Tags for this video have been changed from 'hipster, beatnik, bullwickle' to 'hipster, beatnik, bullwinkle' - edited by chingalera

Pfft, the "Flying Squirrel" is NOTHING compared to the "Bullwinkle" move.

I had to say it... "Isn't Rockie is suppose to be the flying one? Not Bullwinkle?"

A deer?, shit, there goes my Rocky and Bullwinkle joke.
And I might have to dig up a copy of the movie Brainstorm, that looks almost bad enough to watch.

*nature *wtf

Woah, Bullwinkle!

Flagrant, but related, self promotion: http://videosift.com/video/Raging-Bullwinkle-from-Hardcore-TV

>> ^Bullwinkle
A common mistake and a big one. It also discredits your whole "English Major" trumpeting.

Humans make errors regardless of skill level, and frankly, that is an easier one for an advanced person to make than many others on first drafts. It doesn't discredit a damn thing any more than your capitalization of "Major" discredits you. What you've done is a logical fallacy in debate. Because you lacked a rebuttal, you tried to find something I was wrong about then used the associative property to say all else must then be wrong.

>> ^Bullwinkle
I doon't have to write a dissertation (or 100 formal papers) to make a point, though I clearly have to illustrate it again, since you boiled it down to your point instead of mine.
Grammar is about structure, not what is implied (or inferred). So, yes, the speaker may intend to say they couldn't care less when they say, "I could care less," but that is not what they're saying, even if the listener understood what they meant.

Grammar has nothing to do with this and I already admonished those who did, so stop floundering. Whenever this phrase is used, it is a whimsical way of saying they're in danger of caring less than they already do. It is never misinterpreted by the listener as the opposite and for good reason. You would never confess your capacity to care more or less, or fail to state a preference if you cared enough to give one. I can't even believe we're arguing about something so idiomatic. Idioms don't have to be literal, they simply to have to be interpreted for what they intend to convey.

Amen, brotha.

I hate when people say, "I have less M&Ms than you."

My biggest pet peeve is probably when people say "would of" and "could of." GGAAAARRRRRRRRR!!!!

I'm sure you've seen this: http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html

Click the link, scroll down, and enjoy.


In reply to this comment by Bullwinkle:
What's funny is that the "I could care less" thing is very low on my list of grammar pet peeves (that guy was just bugging me). Conversational language is far looser than the written word, and a lot of things get a pass from me. It is also ever evolving. However, while it may be about what is implied or inferred, if you're not careful with what you say, those two can be in direct opposition. That can definitely be the case with "I could care less" (though folks seem to have accepted it). The lazier we get with our language, the less* we will understand each other in the future. The world has enough trouble communicating as it is, we shouldn't help it along.


*Less vs Fewer IS one of my pet peeves, on the other hand.

What's funny is that the "I could care less" thing is very low on my list of grammar pet peeves (that guy was just bugging me). Conversational language is far looser than the written word, and a lot of things get a pass from me. It is also ever evolving. However, while it may be about what is implied or inferred, if you're not careful with what you say, those two can be in direct opposition. That can definitely be the case with "I could care less" (though folks seem to have accepted it). The lazier we get with our language, the less* we will understand each other in the future. The world has enough trouble communicating as it is, we shouldn't help it along.


*Less vs Fewer IS one of my pet peeves, on the other hand.
In reply to this comment by deedub81:
"Grammar is about structure, not what is implied (or inferred)."


Yes, and "language" is about what is implied and what is inferred. Grammar is not the only factor involved in communication.

Language is the systematic creation and usage of systems of symbols —each referring to linguistic concepts with semantic or logical or otherwise expressive meanings.

Communication is the imparting or interchange of thoughts, opinions, or information by speech, writing, or signs. Communication sometimes has nothing to do with grammar.



That being said, it bugs the CRAP outta me when somebody says, "I could care less."






In reply to this comment by Bullwinkle:
"Yep, mixed up imply/infer and didn't reread my post. Whoopee, what a tame and insanely common mistake. Notice how I can admit where I'm wrong instead of kicking the air like a mule."

A common mistake and a big one. It also discredits your whole "English Major" trumpeting.

