Rebellious Scots to crush
Sep. 30th, 2015 10:15 pmThis is really a linguistics question. The lyrics of the national anthem have been in the news recently, which I suppose is what prompted the line "Rebellious Scots to crush" to saunter through my mind on the train today.
It's unpleasant however you read it, but it occurred to me that I was unsure of the scope of the exhortation. Is God being urged to crush some Scots (but only the rebellious ones), or to crush Scots in general (who are, as we know, rebellious)?
There must be many sentences that are similarly ambiguous. For example:
I love to eat tasty Italian pizza.
Does tasty describe Italian pizza in general here, or just the kind that the speaker loves to eat - while viewing less toothsome varieties with relative distaste?
I'm sure there's some linguistic terminology to describe this difference in the scope of adjectives, but I don't know it.
nightspore?
Of course, if only the writer of the anthem had eschewed the ungainliness of dactylic dimeter in favour of good old iambic pentameter, as patronised by Shakespeare and Milton, a relative clause (with or without comma) would have resolved the issue:
Now crush the Scots who are rebellious
Now crush the Scots, who are rebellious
Talking of ambiguity, this morning as I was walking (at a stupidly early hour) through central Cardiff, I saw a newspaper headline that read, "Axes Used to Threaten Police". My immediate thought was, "Well, maybe they used to, but how is that news?"
Time for bed, I think.
It's unpleasant however you read it, but it occurred to me that I was unsure of the scope of the exhortation. Is God being urged to crush some Scots (but only the rebellious ones), or to crush Scots in general (who are, as we know, rebellious)?
There must be many sentences that are similarly ambiguous. For example:
I love to eat tasty Italian pizza.
Does tasty describe Italian pizza in general here, or just the kind that the speaker loves to eat - while viewing less toothsome varieties with relative distaste?
I'm sure there's some linguistic terminology to describe this difference in the scope of adjectives, but I don't know it.
Of course, if only the writer of the anthem had eschewed the ungainliness of dactylic dimeter in favour of good old iambic pentameter, as patronised by Shakespeare and Milton, a relative clause (with or without comma) would have resolved the issue:
Now crush the Scots who are rebellious
Now crush the Scots, who are rebellious
Talking of ambiguity, this morning as I was walking (at a stupidly early hour) through central Cardiff, I saw a newspaper headline that read, "Axes Used to Threaten Police". My immediate thought was, "Well, maybe they used to, but how is that news?"
Time for bed, I think.
(no subject)
Date: 2015-09-30 09:59 pm (UTC)So, here's my favourite, though the missing comma is what makes it hilarious: a magazine cover proclaiming that a certain woman takes great joy in cooking her family and dog. ;-)
(no subject)
Date: 2015-09-30 11:39 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-10-01 07:19 am (UTC)It will be a sad day when such headlines disappear from the earth. That one's in the foothills of Mt. Zeugma.
(no subject)
Date: 2015-09-30 11:38 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-10-01 07:13 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-10-01 04:35 am (UTC)Appositive means: just added adjectives that don't affect or reduce the set of things the adjective applies to. "I had some delicious chocolate," where "delicious" is a reminder that all chocolate is delicious. Or "Keep those disgusting anchovies away from me," which implies that I find all anchovies disgusting, not just the low-quality ones you are approaching me with.
Interactive means the intersection of the class of things the adjective applies to and the class of things the noun applies to. So "the big red house" applies only to the intersection of the sets of big things, red things, and houses.
Here's a good account: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/%7Emyl/languagelog/archives/004165.html
In the meantime, I am looking for a different sort of ambiguity, between transitive and intransitive verbs. "That chicken is too sick to eat" might mean (transitively) that I won't eat it, or intransitively, that it has no appetite. This is a cause/diagnosis thing too, and I am looking for examples in the wild. So if you notice any.....
("Too big to fail" is a conceptual version of this. Banks are too big to fail not because their size makes them steady but because the government will not fail to save them from bankruptcy. "Fail" there isn't used transitively there, but it could be with a little tweaking. "Your essay is too original to fail," can mean: it's bound to make its own way; or I can't give you a failing mark on it.)
(no subject)
Date: 2015-10-01 07:10 am (UTC)I feel as if I come across transitive/intransitive ambiguities of that kind all the time, but of course my mind has gone blank. However, I'll keep an eye out and let you know next time I encounter one.
(Actually, I think your first example could be read transitively, in the sense of "To fail someone in their hour of need".)
(no subject)
Date: 2015-10-01 07:49 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-10-01 08:13 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-10-01 06:34 am (UTC)Far off in sunlit places,
sad are the Scottish faces,
Yearning to feel the kiss of sweet Scottish rain.
(no subject)
Date: 2015-10-01 07:17 am (UTC)