View Full Version : Personal Pronouns (A Rant)
K2ACX
12-17-2003, 03:39 PM
I cannot for the life of me understand what makes the posters on this site so adverse to the use of a personal pronoun!
"Worked WX2YZ ['dubya-ex-teeeeew-waaaaah-zayid'?] yesterday. #Had to be 30 over. #Bought new rig last week. #Works like a charm. #Never used that there IF-shifter before. #Changed IF gears an' came in like a beauty."
COME ON! #This crap is the grammatical equivalent of showing up to a big job interview in sweatpants (which I suppose some hams of greater 'stature' might do in lieu of a stop-off at the Big-n-Tall)! #Categorically akin to all kinds of other foolishness: calling your rig "she" when clearly IT has no sex, announcing that you're "destinated" or-perhaps the WORST offense- constant use and abuse of the 'royal we' when talkin', er, speaking into a microphone! #
I'm sorry to start a whole new thread over this, but the 'liberal' in me figured if I posted it elsewhere someone would think it offensive. #Now before some wacker starts in on how all this is part of our great communications tradition and predates wireless technology itself, take it with a grain of salt and (hopefully) chuckle! #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Brian K2ACX
Yo Brian!
Enjoyed your post. Chuckled when I read it. Heh....
Your points are well taken, sir. But you have to admit that anything - ANYTHING - beats the "Royal We" that has been part of ham radio parlance since Hiram Percy Maxim was a Novice.
"We're running the new Jujitsu KPLXV-5000GRX... about 200 watts... We just put up a new TH11CQDXXX on our tower... Well, our XYL is calling us to chow, so we better sign with you on the next go-round..."
Can I guess that the absence of "I" is a form of "modesty" on the part of the writer? I have to admit that I feel a little "oogy" when I look at something I just wrote, and I notice every sentence starts with "I."
So let's solve this problem, then move on to trying to figure out why so many people have trouble with "your" versus "you're" and "there" versus "their" versus "they're."
I'm out!
ab2kt
12-17-2003, 05:51 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (w3sy @ Dec. 17 2003,10:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">...But you have to admit that anything - ANYTHING - beats the "Royal We" that has been part of ham radio parlance since Hiram Percy Maxim was a Novice...[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Are you also bothered by the "editorial we" found in newspapers and magazines since the Rosetta Stone? The "Talk of the Town" pieces in The New Yorker must drive you to distraction.
For the life of me I can't understand why people are so upset by colloquialisms when they're written down. (Sorry for ending that sentence with a preposition.)
It's true that for some people, bad writing is a badge of honor. As Roland Barthes said, when people say they write badly, what they really mean is that they think well. But come on. We're talking about what are basically off-the-cuff, conversational media. What you pay in loss of formality is more than compensated by the gain in freshness and spontaneity, in my opinion.
Think of the missing pronouns as redundancies compressed out in the interest of better bandwidth.
w5zzq
12-17-2003, 05:59 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (w3sy @ Dec. 17 2003,10:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yo Brian!
Enjoyed your post. Chuckled when I read it. Heh....
Your points are well taken, sir. But you have to admit that anything - ANYTHING - beats the "Royal We" that has been part of ham radio parlance since Hiram Percy Maxim was a Novice.
"We're running the new Jujitsu KPLXV-5000GRX... about 200 watts... We just put up a new TH11CQDXXX on our tower... Well, our XYL is calling us to chow, so we better sign with you on the next go-round..."
Can I guess that the absence of "I" is a form of "modesty" on the part of the writer? I have to admit that I feel a little "oogy" when I look at something I just wrote, and I notice every sentence starts with "I."
So let's solve this problem, then move on to trying to figure out why so many people have trouble with "your" versus "you're" and "there" versus "their" versus "they're."
I'm out![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
That "we" mess drives me crazy. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
To AB2KT --
Dood.... chill.... It's not a big hairy deal either way. I have yet to pull the plug on a QSO only because the chap on the other end referred to himself as "we," though you have to admit that "our XYL" does not make a whole lot of sense.
In fact, it could be said that hams who call themselves "we" are, once again, doing it out of modesty. Too much "I I I" gets kinda self centered after a while, and some people unconsciously mitigate against that by calling themselves "we."
Maybe the less we analyze it, the less ABSURD it seems. Haw....
On the other hand, if a ham is a Siamese twin, or has a tapeworm, "we" would be more than appropriate.
