Conversation
Notices
-
I love how in this writeup I have to do about a documentary in my politics class the rubric explicitly requests "how did you feel as the events unfolded" and then goes to say "do not write in first person!"
"Tyler sympathized with the people involved in the documentary. It appeared as though Tyler was impacted in some way by its events, almost as though he was pondering the cultural implications of such a tragedy. Maybe he was just hungry while watching the film because he forgot to have breakfast that morning."Monday, 01-Jun-15 20:51:29 UTC from web-
@northernnarwhal No, write in the second person. From the teacher's perspective.
"Tyler walked into my classroom this morning ready to tell me all about his feeling on the documentary I played for his class last week. As he began talking, however, I was distracted by the slight smell of Doritos on his breath."Monday, 01-Jun-15 21:14:55 UTC from web-
@redenchilada Jokes on you, that's first person writing since you're using first person personal pronouns ("I") to refer to the subject. Second person perspective involves pronouns such as "you" referring to the subject.
Monday, 01-Jun-15 21:20:22 UTC from web-
Monday, 01-Jun-15 21:21:37 UTC from web
-
@northernnarwhal What about fourth-person writing, then? ...What would that even be like?
Monday, 01-Jun-15 21:22:03 UTC from web-
@redenchilada third person future tense
Monday, 01-Jun-15 21:23:19 UTC from web -
@redenchilada English divides its perspective into three groups, though some languages distinguish between separate third person perspectives based on their salience, where a proximate third party would be treated differently than an omniscient non-participant observer. So while in English both are categorized as "third person", the latter is sometimes referred to in other languages as an ostensible "fourth person" in writing mechanics.
Monday, 01-Jun-15 21:28:09 UTC from web-
@northernnarwhal are you talking about the reflexive person such as "one who does", etc, when you talk of "fourth person"?
Monday, 01-Jun-15 23:41:26 UTC from web-
@awlditzy Well, I'm more so referring to different types of third parties whose perspectives can be represented in writing, and how they're all categorized under the umbrella of "third person perspective" in many languages, but how some categorize the non-salient third person referent as a "fourth person". But you're right in that indefinite generalized referents which leave out the agent can also be categorized as fourth person perspective, even in English. However, the absence of an agent can also lead to an entirely separate discussion of whether those kinds of statements are even "perspective" to begin with.
Monday, 01-Jun-15 23:48:16 UTC from web-
@northernnarwhal depends on construction and differentiation outside the verb in a structure whether not a person represented means a perspective.
Monday, 01-Jun-15 23:54:12 UTC from web-
@awlditzy Yeah, I guess the biggest implication with removing the agent is that the clause would become intrasitive, so unless an antipassive voice is used the subject would still be transitive.
Monday, 01-Jun-15 23:57:54 UTC from web-
@northernnarwhal huh. I didn't even think about that differentiation.
Tuesday, 02-Jun-15 00:06:05 UTC from web-
@awlditzy Yeah, so I guess in this case it would become circumstantial to the context of phrasing of any individual sentence.
Tuesday, 02-Jun-15 00:07:14 UTC from web-
@northernnarwhal i had always thought of the agent removed, or reflexive, either or, as a form of separate distance from the normal third person, but that gets tricky, which is probably an example of said circumstance.
Tuesday, 02-Jun-15 00:12:39 UTC from web-
@awlditzy Yeah, that distance makes it difficult to convey the sense of a third party observing the subject and predicate of the sentence, so it's not "conventional" third person. I guess the discussion then becomes whether the removal of the agent is fourth person perspective or not perspective at all.
Tuesday, 02-Jun-15 00:19:11 UTC from web-
@northernnarwhal unfortunately my study of linguistics as of now is too broadly painted a stroke to make the discussion based on english alone.
Tuesday, 02-Jun-15 00:20:57 UTC from web-
@awlditzy True. English mainly utilizes an active and passive voice but I know from I studied Ancient Greek that a lot of language families utilize a middle where the subject has characteristics of both agent and patient, so the removal of the agent doesn't damage the subject-verb agreement.
Tuesday, 02-Jun-15 00:24:39 UTC from web
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