"What an amazingly thorough rebuttal, just stubbornly asserting the opposite without addressing the logic of my post. Why would anyone interpret that you cared enough to give a preference unless an actual preference followed? Explain. Your entire argument rests on this. For "I could care less" to imply caring when the opposite was intended, it has to be inferred that way by the person to whom it's spoken."

I doon't have to write a dissertation (or 100 formal papers) to make a point, though I clearly have to illustrate it again, since you boiled it down to your point instead of mine.

Grammar is about structure, not what is implied (or inferred). So, yes, the speaker may intend to say they couldn't care less when they say, "I could care less," but that is not what they're saying, even if the listener understood what they meant. As another example, people may know what you mean when you use a double negative, that doesn't make it correct.

"Grammar is about structure, not what is implied (or inferred)."


Yes, and "language" is about what is implied and what is inferred. Grammar is not the only factor involved in communication.

Language is the systematic creation and usage of systems of symbols —each referring to linguistic concepts with semantic or logical or otherwise expressive meanings.

Communication is the imparting or interchange of thoughts, opinions, or information by speech, writing, or signs. Communication sometimes has nothing to do with grammar.



That being said, it bugs the CRAP outta me when somebody says, "I could care less."






In reply to this comment by Bullwinkle:
"Yep, mixed up imply/infer and didn't reread my post. Whoopee, what a tame and insanely common mistake. Notice how I can admit where I'm wrong instead of kicking the air like a mule."

A common mistake and a big one. It also discredits your whole "English Major" trumpeting.

"What an amazingly thorough rebuttal, just stubbornly asserting the opposite without addressing the logic of my post. Why would anyone interpret that you cared enough to give a preference unless an actual preference followed? Explain. Your entire argument rests on this. For "I could care less" to imply caring when the opposite was intended, it has to be inferred that way by the person to whom it's spoken."

I doon't have to write a dissertation (or 100 formal papers) to make a point, though I clearly have to illustrate it again, since you boiled it down to your point instead of mine.

Grammar is about structure, not what is implied (or inferred). So, yes, the speaker may intend to say they couldn't care less when they say, "I could care less," but that is not what they're saying, even if the listener understood what they meant. As another example, people may know what you mean when you use a double negative, that doesn't make it correct.

"Grammar is about structure, not what is implied (or inferred)."


Yes, and "language" is about what is implied and what is inferred. Grammar is not the only factor involved in communication.

Language is the systematic creation and usage of systems of symbols —each referring to linguistic concepts with semantic or logical or otherwise expressive meanings.

Communication is the imparting or interchange of thoughts, opinions, or information by speech, writing, or signs. Communication sometimes has nothing to do with grammar.



That being said, it bugs the CRAP outta me when somebody says, "I could care less."






In reply to this comment by Bullwinkle:
"Yep, mixed up imply/infer and didn't reread my post. Whoopee, what a tame and insanely common mistake. Notice how I can admit where I'm wrong instead of kicking the air like a mule."

A common mistake and a big one. It also discredits your whole "English Major" trumpeting.

"What an amazingly thorough rebuttal, just stubbornly asserting the opposite without addressing the logic of my post. Why would anyone interpret that you cared enough to give a preference unless an actual preference followed? Explain. Your entire argument rests on this. For "I could care less" to imply caring when the opposite was intended, it has to be inferred that way by the person to whom it's spoken."

I doon't have to write a dissertation (or 100 formal papers) to make a point, though I clearly have to illustrate it again, since you boiled it down to your point instead of mine.

Grammar is about structure, not what is implied (or inferred). So, yes, the speaker may intend to say they couldn't care less when they say, "I could care less," but that is not what they're saying, even if the listener understood what they meant. As another example, people may know what you mean when you use a double negative, that doesn't make it correct.

>> ^Bullwinkle:
Banshee, stop tossing around the "English grad" thing like it's some kind of major accomplishment. A) English is one of the most common majors and B) Just because you studied literature does not mean you comprehend language.


Right, because writing about 100 formal papers on literature at a major university gives you roughly same exposure to language and its rules as a high school diploma or an Engineering degree. My bad, shouldn't have mentioned it.


As an example, I might point you to the definition of the word "infer."


Yep, mixed up imply/infer and didn't reread my post. Whoopee, what a tame and insanely common mistake. Notice how I can admit where I'm wrong instead of kicking the air like a mule.


No matter how much inflection or nuance or meaning you want to throw at the phrase, "I could care less" structurally does not imply what is intended when it's typically used.


What an amazingly thorough rebuttal, just stubbornly asserting the opposite without addressing the logic of my post. Why would anyone interpret that you cared enough to give a preference unless an actual preference followed? Explain. Your entire argument rests on this. For "I could care less" to imply caring when the opposite was intended, it has to be inferred that way by the person to whom it's spoken.

(via google cache)

who voted for this video
burdturgler - campionidelmondo - Arg - shadownc - Octopussy - andybesy - mj0lnir - josiemiller - castles - maximillian - Oatmeal - calvados - crotchflame - MrConrads - ex-jedi - Ryjkyj - sharkie - joedirt - pho3n1x - 6k0 - ridesallyridenc - mijijim - nibiyabi - lucky760 - DavidRaine - ChosenOne - Birdman - EmptyFriend - LightningOfGods - Kuga - Dash - dotdude - pierrekrahn - QuadraPixel - Lurch - deedub81 - NobleOne - ant - phlogiston - BillTheDuck - antonye - vyka11 - tasseo4 - dw1117 - rellik - smiley - ElessarJD - eric3579 - omnistegan - ElJardinero - rychan - wazant - LordNeptune - rosekat - notarobot - blutruth - kronosposeidon - Plonq - dag - Ornthoron - BillOreilly - thehelix - MaDMaXX - dbarry3 - lucidgroove - garmachi - tamman2000 - treat - atara - Hex - krazyety - ShakeyMcBones - Haldaug - lesserfool - Shepppard - steroidg - sometimes - Majortomyorke - cdominus - lertad - nadabu - theaceofclubz - wjolson - ristintin - timefactor - Fusionaut - arvana - captmorgano - nathanofborg - JackKetch - Krupo - furrycloud - badetiquette - Trancecoach - Throbbin - Pushkill - legacy0100 - therealblankman - itsmissmia - enon - sillma - chilaxe - Thylan - nickreal03 - dtmike07 - rubadub - Ghostly - JustusShaft - kceaton1 - Duckhunter75 - Kerotan - gwiz665 - McFarQue - Pooterius - MrFisk - NinjaFish - punk225 - Hanns - Spoon_Gouge - mizila - maatc - Desviada - bluephoenix - Payback - laura - islaywombats - chtierna - agopo - MarineGunrock - Fjnbk - Norsuelefantti - OpticNerve - MycroftHomlz - mufflerdog - philippeoc - zomgg - Bullwinkle - JAPR - nedlyskid - jongala - lavoll - kwaran - Deano - UsesProzac - blankfist - ShakaUVM - chakolate - rottenseed - Sketch - Crosswords - boblobblaw - vermonter - phyman - Zifnab - RedSky - robbersdog49 - EDD - RhesusMonk - tagomi77 - cybrbeast - daxgaz - moonsammy - raddishs - Mixaster - BicycleRepairMan - Lowen - spoco2 - Bennu - T-man - rbar - Baera - doogle - BoneyD - Unsung_Hero - jvenezia - Hive13 - broseth - dcmisha - Johnald_Chaffinch - deathcow - UnseenUltra - Crake - alcatrazam - Laekroth - pavel_one - poolcleaner - Mysling - HoRnO - tehmog - aaronfr - shakezilla - ockhamist - Friesian - GreatBird - K0MMIE - pmkierst - Raverman - Issykitty - cheesemoo - Kurtz007 - alien_concept - rasch187 - phelixian - Fiver2 - dbalsdon - everyplatewebreak - Jordass - gorgler - swampgirl - Asylim - Kevlar - dennisj - Ragarnok1 - The_Ettin - Ault - netean - leveric - Clumsy - detheter - Kluz - guitarwolf - dbot2006 - That1Swede - White - littledragon_79 - GeeSussFreeK
[toggle display of all 226]

Bullwinkle FTW...*promote

As a child I didn't appreciate Bullwinkle enough. Now I do. Good post.