jayseven Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 Pick the word, and I'll show you a definition, howverydareyou. (running out of smilies) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 (edited) Pick the word, and I'll show you a definition, howverydareyou. (running out of smilies) "Miaowed" - a spelling-fail/tense-fail, if anything. "That did accidentally go 'meow'" (or miaow, if you prefer), surely? Edited October 25, 2010 by The fish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayseven Posted October 25, 2010 Author Share Posted October 25, 2010 I'll just let you go ahead and google that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairdriver Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 I think you'll find the formal term is "mewed". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayseven Posted October 25, 2010 Author Share Posted October 25, 2010 I think you'll find that not all words are formail, mate. FORMAIL SHIT I FAILED Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supergrunch Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 Jayseven wins at miaowing and language. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayseven Posted October 25, 2010 Author Share Posted October 25, 2010 I believe that's the judge LAYING THE LAW, BITCHES. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 This thread is so full of win! (Referring to The fish's and jayseven's conversation.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 (edited) I think you'll find the formal term is "mewed". What he said. Meow/miaow is the sound the cat makes, to have have made that sound is to have mewed. Similarly, a dog hasn't "woofed", it's barked. The table originated from a place well known for paranormal activity. My mum used to work there back in the 70's, and recalls on various occasions witnessing (with other people) rope knotting in mid-air, being hit by scolding hot pebbles where there were no ovens for miles around, boxes stacking themselves, being kicked and bruised by thin air, amongst many other things. Again, how the hell does that make inexplicable, indemonstrable paranormal activity less likely than, say, a gap in a fence? Edited October 25, 2010 by The fish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supergrunch Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 What he said. Meow/miaow is the sound the cat makes, to have have made that sound is to have mewed. Similarly, a dog hasn't "woofed", it's barked. Utter nonsense, where are you getting this idea from? Native English speakers obviously use both as verbs, especially miaow, so how can you say this isn't the case? It's even in the OED... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 Utter nonsense, where are you getting this idea from? Native English speakers obviously use both as verbs, especially miaow, so how can you say this isn't the case? Do they? I honestly cannot recall ever hearing the word "meowed". "Was meowing", yes, but "meowed", not once. If it is a word that is in common usage and has simply slipped me by, then fair enough, by all means, I will admit I am wrong, and will doubtless hear it everywhere I go for the next few weeks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayseven Posted October 25, 2010 Author Share Posted October 25, 2010 Well if you want to go all OED on me; miaowed, meowed NOR mewed are in the OED. The latter, at least, not in the sense to which you claim is 'correct', so shall we start focusing on grammar or can we agree that I was right in teh first place? Pedantry only gets us so far! EDIT: Scratch that, I don't know how dictionaries work. Clearly they're all in the OED. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supergrunch Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 Do they? I honestly cannot recall ever hearing the word "meowed". "Was meowing", yes, but "meowed", not once. If it is a word that is in common usage and has simply slipped me by, then fair enough, by all means, I will admit I am wrong, and will doubtless hear it everywhere I go for the next few weeks... Well for me at least "mew" is only in my passive vocabulary. Let's say you were asking someone if they're able to impersonate a cat - would you say "can you miaow?" or "can you mew?" I'd only ever use the former, and there "miaow" is obviously a verb rather than a noun. But kudos to you for accepting the possibility of falsification of your ideas about language usage, you'd be amazed how many don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 Well for me at least "mew" is only in my passive vocabulary. Let's say you were asking someone if they're able to impersonate a cat - would you say "can you miaow?" or "can you mew?" I'd only ever use the former, and there "miaow" is obviously a verb rather than a noun. But kudos to you for accepting the possibility of falsification of your ideas about language usage, you'd be amazed how many don't. I appreciate people use "can you miaow", but the actual word "meowed" is novel to me. I can't recall hearing "he meowed", only "he was meowing". My job is to teach people to use English as native speakers do, so I have to accept the current usage of language by natives as 'correct'. "I'm loving it" still makes my skin crawl, though. But what happens when the Earth is destroyed by the sun? Just float around in space? Well, considering that the current evidence suggest that ghosts exist only in people's imagination, they'd cease to be, I imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayseven Posted October 25, 2010 Author Share Posted October 25, 2010 Let me get my rust sorted; He mewed/miowed/meowed at me he was meowing at me The difference? One is an ongoing event, the other was not. There's a difference in meaning. Past present participle adjective verb consonant please, carol? They're all erased from my memory. I'm a native speaker, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 Let me get my rust sorted; He mewed/miowed/meowed at me he was meowing at me The difference? One is an ongoing event, the other was not. There's a difference in meaning. Past present participle adjective verb consonant please, carol? They're all erased from my memory. I'm a native speaker, right? I know they're different, I've just never heard a past simple version of "meow" before... