Stephen Fry: Kinetic Language

Submitted by: DickenMcHunt 6 years ago in

Perennial I-A-B favorite Stephen Fry has had one of his podcasts improved with some visually striking Kinetic Typography
There are 70 comments:
Male 15,832
Sorry Handsompod, but that doesn`t even make sense. Are you trying to say that we spent hundreds of billions of dollars to invade Iraq just so the military could have free gas for driving around in Iraq? Ummm...okay...
0
Reply
Male 1,108
Did I mention Bush? No. Yeah other people said it too, big deal. Our own PM went along with it too. Where were they?

Why don`t we have their oil? Oh that`s right the military fill up at a gas station just off the Florida keys before heading out there.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
Handsompod, whenever you libs start ragging on Bush about WMD, you always CONVENIENTLY forget about this.

BTW, if the war was a nefarious plot to steal their oil, why don`t we have their oil?
0
Reply
Male 3,631
I met a girl today who didn`t know the meaning of the word "prospective."
0
Reply
Male 1,108
Davy and other peace loving Irishmen, if you`re reading this no offence meant. Not all of the Irish obviously. I should have said the IRA.

Proof of Mr. Frys argument.
0
Reply
Male 1,108
Ok, blah blah blah again with the guns, and war and being hard. Protect us from who? The Irish? Oh no you just get involved when it suits you. The Irish were terrorising us for years with bombs in our cities. Where were you then? Oh that`s right you were giving them money weren`t you. Yet we back up your oil war on some bullpoo lies about nukes and terrorists. Strange how when someone else takes the same inititive of your 2nd amendment you cry `no fair they`re terrorists` and recruit others to go and fight for your oil.
Get it from Alaska it must be cheaper to get there than ship half your able men to the other side of the world.
Back on topic, yes words can be misconstrued if you are not clear in what you mean. Here`s an example. I bet you must remember these words Ollie.

Saddam has weapons of mass destruction.

Sounds pretty clear to me, oh hang on that should have read.

There is lots of oil in Iraq.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
Yeah, why worry about protecting yourself? The Yanks will always come save your sorry arses...again.
0
Reply
Male 1,108
Me? Oh I`m a peace loving Englishman that sees no need for guns. I would like to own them for sport shooting, but the constrictions in this country are far too tight. Hell we cant walk down the street with anything sharper than a spoon without being arrested. I do not see how the ancient 2nd amendment can still be valid as; We are not invading you, you guys seem to either shoot each other on purpose, a loved one is shot by accident.
I do agree that in point of law clarity is imperitive. But for once chap, please, pick another subject. :)
0
Reply
Male 15,832
Handsompod, you missed my point completely. Fry was saying that grammar isn`t really important when communicating ideas. I simply provided a counter example.

That one came to mind because so many people either 1) do not understand its clear meaning (stupid liberals), or 2) do understand it and lie about it (evil liberals). So, which one are you?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
Take a look almost anywhere online. These people are not dancing joyously a little off the path of formally correct English purely for the pleasure of it. They`re blanketing the whole park in defoliant, burning the remains and flooding most of the park withsewage to create a desolate and much smaller wasteland of a language out of spite.

Try translating a transcript of this video into txt with only the vocabulary of txt and without losing any of the meaning.

It`s impossible. Not just ugly and tiresome to translate into English, but impossible. It is a simple grunting semilanguage, a neo-Newspeak that suppresses thought by suppressing the expression of thought. It simply cannot convey the amount of meaning that a complete human language can.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Wow, if we could all sound like that man we would all speak a whole lot more. I love the point he makes. I think everyone would be a lot more into language if we were not taught from our first day of school our writing must be perfect to be acceptable. [/quote]

Rubbish.

I went to a very traditional grammar school. I think the fact that it was mandatory to study either Latin or ancient Greek for a minimum of 5 years illustrates just how traditional and formal the place was.

We were not taught that our writing must be perfect to be acceptable. Not even in such a school. I have never, ever, anywhere heard of such a thing being taught.

You appear to be mistaking a requirement for a reasonable degree of competence with a requirement for perfection as the minimum standard at all times.
0
Reply
Male 30
the type does not emphasize in the right manner. I am a Graphic Design major, and that was just random placement of different sized text. still a good video tho.

