Talk:Malapropisms
From Homestar Runner Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
(→Merge?: merge, however, the things listed on this page are not malapropisms) |
(→Merge?: whoops. a little more) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
:::::::'''Merge'''. Deliberatly Poor English has obviously been [[DNA Evidence (running gag)|tampered with]], however. --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 03:25, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | :::::::'''Merge'''. Deliberatly Poor English has obviously been [[DNA Evidence (running gag)|tampered with]], however. --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 03:25, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | ||
Are they ''deliberate'', though? Or are they just through the characters' ignorance (or bad programming)? Sure, they're deliberate by the Chaps, but that can hardly count, can it? --[[User:DorianGray|DorianGray]] 04:29, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | Are they ''deliberate'', though? Or are they just through the characters' ignorance (or bad programming)? Sure, they're deliberate by the Chaps, but that can hardly count, can it? --[[User:DorianGray|DorianGray]] 04:29, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | ||
| - | :I vote '''merge''' on these grounds: '''the things on this page AREN'T malapropisms!''' Malapropisms are when you replace a word with something that SOUNDS like the word, but has a completely different meaning. You can look at [[Wikipedia:Malapropisms#Examples|the examples on Wikipedia]], or [http://www.fun-with-words.com/mala_explain.html this other source I found through Yahoo!]. Allow me to give you an example of my own: | + | :I vote '''merge''' on these grounds: '''the things on this page AREN'T malapropisms!''' Well, at least most of them aren't. Malapropisms are when you replace a word with something that SOUNDS like the word, but has a completely different meaning. You can look at [[Wikipedia:Malapropisms#Examples|the examples on Wikipedia]], or [http://www.fun-with-words.com/mala_explain.html this other source I found through Yahoo!]. Allow me to give you an example of my own: |
<blockquote> I think, therefore, I lamb. </blockquote> | <blockquote> I think, therefore, I lamb. </blockquote> | ||
Revision as of 21:38, 27 May 2007
Merge?
Should this be merged into Deliberately Poor English? Loafing
11:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah I'm leaning towards merging into Deliberately Poor English. Merge
Sam the Man 
- I apologize. I was unaware of the Deliberately Poor English article. It should be merged.· · T2|Things 13:17, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- On the contrary, i think that that page is disorganized. there's a lot of types of deliberately poor english, including replaced words, removed words, misspelled words, non inverted questions, incorrect pluralizations (see Mans) etc. i think they should aqll be separated, maybe not by pages, but certainly by sections. My vote merge and re-write the other page — Defender1031*Talk 16:09, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, that page looks like it might need a re-write. And there's absolutely no reason to apologize, Ten Ten! Loafing 20:00, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- I vote merge. I tampered with the DNA EVIDENCE! 23:05, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- Merge. Deliberatly Poor English has obviously been tampered with, however. --
Super Martyo boing! 03:25, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
- Merge. Deliberatly Poor English has obviously been tampered with, however. --
- I vote merge. I tampered with the DNA EVIDENCE! 23:05, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, that page looks like it might need a re-write. And there's absolutely no reason to apologize, Ten Ten! Loafing
- On the contrary, i think that that page is disorganized. there's a lot of types of deliberately poor english, including replaced words, removed words, misspelled words, non inverted questions, incorrect pluralizations (see Mans) etc. i think they should aqll be separated, maybe not by pages, but certainly by sections. My vote merge and re-write the other page — Defender1031*Talk 16:09, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- I apologize. I was unaware of the Deliberately Poor English article. It should be merged.· · T2|Things 13:17, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Are they deliberate, though? Or are they just through the characters' ignorance (or bad programming)? Sure, they're deliberate by the Chaps, but that can hardly count, can it? --DorianGray 04:29, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
- I vote merge on these grounds: the things on this page AREN'T malapropisms! Well, at least most of them aren't. Malapropisms are when you replace a word with something that SOUNDS like the word, but has a completely different meaning. You can look at the examples on Wikipedia, or this other source I found through Yahoo!. Allow me to give you an example of my own:
I think, therefore, I lamb.
- Now, the correct phrase was "I think, therefore, I am", with "am" meaning to be, however the new phrase contained "lamb", as in the animal. They don't always have to rhyme; here's one from the play The Rivals:
He's as headstrong as an allegory on the banks of the Nile.
- In this, the word "allegory" is incorrectly used. An allegory is, to my understading, something similar to a symbolic representation. The speaker of this line MEANT the word "alligator". As you can see, the two sound similar.
- Therefore, I think these simply need to be placed on Deliberately Poor English (if not already), however, there needs to be NOTHING suggesting they are, in fact, malapropisms. Bluebry 16:38, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
