*Fuck you and wash the dishes.
An excellent paper.
« Pre-blog media like the novel | Main | Turn body sac inside out »
Comments
Verify your Comment
Previewing your Comment
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Recent Posts
- Operation: Infinite Jestice
- A little-known story about a popular modernist painter
- Epigraph
- Bear baiting
- Youtube Wittgenstein commentary
- Though not quite as good as the confluence of the "rue"s
- "systematic claws"
- et in NPR ego
- Holy crap
- Words I have forgotten and the phrases I have substituted for them
Recent Comments
- ben wolfson on Operation: Infinite Jestice
- ben wolfson on Operation: Infinite Jestice
- horus kemwer on Operation: Infinite Jestice
- redfox on Operation: Infinite Jestice
- Mr. F on Operation: Infinite Jestice
- rob helpy-chalk on Lovelyville, next door to Terribletown
- mariana soffer on A little-known story about a popular modernist painter
- JP Stormcrow on This be close reading
- HenryM on This be close reading
- Max on This be close reading
I like "describe and fuck communism."
Posted by: bitchphd | May 10, 2005 at 03:11 PM
I wouldn't have found it via your comment, but apparently I would have found it without Chopper's link.
Posted by: washerdreyer | May 10, 2005 at 08:50 PM
*Shit on each irregular verb.
It's that sort of care which distinguishes the grammarian dilettante from the true language-shitter.
Posted by: dave zacuto | May 10, 2005 at 11:03 PM
I found his argument to be basically persuasive. Fuck analyzing "fuck you" as an imperative!
Posted by: Adam Kotsko | May 11, 2005 at 11:30 AM
Here's what I think. I think we can treat fuck2 as a jussive subjunctive. "Fuck communism" is roughly semantically equivalent to "let communism be fucked," yes? An imprecation, if you will. This sort of explains the restriction against adverbial elements (*fuck communism tomorrow) because of the nonspecific nature of an imprecation. I don't remember enough syntax to say that more intelligently.
If Jim McCawley were still alive I would totally run over to his office and ask him about this.
Posted by: tammy | May 11, 2005 at 12:09 PM
"Fuck communism" is roughly semantically equivalent to "let communism be fucked," yes?
I am skeptical. And what about "let Lyndon Johnson be fucked on the sofa", or a bare "fuck!"?
Posted by: ben wolfson | May 11, 2005 at 12:25 PM
I think Tammy's argument is convincing, insofar as I understand it; it's not like "Fuck communism" is the sort of imperative which one expects the listener to fulfill.
Posted by: dave zacuto | May 11, 2005 at 12:35 PM
Ben, I'm not sure what you're saying about those two. The point of "Fuck Lyndon Johnson on the sofa" was that it can only be read as an imperative ("Copulate with LBJ on the sofa"). So I suppose you could say "let LBJ be fucked on the sofa," but then you're dealing with a different fuck, is what McCawley's saying, anyway.
Also, I think may might have been a better word to use than let. "May Lyndon Johnson be fucked!" (I'm imagining Jerry Stiller saying this, for some reason, fists in the air.)
As for "fuck!," I'm kind of surprised he brought that up at all, since it seems like a bit of a red herring. As a plain old interjection, it doesn't really need any explanation; there's plenty of syntactic precedent for that.
Posted by: tammy | May 11, 2005 at 01:00 PM
I also don't know what I was thinking of when I said that. Nevermind. Jerry Stiller would be a very good person to say "may Lyndon Johnson be fucked!".
Posted by: ben wolfson | May 11, 2005 at 01:05 PM
Oh for fuck's sake, this conversation is fucking fucked.
Posted by: bitchphd | May 11, 2005 at 03:35 PM
Fuck to oboe?
Posted by: Chopper | May 12, 2005 at 08:42 AM