are you your name?
- Thread starter gratitude&love
- Start date
water said:
OOH i have just been typing for at least an hour, i'm not sure wich button i brushed but it deleted everything. i dont remember the last time i felt such rage. but i'm going to just start over, maybe i wasnt supposed to send that post.
alright, i'll get to the names in a little bit but first i think i should clear up what the author of the book is saying, he's not giving definition to names persay rather to letters, or sounds the letters make.
for instance, letters of mood discusses the effect of words with the letter M
the mm sound evokes feelings of maternal warmth as in mothers milk, mollify, summer, mammary, also would explain why the mm sound for babys content, and, when we like something.
our response to the M sound is cross-cultured, evidence of this is that virtually every language on earth, the word for mother is dominated by the M:
mater(latin), mere(french), madre(spanish), mer(vietnamese), mae(portugese), mama (zulu), imma in sanskrit and hebrew, mataka in polish, it is also the initial letter of the archetypal mother image Madonna(the virgin mary).
and like he states, it works to feminize names as well, Marilyn Monroe realized this, wich may be why she changed it from Norma Jean Baker.
really it worked in alot of the other names of famous people: Mary tyler moore, marla maples, marsha mason, marlee martin, maid marian, mellisa manchester, even marilyn manson.
and the reverse happend when actor marion michael morrison, changed his maternal mantle to john wayne.
he deals with letters of expression as well wich would be vowels.
wich provoke the face into certain expressions.
words or letters of warning wich i spoke of earlier, with the bad dog scenario.
letters of intimidation:
wich is in conjunction with words of warning.
police officers are trained to use their voices as tools of intimidation, and can often nuetralize situations by simply barking orders, that are crisp and deeply ressonant, such as ; stop, halt, back up, and get down.
formed from the tounge's hard contact with the palate or the forcefull expulsion of air from the lips, the B, hard C, G, D, K, P, and T conspire to create words like, kick, strike, beat, bite, cut, poke, punch, gun, conk, crash, kill, and crack.
these same principals he is saying effect the names we call each other, to create a expectation. your parents in naming you were doing this same thing, wether they were aware of it or not.
true our personality charecteristics are also subject to vagaries of our dna and enviroments growing up. names play an important role in how people precive us(and how we precieve ourselves).
i will get to the names but right now my wife is pestering me to take her for a ride on the new harley, so as i do have priorities the names will have to wait for tonight. sorry
gratefull for your intrest in my little thoughts.
malice, malcontent, malevolence, maim, monstrosity, manly, manhood, manliness, man, male. yeah, these words invoke all -kinds- of feminine, fuzzy feelings in me. blissful, content, peace, good, tranquil, these words are all very harsh and forceful. i see your point. ...oh wait, no i don't.
a lot of words in latin-based languages sound very similar. there is a reason for that, and it is not because of the sounds that they invoke. it is because a majority of the languages that we hear of are based in Indo-European roots. someone more studied in linguistic history can probably explain further.
a lot of words in latin-based languages sound very similar. there is a reason for that, and it is not because of the sounds that they invoke. it is because a majority of the languages that we hear of are based in Indo-European roots. someone more studied in linguistic history can probably explain further.
gratitude&love,
The associations between letters/sounds and particular meanings are secondary, and culturally specific. They are urban myths, if you will.
As for the sound /m/: it is so common across languages because it is one of the sounds that is easiest to articulate. You just close your mouth and blow through the nose, and you get an /m/.
But this is true only for English, and not even for English consistently.
Let's see:
bubbles, breathe, balm,
kind, kudos, caress,
good, generous, glee,
daisy, darling, dear,
poopy, poppy, pretty,
touchy, tiny, tender,
-- all terrrrrrible words, right?
Also, have a comparison with a Slavic language:
kick - brcniti
strike - udariti
beat -tepsti
bite - ugrizniti
cut - rezati
poke - drezati
punch - mahniti
gun - orožje
crash - sesuti
kill - ubiti
crack - zlomiti
??