As for written-down colloquialisms, hey, no problem here. I try to write the way I talk when I post here. Only ONCE did I get picked apart for it, but it was by one of our more anal Left Coast users, and even he seemed to get over it (and get over HIMSELF) eventually. <snicker>
MFC, and good day!
N8CPA
12-17-2003, 06:10 PM
And let me add...
It's "for me!" Or "for us." It's for "my wife and me," not "for my wife and I."
When your English teacher corrected you for saying, "Roger and me went to the playground..." he or she should have further explained that it's "Roger and I" as the subject of the sentence. When "Roger and I" come after the verb or preposition, "I" is "me."
I wonder how today's English speakers would cope with German with its four grammatical cases, or Latin with its five, when they can't even concisely manage English's three.
Funny. I call my favorite "its" "shes." My car, feminine. My rigs, feminine. But "I" v "me" slippages set my eyes rolling toward my forehead.
Okay, that's it for my rant and I--she's all done. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
We have never minded the use of "we" on the air. Nor have we ever been bothered by such phrases as:
"The handle here is......(followed by an actual name)..."
"Hope to see you later down the log..."
"The rig here is......."
"W3GX this is WA3RVR with K3HAV on the side....."
"We'll be by on on your final........"
"WA3LQV tying the ribbons on it, this is WA3SSV"
We think its all part of the fun of ham radio http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
73
P.S. We #learned all these colloquialisms from oldtimers who never set transmitter on 27 Mcs.
K2ACX
12-17-2003, 06:30 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ac3p @ Dec. 17 2003,13:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We have never minded the use of "we" on the air. Nor have we ever been bothered by such phrases as . . .
. . .We think its all part of the fun of ham radio http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Nor have we, truly. Just figger'd it might evoke a smile, so wrote it down there. Still think radio's lotsa fun, just don't mind ribbing it now 'n again there.
Hope to catch you on down the log.
Brian K2ACX
K7KBN
12-17-2003, 06:31 PM
My favorite: "OK on...".
OK on your QTH in Pascagoula. OK on your rig. OK on your XYL calling you for dinner... it's as if the other guy is trying to prove he copied you.
N7CPC
12-17-2003, 06:36 PM
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif 10-4 an' a big QSL gud buddy! Keep em comn' wall to wall an treetop tall! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
....(what ever)....
KC5JSR
12-17-2003, 06:54 PM
I have to add, that when I say "we" I'm referring to the two other guys/gals on the air (My-self and Irene). http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
73'
John C.
N3TTN
12-17-2003, 07:16 PM
Maybe we (and I use "we" at my own peril) should have an English Professors only band, one slip....you use "is" where you should have used "are" and you is OUT! No second chances. And lord help you if you use "ok", okay is not a word, well actually it is....but don't use it anyway OK? Seems to me "we" used to have a president who was (is) an expert on the meaning of "is"...hmm....I wonder if he is (was) a ham. Actually, I think we should cease calling ourselves hams, ham is a type of meat, not a radio operator... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
"WE GONE ! " Whoops, CBer's phrase. "MY BAD!"
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
73 from Jim AG3Y
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
k7dlx
12-17-2003, 08:12 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Originally Posted By W3SY
...though you have to admit that "our XYL" does not make a whole lot of sense....[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Sure it does.
If you live in Colorado City, AZ (http://www.polygamyinfo.com/plygmedia%2003%2096prescott.htm).
HAW right back to ya! #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Richard
N3TTN
12-17-2003, 08:27 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Sure it does.
If you live in Colorado City, AZ.
HAW right back to ya! #
Richard
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Hi Rich, you don't know how "prophetic" that statement is http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif You should check out the book "Under The Banner Of Heaven" by Jon Krakauer....great stuff. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif #BTW, thanks for letting me "borrow" your signature, albeit in slightly modified form.... I found a page with about fifty of these "Borg-isms", but the Dyslexia one is my fave.
73, N3TTN
k7dlx
12-18-2003, 06:27 AM
Well, I got the "7" call in St. George, Utah, and had to deal with the polygs almost daily there, so I'm well aware of what goes on out there - I was in Radio broadcasting there, so the news stories out of Colorado City and Hildale were rather interesting, to say the least.
Don't worry about the sig - I stole it off someone on another message board I frequent. I love plays on words.
73!
Richard
AE6IP
12-18-2003, 06:45 AM
d00d!
i got some bad news fer ya.
The elided subject or object has been a legit part of english grammar since before shakespear.
Party On!