tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5541500.post3441430267971194527..comments2024-03-29T11:29:58.276+09:00Comments on BigHominid's Hairy Chasms: "yeah—no..."Kevin Kimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01328790917314282058noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5541500.post-67945100139527704022019-03-12T20:29:20.260+09:002019-03-12T20:29:20.260+09:00In my case, what prompted my blog post was my own ...In my case, what prompted my blog post was my own annoyance at the seeming prevalence of the expression. I'd say that, even if we take it as some kind of playful utterance, it doesn't seem to have any deep meaning, and it doesn't seem to have much more than a placeholding/delaying function, so that makes it about as substantive as a mental/verbal fart in my book. And given my annoyance at the expression, I'd say it qualifies as a piece of linguistic stupidity. My thinking is that one simply has to weather such expressions when they arise and hope they disappear sooner rather than later.Kevin Kimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01328790917314282058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5541500.post-29554540669535202592019-03-12T18:18:55.504+09:002019-03-12T18:18:55.504+09:00Farts can indeed be very playful, and I wasn't...Farts can indeed be very playful, and I wasn't accusing you of seeing "playful" and "not deep" as mutually exclusive. But you referred to the same phrase as both "a verbal and mental fart" and "this latest bit of linguistic stupidity." That's probably what prompted my comment.<br /><br />As for overthinking... come on, man, you know that comment was in jest. Anyway, that was the tone it was supposed to be in. I'm right there with you in the Overthinkers Club. After all, there would be no blogs were it not for overthinking.Charleshttp://www.liminality.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5541500.post-40648732027562533522019-03-12T14:04:42.743+09:002019-03-12T14:04:42.743+09:00And farts aren't playful? I don't see &qu...And farts aren't playful? I don't see "playful" and "not deep" as mutually exclusive. If anything, I see a great deal of semantic overlap.<br /><br />I'm guessing that you come from the Hit 'Em When They're Down school of blog commenting in which, for example, a person makes a meal and says, "I realize this isn't my best effort," to which your school replies, "This is not your best effort."<br /><br />To wit:<br /><br /><b>ME: "My problem—my mistake—is that I'm trying to parse out the literal, logical value of the new phrase. That's impossible."<br /><br />ALSO ME: "I don't think you're supposed to dwell on the utterance: you're just supposed to let it run in one ear and out the other like the drivel it is."<br /><br />YOU: "Someone is thinking way too much about things that probably shouldn't be thought about that much."</b><br /><br />Sigh...<br /><br />But at least I'm in good company:<br /><br /><b>"What do you mean? Do you wish me a good morning, or mean that it is a good morning whether I want it or not; or that you feel good this morning; or that it is a morning to be good on?"</b><br />—Gandalf the OverthinkerKevin Kimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01328790917314282058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5541500.post-24343980386281935322019-03-12T08:45:13.433+09:002019-03-12T08:45:13.433+09:00Someone is thinking way too much about things that...Someone is thinking way too much about things that probably shouldn't be thought about that much.<br /><br />But since we're doing that here... just because an utterance cannot be parsed literally, that doesn't mean that it is nothing more than "a verbal and mental fart." Human beings are playful creatures, and we like to play with our language. Besides, I thought you liked farts!Charleshttp://www.liminality.orgnoreply@blogger.com