The associations between letters/sounds and particular meanings are secondary, and culturally specific. They are urban myths, if you will.
As for the sound /m/: it is so common across languages because it is one of the sounds that is easiest to articulate. You just close your mouth and blow through the nose, and you get an /m/.
But this is true only for English, and not even for English consistently.
Let's see:
bubbles, breathe, balm,
kind, kudos, caress,
good, generous, glee,
daisy, darling, dear,
poopy, poppy, pretty,
touchy, tiny, tender,
-- all terrrrrrible words, right?
Also, have a comparison with a Slavic language:
kick - brcniti
strike - udariti
beat -tepsti
bite - ugrizniti
cut - rezati
poke - drezati
punch - mahniti
gun - orožje
crash - sesuti
kill - ubiti
crack - zlomiti
??
” alright, i'll get to the names in a little bit but first i think i should clear up what the author of the book is saying, he's not giving definition to names persay rather to letters, or sounds the letters make.”
In short: a hack.
For the dealio is this: I can say the word “vittu” (which is not an ugly word, yet a curse word with the same implications as Fuck) softly, vigorously or with authority – the word itself does not define the situations it presents itself in.
“our response to the M sound is cross-cultured, evidence of this is that virtually every language on earth, the word for mother is dominated by the M”
Bullshit.
Äiti, in finnish which accidentally, is not of indo-European origin – as your examples were.
Now, I could draw conclusions akin to the ones of the authors, but one would have to keep in mind the cultural ramifications – language-wise.
Btw: Mother, for example, does not sound soothing when pronounced phonetically like a Finn should.
Äiti and Anya (Hungarian) are of the Finno-Ugric language family.
Words in themselves offer no universal codes, values – they mold according to usage.
Take the word “rakkaus”, means love. It’s not a soft word, at all.
Or the phrase “Aja hiljaa sillalla”, which is a warning to drive slowly over the bridge – and warnings covet authority according to your logic. And since the three words in this phrase all imply various nuances – often universal according to that book – then it all fucks up since language is constructed via the usage of sentences. A sentence filled with “ugly” words can sound pretty, and vice versa.
The phrase in itself sounds beautiful. But take, for example, the middle word ‘hiljaa’ and yell it, it translates to: SHUT UP!
My name, for example, differs according to which ever language is raping the pronunciation.
In short: a hack.
For the dealio is this: I can say the word “vittu” (which is not an ugly word, yet a curse word with the same implications as Fuck) softly, vigorously or with authority – the word itself does not define the situations it presents itself in.
“our response to the M sound is cross-cultured, evidence of this is that virtually every language on earth, the word for mother is dominated by the M”
Bullshit.
Äiti, in finnish which accidentally, is not of indo-European origin – as your examples were.
Now, I could draw conclusions akin to the ones of the authors, but one would have to keep in mind the cultural ramifications – language-wise.
Btw: Mother, for example, does not sound soothing when pronounced phonetically like a Finn should.
Äiti and Anya (Hungarian) are of the Finno-Ugric language family.
Words in themselves offer no universal codes, values – they mold according to usage.
Take the word “rakkaus”, means love. It’s not a soft word, at all.
Or the phrase “Aja hiljaa sillalla”, which is a warning to drive slowly over the bridge – and warnings covet authority according to your logic. And since the three words in this phrase all imply various nuances – often universal according to that book – then it all fucks up since language is constructed via the usage of sentences. A sentence filled with “ugly” words can sound pretty, and vice versa.
The phrase in itself sounds beautiful. But take, for example, the middle word ‘hiljaa’ and yell it, it translates to: SHUT UP!
