This really must have been eating you up.
OT - "It begs the question"
Section 1 has a permanent stick lodged deep up his ass.
And is turned side-ways.
interesting, to the say the least... yet he contributes infinitely more than the individual who has nothing better to do than attack a fellow board member.
(assumes all contributions are equal and valid)
This is my favorite kind of Section 1 post (honestly). There's nothing political or nefarious about it - it's just a fun, stupid topic that will probably provide the most entertaining thread of the weekend.
Sometimes Section 1 gets on a rant and tries to get political (ie "UMAA of Boliva Refuses to allow Rich Rod or John U Bacon to Speak").
I will say that these harmless posts are actually entertaining and insightful. I am at a 50% upvote/downvote with Section 1. This post is an Upvote.
And there's nothing wrong with that.
Let's take up a collection for a Bolivian vacation.
It feels like in every post I see from you you're (wrongly) accusing somone of being a troll.
Your usage of "deep" in your post totally begs the question of if should you have used "deeply" instead.
the place for this shit, man. I thought this was either gonna be something about Gibbons or about what if McDowell does not choose us. I am deeply let down.
Wait, do to you also have a problem with people saying or writing Go Blue?
Everyone is entitled to an opinion, so I'm good.
Now I got someplace to go to.
There's no positive to looking ignorant to someone who knows the correct useage of a frequently misused phrase.
I'm sorry you're too ignorant to understand that.
Captures my sentiment completely. I was like... "oh boy!" which degenerated (only in my thoughts) into FUCK YOU!
There! Because it was really eating me up!
This explains the term and its proper usage. We are all off the hook.
This shows that even professional journalists use it wrong 15 out of 17 times. How does this make it ok to use it improperly?
which differs from what OP stated how it should be used.
I pointed out that in precise usage, it does not mean “to raise the question” or “to beg that the question be asked” or even “to evade the question.” Rather, it refers to a circular argument; it means “to use an argument that assumes as proved the very thing one is trying to prove.”
(Checking recent posts to see if I have said, "It begs the question")
With the new voting system, and at this rate, I will pass section 1s point total by Spring '15
Your post begs the question: why are you posting this?
(Sorry, I just couldn't resist.)
Terry Foster always uses it begs the question...not surprised.
As much ad I like Doug Karsch, it is one of his favorite expressions and it drives me crazy every time he says it. Of course, he went to State...
Care less about this post:)
I seen what you did there.
Oops; sorry. I thought you were saying you "seen" what I did here. Oh well; +1 for you anyway.
what they did their. Duh...
Irregardless, it's up.
TAKE THAT, POSEURS
This is totally reasonable, because not using strictly prescriptive grammar obviously makes a person a jerk.
...Can you really deny the possibility?
Godwin's law worked quickly on this thread.
I can't stand all of you Goodwin's Law evoking, puppy hating posters.
And I've got a lot of grievances with you capricious, democracy-hating moderators.
Sounds like a good idea for a thread!
"Welcome to the February Festivus Thread. Let your OT rage direct your keyboard as you gripe about things you could easily skip over. Or take a whack at the moderators. justingoblue? More like justingohome. BiSB? Was the vowel not cool enough for you when you squashed your name to fit on one line of the census form?"
JGB, you only have anything original to say about hockey or softball and you're everyone's least favorite mod- boom, roasted. LSA, you like ponies and stuff nobody has ever heard of- boom, roasted. BiSB, your name is gibberish and [pretends to throw ball] you fell for that- boom, roasted.
could care less that your so upset about the grammar mistake's that people make on are favorite web sight.
I bet you didn't even went to Michigan.
You dont even know what your talking about. I here people talking about this all the time.
I can't take anymore of the grammer errors.. my OCD is killing me
It's grammer you moran.
Its its you, jerk.
You could care less huh ? So how much do you care ? All I know is you have some level of care because you could care less.
Edit: this applies to Logan down below.
My post obviously went way way over you're head. I hope you seen what I did their.
You'll understand when you've been here a while.
Well i been on this site since 09, so if I was ever going to understand I assume I would have by now.
Um accept you seem to expecially care....
