrote:
Temple Wang wrote:

Oh, goody!  TNBW’s streaming “Battle of the Language Pedants” again, staring fan favorite, Pulitzer Prize winning author of (seriously, I shit you not) “Examination of Serious Coincidence Through Dialogue with The Dark Prevailer, Part 24,“ and humorist extraordinaire——*drum roll*——Charles Eff Bell!!!

A blurb for my profile page. I'd say thank you, but no.

Ah, don’t bother.  I doubt anyone’s reading your profile page either ...

Since we have crossed WAY (“up” and) over the Rubicon, in an effort to counterbalance the heady discourse from your pedagogical faction, I’m gonna point out that in certain cases, the “up” can make a real difference, for example:

Up Chuck vs Chuck
Effed Up vs  Eff
Up Chuck’s vs Chuck’s
...which leads me, of course, to the bottom line ...
Chuck Eff vs Eff Chuck

PS: I think I can make a haiku or even a limerick outta that, gimme a bit ...

Re: Psychiatric discourse on the correct use of 'up'

Temple Wang wrote:
Charles_F_Bell wrote:
Temple Wang wrote:

Oh, goody!  TNBW’s streaming “Battle of the Language Pedants” again, staring fan favorite, Pulitzer Prize winning author of (seriously, I shit you not) “Examination of Serious Coincidence Through Dialogue with The Dark Prevailer, Part 24,“ and humorist extraordinaire——*drum roll*——Charles Eff Bell!!!

A blurb for my profile page. I'd say thank you, but no.

Ah, don’t bother.  I doubt anyone’s reading your profile page either ...

You can invite Charly Ring, Bevin Wallace, Bill Weldon, and Van Alsen.

33 (edited by Temple Wang 2018-12-31 00:30:41)

Re: Psychiatric discourse on the correct use of 'up'

Charles_F_Bell wrote:
Temple Wang wrote:
Charles_F_Bell wrote:

A blurb for my profile page. I'd say thank you, but no.

Ah, don’t bother.  I doubt anyone’s reading your profile page either ...

You can invite Charly Ring, Bevin Wallace, Bill Weldon, and Van Alsen.

When I see you go off into your conspiracy theory blathering, it makes me think of this:

“Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you.”
― Joseph Heller, Catch-22

AND, while I’m Heller-ing, one you can relate to ...

“Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity ...”
― Joseph Heller

PS: You’re gonna have to get wittier, Chuck; you’re making me do all the heavy lifting in this relationship ... these lame retorts may work in the “Incels Unite” sub-Reddit, but we got humor standards to uphold here, so get funny or scoot back under the bridge, darn it.

Re: Psychiatric discourse on the correct use of 'up'

Temple Wang wrote:
Charles_F_Bell wrote:
Temple Wang wrote:

Ah, don’t bother.  I doubt anyone’s reading your profile page either ...

You can invite Charly Ring, Bevin Wallace, Bill Weldon, and Van Alsen.

When I see you go off into your conspiracy theory blathering.

A conspiracy requires more than one actor.

35 (edited by Temple Wang 2018-12-31 23:42:55)

Re: Psychiatric discourse on the correct use of 'up'

Charles_F_Bell wrote:
Temple Wang wrote:
Charles_F_Bell wrote:

You can invite Charly Ring, Bevin Wallace, Bill Weldon, and Van Alsen.

When I see you go off into your conspiracy theory blathering.

A conspiracy requires more than one actor.

You take yourself WAY too seriously, Chuck.  Which is kinda ironic, since nobody else does ...
You enjoy your New Year’s Eve ... g’night *kiss*
https://media.giphy.com/media/Rz5mrlv5kPwdi/giphy.gif