My name, for example, differs according to which ever language is raping the pronunciation.
andrew: andapendrapew said:
the combonation of the authoritarion letter A and the negative letter N sets up a level of tension that manifests itself in many pessimistic forms (anger, antagonize, anxious, anti, anguish and annoy) and its this friction that creates the inherent conflict in the AND personalities.
the dark qualities of the letter D (death, destruction, doom, damnation and despotism) dont do much to mitigate the problem, and even those who names incorporate the letter R (andrea, andre, andrew) are affected by the dramatic effects of the dr phoneme found in words; druid, dragon, drek, drum, dream, drastic and dread.
consequently, many ANDs choose to soften their names by using the diminutive form(andy andie)- suggesting a person somewhat uncomfortable with the inherent arrogance of their names. the diminunitizing effect of the y and ie at end of a name has its roots in childhood, when parents unconciously soften their speech by appending words with high-frequency tones(cat-kitty, dog-doggy, blanket-blankie).
since these names are influenced by some of the darker aspects of the human condition, ANDs tend to struggle with occasional bouts of cynicism that color their outlooks and permeate their relationsips. but although these are individuals who prefer to see the glass as being half empty, ANDs consider themselvs to be realists rather then pessimists, who are simply being candid about the state of the world. while this may translate as a tendency to stomp on the flower of hope when it blooms, ANDs feel that it's their duty to tell the truth. if nothing else you'll never be in doubt as to where they stand. these are unquestionably strong individuals who are not going to be swayed by criticism.
as an extention of their serious natures, ANDs have a tendency to parent those around them and bring all the qualities of a big brother or sister into the relationship. whise thes might prove tedious to some, it will prove attractive to thosed who need honest criticism in their lives . and this is where the AND personalities shine. when they feel appreciated, theres nothing they wouldnt do for a friend.
life with ANDs may be comfortable and predictable, but expect it to be punctuated by periodic bursts of high maintenance. still their saving grace is rooted in their exceptional communication skills, and because they always talk things out before loosing their tempers, you can count on family life flowing along relatively smooth.
sorry it took so long, ive been quite busy.
man i hate having a bad temper, that was alot of typing i just decided to erase.Perfect said:
i really wish i knew more on this subject to debate it intelligently with you.
but alas this is the first book ive read on the subject. as well as like the sixth book ive read in total. so really all you poor saps out there that have been sucked in to my ignorance i apologize. there i go again being cynical.
oh well i'll do the best i can.
i would agree that it isnt always the case as what ive said thus far about the book and if i wasnt so lazy i would keep copying stuff from the book, but i'd rather just ramble on with my own thoughts on the matter. so what your saying is its not true in the case of Aiti? ok theres one, and i'm sure there are some others out there. but the fact remains that the m sound is far less aggresive then the B, D, K and whatever other ones i wrote down before, and thats the case in the majority of the scenarios.
i could go through the dictionary and type all the magnificant, melodious, magicall, magnetic, majestic, mellow,malible, marketable, marvelous, moving, mindfull, methodicall, mercifull, mending, M, words and perhaps that would make you more open minded to my interpretation to the meaning. or maybe im mistaken, your mistrust makes you misinterpret, my mission. your belligerance is benign and youll do your best to bitchslap my mercifull message.
in order to bellow your ballistic blustering bullshit, butt dont banish me from your bull headed debates. i will try to mitigate my information to make it more easy to maintain your boastfull, boring, concepts, i will only mutter those things that are mundane, and that you can mutually monologue. so that you can monopolize the market on any given subject. and we monkey folk will bow to your bitter, bigmouth, badgering, dominance. \
dare i defy your dominant intellect, break me, drive my dumb thoughts into the dirt. damn my disdainfull decatant, dreary, discourse. different is discouraged, down with this debate for all who dissagree, discolor, and deny any other a shot at magnificance. bore into my soul and dislodge my momentum. bastards, pestering, dreary, dragons, from the depths of hell, demons, daring any mesiah's to try to emerge. so that we may degrade destroy, bend bash and downtrod any defiant to their great dominance.
stop!