I do agree with the OP. It kills me everytime I hear it used wrong. And I ONLY ever hear it used wrong.
An easy example of how the informal fallacy is to be used and one that hits home: "Man, we have zero rushing yards because 'we just suck' at rushing the ball". This person has begged the question with such a statement. They have begged, well, why do we really have zero rushing yards? Or, why do we really suck at rushing the ball? They both mean the same thing and the above "we suck at rushing" doesn't really answer why we have zero rushing yards.
Therefore, we suck at rushing.
You answered the begged question. Well done.
A- because my class is hard, no one gets an A+.
The question is mute...
(that's the one that really pisses me off)
I assume you mean the question is moo. Like a question raised by a cow. It doesn't matter. It's moo.
I believe that is the correct phrase.
Mirriam-Webster disagrees: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/beg (see definition 2). This looks like a case of maybe it meant only one thing years ago, but common usage trumps all.
For all intensive purposes, though, I could care less about you're post on this topic.
Well, you missed the "all intensive purposes" and "you're". He did all of that on purpose.
Spot the other two errors in my post, GoBlu, and I'll give you an upvote!
One hundred years ago, calling someone gay meant that person was happy and carefree. Now, thanks to common usage, it means homosexual. I don't know how long ago "begs the question" was first used by someone who meant "raises the question," but at this point "begs the question" is almost universally used, and understood, to mean "raises the question." Those few holdouts who insist on sticking to the original definition should stop being such pre-Madonnas, IMO.
It's lefter,You know like more lefter.
I am a self respecting professional and I still don't give a flying.....
I have a belly button.
You should probably make a thread about this too
Do you wipe your own ass too?
I'm of the view that language is correct as long as it conveys the user's intended meaning. Yes, there are rules and those can frequently be "broken," but the whole damn system of human communication is centered on lingual rules being borken ad infinitum.
Long story short the OP's complaints may be valid but are also uselessly pedantic and will affect little. It literally makes my head steam.
Pics of your head steaming or it didn't happen.
It's a common phrase people use in conversation and everyone knows what it means. I've heard some of the most intelligent and succesful people in the world use the phrase.
Barack Obama uses it on a regular basis for instance.
Well this thread is just the gift that keeps on giving.
Not touchin' that one!
Intelligent? Successful? I'll leaf that one alone.
It bothers you when people use this phrase in general, or only in formal writing (like, you know, on a sports blog...)?
Descriptive or Prescriptive Grammar?
I'm normally a prescriptivist, but in this case the logical, common sense way of understanding the phrase trumps the ancient origin of the phrase. But the more I think about it, do apostrophies really matter? Great, now my mind is completely bottled.
and YOU are the first person on my guest list.
Bunch of savages in this thread.
WHERE THE HELL IS YOUR DEFINITE ARTICLE.
IT'S "A BUNCH OF SAVAGES" YOU FRICKEN NEANDERTHAL
While I understand your larger point about there being a difference between formal language and more relaxed language, "it begs the question" has a precise, technical meaning. Using it to mean "raises the question" is at best unclear (whereas my informal use of language was not).
For some reason, your name/avatar makes me more inclined to agree with whatever you're stating. Good choices.
His avatar makes me head the voice of the owl in the tootsie pop commercials. Which begs the question, how many licks does it take to get to the center of a tootsie pop?
Don't you pay attention? The answer is three.
BOOM Y'ALL JUST GOT LIT UP CUZ!!!!
You must have meant "INDEFINITE ARTICLE''.
A fair number of us suffer from Thripshaw's Disease. Python picks it up here....
Love Monty Python, but it's hard to tell what's supposed to be gibberish and what's just British.
This thread is a blessing in the skies.
Loving the passion you have.
On any other website I would assume you were a troll.
Here... perhaps a lawyer? I can't think of any other profession for which a well-understood but technically incorrect syllogism would actually be a problem.
On the other hand, accusing people of being jerks over a grammar mistake would be a problem in quite a few professions.
If u want to lecture, be a teacher and show how we're all using it wrong and how we should use it properly.
Begs the question, are you the worlds biggest douche?
Your username is fitting considering your position.
