|
Return to Protein Wisdom homepage
December 11, 2008
Linguist Proves Obama’s a, uh uh, Genius [Dan Collins]
21 Comments ::: Post a comment »RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI: http://proteinwisdom.com/wp-trackback.php?p=13857 Leave a commentIf you want to leave a feedback to this post or to some other user´s comment, simply fill out the form below. |
||
|
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 12/11 @ 8:13 am #
Reminds me of how Kim Jong Il supposedly scores 18 holes in one every time he goes golfing.
Comment by apotheosis on 12/11 @ 8:16 am #
By employing my, like, unique language analysis skills, I totally just determined that she said girls can’t be working people.
SEXIST!
Comment by MarkD on 12/11 @ 8:18 am #
Obama’s a girl?
Comment by Mossberg500 on 12/11 @ 8:19 am #
It’s amazing what passes for scholarship these days! Let me try:
thor is like, a douchebag.
Hey, that does work! Kewl!!!
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 12/11 @ 8:22 am #
There are so many more people like me, who can barely swim, than there are people like Michael Phelps.
Therefore the way I swim is the “correct” way.
Is that a fair assessment of “Muffy”’s argument?
(aside: this woman goes by “Muffy” in a professional context? Good gravy.)
Comment by alppuccino on 12/11 @ 8:30 am #
Once again, you’re all laboring under the mindset that “The First Black President!!!” is just business as usual and let’s get it going and it’s going to be a breeze. Hey! It’s not going to be easy. Our president doesn’t look like the other guys – GUYS, on those Fye-Dolla Bills. I mean, how do you chisel a fro into the side of a mountain? It ain’t easy. Slack must be cut. Much slack.
Comment by alppuccino on 12/11 @ 8:35 am #
How do you carve a fro into a mountain?
How do you catch a cloud and pull it down?
How do you solve a problem like Obama?
(big finish)
HOW.WILL.YOU.PAY.FOR.RAINBOWS.WHEN…YOU’RE….CROWNED.
—in memory of pdbuttons
Comment by Slartibartfast on 12/11 @ 8:35 am #
Muffy? This has to be a joke.
Comment by Dan Collins on 12/11 @ 8:38 am #
A flick of the wrist, a will-o’-the-wisp, a putz?
Comment by alppuccino on 12/11 @ 8:43 am #
Thugs from Chicago with half-severed fingers,
Former First Lady whose legacy lingers,
Richardson’s nod, well it came with some strings,
Now he’ll be one of my favorite things.
Comment by Bob Reed on 12/11 @ 8:58 am #
SBP your analogy is spot on for the argument Ms. Siegel is attempting to make.
There was a time when educated people valued the ability to articulate ideas clearly…
But Ms. Siegel is essentially advocating the further diminishing of our level of discourse by trying to affirm that prosodic fillers, long recognized to be a thought gathering pause by someone who began blathering before thinking about what exactly theu were going to say, are really discourse particles, and serve an important, useful, and descriptive function in langauge…
This argument is poppycock. Is it usefully descriptive, for instance, to refer to any arbitrary object as “shit”? Based on Ms. Siegel’s logic I suppose it would be…
“Gimme my shit, man..”
“I was all tired and shit..”
It’s not a vulgar interjection any more; it’s the shit now…
It figures this faux-academic works at Temple…Truly a temple to moral relativism, subjectivism, and essentially-stupidity…
She is among the ones who are, like, dumbing our society down, man…
Because of the fairness…
Out of respect for their culture…
But primarily, for the children…
*Hand wringing furiously during the last three lines*
Have a lovely day, y’all
Comment by Bob Reed on 12/11 @ 9:02 am #
Oh, I forgot…
Leave it to Temple to academically prove that O!s Wizard-of-Uhhs routine is actually more thoughtful, comtemplative, and brilliant than was heralded before…
Give.me.an.effin’.break…
Comment by maggie katzen on 12/11 @ 9:04 am #
if that’s the only way you’ll get a word in edgewise it’s useful. I’m just sayin’. I often have a hard time stringing words together and I have to just tell RTO to shut up and let me think. but first… I have to make some noise.
Comment by Bob Reed on 12/11 @ 9:18 am #
Well in your case there is a difference Maggie…
It’s part of the long tradition of spousal, ahem, discussion…
Comment by happyfeet on 12/11 @ 9:31 am #
Here goes nothing. I demand that psycho comment on this article.
Comment by happyfeet on 12/11 @ 9:31 am #
ok everybody refresh
Comment by happyfeet on 12/11 @ 9:41 am #
oh. This article is from 2002. I retract my demand.
Comment by Pablo on 12/11 @ 9:51 am #
There are far more useful words. Blago gets it.
Comment by J."Trashman" Peden on 12/11 @ 10:23 am #
“But languages change because they need to change.”
Sigh…I remember
MaMaEbonics.Comment by McGehee on 12/11 @ 11:20 am #
The word “like,” when used thus, is a “discourse particle,” eh? Well, every particle needs a proper name with the “-on” suffix.
I nominate “moron.”
Comment by Sdferr on 12/11 @ 11:57 am #
I got stuck at “Linguist proves…” and haven’t been able to get any further, so lost in wonder at the thought.