But, grammar ain’t no good.

What? Am I not allowed to say that? Oh my, I started a sentence with the word “but”! Are you wondering why I underlined the word “say” and put quotation marks around it just now in this very sentence? What grammatical rule in the English language allows me to do so? Well, save for some obscure, ridiculous situations… none! Of course, this may be an obscure, ridiculous situation indeed. I underlined “say” because I didn’t actually say those words, I wrote them. At first, that’s trivial, but imagine… [insert dreamy fading, wavy-line sequence that drifts off into an alternate reality]

An underline is as arbitrary as any other decoration of words, the only important part is the concept for which the underline needs to exist, albeit an impermanent existence if you can find the will to temporarily submit to my thinking. Doubtful. The underline is there to make sure that you know that “say” means more than the action of saying the words in this context, but obviously writing them as well. In the alternate reality here into which we have drifted, I may be speaking this message to you rather than you reading it and thus I could have left out all of this explanation. If I had chosen the word “write” instead of “say” then I would have read “write” out loud to you instead of “say”. Now, of course it is true that I did write these words, but I am also saying them currently instead of writing them… maybe. I suppose I could have arranged the sentence in a fashion similar to the following: “Am I not allowed to say or write that?”, and while a much more precise statement, not quite as efficient as it could be. We should spend more time thinking about what we are saying rather than how to say it. We should not have to do more work to make sure that the person receiving the question fully comprehended the context of what we want to communicate. There are many ways to communicate and we should not have to formulate the message for each of them. A much shorter question could be asked and it could be asked the same way in both speech and writing as well as other mediums. This would create a situation where we did not need to recreate the message to fit the appropriate format, most likely with much loss of information and context in the translation, but could focus more on the content of the communication. The concept here is a redefinition of the comprehension and semantics of everything that we are. This lends itself very heavily to influencing out modern day life, as you will soon discover. If I could say such a thing as: “Is that thought inappropriate?” and probably be much more on the spot, I would. You might be wondering why I didn’t start with that phrasing. Well, the explanation is simple. The word “inappropriate” in modern language does not express a sense of urgency nor absolution, it only is an indicator of a mismatch of context that may have an undesired effect on others not in agreeance of the context. The word “allowed”, however, does. The same goes for “thought” and “say”. Thoughts seem personal and not as relevant to others, actions, however, are more ulterior. The problem arises here. While the concept is that I should be allowed to say or think or write anything that I want, the word “say” is taken literally by some people. This means that they assume it ONLY means the action of being allowed to “say” what you want, for example, instead of write it. Of course, in historical account, it would be held that I wrote these words instead of typed them because of my phrasing, a painfully simple thing, but in the context of greater things… very important. Someone may insist that I literally wrote these words instead of typed them and attach zealotry to that position. While that may seem hard to believe, trust me, they are out there and they are in positions of (unnecessary) power. However, back to the subject at hand… for now. There are many concepts, messages and opinions to be expressed in this universe and it would take an awful lot of time to put them all into every language, every medium and every perspective. No, I think it would be much easier to have everyone just find common ground and vocabulary (be it words, actions or thoughts) to communicate and avoid the confusion. The “rules” say I should have broken that “paragraph” up and not used so many “quotes”. What do you think?

You’ll find, quickly, that I know all of the rules of grammar, punctuation, etc… I just choose not to use them sometimes as they were intended, as I do not believe that they are perfect. Do you even have ANY idea what a preposition is? How about a linking verb?

So, seeing as our “rules” for grammar are even slightly incomplete, we need some reconsiderations. This entire statement has been full of holes, “errors” and incomplete scenarios (such as me discussing underlines at all since there is no underlining in speech, but only ways to emphasize and affect spoken words to represent the same concept).

Here’s the kicker though… did those “mistakes” prevent this message’s context from coming through? Did my “mistakes” prevent the desired effect?

1.) What makes a writer?

2.) What makes an artist?

3.) What makes an editor?

A.) What makes a reader?

B.) What makes a listener?

C.) What makes a prisoner?

What are you?


No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: