Posted: Apr 16, 2012 8:58 pm
by Lion IRC
Zwaarddijk wrote:
Lion IRC wrote:Zwaarddijk, I would be interested to hear your thoughts about the rationale - in terms of linguistics - for the use of expletives. How "reasonable" is it to... !X#&!!MF@[b][color=#CC0000][b][/b][/b][/color] ?

Or as a moderator on Undernet #apologetics said to someone recently...

"Wow, you swear a lot. You must really know your topic well."

I can't give an answer in less than five pages for that, but I will probably get to it somewhere just after sociolinguistics.

Duly note, though, that Paul the Apostle calls things dung as well to make a point about them. If a kid these days says something is shitty, you'd probably find that a rather terribly poor phrasing - is it any less poor when Paul used it to make his argument sound more convincing?:

Yea doubtless, and I count all things [but] loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them [but] dung, that I may win Christ,

ἀλλὰ μενοῦνγε καὶ ἡγοῦμαι πάντα ζημίαν εἶναι διὰ τὸ ὑπερέχον τῆς γνώσεως Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ κυρίου μου δι᾽ ὃν τὰ πάντα ἐζημιώθην καὶ ἡγοῦμαι σκύβαλα εἶναι ἵνα Χριστὸν κερδήσω - σκύβαλον being "dung, shit, excrement".

He says compared to dung...this is much more important. Thats not an expletive. Thats a functioning noun.
He doesnt say *$!!!#F$! load of dung.

/me wanders off to find a better language professor.