Infer vs imply. This one I can't stand even more than others mentioned. Mostly because they simply mean different things. My boss, who is otherwise a really smart guy, says, "he inferred xxx" all the time when he really means someone implied something. I want to grab him and say "YOU inferred jackass!". /end rant
You tell them Section 1...
It begs the question though, is The Big Lebowski the greatest film of all time?
There's no question. Yes, yes it is.
writer. My father once showed me an email he got from a MD. It had to be one of the most poorly written emails I have seen anyone with a college education write.
Meanwhile, the autodidact Abraham Lincoln wrote the Gettysburg Address.
There are certain things a person needs a college education for. Writing isn't one of them.
I rarely neg but had to do this one. Srsly, some people have such a holier-than-thou attitude that they feel they HAVE to share their superiority with everyone.
As someone with a STEM degree... Aero engineering, and "STEM" makes me think of stem cell research, but, no politics on this site... anyway, I submit there might be another explanation, one the OP failed to consider.
Sometimes, idioms and the meaning of words change by usage. He didn't stop to consider that the phrase, "It begs the question," no longer has the same literal meaning as those particular words. I submit that it's common meaning now means, a problem or question whose answer immediately gives rise to a second, underlying or more important question. When you hear that phrase REPEATEDLY used, and always in that context, then it's got a new meaning.
That's how language changes, right. Or how phrases / idioms take meaning different from their literal words. Like, "Take a shower"? Where are you taking it to? Etc. (That's probably not the best example but it immediately came to mind.) (Along with Jessica Alba in the shower, but, I digress.)
That someone felt the need to ridicule everyone for using a very common phrase, it's nonsense. OK Mr Grammar Nazi... your concern is duly noted, and, ignored.
Thanks alot for the tip.
bottles my mind.
at least you didn't loose your mind!
I have been reading this blog for years.. this post is so dumb that it compelled me to make an account to tell you how dumb this is.
I now pass it on to billy madison to express my feelings:
Haha. One of my favorites.
What a waste of pixels. I feel sorry for the memory that this thread will take up on Brian's memory-storing device at MgoHQ.
Some people can't handle OT threads.
While your real purpose in this post was to appear superior, it had the opposite effect on my opinion of you. Anyone who makes a post like this is quite insecure in their intelligence. You try to pin down the evolution of language, and point a finger at anyone who is not in keeping with anachronistic meanings as wrong. Here's a tidbit for you - language evolves.
What you should really be doing is watching its evolution, and paying attention to the contextual factors that cause changes in meaning. That's what is interesting, and it contributes to being an interesting person. It does not make you an interesting person to be able to point a finger at someone's turn of phrase and call it wrong - it makes you a dull-witted person who is oblivoius to change, whose intelligence is a solipsistic outgrowth of their blinded attachement to a few artificially static facts.
Hey, you spelled oblivious and attachment wrong.
I was thinking of writing the same thing about coincidental posts discussing serendipitous sports stories.
I also am abhored at the poor grammer shown by many posters, irregardless of what the topic is. Your just kidding yourself if you think people wont notice. What bug's me the most though, is the misuse of punctuation -its not that difficult people! But the OP poster is right about misused, worn out phrases. In the end analysis, I beg to differ with those who want to float a trial balloon by begging the question.
What's funny, well not really, more sad, is that there is a large portion of the population that would read that and would flat out agree and act as if nothing was improper. Maybe, they'd recognize something was off, like the "your" for example. This is all anecdotal, of course, and while I'm at it I am not trying to come across as superior. I do not think the OP is either; it's a qualm of his and somewhat of an interesting OT subject that most don't even realize.
I'm not speaking of people here on this blog, the many erros we type daily aside, but the portion of people who were not taught properly. Most of the population used to be intelligent and pay attention to the details I would think. Times have very much changed. Many, many do not these days, as the example of the Dr. above who couldn't wirte a proper letter; at what point did we let it become okay to not communicate via text properly?! (The internet age, I would gather? Possibly before that, for those older than me?)
You misspelled the word "write."
can't be choosers.
I hear older(40+) people misuse this way more than younger people.
Classic mgoblogger...has to create a thread just to call people out on grammitical mistakes.