@DixxyRarr lysdexia is a bitch, but seriously, it is a pain in the ass. I am also more than slightly dyslexic.
0
Reply
Male 208
lmfao @SvampeBob
0
Reply
Male 1,108
[quote]Consider the 2nd Amendment. [/quote]

Again!? Really OldOllie? You just can`t help yourself can you. A post about language and you have to bring in the constitution and your right to own guns to shoot the invading British.
I`m amazed, not suprised but seriously dude, you amaze me. Is it your hobby or something?
0
Reply
Male 418
Wow, if we could all sound like that man we would all speak a whole lot more. I love the point he makes. I think everyone would be a lot more into language if we were not taught from our first day of school our writing must be perfect to be acceptable.
0
Reply
Female 2,674
I liked this a lot. Creating beautiful language is definitely not my strong point. I`m a horrific speller, and more than slightly dyslexic. BUT- I do appreciate reading and listening to beautiful language... so keep on keepin` on, word lovers, for I couldn`t imagine a world without you :)
0
Reply
Male 1,299
I guess Beternal didn`t actually watch the video...
0
Reply
Female 437
I wanted to hear what he was saying at the end, I ended up leaning into my speakers a bit more to try and work it out, something about aitches
0
Reply
Male 3,076
hehe I like the ending but STFU! oh GOD I`M BORED NOW!
0
Reply
Male 1,557
@beternal In this clip, Fry was saying AGAINST that very thing you dislike. And he`s hardly `fretting` over it, this is just one of his podcasts where he simply mentions his thoughts and feelings. I`m pretty sure he`s not claiming language usage to be one of the worst things in the world.

@mamba Chitty Chitty Bang Bang
0
Reply
Male 2,586
and if anyone corrects that additional `e` I accidentally typed in there, you deserve a fork to the testicles.
0
Reply
Male 2,586
God I hate Stephen Fry...

Seriously, there are more important things in this world to fret about than grammar and the use of English.

He speaks like an arsey friend of mine... everything is a correection or an intellectual insult. The phrase "well ACTUALLY" is a common occurrence and it pisses me off royally. Yes, sometimes you get lazy with English, sometimes you do it for the effect, but when everyone thinks you`re a condescending and impossibly arrogant twat BECAUSE of these annoying rants that serve only to mock those people that do not conform to your way of thinking, you deserve your isolated and depressingly hermitic lifestyle.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
"I don`t want to get killed because of a typo. It would be embarrassing." - Commander Susan Ivanova, Babylon 5.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Hehe, we let that one slip Ollie. Despite our differences, I can recognise an intelligent person when I meet one. People who try to demean another person`s rational thought over something as trivial as an obvious typo, only serve to make themselves look like asshats. IMO, of course.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]unambiguously communication[/quote]
LOL! Here I am trying to sound intelligent, and I drop a turd like that! Actually, I was way over the 1000 character limit, and I had to go back and edit. It originally said, "...unambiguously communicate information." Oh, well, you know what I meant anyway.
0
Reply
Male 26
I can`t help but notice the language use on this page is a lot tidier than on many others.
And that there are for once, no corrections of others.
I can dig it.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
I used to me more of grammar-nazi than I am now. The only circumstance now where I do so is the approximately weekly occurrence of someone posting on here: "Davymid your a retard"

I simply can`t resist the reply:

*you`re
0
Reply
Female 1,008
I`m really tried, so I`m not going to have a chance to make a good argument. I do agree that we should accept language as the fluid thing it is and enjoy it and have fun with it. I do not agree that we should let all these grammatical errors go. I don`t jump at the smallest grammatical or punctuation errors, in fact I make them myself all the time, but I still feel like we should tech people eh proper use of certain words. People should know when to use "amount" and "number" and they should know the difference between "uninterested" and "disinterested." I for one would much rather have a disinterested judge than an uninterested one.
0
Reply
Male 358
I should have expected everyone to whip out their Oxford Dictionaries on a Stephen Fry speech concerning linguistics.
0
Reply
Female 803
The only time I actually go off and correct slight grammar errors (such as the misuse of their/they`re/there) is when I KNOW it will infuriate the person misusing them. Even then, it is only because the person is deserving.
0
Reply
Female 196
and why they wouldn`t want to do that.

The people who go around criticizing others for minor spelling and/or grammar mistakes make me angry too. I only ever ask people what they mean or to clarify themselves if I am actually confused about what they are trying to tell me.
0
Reply
Female 196
While I am at times anal about the use of language it is because of the clarity argument mentioned and to be honest, the principle of the thing. If we are working towards a way to communicate to everyone, then everyone should know what everything means and to differ from that would be opposing the idea of this kind of interpersonal communication.

