Thursday, March 22, 2012

A Rant

Hi,


Over at my group on WDC, The CSFS, a new forum has been opened welcoming rants. Now, being me I had to give it a go, but found I had little to rant about... or did I? Here is that rant:



Well, I have very little to rant about. My life is going great, my grades are very good - all is well. So why am I here? To rant about the lack of something to rant about and hopefully during the rant work out something that I could perhaps pass as a valid reason to rant.

Rant: Speak or shout at length in a wild, impassioned way. Well, that's according to Google anyway. Of course I didn't have to use Google, I could've used Bing but that search engine doesn't present information nicely like Google does and instead takes me to The Free Dictionary which defines a rant as 'To speak or write in an angry or violent manner; rave.' A slightly different definition but nonetheless the same. Using the little known Altavista search engine produces similar results to Bing so I will take the second result which takes me to the Urban Dictionary which states a rant is ' To speak agressivly about somthing. or to take your own tangent about a subject and talk for a long time in a passionate manner. also see Aitkenism.' Following up on its suggestion of a word to also see takes me to a page saying the word is not yet defined.

Was that link provided for people to rant about? Or was it merely a mistake on the behalf of the poster, if so why were they not more careful with there also see, which could otherwise had been a useful extension on my knowledge of the word 'rant'. The knowledge I have, however, is sufficient to be going on with. I can easily find out that 'rant' has its origins between 1590 and 1600 coming from the Dutch word 'randten', which is now obsolete but meant 'to talk foolishly' when it was in common Dutch use.

But the link would likely be as of much accuracy as the source. Being Urban Dictionary I would probably come to find that it is a slang word that is apparently used by people my age. Because supposedly we all have the vocabulary of an asphyxiated pig who must resort to retarded squeals with little meaning to those with a reasonable mastery of the English language. How the word 'cum' meaning 'with; combined with; along with' could possibly have come to hold the same meaning as the slang version of 'come', that is the 'product of an orgasm, such as semen', is beyond me. To make it worse my supposed 'peers' seem to claim that it is this generation who came up with this cool slang despite 'cum' being used in this sense since 1973, and the word 'come' being used for this meaning originating 1650 with this as proof:
They lay soe close together, they made me much to wonder;
I knew not which was wether, until I saw her under.
Then off he came, and blusht for shame soe soon that he had end it;
Yet still she lies, and to him cryes, "one more and none can mend it."
But still, there are easier words to source the meaning of. One of the most commonly used words used in youth lingo on TV is 'blad' which also comes in to other flavours of 'blud' and 'blood'. The meaning is of course going to relate to blood and means brother, or close friend. Sadly those who use this word often fail to realise the sentimentality of the word. Once I overheard two people talking to each other. One said 'hey, blad! Was-sup?' I then proceeded to do the ridiculous thing of confronting them (I did know them, but still...) I asked the one of them if they were related to which he replied 'nah, blud.' I then asked him if they were really close friends. He replied 'nah, blud, we just met like'. I replied 'Oh, it's just you sounded really close, but I haven't seen him with you before.' Needless to say he question me on what gave him that image. His 'cred' wouldn't do if someone like me could get away with implying he was gay. I wasn't, he was the one implying a close friendship or relation. I explain what blad meant and he replied with 'Nah (he says that a lot) man. We ain't nuthin' like that. We just like bredrin, 'tis all.'

I don't know why they insist on being seen as people with a small vocabulary when they use a word clearly derived from 'brethren' , the archaic plural of brother or the normally legal/religious term for 'fellow members'. And they say they don't like Shakespeare yet they happily use 'tis. I was in a position to continue the debate as I knew I would win (not being arrogant or anything, but this guy ate my RE homework once... bringing us to the pig analogy) so I asked him if he enjoyed Shakespeare or read the bible. He replied 'nah, bruv'. It was quickly becoming apparent that either this person was a long lost relative or incapable of understanding what he was saying and what I was in relation to him. I cleared this issue up by asking a few questions about his family tree and I learned to neither of our surprises that we were indeed unrelated. At this point, what is known as an 'awkward turtle' moment. He left and I was wondering if he had intended to sign the word 'platypus' to me or if, as I suspected, he was made awkward by being seen to have lost an argument with a geek.

Not all is lost. The media greatly exaggerates the extent of the youthful destruction of what is already a complex language without needing to be made turbid by the sheer wonder of the in-aptitude some people have of their own language. But like I said at the start of that unusually long sentence without punctuation, the media greatly exaggerates the language of youth. I, for one don't use words like in'it or lad (in the new context not needing to refer to an actual lad). I do occasionally use them, but only if I am mocking the way those who are, apparently, my peers speak.

So, this has turned out to be rant with a fair amount in it, despite my original proclamation that I had nothing to rant about.

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...