Author Topic: Quotes from work (Read 192188 times)

Porter · « **Reply #1175 on:** November 07, 2012, 12:13:41 PM »

Quote from: rivka on November 06, 2012, 11:08:33 AM

Quote
“While this might be quote on quote easy to get, we make sure the families understand what they’re getting into,” Nutt said.
*wince*

I find that both *wince* and

.

Jonathon · « **Reply #1176 on:** November 07, 2012, 12:24:30 PM »

That's my reaction to most eggcorns.

Jonathon · « **Reply #1177 on:** November 14, 2012, 09:41:19 AM »

Quote

"The status of women is one of the questions of the day. Socially and politically it forces itself upon the attention of the world." To whom is this quote attributed, and when was it written? These questions will be answered as we discuss this timeless and timely topic.

This is the opening paragraph to a student symposium paper. I think it might be the worst opening paragraph I've ever read.

rivka · « **Reply #1178 on:** November 14, 2012, 09:54:32 AM »

It's definitely up there.

Jonathon · « **Reply #1179 on:** November 14, 2012, 10:18:23 AM »

From the opening of a section on women of Christianity:

Quote

Women have done, and continue to do, a variety of things, depending on the time, place, and circumstances of life. . . . Like the image of Rosie the Riveter and TV icons such as Donna Reed, women seek to maintain a balance in life, for themselves and their families, by doing whatever is needed.

The first sentence is laughably vapid. The second is just baffling. Are Rosie the Riveter and Donna Reed examples of the women of Christianity?

rivka · « **Reply #1180 on:** November 14, 2012, 11:55:47 AM »

Sure. Aren't pearls and welding tools basic Christian motifs?

Jonathon · « **Reply #1181 on:** November 14, 2012, 12:07:14 PM »

Jonathon · « **Reply #1182 on:** November 15, 2012, 08:47:47 AM »

Opening line of a different student paper:

Quote

Our society is built on the Yankee ideals of rugged individualism and social Darwinism.

BlackBlade · « **Reply #1183 on:** November 15, 2012, 08:57:46 AM »

Jonathon · « **Reply #1184 on:** November 15, 2012, 09:17:24 AM »

Didn't you learn in history class that the Founding Fathers were all eugenicists?

rivka · « **Reply #1185 on:** November 15, 2012, 11:11:05 AM »

Who based their ideals on the research of a man who hadn't even been born yet!

Jonathon · « **Reply #1186 on:** November 15, 2012, 12:06:27 PM »

Because they were inspired, duh-doy!

Noemon · « **Reply #1187 on:** November 17, 2012, 10:01:15 PM »

They were forward thinking.

BlackBlade · « **Reply #1188 on:** November 18, 2012, 08:27:50 AM »

Quote from: Jonathon on November 15, 2012, 09:17:24 AM

Didn't you learn in history class that the Founding Fathers were all eugenicists?

No! And now I want a refund for about twelve years of second rate history classes!

Jonathon · « **Reply #1189 on:** December 19, 2012, 10:17:36 AM »

Quote

No mention of dusting off feet is mentioned in D&C 84:88–93 either.

I love it when mentions are mentioned.

BlackBlade · « **Reply #1190 on:** December 19, 2012, 12:47:41 PM »

Quote from: Jonathon on December 19, 2012, 10:17:36 AM

Quote
No mention of dusting off feet is mentioned in D&C 84:88–93 either.

I love it when mentions are mentioned.

LOL.

I know we don't have context, but what does he mean dusting off feet isn't mentioned in that passage?

Jonathon · « **Reply #1191 on:** December 19, 2012, 12:54:38 PM »

I'm not sure what you mean. Nowhere in that passage does it mention dusting off feet.

Tante Shvester · « **Reply #1192 on:** December 19, 2012, 01:01:12 PM »

Quote from: Jonathon on December 19, 2012, 10:17:36 AM

Quote
No mention of dusting off feet is mentioned in D&C 84:88–93 either.

BlackBlade · « **Reply #1193 on:** December 19, 2012, 10:29:11 PM »

Quote from: Jonathon on December 19, 2012, 12:54:38 PM

I'm not sure what you mean. Nowhere in that passage does it mention dusting off feet.

It mentions cleaning ones feet. Surely shaking the dust off one's feet fits some definition of cleaning.

Jonathon · « **Reply #1194 on:** December 19, 2012, 10:48:20 PM »

Ah, I see. That passage mentions cleansing with water. The author was talking about mentions of shaking the dust off one's feet in the D&C and was merely noting that this is not the same thing.

Jonathon · « **Reply #1195 on:** December 20, 2012, 09:17:52 AM »

Quote

Schechner’s interest in the ranges of performances in life from human behavior to the performing arts to ritual to play examined the same topics as Turner, but from a different lens.

I've read this three or four times and still don't fully understand it.

Porter · « **Reply #1196 on:** December 20, 2012, 12:05:31 PM »

You broke my brain.

Brinestone · « **Reply #1197 on:** December 20, 2012, 12:37:52 PM »

Quote from: Jonathon on December 20, 2012, 09:17:52 AM

Quote
Schechner’s interest in the ranges of performances in life from human behavior to the performing arts to ritual to play examined the same topics as Turner, but from a different lens.

I've read this three or four times and still don't fully understand it.

I think this punctuation would help:

Schechner's interest in the rangers of performances in life—from human behavior, to the performing arts, to ritual, to play—examined the same topics as Turner, but from a different lens. The commas aren't technically correct, but I think they help understanding.

Jonathon · « **Reply #1198 on:** December 20, 2012, 01:02:39 PM »

They do help the reader to parse it, but I'm still not sure what it means. Schechner's interest examined the same topics as Turner, but from a different lens? Isn't it Schechner, not his interest, that examines the topics?

It seems like the author is trying to convey several different but related ideas, but they're sort of mashed together in a way that makes the relationship unclear.

Schechner examines the same topics as Turner.
Schechner examines the same topics through a different lens.
Schechner is interested in the range of performances in life.

What's not clear at all to me is whether the interests listed are the the topics being examined, the lens through which they're examined, something else entirely. At the very least I'm pretty sure they're not doing any examining.

pooka · « **Reply #1199 on:** December 22, 2012, 06:43:22 PM »

Nonfiction writing requires you summarize your thoughts now and then, even when not warranted and when it will just confuse people. Though as I mentioned in guess the author the other day, this kind of problem indicates your scope of inquiry might need calibration.