I do like how the manipulation of language can provoke my thoughts and make me imagine interesting things, though. Like using nouns in place of verbs and vice versa.

While I can see the attraction in playing with language there are some popular phrases that confuse me. These phrases do not communicate ideas as well as others could. Like when people started saying "nasty" or "sick" in a positive way I would have to ask them to explain to me what they meant which negated their original words. If they used words and structure that we both understood, we could communicate more effectively and I don`t underst
0
Reply
Male 15,832
y.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
In most cases, proper grammar isn`t required for unambiguously communication -- most, but not all. In matters of law, a choice of a word or the placement of a comma can be critical. Since we have eschewed rigorous study of grammar, though, the law has become just as muddy as the rest of the language, to be interpreted by context rather than content.

Consider the 2nd Amendment. The opening words, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,..." comprise a nonrestrictive appositive gerund phrase. While that may sound trivial and irrelevant to you, to the authors of those words, it was absolutely critical, since a nonrestrictive appositive has absolutely no effect on, i.e., it does not restrict, the meaning of the rest of the sentence that follows.

While arguing over "less" or "fewer" is wholly without consequence, failure to understand the unambiguous meaning of a nonrestrictive appositive can lead to tyrann
0
Reply
Male 17,512
It`s fair to say that the grammar dogmatists need to relax and quit being so anal about language, There are too many times when it gets boorish and actually rude to interject just for the sake of `correctness`.

Usually, Those small linguistic errors are not pointed out for the purpose of `clarity`, But are used as point to ridicule or defame. I find that sort of pigeonholing to be reprehensible.
0
Reply
Male 2,796
ireally enjoyedthis toagr eatextent
0
Reply
Male 628
I would call that a *fantasmagorical whipping of grammar nazis everywhere- also, 10 points if you can tell me where i got *thatword from =]
0
Reply
Male 2,619
If you ever have the opportunity to meet Mr Fry you should call him "the UKs National Treasure"
Seriously.

He likes that
0
Reply
Male 12,365
There`s a huge amount of ground between demanding precise adherence to perfectly correct grammar and syntax at all times and attacking anyone who uses basic English mostly in line with established syntax and grammar, while using a crude partial language that doesn`t allow the expression of subtlety or anything other than simple ideas. Rejecting the former does not require embracing the latter.

almightybob1 makes the point well in their post (Wednesday, October 27, 2010 1:29:12 PM).
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]That being said, if one is able to get their point across then the point of language has been fulfilled.[/quote]

I disagree. That point could be fulfilled with grunts and gestures in daily life. Human language needs enough complexity to be able to match the complexity of human thought.

It`s all very well playing with language for the enjoyment of doing so when, like Stephen Fry, you`re very good at it.

What bothers many people, including myself, is the far larger number of people who either can`t be bothered to learn more than a primitive partial language or who choose it deliberately and, in both cases, try to drag all language down to that level by deriding and reviling anyone who makes any attempt at using a complete language. It`s now normal to call anyone who is even fairly competent with language a Nazi. How low can you get?
0
Reply
Male 1,347
i always thought it was couldn`t care less, though from the context it should be easily understood and thus correct in some form. As in, I could care less but it`s not worth effort
0
Reply
Male 290
(1k limit)

I have to admit however that the evolution of things like "tl;dr" (along with countless others) is something I thoroughly enjoy; a 5 character abbreviation can adequately describe most people`s view of my previous post.
0
Reply
Male 290
"My counter-point is that it is a courtesy to the readers of your work that you do spell correctly, because it relieves them of the burden of deciphering what you wrote. Language should flow, and grammar is what controls that flow"
That.
Although you do need correct syntax and spelling to complete it.
That being said, if one is able to get their point across then the point of language has been fulfilled.
I think the misuse or informality of language used to communicate with others online is a source of insulting statements. Like political or religious views are.
Personally it bothers me when people use "of" in the place of "`ve" or "your" instead of "you`re" because to me it shows a lack of effort. But I recognise this is is due to my personal idiosyncrasy, parts of which probably annoy others in equal measure. So I usually don`t bother to say anything.
0
Reply
Male 15,510
That is why I love Spanish over English any day
0
Reply
Female 154
That was very enjoyable.
0
Reply
Male 1,240
Irregardless doesn`t have a meaning. Despite that, it`s in the Firefox dictionary and it corrected me when I misspelt it.

