What to use instead of "pun intended"?
John Hawkinson
article where the author used a pun in the sentence, and then used the
construction "pun intended" in parentheses afterwards, like so:
That was a totally cool trip to Antartica, dude! (pun intended)
[so the example stinks :-(]
Anyway, I've noticed that occassionally I too will do this; subsequent
reflection, however, indicates that such usage is a tad
awkward/undesirable/something-to-avoid. Therefore, anybody have
anything better they'd care to suggest?
--
John Hawkinson
jh...@panix.com
Rich Zidonis
In a previous article, jh...@panix.com (John Hawkinson) says:
>That was a totally cool trip to Antartica, dude! (pun intended)
>[so the example stinks :-(]
>
>Anyway, I've noticed that occassionally I too will do this; subsequent
>reflection, however, indicates that such usage is a tad
>awkward/undesirable/something-to-avoid. Therefore, anybody have
>anything better they'd care to suggest?
>
How about "fun intended." Is not funning and punning what you had in
mind?
--
rich
Internet: ai...@cleveland.freenet.edu
Mark Slagle
> Anyway, I've noticed that occassionally I too will do this; subsequent
> reflection, however, indicates that such usage is a tad
> awkward/undesirable/something-to-avoid. Therefore, anybody have
> anything better they'd care to suggest?
Let it speak for itself. Keep them guessing.
--
----
Mark E. Slagle PO Box 61059
sla...@lmsc.lockheed.com Sunnyvale, CA 94088
408-756-0895 USA
Bunweasel
Such a construct should never be necessary. Puns, like nuns, buns and huns
should appear in groups of no less than three. This rule also applies to
busses and sometimes trusses, but suns and ones are exceptional. I don't
understand either.
-m.
David Sherman
...is a possible alternative. Or even "no pun intended",
although you do intend it. I recently wrote something like this,
in a technical analysis of tax legislation that's in a looseleaf
publication I write:
"... the exclusion from zero-rating of
wine, spirits and beer was drafted
(no pun intended) in such a way
as not to apply to the ingredients
that go into such goods."
Actually, to be fair, I didn't intend the pun when I drafted
(oops) that sentence. It hit me when reviewing the typesetting
proofs and I added the parenthetical comment at that point.
David Sherman
Toronto
Tax Lawyer & Writer
Mark Slagle
> Actually, to be fair, I didn't intend the pun when I drafted
> (oops) that sentence. It hit me when reviewing the typesetting
> proofs and I added the parenthetical comment at that point.
Why? It flows better without the comment. And how
is the statement improved by saying that you didn't
intend the pun?
Steve Taylor
>Hmm. I can't seem to think of a good example, but I just read an
>article where the author used a pun in the sentence, and then used the
>construction "pun intended" in parentheses afterwards, like so:
>That was a totally cool trip to Antartica, dude! (pun intended)
>[so the example stinks :-(]
>Anyway, I've noticed that occassionally I too will do this; subsequent
>reflection, however, indicates that such usage is a tad
>awkward/undesirable/something-to-avoid. Therefore, anybody have
>anything better they'd care to suggest?
I'd say you should just never acknowledge the pun. People will either get
it or not. If you fear that the pun wont be noticeable, work on the phrasing
to give more clues - pointing to a joke or sticking a label on it tends to
defuse it. Three things which I dislike for the same reasons are:
- "pun intended"
- someone making a joke, then saying "ha ha just a joke"
- smileys on the net
Of course, many people defend smileys vigorously, and I suspect that mine
is a minority opinion. Ah - if only *I* ruled the world...
Steve
st...@fulcrum.oz.au
Jeff Shaevel
>In article 18...@panix.com, jh...@panix.com (John Hawkinson) writes:
>>That was a totally cool trip to Antartica, dude! (pun intended)
>>[so the example stinks :-(]
[...]
>I'd say you should just never acknowledge the pun. People will either get
>it or not. If you fear that the pun wont be noticeable, work on the phrasing
>to give more clues - pointing to a joke or sticking a label on it tends to
>defuse it.
