Member Profile

A little about me...
Spend 40 minutes of your life learning how to live via sartre http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5997040150951355473 if you dont...well.... http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_li94xm5A9W1qcu0bjo1_500.gif

Member Since: June 11, 2008
Last Power Points used: January 17, 2015
Available: now
Power Points at Recharge: 1   Get More Power Points Now!

Comments to JiggaJonson

siftbot says...

Congratulations! Your comment on How the Media Failed Women in 2013 has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

siftbot says...

Happy anniversary! Today marks year number 6 since you first became a Sifter and the community is better for having you. Thanks for your contributions!

siftbot says...

Congratulations! Your dedication to finding diamonds in the rough and pushing videos of other members to success has earned you your "Assister" Level 15 Badge!

oritteropo says...

I think the usage of sit vs set is a regional thing. We don't use the two words exactly the same way here in Australia that the English do.

Shouldn't it be "I can set my cactus down on a table" or "I can sit my cactus on a table"?

I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on Jinx's sea of dribble.

JiggaJonson said:

One last thing,
I've been thinking about other word pairings that are very similar in phonetic pronunciation, spelling, and meaning. I came up with a few, but, for an example, consider the following:

Think about the difference between the words "sit" and "set"

I can set something on a table.
I can sit something on a table.


If I were to say
"I sit my cactus on the table."
It sounds awkward, less natural compared to:
"I set my cactus on the table."
I assume this is because "sitting" usually refers to a person or other conscious something.

I can say
"I set my son on the table."
"I sit my son on the table."
and have them be allllllllllllmost interchangeable.

Still, the difference remains. The subtle difference in meaning requires that the words differ, expanding and exacting our communication.

If Jinx really meant to say that there was a pool of human saliva that the comments were drowning in, he should have used a verb phrase in his comment like this:
"the comments are already drowning in a sea of dribbling"

oritteropo says...

The stone conservatory is a drooling idiot, the window slit is the idiot mouth, the weather stains are the drool... not a slow trickle, just the hanging saliva. The weather stains are water, but standing in for saliva as the window is standing in for the mouth.

I wish I'd started off by quoting Poetry, I didn't like my first response

JiggaJonson said:

Ahh but don't you see? Even in the poem you quoted, what's more likely the meaning of that line?

"The weather-stains for the dribble"

Is it
"The weather-stains for the saliva"

"The weather-stains for the slow trickle"

Does the author intend to mean the weather that day is made of saliva or simply water?

I understand the difference is subtle, but that's the reason for a DIFFERENT word.

Keep in mind that Jinx described his own meaning as human saliva.

oritteropo says...

I would really love you to have persuaded me that I was wrong, but I really think the two words are just too closely related.

I did come across the wonderful descriptive phrase "brain-dribble" from Henry Duff Traill, but not in a sense that helps either of us.

I also came across a Henry Lawson poem, One Hundred and Three, from 1908, which includes this passage:

They double-lock at four o'clock and the warders leave their keys,
And the Governor strolls with a friend at eve through his stone conservatories;
Their window slits are like idiot mouths with square stone chins adrop,
And the weather-stains for the dribble, and the dead flat foreheads atop.

Clearly dribble isn't often used as a noun, and a look at google books found it more often as a name than as a noun, but it is such a close synonym to drivel and slavver that I remain unconvinced that you can't... as much as, like I said, I would love you to have convinced me and for Jinx to have been wrong.

JiggaJonson said:

Meh. The noun form is the one that's really important because that's how it was used in the sentence.

What he said was:
"...it's already lost in a sea of dribble"
What that means is:
"...it's already lost in a sea of the act of dribbling"
"...it's already lost in a sea of a small quantity"
"...it's already lost in a sea of a slow trickle"


The real issue here is the snide response I didn't like and the unwillingness of people to admit they're wrong and correct a mistake.

Ironically, by saying "it's already lost in a sea of dribble," then defending the misuse of that word @Jinx was adding to the drivel on the internet without realizing it.

See also:

siftbot says...

Congratulations! Your dedication to finding diamonds in the rough and pushing videos of other members to success has earned you your "Assister" Level 14 Badge!

Send this Article to a Friend

Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients

Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Member's Highest Rated Videos