4 ms·

Humans communicate using an imprecise language. Some parts of our language are designed to convey belonging and familiarity - rather than facts. Why do fairy t

by edent 6y ago

Humans communicate using an imprecise language. Some parts of our language are designed to convey belonging and familiarity - rather than facts. Why do fairy tales start with "once upon a time"? It helps the reader feel familiar with the text they're about to encounter. Why do formal speeches start with "Ladies and Gentlemen"? The audience knows the expectation of formality which that structure provides. In this case, the author is using a cliché for a couple of purposes. This first is to let the reader know that this is an informal piece of work and shouldn't be treated as a rigorous scholarly article. The second is, hopefully, to make the reader feel "in the know". Anyone from the target audience reading that might think "I haven't been hiding under a rock! Unlike other people who read this. I am smart!" Not every piece of writing has to be original. Clichés exist to help guide people through unfamiliar territory and to provide them reassurance. And they all lived happily ever after.

latexr 6y ago
Your first examples are timeless and neutral. They don’t convey when they were written and make no assumptions of the reader. The author’s intro will be relevant for a few months at best and has a negative connotation. I doubt anyone will feel empowered or happy by the author’s phrasing. I agree clichés have a purpose. I’m commenting on this one because I feel it has no redeeming qualities.
- TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
  The parent showed two good examples why it isn't completely negative: informality signaling and tribal/relevance awareness signaling. The fact that some people aren't part of the tribe doesn't mean that it serves no purpose. Not all writing has to appeal to or be directed towards everyone.
- wolco 6y ago
  No in this case you are negative. It could read as funny. No way I've been hiding under a rock silly my 4 year old might say. Informative: I have been at the cottage this week what happened? Creates a narrative/introduction: I've been following this story what's new? There are people who will turn it into.. I've only been following this a bit. I suck, I could do better. Why did I waste my time on some other story? I need to do better in life. How you perceive that old boring saying tells us about you.
  - latexr 6y ago
    I agree it could be read in different ways, though that could be said of anything. Even your mood or current context can influence how you perceive what you read. I don’t think being old and boring is a reason to not reevaluate our words; I find doing so can be interesting.
- rimliu 6y ago
  Too much sugar is bad for you.
  - latexr 6y ago
    “Of course too much is bad for you. Too much of anything is bad for you. (…) That’s what “too much” means. (…) “Too much” is precisely that quantity which is excessive. That’s what it means.” From https://youtu.be/XewVicFzRxw?t=2m44s https://youtu.be/XewVicFzRxw?t=2m44s
- mumblemumble 6y ago
  The entirety of the article is relevant for a few months at best. As for the negative connotation, it's certainly there, but it sure seems to me that it's meant to be taken facetiously, presumably made under the assumption that it's relatively unlikely to offend anyone. I would guess that a Venn diagram of people who read this blog (or follow news sites that would link an article on this blog), and people who hadn't heard of the Twitter hack, probably looks a lot like an illustration of Mars and the Sun, drawn to scale. There's always Scalzi's Law waiting in the wings when someone tries to be humorous on the Internet, but, considering that this particular formula doesn't have any clearly discernible minority group as its victim, or anything like that, I'm inclined to say it's safe to stick to HN's 3rd guideline on commenting here.
  - latexr 6y ago
    > As for the negative connotation, it's certainly there, but it sure seems to me that it's meant to be taken facetiously I agree. I don’t think the author (or most people who use the sentence) wrote that to be intentionally disparaging. But I also think it’s healthy to reevaluate the idioms we use on auto-pilot. My commentary is on the phrase, not the author.

by edent 6y ago

latexr 6y ago

Your first examples are timeless and neutral. They don’t convey when they were written and make no assumptions of the reader. The author’s intro will be relevant for a few months at best and has a negative connotation. I doubt anyone will feel empowered or happy by the author’s phrasing. I agree clichés have a purpose. I’m commenting on this one because I feel it has no redeeming qualities.

TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
The parent showed two good examples why it isn't completely negative: informality signaling and tribal/relevance awareness signaling. The fact that some people aren't part of the tribe doesn't mean that it serves no purpose. Not all writing has to appeal to or be directed towards everyone.
wolco 6y ago
No in this case you are negative. It could read as funny. No way I've been hiding under a rock silly my 4 year old might say. Informative: I have been at the cottage this week what happened? Creates a narrative/introduction: I've been following this story what's new? There are people who will turn it into.. I've only been following this a bit. I suck, I could do better. Why did I waste my time on some other story? I need to do better in life. How you perceive that old boring saying tells us about you.
- latexr 6y ago
  I agree it could be read in different ways, though that could be said of anything. Even your mood or current context can influence how you perceive what you read. I don’t think being old and boring is a reason to not reevaluate our words; I find doing so can be interesting.
rimliu 6y ago
Too much sugar is bad for you.
- latexr 6y ago
  “Of course too much is bad for you. Too much of anything is bad for you. (…) That’s what “too much” means. (…) “Too much” is precisely that quantity which is excessive. That’s what it means.” From https://youtu.be/XewVicFzRxw?t=2m44s https://youtu.be/XewVicFzRxw?t=2m44s
mumblemumble 6y ago
The entirety of the article is relevant for a few months at best. As for the negative connotation, it's certainly there, but it sure seems to me that it's meant to be taken facetiously, presumably made under the assumption that it's relatively unlikely to offend anyone. I would guess that a Venn diagram of people who read this blog (or follow news sites that would link an article on this blog), and people who hadn't heard of the Twitter hack, probably looks a lot like an illustration of Mars and the Sun, drawn to scale. There's always Scalzi's Law waiting in the wings when someone tries to be humorous on the Internet, but, considering that this particular formula doesn't have any clearly discernible minority group as its victim, or anything like that, I'm inclined to say it's safe to stick to HN's 3rd guideline on commenting here.
- latexr 6y ago
  > As for the negative connotation, it's certainly there, but it sure seems to me that it's meant to be taken facetiously I agree. I don’t think the author (or most people who use the sentence) wrote that to be intentionally disparaging. But I also think it’s healthy to reevaluate the idioms we use on auto-pilot. My commentary is on the phrase, not the author.