Sunday, September 16, 2012

The flow of my lecture was interrupted once by “Professor, your son has a paper-clip in his mouth"…
That's a problem. Including the idiot student journalists' cell phone numbers is a problem.
[update: they were public contact numbers on the paper's website.]

The link to Langauge Log was brilliant timing.
It baffles me that a man such as yourself, a man who relies on that same First Amendment to pursue your own religious studies without fear of persecution from the state, could somehow justify stifling another person's right to speech. To call that hypocritical would be to do a disservice to the word. Mindfucking obscenely hypocritical starts to approach it a little bit.
I don't think that the Greek rhetoricians had a word for the juxtaposition of disparate styles represented by passages like "not only are you violating the First Amendment, you also come across as a narcissistic fromunda stain". It's reminiscent of Mikhail Bakhtin's notion of heteroglossia, as explained in his essay "Discourse in the Novel":
The internal stratification of any single national language into social dialects, characteristic group behavior, professional jargons, generic languages, languages of generations and age groups, tendentious languages, languages of the authorities, of various circles and of passing fashions, languages that serve the specific sociopolitical purposes of the day, […] — this internal stratification present in every language at any given moment of its historical existence is the indispensable prerequisite for the novel as a genre.
It's not reminiscent it's exemplary. And it brings us back to oratory and politics as practice before theory. That a professional athlete could do it better than a college professor helps to explain why comedians are more serious than journalists.

All repeats. I'm done.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comment moderation is enabled.