It did not recognize misspelt, despite it being a real word (UK spelling of misspelled).
0
Reply
Male 4,290
I don`t care about disinterested/uninterested. Both are negating prefix + interested, that`s fine. But irregardless and could care less piss me off. Writing something that means the exact opposite of what you mean through ignorance is retarding our communication, not advancing it.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
It is English, it`s just evolved ;)

I understood his point. It was "stop being so pedantic, people don`t have to spell correctly all the time".
My counter-point is that it is a courtesy to the readers of your work that you do spell correctly, because it relieves them of the burden of deciphering what you wrote. Language should flow, and grammar is what controls that flow.
0
Reply
Male 194
Besides, I think you missed the point entirely if you believe he was talking about epically bad grammar. And I don`t think you missed the point :]
0
Reply
Male 194
almightybob1, there is a difference of having obsessively correct grammar and doing your best to break all the rules there are. If that had been the English we all learned as children, we could probably read it, but even the most educated 1337-speaker has issues reading your post simply because it isn`t English.
0
Reply
Female 3,001
"From the very beginning I was waiting for it to zoom out so I could see what it was spelling."
sameee :)
0
Reply
Male 1,240
So we all can agree that calling yourself a grammar Nazi is bad in two ways:

1) The fact that you`re defending something that need not be defended, that you`re stopping the evolution that`s essential for the language you profess to love to live, that you are using rules that are there for clarity to hinder others from expressing themselves freely and still getting it wrong.

2) The fact that you`re proud of comparing yourself with a xenophobic, totalitarian and generally drated up ideology from the 30s that led to the continuance of a world war and a mass murder so bad it has become synonymous with holocaust.

Good job. Well done. Have some tea and some lady biscuits.

Are you done?

Good. Now, get the drat off our webpage, because we don`t want you here.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
ye stevn iz totaly write therz no such fing as bad spelin or gramer ur just 2 ignerant 2 undertsand it from da wurds roun about lol who rele cares about ur an ur or there there an there it duznt mater n if u fink it duz ur as bad as hitler lol u fink it makes it hardr 2 reed wel just put a bt mor effort in n don b so layz lol mayb we shud al just RELAX RITE?!?!?!?!?!?
0
Reply
Male 757
lulz, teh pro iz prechen mah ways uf spaking! just kidding, i like these things
0
Reply
Male 3,462
Oooo I love Stravinsky and Mahler!
0
Reply
Male 236
From the very beginning I was waiting for it to zoom out so I could see what it was spelling.
0
Reply
Male 4,807
Im now forever using "your" as "you`re".
Butt only when I do it hear four you.
0
Reply
Male 10,339
This was a Grammar Nazi`s Anti-festo.
0
Reply
Female 7,866
I agree to an extent- but whilst language should be a joy, I get frustrated when it is not clear, when the meaning is lost in abbreviation and misuse. I loathe a limited vocabulary- they are so mant wonderful words- and yet people stick to so few.
0
Reply
Male 25,416
Wow, thats how subtitles should be!
0
Reply
Male 79
Grammar nazis you have been told. From now on you are to be known only as pedants.
0
Reply
Male 6,694
I love it.
0
Reply
Female 276
Im in love with stephen fry <3
0
Reply
Male 1,526
I started to wonder that the shape of the word animation would take at the "n".
I was happy when you zoomed out and I saw language :)

Semweiskandell có bwerthò, I like the sound of that to. Hell if I know what it means.
0
Reply
Male 84
Grammar Nazis... be ashamed.
0
Reply
Male 2,422
This was great. I have a buddy that makes new words out of two similar meaning and sounding words. Collapsized, for instance, which is too awesome not to be a word. He never does it on purpose, just pulls them out of thin air.
0
Reply
Male 1,587
Makes you think about being a grammar Nazi huh?
0
Reply
Male 2,551
When I went back to the homepage, is it weird that I noticed the link underneath was the one about `innapprorpirate` clothes for a kids show?

Heh.
Stephen Fry is pretty badass though.
0
Reply
Male 684
Brilliant!
0
Reply
Male 1,299
Link: Stephen Fry: Kinetic Language [Rate Link] - Perennial I-A-B favorite Stephen Fry has had one of his podcasts improved with some visually striking Kinetic Typography
0
Reply