Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Lost for Words

Page: 1 2 3 4(5)6 7

Cloned Christ on a HoverDonkey

15:14 / 12.09.04

avatar?

unheimlich manoeuvre

15:30 / 12.09.04

alas, it may be nom de guerre. meaning an assumed name or a pseudonym. [French. war-name]

alas

16:10 / 12.09.04

Avatar, great word!, might work--my dictionary says it comes from Hindu deities taking on especially animal characters, so I'm wondering how much of that context it still carries? Mine is a pretty Western, secular context. Nom de guerre is close, but in the sentence I need to refer to this character as a character, not just a name used for cover. (If that makes sense.)

I swear there's a literary term for this that I'm blanking on. (I'm supposed to be a literary scholar! Argh!).

Cat Chant

12:56 / 14.09.04

Hmm. So, like, if you referring to Wide Sargasso Sea you would say something like "Bertha, Jean Rhys's [avatar/dummy]..."

I think 'avatar' still carries a religious connotation (like 'incarnation'), but it's used a lot in fandom to refer to fictional characters in other texts who are really like characters in the fan text, whether intentionally or not: you could refer to Hamlet as an 'avatar' of Spock, if you were that way inclined (sorry, blanking on any plausible examples).

Will think about this. The closest I can get is 'golem', which is still religious and not even as close as 'avatar'...

Loomis

13:09 / 14.09.04

How about 'vessel'?

Sekhmet

13:17 / 14.09.04

Mouthpiece, alter ego, proxy?

Loomis

13:28 / 14.09.04

Stooge! I'd love to write an essay referring to a character as an author's stooge. Or perhaps chump, patsy ...

_Boboss

13:31 / 14.09.04

pseudo-identity

or, for perfect accuracy

fiction-pants

ONLY NICE THINGS

13:38 / 14.09.04

In Internet parlance, "sock puppet".

How about pointing out that the novel is a roman-a-clef, and then saying "the author's mouthpiece/character"?

Jack Fear

13:53 / 14.09.04

"The author's stand-in," perhaps? Inelegant, but gets the job done...

I've heard "waldo" used for this, primarily in a science-fiction context.

Triplets

13:58 / 14.09.04

Fictionsuit

To me, avatar isn't a psedonym but a set of linked, chosen characteristics under one roof/name.

Jack Fear

14:20 / 14.09.04

That's great, Tripletrs, except that, y'know, not everybody has read The Invisibles. Especially not in academia, where this sort of discussion is most likely to take place.

Actually, looking at the specific usage here--the character standing for the author in an autobiographical work--sends me back to the critical language used to discuss Jack Kerouac's work, which was notorious autobiographical. "Alter ego" crops up a lot, as in "Kerouac, through his alter ego Sal Paradise, explores..."

Or even "It is Sal Paradise, the Kerouac character, who is..."

grant

20:33 / 14.09.04

"Alter ego" is definitely the one that is used most, although I think "waldo" and "fictionsuit" are both more precise in describing exactly what's going on.

(A "waldo" is one of those devices that, say, a chemist would use to handle some kind of volatile, caustic substance -- a tank with a window on the top and two thick rubber gloves sticking in through the walls, allowing someone outside the tank to move stuff around inside the tank without actually being in contact with it. It's also used to describe a remote controlled robot's arms.)

Cloned Christ on a HoverDonkey

21:01 / 14.09.04

Don't you find, as this thread develops, that we're all looking for words that we're sure exist, words that should exist but, ultimately, words that don't exist?

I know I do...

unheimlich manoeuvre

14:46 / 15.09.04

i read that as "looking for words that were sure sexist."

(sorry threadrot and typo humour.)

so if the book was biographical and *anonymouse*, like in Primary Colors, would the character be a nom de guerre?

ONLY NICE THINGS

15:11 / 15.09.04

Primary colours is a roman-a-clef, pure and simple, isn't it? So one can simply say "Jack Stanton, who represents Bill Clinton"....

Since the writer and narrator is anonymous, it clearly isn't a nom-de-guerre - it's not a nom at all, so just "the narrator" might do.

unheimlich manoeuvre

15:24 / 15.09.04

thank you, Haus.
inchoate is inarticulate.

TeN

21:18 / 15.09.04

I first want to say thank you to Saveloy for starting this thread. Brilliant!

on to my question...
I need a word (or words) that mean(s): sewer worker

I've been struggeling with this one for a while now

William Sack

09:44 / 16.09.04

Right - say I was talking to someone about a friend or relative, or whatever, who was really famous or successful and that I was trying to make myself look better by virtue of their fame or success, what am I being?

I was discussing this very thing with my good friend George Morrison recently and he suggests you are "basking in reflected glory."

Kit-Cat Club

13:25 / 17.09.04

I'm proofreading an article in which the author thanks an institution's 'inextinguishable librarians'. I'd already corrected this to 'indefatigable', but he has changed it back. Am I correct or is he justified in this?

_Boboss

13:46 / 17.09.04

unless the librarians are all on fire, and it's that trick birthday-candle kind of fire, i'd have to say you're right.

Loomis

14:02 / 17.09.04

Perhaps he means to say that they are indistinguishable. Librarians do all look the same you know. Except for the Flowered variety.

Kit-Cat Club

15:18 / 17.09.04

I strongly suspect that he is rather too fond of his own rhetorical flourishes, and doesn't want to give this one up. Even though it's WRONG. Still, I've changed it back, and if he does it again it's his bloody look-out.

Char Aina

13:04 / 18.09.04

monolgue is the words of one.
dialogue is the words of two.
what do you call the words of many?

polylogue?

i'm looking to describe someting like a columnist and his folowing communicating on an issue over time.

Char Aina

13:55 / 18.09.04

more intensive google-wrangling has come up with the term 'polylogia', which as far as i can tell is a medical term used to describe a stream of words, often making little or no sense...
while not what i wanted, it has connotations that i am liking.
could the word polylogue be seen as a logical extension of this concept?
would this particular meaning hamper using 'polylogue' to mean what i was initially trying to say?

ive been looking too long, i think.

Char Aina

14:03 / 18.09.04

Don't you find, as this thread develops, that we're all looking for words that we're sure exist, words that should exist but, ultimately, words that don't exist?

I know I do...

i'm reading 'salmon of doubt' the posthumously published douglas adams collection of fragments from his computer and columns, and he mentions a project that he and a friend worked on together fixing that very problem. they invented a word for that feeling you get when you go into the kitchen and forget why as soon as you are through the door, for example. perhaps there should be a barbelith project to address some of these concerns?

we have enough people here with the language skills to advise any aspiring logodaedalus on any creations that dont quite pass the post, i feel.

hell, we've already begun with hir and ze, havent we?

Jack Fear

14:12 / 18.09.04

monolgue is the words of one.
dialogue is the words of two.
what do you call the words of many?

Good old-fashioned "conversation" should suffice, I would think...

Char Aina

14:50 / 18.09.04

it would cover it, i suppose...
it doesnt sound 'high' enough for my liking, though.
i'm a pretentious twat and conversation doesnt cut my wanky mustard.
dude, threads in the conversation are fluff, y'know? a lecturer and hir students aren't having a conversation... they are having a [hingmy]logue(or whatever).

although there is a free flow of ideas back and forth between the many, there is one distinct leader. one discussing with many, sort of thing.

if it comes to it i'll neologise before i drop the wankiness.

Less searchable M0rd4nt

15:44 / 18.09.04

"Inextinguishable librarians" = wrong wrong wrongity WRONG.

You can have inextinguishable faith, inextinguishable laughter, inextinguishable feuds, but not inextinguishable people or objects. You can only have inextinguishable vauge stuff like feelings or ideas or whatever. (I checked and it said so on the internet so it's TRUE.)

Nice name for a band though.

Less searchable M0rd4nt

15:46 / 18.09.04

(I mean obviously you can have literally inextinguishable objects, like birthday candles or whatever, but not metaphorically inextinguishable ones.)

Sekhmet

20:47 / 20.09.04

Toksik - colloquy, perhaps?

Whisky Priestess

21:22 / 20.09.04

TeN: Victorian sewer workers were known as "toshers". Great word, use it for me.

I think "dialogue" can cover the situation you are describing ... er, can't remember who was asking ... as the columnist in question is replying individually to each reader, addressing one concern at a time. And I think (probably wrongly) that "dialogue" can refer to verbal interaction between two or more people. Give it a go, see if Irate of Islington writes in.

Saveloy

08:57 / 21.09.04

toksik:
"i'm reading 'salmon of doubt' the posthumously published douglas adams collection of fragments from his computer and columns, and he mentions a project that he and a friend worked on together fixing that very problem. they invented a word for that feeling you get when you go into the kitchen and forget why as soon as you are through the door, for example."

Ah, that's probably "The Meaning of Liff", which was published as a slim black volume back in 1980-something. They didn't invent any words but took place names and added definitions to them. For example:

"HAMBLEDON - the feeling you get on a Sunday afternoon when mowing the lawn and a propellor driven aircraft flies overhead"

"perhaps there should be a barbelith project to address some of these concerns?"

I'm sure there was a thread a while ago, but it may have been deleted by now. I'll have a look... ..yes! Here we are:

New Words

ONLY NICE THINGS

09:14 / 21.09.04

a lecturer and hir students aren't having a conversation... they are having a [hingmy]logue(or whatever).

Seminar. They are having a seminar. That is, a formal meeting between a teacher and a small number of students for the purpose of discussion. More generally, a formally-arranged conversation is, as noted above, a colloquy. If the students then discuss it over lunch, they are having a conversation.

although there is a free flow of ideas back and forth between the many, there is one distinct leader. one discussing with many, sort of thing.

The authority of one of the speakers doesn't matter in monologue or dialogue - why should it in some notional polylogue?

In general, don't let being pretentious stop you being correct or comprehensible; many of this parish have tried to puff up their plumage by using the long words and ceased in doing so to speak anything resembling English.

grant

14:04 / 22.09.04

Ah, that's probably "The Meaning of Liff", which was published as a slim black volume back in 1980-something. They didn't invent any words but took place names and added definitions to them.

I love that book. I still use "kentucky" to describe the feeling when something fits perfectly, like the last book sliding into the last-book-sized gap on a bookshelf. And "albuquerque" for any decorative squiggle, meant to evoke writing but not actually writing.

Page: 1 2 3 4(5)6 7

Add Your Reply