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayseven Posted October 25, 2010 Author Share Posted October 25, 2010 Well let's be honest, it's not every day we're caught talking about meows now, is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diageo Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 The fact that you care is embarrassing enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supergrunch Posted October 26, 2010 Share Posted October 26, 2010 My job is to teach people to use English as native speakers do, so I have to accept the current usage of language by natives as 'correct'. "I'm loving it" still makes my skin crawl, though. Same here, as a linguist. There's also no coherent notion of correctness if you're anything other than descriptive, unless you're talking about written language. But what's wrong with "I'm loving it"? It's surely grammatical in your dialect... Let me get my rust sorted; He mewed/miowed/meowed at me he was meowing at me The difference? One is an ongoing event, the other was not. There's a difference in meaning. Past present participle adjective verb consonant please, carol? They're all erased from my memory. I'm a native speaker, right? It's the difference between past (simple) and past continuous/progressive. I know they're different, I've just never heard a past simple version of "meow" before... As jayseven says, that's not terribly surprising. But that doesn't mean it can't be used - open class lexical verbs virtually never exhibit gaps in their paradigms like that, so it would be extremely odd if "meow" as a verb was grammatical but "meowed" wasn't. The only cases which could be exceptions (though I can't think of any) are those where particular forms aren't semantically viable, which isn't the case here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted October 26, 2010 Share Posted October 26, 2010 (edited) But what's wrong with "I'm loving it"? It's surely grammatical in your dialect... 'Love' is a stative verb - 'I love it' would be the correct version (this is changing, though) as to love it requires no action on your part, and is continuous. It's wrong/sounds strange to my ear for the same reason "I'm having brown hair" or "he's not coming to work today, he says he's having a really bad headache". Edited October 26, 2010 by The fish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairdriver Posted October 26, 2010 Share Posted October 26, 2010 'Love' is a stative verb - 'I love it' would be the correct version (this is changing, though) as to love it requires no action on your part. "I'm loving it" has that precise connotation in my mind, that you're actively going out your way to love it. I see it as acceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted October 26, 2010 Share Posted October 26, 2010 "I'm loving it" has that precise connotation in my mind, that you're actively going out your way to love it. I see it as acceptable. I have to say, you strike me as one of those people who's turned to a friend in a bar and has said "I'm liking the music in here". If you're used to throwing the difference between stative and dynamic verbs out the window, then you're less likely to be bothered by it. It's a distinction commonly ignored by metrosexuals (like your dear self) and English speakers from the Indian sub-continent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supergrunch Posted October 26, 2010 Share Posted October 26, 2010 'Love' is a stative verb - 'I love it' would be the correct version (this is changing, though) as to love it requires no action on your part, and is continuous. It's wrong/sounds strange to my ear for the same reason "I'm having brown hair" or "he's not coming to work today, he says he's having a really bad headache". Huh, strange, "love" is definitely dynamic for me. How many of Dowty's tests fail for you? For me they all pass: Forms a progressive: I am loving. Is a complement of "force": She forced me to love her. Occurs in imperatives: Love me! Can be pseudo-clefted: What I did was love her. Although my judgements are going a bit after a day of reading syntax papers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diageo Posted October 26, 2010 Share Posted October 26, 2010 This thread is so full of win. You're fine with this? "I'm liking the music in here" Yet this annoys you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairdriver Posted October 26, 2010 Share Posted October 26, 2010 I have to say, you strike me as one of those people who's turned to a friend in a bar and has said "I'm liking the music in here". That has never happened. If I'm ever in a place where I like the music, it being such a rare occurrence, I get very excited by the fact. One time I heard Water by PJ Harvey before the start of the cinema. "Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesss." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts