Larian Studios Forums General Chat Chat (Anything) The Argumentative Git thread

so no hope than "salt" becomes a standalone normative proposition?

aphorisms and short sentences...

1. are they meaningless?
No!

2. Or are they a way to express something that can't be expressed otherwise?
No!

3. in the extrem case of minimal oral communication: "salt" and "give me the salt please?"... are these two expressions equivalent?
No!

4. and why or why not?
Shoot - you cannot answer an "or" question with yes or no. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/memad.gif" alt="" />

Clear, short answers to definite questions - are they adequate?

Aphorisms and short sentences should be regarded differently. The definition(s) of aphorisms have been abundantly displayed. They inherently have a meaning, which supposedly is easily obvious to the reader.

Short sentences may not always be that obvious - they will always have some meaning (hence the "no" in 1.), however whether they preclude misunderstanding in their concise formulation is a different matter.

And certainly you can express anything otherwise - especially with more words. This certainly often does not also increase the understanding (in politics and "legaleeze" it's even less understanding, the more words are used), and more often than not, increasing the understanding is not the point in using more words.

Minimal oral communication would require you to say at least "give salt" rather than "salt" - so the two expressions are not equivalent (of equal value) as they do NOT give the same information.

For a test of minimally required information in oral communication, imagine a blind person sitting at the table, listening to conversations. Whatever you can make clear to the blind in minimal use of words, would be the minimum required to have minimum oral communication - otherwise you could as well keep your mouth shut and communicate via sign language. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />

very good logician's argument, glance <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/up.gif" alt="" /> but it could be objected that "salt" is always pronounced with a reference (intonation or gesture) that completed the universe...

...but think of the blind man <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />

You specifically asked "oral" communication - not general communication, which would of course include gestures, among others.

To All Those People Who Keep Sending Me Email About The Football/Aphorism Riot

STOP
I will no longer open your messages and I certainly will not post anymore of them here.

Sorry, fellow forum members, but I had to post the above message. I have even begun to receive death threats. Allow me to explain and recount what has happened. These football fans and aphids are crazy, a real bunch of nutcases. I should have realized it when I got that ugly message from Liverpool which was full of bad words, and I never should have reproduced it here in this forum. I'm not going to even attempt to report on all of the hate mail and just plain screwy stuff I am receiving, but allow me to give you a sample of it.

I received one letter complaining that I misrepresented the role of the aphorism in human society, linguistics, and football. I replied to that sender by saying, "Look this is just a forum for a PC game I play. Don't take it so seriously." The sender then sent me a sarcastic response which said, "Aphorum for a PC game! What's the matter? Can't you aphord tickets for a real life game like football?"

Then there was the correspondence from the starting lineup of the European's offense, the famous triple threat of Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe. Their uneducated contention (apparently good football players aren't necessarily that smart) was that they sweat a lot when they play. They therefore experience diaphoresis (diaphoresis means sweating a lot). So far this is all correct, but they then interpreted that to mean that they could die of aphoresis. Aphoresis, as far as I could make out, is a term they coined to mean excessive aphorisms. Somehow, they then went on to use dying of aphoresis as a justification for the riot.

The death threats
If anything happens to me, which you will know by the absence of any future posts on this forum, I want all my forum friends to know who has been sending me death threats and why. My killers will then be brought to justice. Hopefully by posting their names here they won't dare to make any attempt on my life.

Saalt B'cooms, an african from Nigeria

A. Stan Malone, Irish cult worshipper and linguist(I don't know what the "A" stands for.)

Norm Ativpropos E. Shun (short for Shunalakakis, which I didn't write in full as it is too long. Also I am not sure what the "E" stands for either.), a Greek who worships the old Gods


As to why they are sending me death threats, believe it or not, it centers around the ancient Greek deity, Aphrodite.

Stan Malone, who is also a football fan, claims to worship Aphorodite, the Goddess of aphorism. All of his threats are filled with pithy metaphysical sayings like, "He who dies the real death will never have to die again." And sometimes he just uses standalone normative propositions like, "Die." I think he wants to kill me because he feels that I denigrated the aphorism.

Saalt B'Cooms somehow got ahold of my replies to Stan Malone, and took great offense. Although it was Stan who brought up Aphorodite, Saalt blames me for the invocation of a false European imperialist god and states emphatically in his death threats that the only true god is Afrodite. He also rants on and on about how the Europeans stole the African victory in the football game. There is not a single aphorism in his messages, but I believe that he would like to kill me because the Europeans used the aphorism as an excuse to overturn and oppress the Africans.

I won't even discuss the values, judgements and claims made by Norm Ativpropos E. Shun.

Thanks for your support, fellow forum members, and help save me from Saalt B'Cooms A. Stan Malone Norm Ativpropos E. Shun.


Sincerely,
Cleglaw

This thing (read pain) should be over soon...

Übereil

ok on second thought winner is cleg (the only one that can change "salt" into a "standalone normative proposition"... woops my fault <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shame.gif" alt="" />...some confusion there!... normative has nothing to with it!)
... (on prime i was really wondering... cleg or glance? but...)


PS: the salt question is really not so simple, glance... if you admit that you can't pronounce without a meaningful voice modulation(modulating?/intounnation?) "salt" and there is no reason you won't admit it because if i said "salt" and you hear it, you would know instantly and without any ambiguity if i'm expecting salt or if i have versed all the salt box in my plate so the necessary information is present. but the logical problem is to know if you can modelize voice modulation... and if voice modulation can be a predicate's class. probably not. the non logical problem is: isn 't that a serious limit to human relationship?