im wrong youve mastered the ways of this world i will no longer downplay your monumental monarchy, rather mold me, as the masses i will marvel at all that you are, but only momentarily for i deny you your power, disdain i have for those who are dicks! :bugeye:
oh and incidentally, dr. cello if the depiction of rebbeca, was so vaigue and could be applied to anyone... how then, could it be wrong?
hopefully no ego's were hurt in the posting of this reply!
gratefull to be gratefull
actually i got a deal on it i couldnt pass up and the ride was to merely go on a date, if you really want to know we have sex once a day, well there are times we skip a day but usually we make up for it. and yes i do like the power of a harley. but i more enjoy the scenery of nature that one can enjoy much more with the wind in ones hair. although the bike is a bit noisy, in turn the reason we wear earplugs. yeah i know what a whimp, but i dont care.Perfect said:
question what is wrong with you? do you not get laid much? you automatically associate a motorcyle with sexuall incompatance. it sorta sounds like jelousy, but of whom? me for having a bike or my wife?
it kinda sounds like you wish you could go for a ride with me?
me said:
usually a description in books like these is a combination of generalities and 'things people want to believe about themselves'. this combines to make for a description which, when reading your own, you can very easily say 'yes, this is me!'. however, in the case of rebecca, the 'things you want to believe' are false (and contradictory, as i said.)
you should probably take into account a few factors. first, you are very likely not possessing in the skills and knowledge necessary for a useful self-analysis, so 'omg this fits perfectly' is likely not accurate. second, you just spent money on this book, and are spending time reading it. you do not want to feel like your time was wasted; therefore, you are more likely to believe it because your psyche thinks it's in your interests to do so. third, theories like this sound nifty and general wishful thinking means you want to believe them.
new rule. stop using alliteration in your posts. it doesn't further your cause. it makes you come off as a pretentious twat. try to use reason rather than waxing eloquent--and if you can't do so, then don't argue the point. your alliteration, by the way, contains many counterproductive examples. and it doesn't prove a point. multiple of us have already demonstrated that there are other words with these 'connotative sounds' that convey the exact opposite meaning. please stop trying to convince us otherwise. or at least wait until you have actually done your research (and research means more than just this one book.) debates become counterproductive when the uneducated try to come off as learned or knowledgeable.
Love%gratitude
“but the fact remains that the m sound is far less aggresive then the B, D, K and whatever other ones i wrote down before, and thats the case in the majority of the scenarios.”
Thing is, that those letters and their phonetic principles are not akin to ‘abrasive’. They are aggressive to you? Perhaps, but what I found rather absurd was the so called universal position these totally pseudo authors enforce. Language and its ramifications manifest the minds of the speakers, and language constantly invents itself – perpetually. Hence this ordeal is universally impossible.
As Dr.Cello said, alliteration is not constructive; it is boastful as well as ignorant.
And as I versioned up an scenario where the same immense, even destructive power that is your penile extension, manifests itself as an Harley (Hells Angels RAWR), I though it made as much sense as the ‘Andrew analysis’. So don’t fret, follow your daily sex plan and stick a plug up your… ear.
roman:
“Be careful, dude. Perfect is all kinds of european.”
I don’t consider myself European, so I’d probably stick a firecracker up his ass.
“but the fact remains that the m sound is far less aggresive then the B, D, K and whatever other ones i wrote down before, and thats the case in the majority of the scenarios.”
Thing is, that those letters and their phonetic principles are not akin to ‘abrasive’. They are aggressive to you? Perhaps, but what I found rather absurd was the so called universal position these totally pseudo authors enforce. Language and its ramifications manifest the minds of the speakers, and language constantly invents itself – perpetually. Hence this ordeal is universally impossible.
As Dr.Cello said, alliteration is not constructive; it is boastful as well as ignorant.
