Author Topic: Quotes from work (Read 192007 times)

Jonathon · « **Reply #100 on:** February 02, 2007, 09:56:11 AM »

I have just lost all faith in the accuracy of the quotes we use in our planners. I just came across one that was attributed to "Marlene vos Savant." That's the way her name appears in the book of collected quotes that was used as a source.

Porter · « **Reply #101 on:** February 02, 2007, 10:05:33 AM »

I assume they're talking about Marilyn vos Savant?

Jonathon · « **Reply #102 on:** February 02, 2007, 10:35:42 AM »

Yup. Google returns 68 hits for "Being defeated is often only a temporary condition. Giving up is what makes it permanent. Marlene vos Savant" and 443 for "Being defeated is often only a temporary condition. Giving up is what makes it permanent. Marilyn vos Savant."

Jonathon · « **Reply #103 on:** February 22, 2007, 11:10:54 AM »

"It takes less time to do a thing right than it does to explain why you did it wrong." —Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

I heartily disagree. That's the beauty of excuses—they take remarkably little time and effort.

Farmgirl · « **Reply #104 on:** February 22, 2007, 11:35:57 AM »

Quote

Are you bored with life? Then throw yourself into some work you believe in with all your heart. Live for it, die for it, and you will find happiness that you had thought could never be yours.
- Dale Carnegie

That was on our company home page today. I really really like that quote.

FG

Jonathon · « **Reply #105 on:** February 22, 2007, 01:05:01 PM »

Here's one for Porter:

Quote

Chop your own wood, and it will warm you twice.
—Henry Ford

Jonathon · « **Reply #106 on:** April 17, 2007, 10:39:35 AM »

This one's a bit of a head-scratcher.

Quote

To listen is an effort, and just to hear is no merit. A duck hears also.
—Igor Stravinsky

Porter · « **Reply #107 on:** April 17, 2007, 10:50:53 AM »

Quote

Here's one for Porter:
Quote
Chop your own wood, and it will warm you twice.
—Henry Ford

It's true.

Tante Shvester · « **Reply #108 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:01:02 PM »

Quote

This one's a bit of a head-scratcher.

How so?

Jonathon · « **Reply #109 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:04:05 PM »

It's just such a bizarre example. I mean, is "duck" really at the top of the list of things that hear but don't listen? Do ducks have no merit? Do they make no effort? It just seems really strange to me.

Tante Shvester · « **Reply #110 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:06:22 PM »

I'm guessing that you, unlike Igor, never tried reasoning with a duck. I do believe that his first wife was a duck, so there is a bit of a barb intended there for her and his ex-in-laws.

Jonathon · « **Reply #111 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:21:27 PM »

You guess wrong, my dear Shvester. I have had many interesting and thought-provoking conversations with ducks. Their comical appearance belies a depth of intellect and wisdom not often found in the animal kingdom.

Tante Shvester · « **Reply #112 on:** April 17, 2007, 02:07:35 PM »

Well then, I stand corrected. And lest you accuse me of bigotry, let me state for the record that some of my best friends are quacks.

rivka · « **Reply #113 on:** April 17, 2007, 04:31:19 PM »

Quote

This one's a bit of a head-scratcher.
Quote
To listen is an effort, and just to hear is no merit. A duck hears also.
—Igor Stravinsky

Those nutty Russians.

dkw · « **Reply #114 on:** May 03, 2007, 08:56:26 AM »

I just had a phone conversation lasting less than 2 minutes and the other person used the phrase "per se" at least four times. Incorrectly. It seemed like she was just using it as a filler-sound. Or maybe to mean "at all."

"I'm not a member of your church per se."

"Well, I don't have a ride per se."

Porter · « **Reply #115 on:** May 03, 2007, 09:11:05 AM »

I guess I don't know how it's used correctly, because neither of those sound wrong to me.

Jonathon · « **Reply #116 on:** May 03, 2007, 09:21:14 AM »

It means "by itself" or "intrinsically." I think it's becoming increasingly common* for people to use it to mean something more like "technically" or "actually."

*This could just be an example of the recency illusion.

Porter · « **Reply #117 on:** May 03, 2007, 09:24:19 AM »

I actually looked it up, and then within 30 seconds saw that DKW had used it correctly over on Entropical.

Jonathon · « **Reply #118 on:** May 03, 2007, 09:34:02 AM »

It's easy to see the semantic creep involved, though. Take her post over there:

Quote

He can be frustrating and annoying, but I don't think he's done anything wrong per se.

The meaning here is that being frustrating and annoying are not intrinsically wrong, or that they are not wrong by themselves. But in a looser sense, you can replace "per se" with "technically."

Quote

He can be frustrating and annoying, but I don't think he's done anything technically wrong.

But this doesn't work in reverse—you can't (or maybe shouldn't) replace "technically" with "intrinsically."

Quote

I don't technically have a ride.
*I don't intrinsically have a ride.
*I don't have a ride by itself.

dkw · « **Reply #119 on:** May 03, 2007, 09:54:38 AM »

I guess the sentences I quoted above could be correct in other circumstances. If, say, the woman had been attending our church for awhile but wasn't technically a member. As opposed to never having set foot in the building at all, which is the reality in this case.

Jonathon · « **Reply #120 on:** May 09, 2007, 12:37:44 PM »

I'm always amused to see how many of the inspirational quotes in our planners contradict each other. For example: "Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they're yours" and "Accept your limitations and you go past them." Uh . . . so which is it? Or do we just care more about giving people warm fuzzies than we do about giving them real advice?

Tante Shvester · « **Reply #121 on:** May 09, 2007, 01:55:32 PM »

Quote

Or do we just care more about giving people warm fuzzies than we do about giving them real advice?

Um, DUH!

rivka · « **Reply #122 on:** May 09, 2007, 06:47:17 PM »

Quote

Or do we just care more about giving people warm fuzzies than we do about giving them real advice?

DING, DING, DING! Welcome to the world of self-help publications.

Although honestly, I don't see those two as contradictory. Accepting your limitations is not the same as fighting to not overcome them.

Porter · « **Reply #123 on:** May 09, 2007, 08:21:54 PM »

Quote

Accepting your limitations is not the same as fighting to not overcome them.

But what it is is not fighting to overcome them.

Jonathon · « **Reply #124 on:** May 09, 2007, 08:25:43 PM »

I'm confused. Where did "fighting to not overcome them" come from?