Thank God it is over! I just narrowly escaped with my life. I was sitting at the counter in a diner when a huge ebony man with pearly white teeth and a huge scimitar came up and glared at me. I immediately knew who it was. I looked him in the eye, carefully modulated my tone of voice and said,"Saalt!" He understood my cry of recognition immediately since it was his name, but a fellow diner misunderstood me (fortunately as it turned out). My fellow diner passed me the salt shaker. I immediately hurled the salt at Saalt which gave me just enough time to run out the back door into the alley. Saalt was on my heels. There was a ruddy faced fellow with silver streaks in his black hair in the alley waiting for me with a club and a set of bagpipes(saalt and piper I thought to myself). He stood alone, Stan Malone.
At last the two antagonist worshippers of a pagan god met face to face. They forgot about me and immediately went at it with each other. I left and have no idea who won.
----------------------
The next topic for this thread is:

The Pun--the lowest form of humor or the foundation of all humor?

i'd say glance wins this one. but cleg, it isn't fair! u're so good at this, yeah, i guess u should win this.

great one, cleg! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/up.gif" alt="" />

@Cleg,I'm sorry, I trying to keep the Library Association from reading books, as they want to find assassin addresses, they can't stand non-aphorisms being named as such (you shouldn't have used a primitive sport...) - but we're a bloodthirsty bunch. Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/puppyeyes.gif" alt="" /> - it was my duty to report this... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cry.gif" alt="" />
Kiya <feeling for you - in a safe distance>

Keep away from libraries in the next 100 yrs - they have your data <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shhh.gif" alt="" />

You were ... errhm, are the salt of this thread...

not wikipedia definitions but maybe not so false either:

humor: some kind of verbal "sliding" from reality to unreality that is an attempt to be funny i.e to provoke smile or laugh.

pun: some kind of "sliding" in the meaning of a word or a group of word based on their phonetic proximity that is not necessary attempted to be funny.

consequences:
=>As it has some something common with the essence(to be a "sliding"), The Pun may be a good way to acceeds to what is the essence of humor. and so can't be the lowest form of humor.
=>Nethertheless the Pun as foundation of all humor is probably too restrictive. As there are others proper forms of humor that are not based on phonetic proximity
It seems to me that foundation of humor is a larger language "sliding" that is based on phonetic proximity or proximity of meaning.

PS: I'm not sure sliding is very appropriate in that use... transition? "glitch"?...

I spoke of Aprhrodite,and now you are giving me Erudite. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Ah, well, Eru- or Aphro-, both love something, the first books, the latter, hmm... Cleg, I think, you should fear the Eru-Brotherhood more <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/badsmile2.gif" alt="" />
Kiya

[color:"orange"]The Pun--the lowest form of humor or the foundation of all humor? [/color]

neither!

or

either?

No! - neither!

Undisputably, the pun is a form of humor - but it's neither low nor simple nor basic. The foundation of humor would be a twist in understanding - a difference between literal meaning and implied meaning (sometimes it works the other way round though). And that is not to be meant as a full definition of humor, as there are other ways also to create humor.

A pun - is a pun_ch. A strike, a headline, something short and direct - and something that works better when written, respectively read. (Here we're back to the fine modulations of pronunciation! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />)

A pun - is a gun. Anyone not knowing the implication of the twisted word(s) is dead - serious.

what other ways? could you give an example? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

i think humor is always a twist in understanding... and i just can't think about an attempt of humor that will not based on that.

I will give extra consideration to arguments that contain puns.

pun is not so punk...

"contentment contains contempt" is a pun but it's not funny... maybe punk?

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/down.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/down.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/down.gif" alt="" />

Erm... have Cleg announced a new topic <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />?

Übereil

I never found the pun fun but I'm not going to cop out, handcuffing myself by claiming neither/xor, and while I would prefer to avoid contracting any paronomasiacic rash, I nonetheless have to post this in a hurry.

As a sample of what were-discussing, (that is, turning into a discussion), here:
If you leave alphabet soup on the stove and go out, it could spell disaster.

A common punny line that leaves a bad taste in the mouth, the humour, like bad air, if often constrained to a particular region, preferrably one I nether have to visit. In this case, the English language and some complex turns of phase, and therefore shouldn't alternately be seen as either, but certainly not the base for all humours, despite lacking the delightfully acidic bite of true humor IMO (sarcasm), but that is just my opinion, in fact, the pun simply is language specific, and therefour no matter how many we actually serve as examples, it cannot be the foundation.

That criterion must fall to that humor which is available to the largest number regardless of their respective lack of culture, to wit, all of us and moire, simple visual jokes, a la the three stooges, physical comedy, is most accessible to the greatest number.

Ergo I would argue that seeing someone slip on a banana, rather than earing the squish and airing humorous disagreements, is necessarily the foundation, as the founding example of all kinds of humor, the unexpected, rather than the more advanced tumor, the "lowest form", a prehumorous condition. (the scale must exist before we can see the horrible injustice of the pun, (please - I know you were waiting for that one))

Which means of the twain you've forced us to claim, I would own that puns are the lowest of the low, and the key to the argument I think, but not the very root of humor, if you buy this argument, as I am growing to in deed.



If I am crowned pun-king, my first act will be to die my hare red, move the dead rabbit to the garden, pay the guard for his service, drink tea from it, spit the T back in the alphabet soup, light a fire to reheat the soup, take the illuminated letters and post a new topic boldly.

Bilingual puns
I knew a Frenchman who wouldn't stay on the 8th floor as he was on a huit free diet.
Four Spaniards drowned--cuatro sinko.