And as I versioned up an scenario where the same immense, even destructive power that is your penile extension, manifests itself as an Harley (Hells Angels RAWR), I though it made as much sense as the ‘Andrew analysis’. So don’t fret, follow your daily sex plan and stick a plug up your… ear.
roman:
“Be careful, dude. Perfect is all kinds of european.”
I don’t consider myself European, so I’d probably stick a firecracker up his ass.
well you made me chuckle anyway. gotta start nightshift so probably be absent for couple weeks. or most of the way absent anyhow.Perfect said:
Well, gratitude&love does have one point which I cannot refute.
Most of the objections to his stance so far came from the position that
unless the statements about names and sounds/letters are true for all
languages, then they aren't true at all.
But is this so? Is it true that unless the statements about names and
sounds/letters are true for all languages, then they aren't true at all?
The arguments used in said book and as presented here are poor, because they
are mostly based on selective observation (like "All words that being with
an m envoke something good.").
But the conclusions are actually true FOR A SPECIFIC population:
A: It is true that some people believe in stereotypes and act on them.
B: It is true that some people believe in urban myths and act according to
them.
A and B are irrefutable.
I concede.
A particularistic argument is irrefutable. No point arguing here. Move on.
Most of the objections to his stance so far came from the position that
unless the statements about names and sounds/letters are true for all
languages, then they aren't true at all.
But is this so? Is it true that unless the statements about names and
sounds/letters are true for all languages, then they aren't true at all?
The arguments used in said book and as presented here are poor, because they
are mostly based on selective observation (like "All words that being with
an m envoke something good.").
But the conclusions are actually true FOR A SPECIFIC population:
A: It is true that some people believe in stereotypes and act on them.
B: It is true that some people believe in urban myths and act according to
them.
A and B are irrefutable.
I concede.
A particularistic argument is irrefutable. No point arguing here. Move on.
No water, you sissy.
When I function in an environment which enforces specific codes, I am a subjective being.
Now, English derives its nuances from my cultural references, as does my native language, as does the other languages I’ve studied. So you’re saying I shouldn’t try and debunk an ordeal deemed as universal as this?
So yeah, concede.
Like... some people dig pedophilia, they think it’s the definition of true love.
particularistic argument is irrefutable
damn right. gonna go pick up my niece.
When I function in an environment which enforces specific codes, I am a subjective being.
Now, English derives its nuances from my cultural references, as does my native language, as does the other languages I’ve studied. So you’re saying I shouldn’t try and debunk an ordeal deemed as universal as this?
So yeah, concede.
Like... some people dig pedophilia, they think it’s the definition of true love.
particularistic argument is irrefutable
damn right. gonna go pick up my niece.
Perfect said:
No. Debunk the principle of the ordeal. It is universal, but it has individual, particular manifestations.
Phenomenon X has the group of meaning and connotations G1 in language 1, and G2 in language 2, whereby G1 and G2 are not identical. You can't say 1 is correct and 2 isn't.
They can be refuted within other discourses, like ethics. But not in the same discourse that provides the argument.
Better not.
belief does not necessarily equal reality. i think that we've demonstrated that even in one language, 'm' does not always equal something good, nor b something negative. while it is true that there are superstitious people and people who believe in urban legends, their acting on them does not necessarily make the principle true.
it is true that our expectations do affect people's reactions (exempli gratia, if i expect someone to like me they are more likely to be favourably inclined towards me), so if i expect my child's name to mean X about their personality, my actions and behaviour might cause them to take on that trait, to a degree. but there are still so many aspects of personality that are being avoided, and the point remains that it's not actually the name which is creating their personality, but rather my treatment of the name and their reaction to my treatment.
it is true that our expectations do affect people's reactions (exempli gratia, if i expect someone to like me they are more likely to be favourably inclined towards me), so if i expect my child's name to mean X about their personality, my actions and behaviour might cause them to take on that trait, to a degree. but there are still so many aspects of personality that are being avoided, and the point remains that it's not actually the name which is creating their personality, but rather my treatment of the name and their reaction to my treatment.