Re: Vaporizable Offenses

111
tommy wrote: Mon Jan 29, 2024 12:21 pm
losthighway wrote: Sun Jan 28, 2024 2:50 pm
seby wrote: Fri Jan 26, 2024 6:25 pm

Using “try” here is weird. There would need to be a lot of emphasis for the intended meaning to cone across at all.
There is a context where this works for me. After the turn of the century when the "craft brewing" craze exploded the beer market it became common to find not only breweries and tap rooms, but ordinary bars with a row of a dozen taps, monthly features, seasonals etc. This made the act of ordering a beer a kind of tasting experiment where connoisseurs would organize outings to places in order to "try" specific brews. So while I wouldn't ask to "Try a Miller Highlife" it's easy to fall into wording a request for a carrot saison as something you're willing to try.
This is always the scenario he uses the word try, typically at beer bars, breweries, or anywhere with craft beer on tap. He’s legitimately trying the beer for the first time, but he’s committing to a full pour. Which is very much unclear to the person taking his order.
Take him aside and have a talk with him.

Or, maybe everyone should start doing that when in his presence. Maybe he'll figure out how silly he sounds.
Records + CDs for sale
Perfume for sale

Re: Vaporizable Offenses

112
Dave N. wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 3:51 pm There’s a lot on NPR that is worthy of vaporization, but my top three lately are:

Reporters greeting each other with hey. “Hey, Ari!”

An interviewee discussing something thoughtful or somber and the interviewer replying with “Mmmmm…”

Pundits starting their opening sentences with “Look…”
I would add to this a newish trend that just drives me nuts; punctuating the end of a sentence with a rhetorical "...right?". As in "electric vehicles aren't without their own inherent problems, right?" or "securing voting machines is in our collective best interest, right?" You half expect something to come next to refute or question the original statement...but it doesn't. The speaker is just asking for a rhetorical affirmation of what was just said, and by doing that, giving themselves that affirmation. I think it's supposed to make news information sound more conversational, but I don't want that. I don't want basic information in the style of fucking Radiolab. It has two flavors depending on the delivery, one is very 'don't I sound casual AND knowledgeable and like I'm pretending to know you' and the other is a real 'you're being swindled by a youth pastor with a headset mic' vibe that feels very scammy. I was first hearing this on NPR maybe 5 years ago and now I hear it everywhere, but mostly wherever talking heads blather like podcasting or youtube. I hardly engage in either, but I always come across it and it seriously makes me cringe. Like the trend from 10 or so years ago of phrasing statements like questions, where your voice goes up at the end like there would be a question mark there, except there was no question communicated. Barf.
Radio show https://www.wmse.org/program/the-tom-wa ... xperience/
My band https://redstuff.bandcamp.com/
Solo project https://tomwanderer.bandcamp.com/

Re: Vaporizable Offenses

113
Tom Wanderer wrote: Mon Jan 29, 2024 1:54 pm
Dave N. wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 3:51 pm There’s a lot on NPR that is worthy of vaporization, but my top three lately are:

Reporters greeting each other with hey. “Hey, Ari!”

An interviewee discussing something thoughtful or somber and the interviewer replying with “Mmmmm…”

Pundits starting their opening sentences with “Look…”
I would add to this a newish trend that just drives me nuts; punctuating the end of a sentence with a rhetorical "...right?". As in "electric vehicles aren't without their own inherent problems, right?" or "securing voting machines is in our collective best interest, right?" You half expect something to come next to refute or question the original statement...but it doesn't. The speaker is just asking for a rhetorical affirmation of what was just said, and by doing that, giving themselves that affirmation. I think it's supposed to make news information sound more conversational, but I don't want that. I don't want basic information in the style of fucking Radiolab. It has two flavors depending on the delivery, one is very 'don't I sound casual AND knowledgeable and like I'm pretending to know you' and the other is a real 'you're being swindled by a youth pastor with a headset mic' vibe that feels very scammy. I was first hearing this on NPR maybe 5 years ago and now I hear it everywhere, but mostly wherever talking heads blather like podcasting or youtube. I hardly engage in either, but I always come across it and it seriously makes me cringe. Like the trend from 10 or so years ago of phrasing statements like questions, where your voice goes up at the end like there would be a question mark there, except there was no question communicated. Barf.

Re: Vaporizable Offenses

116
A_Man_Who_Tries wrote: Fri Jan 26, 2024 2:16 am Not the point. Helicopter is a rebracketing of helico-pter.

The biopic one tickles me as it's such a recent internet nerd phenomenon. I've spent significant chunks of the last decade shopping a biopic amongst other things, and dealiing with people who in some cases deal with nothing but biopics I'd still say it's a solid 90/10 in favour of 'bio-pic', as far as speech is concerned.

Time had largely rebracketed it, much like helicopter or hamburger, then this fairly recent nerd insistence hit.
Yeah I know but no English speaker uses "pteron" as "wing", or even uses "pt" words at all, so we were never going to adopt "-pter" as an English suffix. No ROFLpter.

But how the heck has time largely rebracketed bio-pic as bi-opic? And since when? Back in my day, five years ago or whatever, people knew what a biography and a picture were, so we'd say bio-pic like bio-pic because it means a fucking bio-pic. But I never heard about any recent nerd drive to stop pronouncing words weirdly on Youtube. If such a movement exists, I'm backing it.

Oh yeah he's got a really interesting bi. They're going to make an opic about it.

Re: Vaporizable Offenses

117
seby wrote: Fri Jan 26, 2024 6:25 pm
enframed wrote: Fri Jan 26, 2024 3:06 pm
tommy wrote: Fri Jan 26, 2024 2:04 pm

I can understand this frustration. But I have a friend who always says a variation of “Yes. May I please have…” which is 100% the proper polite way to say something, but damned if it isn’t annoying the 3rd time you hear it out of him in a single night. What he does get wrong every single time at a bar, “May I please TRY the…” which confuses every bartender’s because he is meaning to order that beer, but they think he’s asking to taste it first.
Do you think he asks to "try" because he's an idiot, or because he enjoys the extra attention? Either way I think he needs some therapy.
Using “try” here is weird. There would need to be a lot of emphasis for the intended meaning to cone across at all.
I think you guys are underestimating the commitment of the true alcoholic.

"I'll try 16 ounces of [x] beer before I commit to ruining my life with it."

16 ounces IS a trial dose. A moment on the lips. Pure ephemera. A confetto in a cyclone of pints.
tbone wrote: Sun Dec 10, 2023 11:58 pm I imagine at some point as a practicality we will all start assuming that this is probably the last thing we gotta mail to some asshole.

Re: Vaporizable Offenses

118
Anthony Flack wrote: Thu Feb 01, 2024 1:49 pm But how the heck has time largely rebracketed bio-pic as bi-opic? And since when? Back in my day, five years ago or whatever, people knew what a biography and a picture were, so we'd say bio-pic like bio-pic because it means a fucking bio-pic. But I never heard about any recent nerd drive to stop pronouncing words weirdly on Youtube. If such a movement exists, I'm backing it.
Back it by all means - it'll certainly win out over time, and that's great. Language changes, thank fuck.

Edit: Thinking on, that's wrong according to linguists. They'd say it wouldn't win out over time. Still, I think it'll get at least one more go-around by dint of a generation of young hires.
at war with bellends

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests