Linguistically Speaking

Is there a difference between the words angry, annoyed, irritated,irked perturbed? What about the differences between imitate, emulate, copy, mimic? These words are similar in meaning but do they mean exactly the same thing? Being a person who is very particular about what words I use to describe what I intend to say, I think these synonyms although similar in meaning are not absolutely interchangeable. Meaning thereby when I say I “intend” to say something, it’s not exactly the same as saying that I “want” to say something. I think this is the case with everyone. It is easy to tell the context of the conversation by carefully scrutinizing the words used in it. Albeit small, there is still a difference in meaning we associate with different words.

This makes me wonder. What if we associate slightly different meanings to the same word? What if when I say the word annoy, I intend to say something which is ever so slightly different than what the listener thinks I meant. What sort of problems could this create?

If I were to elaborate on this point a little bit, it would follow that we make sure our friends or people we love associate the same emotions and meaning to certain words as we do. Or maybe that’s how it already is. Maybe only those people become friends whose meanings of words mean similar things.

I suggest we pay very close attention to this phenomenon. We have to be extremely perceptive of it. For if we are not, this has potential to cause problems where there should be none. 

Against all censorship

Recently( this means for the last 5 years or so) I have been watching with some consistency, new and old stand up comedians, and trying to take life's real lessons from things they say. It is no surprise that what they say is filled not just with irony and satire, but also with truth and honesty. I have however stumbled upon something which qualifies for a post in this blog.

I am sure that when these comedian guys sit and write their routine, they always ask themselves as to what is it that they can say that that will most offend their listeners. and then they proceed to say just that. Much of stand up comedy(pronounced life) is based on saying things that people think about but yet cant never bring themselves about to saying them. It is left on the shoulders of the stand up comedian therefore, to try to think of those things and then say them. This also charges right through the domain of self expression and freedom of speech. But what is freedom of speech really. I mean at what point does an idea becomes so uncivil that it is definitely, absolutely, completely, totally, wholly, and utterly inappropriate to voice? In other words, at what point does an idea NOT fall under the umbrella term freedom of expression. or is there never a time like that. Maybe everything falls under freedom of speech. Lets take a sweet journey down an idea lane to check to see at what point is it definitely wrong to say something.

Being supportive of the LGBT rights

One race of people is superior to another (brown people are inferior to yellow people for example)

Being Supportive of the Nazi regime

Claiming that slavery is justified and being all up for its reinstatement.

Being generally or specifically profane and godless

Being up for human limb mutilation

Being up for incest

Being in favour of a Nuclear holocaust.
.

Or is it that just about everything that I can think of, I can say? because after all, ideas are bulletproof.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSLeuTvRPdI