[ExI] Language Changing Before Our Very Eyes

[Lee Corbin]

PJ writes

>> >> On 5/21/07, PJ Manney <pjmanney at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> <sigh>
>> >> I don't know why I rise to this bait...
>> >
>>  Jef wrote:
>> > Same here.  I must have issues.  ;-)
> 
> We all have issues, Jef.  Otherwise we wouldn't be on this list.  ;-)
> 
> Lee wrote:
>> "Same here"?  Whatever are the two of you on about?
>> and PJ mentioned the "bait" occuring here somehow.
>> What exactly is that?  Speaking of language "rising to
>> bait" implies that an imposition has occurred some way.
> 
> It simply means that it's our bait.  You're just doing what comes
> naturally -- throwing in a line.  But a fish is not required to see a
> juicy worm on a hook and bite it.  Smart fish avoid the hook because
> they recognize it as a potential danger.  But some fish, like us, just
> can't help it.  So you send out what look to us like either an obvious
> misunderstanding or zingers.  Jef and I respond to the bait.

But since---absolutely no sarcasm implied here---you have literally
been so kind as to offer an explanation, would you at least mention
why my original passage

> > Not so many years ago, that sentence would have read "composed"
> > instead of "comprised". (I actually think that the above is incorrect,
> > and that the official and correct use of "comprise" is, for example,
> > to say that X, Y, and Z comprise W.)  But I also have a sense---
> > a vague one, to be sure---that the above writer was striving for
> > precision, and that he may have felt that "compose" was too loose.
> > And indeed, this use of "comprise" may by now carry a more specific
> > meaning to some of his readers.

contained a "misunderstanding or zinger".  Surely, if it's just that you
identified a *misunderstanding* on my part here, that's natural. But if
I've put something else, like a zinger here, I'd like to know.

Anyway, ok, that's a new usage to me:  post an erroneous view,
and it's "bait".  Live and learn  :-)

> I'm a slow learner in some things.  It's taken me a long time and
> repeated self-bashings on the email brain to learn that irony/satire
> doesn't translate here and especially not with some readers.

Oh, me too!!  The number of times I've been misunderstood 
because I thought my irony obvious is beyond count. But
(perhaps like you) I never learn. Or, what may be closer to
the truth, we just suppose that surely most people see what's
up.

> My apologies, Lee.

Thanks, PJ.  Though I was hardly insulted, but I was very confused,
and so thank you again for taking the time to explain it.

Lee