Perhaps there is an ego issue here as well: the author doesn't want the reader
to "catch" the pun, thereby "scoring" the joke. The author would like the reader to
know that he was clever enough to have thought of the pun in the first place.
My opinion on that is: big deal. Your readers will get an extra kick out of
discovering something, and if they think that they are being clever, let them.
They'll enjoy the writing that much more and little harm is done...
>Of course, many people defend smileys vigorously, and I suspect that mine
>is a minority opinion. Ah - if only *I* ruled the world...
Glad you don't. :-)
--
Jeff Shaevel :-)-: (comedy/tragedy) Love may be blind,
sha...@apple.com but lust is autistic.
Dennis Baron
way to becoming a new punctuation mark before it was picked up by the
email crowd. More than 5 years ago I began noticing students drawing
smiley faces on the papers they were handing in to me, much in the way
an earlier generation of students might put JMJ up in the corner for
good luck.
Was the smiley supposed to put me in a better mood when I graded? If
so, it backfired, since to me it signalled sappy sentimentalism.
I understand the students to have picked up the practice from their
elementary school experience where teachers, always looking for new
things to do, affixed smiley stickers to good papers (and frown(e)y
face stickers to poor ones).
What's my point? Emailers are in at the ground floor, so to speak, in
the introduction of a new punctuation mark. We probably can't do much
to stop it, even if we wanted to, and it surprises me how many of us
do so much to further it.
The smiley to me is an elbow in the ribs, a "get it?, hunh?" when I
have either already "got it" or don't really want to.
Anybody out there want to reform the rest of the punctuation system, as
long as you're at it? It's probably due for an overhaul (it's been
at least 50,000 vowels since the last time we changed our commas).
__
deb...@uiuc.edu (\ 217-333-2392
\'\ fax: 217-333-4321
Dennis Baron \'\ __________
Department of English / '| ()_________)
Univ. of Illinois \ '/ \ ~~~~~~~~ \
608 S. Wright St. \ \ ~~~~~~ \
Urbana IL 61801 ==). \__________\
(__) ()__________)
Emory F. Bunn
|Consider, oh please do consider, that the smiley icon was well on its
|way to becoming a new punctuation mark before it was picked up by the
|email crowd. More than 5 years ago I began noticing students drawing
|smiley faces on the papers they were handing in to me, much in the way
|an earlier generation of students might put JMJ up in the corner for
|good luck.
(Stuff deleted.)
What does JMJ stand for, and why was it supposed to bring luck?
Just curious.
Ted
Margaret Mikulska
>In article <baron.8....@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> ba...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Dennis Baron) writes:
>
>|good luck.
>
>What does JMJ stand for, and why was it supposed to bring luck?
Could it be an invocation to "Jesus, Maria, and Joseph"?
-Margaret
miku...@astro.princeton.edu
dks
ba...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Dennis Baron) writes (about the use of 'smileys'):
>I understand the students to have picked up the practice from their
>elementary school experience where teachers, always looking for new
>things to do, affixed smiley stickers to good papers (and frown(e)y
>face stickers to poor ones).
To me, this is a novel -- and credible -- explanation. Is it credible to
most a.u.e. readers?
>The smiley to me is an elbow in the ribs, a "get it?, hunh?" when I
>have either already "got it" or don't really want to.
I'd agree that _many_ smileys are unnecessary. My position on the
use of these little faces is well-known, as 'rn' says, "throughout
the entire civilized world." Nevertheless, I must admit that some
people manage to use these little faces endearingly (in Usenet postings,
not in graduate theses on digital signal processing). While I myself
have not quite mastered the art of sideways caricature, I have to say
that there really are times when nothing is as friendly as a smile, no
matter at what angle it is administered.
Love and kisses,
Dhanesh
John Haxby
to people over the pond that weren't to be taken seriously were.
The trouble is that British sense of humour and American sense
of humor aren't recognisable by non-natives, at least a good
part of the time.
--
John Haxby, Definitively Wrong.
Digital <j...@rdg.dec.com>
Reading, England <...!uknet!wessex!jch>
----------------------------------------------------------------
The opinions expressed herein are my own, not my employers.