I first learned about this right here on MGoBlog in a similar post a year ago. By enlarge it's very informative.
bE a sILly tHREad inDedE.
iT bEGs tHe qUEsTyuN tHOUgh - wiLL tHeiR b MOr?
of poor grammar.
Is this the line for the POSBANG?
I know this thread has turned into a total joke, but I agree with the OP. That is one of those things that drive me crazy. Right up there with a coach or player saying they're "humbled" when something great happens to them.
Do you also get mad that people use "enormity" to mean large rather than monstrously wicked? Or "nonplussed" to mean unfazed rather than bewildered? Language changes.
Also useful: http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=2290.
This thread: not useful.
We ain't come to play school Section 1!
in question is panhandling to the lowest common denomination, at least that's my cents of it.
Construct artesian coordinate systems?
All jokes aside, the worst thing about mgoblog is the access of grammar nazis.
I mean really, we should take it away. This would be a better place.
The goal of writing anything is for your reader to clearly understand your thoughts, not to critique some randomly set grammar bullshit.
I can't frickin tell if this is some kind of joke only you get or what. Your post on grammar is full of comma splices. And that's not what a syllogism is.
Can't you go back to complaining about The Free Press? At least then I thought you were a lunatic instead of an idiot.
There are three commas that should be deleted, but it's free of comma splices.
I agree with you about "syllogism" though--it's a weird use of a technical term, and he's committing a use/mention confusion anyway, as "beg the question" is not a syllogism (nor an argument) but a phrase. The type of argument named by that phrase need not be the kind of two-premise argument usually called a syllogism, although Section 1 likes to write as inaccessibly as his Cooley JD allows, so it's not very surprising that he'd use the term pompously to refer to any kind of argument.
I think I have committed comma-splice errors on occasion. But I expect that those are most often intentional confrontations with the rule.
And yes, I suppose that I might have avoided a couple of commas.
"Syllogism" was prompted by the Poynter link, which referred to that term. Syllogisms play into the proper use of "begging the question." I think I agree with you otherwise.
And I'm both amused and gratified about the fact that 24 hours and about 170 posts later, nobody figured out why I posted this. I'll bet that I've had more fun, checking in on this thread during commercials in the golf/basketball telecasts, than anyone else. More than you apparently realize, I feel a lot like Colbert in the .gif just below.
I didn't go to Cooley. Not that there's anything wrong with Cooley.
Well, RPC more or less denies knowing what "syllogism" means, though the example he presents is decent enough. The reason I think it's a misuse of the term is that a syllogism is a very particular kind of argument--the Wikipedia article does an ok job of introducing the basics--and one can beg the question without using or attempting to use syllogistic reasoning. The term does have a derivative sense in which it just means any kind of deductive reasoning, but I would be surprised if anybody who actually understands the primary meaning would use the more general one. I also think it's possible to beg the question when not engaging in deductive reasoning at all, though sometimes textbooks do characterize question-begging as putting forth a deductive argument that takes its conclusion as a premise.
When does the phrase mean what people think it means?
(% of pop misuing term or phrase) x (# of years misused) = New meaning/additional meaning officially added
Perhaps a result of 5 or above should be the benchmark. If 50% of users use a term incorrectly for 10 years then .5x10=5 and a new meaning is added to the definition.
I'm sure an interested and industrious fellow could create a proper equation or link to one that already exists.
For all intensive purposes, Section 1 usually relegates his posts to serious topics about Michigan football. You might have taken this post seriously on accident. But lets nip that notion in the butt. Case and point: The topic is clearly one of common Internet discourse: grammer. You should of recognized it as simply a play on that discourse and not picking up on these topics will wreck havoc on your point total in the future. Irregardless, one should not throw around neg points simply for disagreeing with a post or a topic, though I could care less what you do with your points.
I am pretty sure this thread is actually about RichRod.
who gives a fuck
Should we talk about how the University conducts itself or mistranslations from Latin? It's up in the air!
This post Begs the Question of whether or not overused idioms are just a lazy-assed way out of expressing a coherent thought.
because the Wolverines will be undefeated.
Which begs the question: Will David Brandon sell the Title Trophy to the highest bidder?
It is totally dominate. :)