4 ms·

The Sanskrit word इति (iti), which literally means "thus" or "like this", can be used to offset direct or semi-direct speech (without needing a verb to make the

by waqf 10y ago

The Sanskrit word इति (iti), which literally means "thus" or "like this", can be used to offset direct or semi-direct speech (without needing a verb to make the meaning clear). In respects it's very similar to the English "I was like". Reference I just found: http://staefcraeft.blogspot.com/2010/09/english-like-can-like-function-like.html http://staefcraeft.blogspot.com/2010/09/english-like-can-lik...

Declanomous 10y ago
The author tried to address this in the final paragraph, but I think they completely missed the point of the quotative like. When I use the quotative like (which I do often), I'm not quoting someone, I'm conveying meaning. For instance, I was out with my best friend disc golfing recently. He had just thrown his favorite disc when a dog that was off leash ran over and grabbed his disc. As the dog approached he started exclaiming. The dog was kind of paying attention to him, and went for his disc several times before grabbing it. I can't relate exactly what he said. It was something similar to "Hey! No! Don't! Don't grab my disc! No! For the love of God, NO! WHY!?" Despite my best efforts, that quote is wholly inaccurate. When I related the story to his wife, I used the following syntax: "And he was like 'No! NO! Nooooooooooooooooooooo!' as the dog grabbed his disc." Had I claimed my friend had "said" that, he could have rightfully objected, as it wasn't a true representation of what he said. However, my recollection accurately captured the panic as the dog ran over to his disc, and the despair that was immediately apparent as the dog grabbed his disc. Using the quotative like allows me to acknowledge my unreliability as a narrator, while also conveying my interpretation of the events more truthfully and quickly than would be possible if I were actually quoting what happened. A long argument could be related using the following syntax and everyone would still have an idea of what happened, without losing any of the emotional impact that a more dispassionate non-quotative telling would have: "I was like 'yes' and they were like 'no' and I was like 'but yes' and they were like 'but no' and I was like, 'I'm not going anywhere until this is resolved' and they were like 'well OK'." Anyways, I think the author kind of missed the boat on that one, since I think it's the most versatile use of the word like, and the one that is most easily misunderstood.
- waqf 10y ago
  That's sort of what I meant by semi-direct speech. It conveys the sentiment rather than the words (like indirect speech), but it uses the tense and person markers that the original occurrence would have used (like direct speech).

by waqf 10y ago

Declanomous 10y ago

The author tried to address this in the final paragraph, but I think they completely missed the point of the quotative like. When I use the quotative like (which I do often), I'm not quoting someone, I'm conveying meaning. For instance, I was out with my best friend disc golfing recently. He had just thrown his favorite disc when a dog that was off leash ran over and grabbed his disc. As the dog approached he started exclaiming. The dog was kind of paying attention to him, and went for his disc several times before grabbing it. I can't relate exactly what he said. It was something similar to "Hey! No! Don't! Don't grab my disc! No! For the love of God, NO! WHY!?" Despite my best efforts, that quote is wholly inaccurate. When I related the story to his wife, I used the following syntax: "And he was like 'No! NO! Nooooooooooooooooooooo!' as the dog grabbed his disc." Had I claimed my friend had "said" that, he could have rightfully objected, as it wasn't a true representation of what he said. However, my recollection accurately captured the panic as the dog ran over to his disc, and the despair that was immediately apparent as the dog grabbed his disc. Using the quotative like allows me to acknowledge my unreliability as a narrator, while also conveying my interpretation of the events more truthfully and quickly than would be possible if I were actually quoting what happened. A long argument could be related using the following syntax and everyone would still have an idea of what happened, without losing any of the emotional impact that a more dispassionate non-quotative telling would have: "I was like 'yes' and they were like 'no' and I was like 'but yes' and they were like 'but no' and I was like, 'I'm not going anywhere until this is resolved' and they were like 'well OK'." Anyways, I think the author kind of missed the boat on that one, since I think it's the most versatile use of the word like, and the one that is most easily misunderstood.

waqf 10y ago
That's sort of what I meant by semi-direct speech. It conveys the sentiment rather than the words (like indirect speech), but it uses the tense and person markers that the original occurrence would have used (like direct speech).