1662: "Jack and Jill"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
squall_line
Posts: 169
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 2:36 am UTC

1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby squall_line » Wed Mar 30, 2016 1:20 pm UTC

Image

Title: Jack and Jill
began to frack.
The oil boosts their town.
But fractures make
the bedrock shake
and Jack came tumbling down


Ponds on hills are all over the place in farmland. I would imagine that it would also be necessary to climb a hill of some sort if one were to need water from a dammed reservoir.

User avatar
HES
Posts: 4871
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 7:13 pm UTC
Location: England

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby HES » Wed Mar 30, 2016 1:27 pm UTC

But it would also be trivial to run a pipe to the settlement at the bottom, and avoid head injuries all together.
He/Him/His Image

piratejohn
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2015 5:26 am UTC

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby piratejohn » Wed Mar 30, 2016 1:32 pm UTC

Do Jack and Jill live in Flint?

DanAxtell
Posts: 53
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 9:59 am UTC
Location: USA (Vermont)

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby DanAxtell » Wed Mar 30, 2016 1:37 pm UTC

My neighbor up the hill has an artesian well while we have a 400-foot drilled well. My reaction when I found out was, "What is going on with the hydrology around here?" (I don't use language as strong as Randall's.) Apparently, it's something to do with the geological folding in the aquifer that happened before we moved in.

User avatar
Envelope Generator
Posts: 582
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 8:07 am UTC
Location: pareidolia

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Envelope Generator » Wed Mar 30, 2016 1:40 pm UTC

"Me and Jack are going up the hill and then down the other side to fetch a pail of water."
"Me and Jack are going up the hill because I left my pail there."
"Me and Jack are going up the hill to our house to fill a pail of water from the tap."
I'm going to step off the LEM now... here we are, Pismo Beach and all the clams we can eat

eSOANEM wrote:If Fonzie's on the order of 100 zeptokelvin, I think he has bigger problems than difracting through doors.

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6479
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby ucim » Wed Mar 30, 2016 1:43 pm UTC

Me and Jack are going up the hill to go to school to learn grammar and scansion.
Spoiler:
...and to go to Jupiter.
Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

Story
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 9:03 pm UTC

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Story » Wed Mar 30, 2016 1:57 pm UTC

Maybe they have a wind trap to collect water on the hill.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3552
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Soupspoon » Wed Mar 30, 2016 2:14 pm UTC

Well, apart from the fact that screw-pumps can desalinate their water-sources (as long as they're not pumping into a previously contaminated location), perhaps the biome at the bottom of the hill is dominated by a salt-water aquifer...


Merfax
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 2:13 pm UTC

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Merfax » Wed Mar 30, 2016 2:22 pm UTC

I don't know why this one confuses so many people.
Natural spring water is often high in mineral content, and over centuries the evaporates leave impressive mounds. This places the outlet of the spring high up on a "hill". I've seen these in Nevada, and a few in the Australian Outback are over a hundred feet high. They look a little like miniature volcanoes.

j-beda
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:11 am UTC

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby j-beda » Wed Mar 30, 2016 2:25 pm UTC

"Me and Jack are going..." could be rephrased as "Me is going and Jack is also going..." to more clearly highlight the subject/predicate/object mismatch. While it might be true that "English is as English does", the majority of native english speakers would say "Jack and I are going...".

While both "I" and "Me" are first person pronouns, they are not used identically. "Me" is the object pronoun, used as the object (or receiver) of the action of the verb ("Jack gave the pail to me.") "I" is the subject pronoun, used for the one "doing" the verb ("I went up the hill.")

http://www.learnersdictionary.com/qa/wh ... -to-use-me

Schoolhouse Rock - Mr Morton is the subject.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdUXxdmhIsw

User avatar
HES
Posts: 4871
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 7:13 pm UTC
Location: England

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby HES » Wed Mar 30, 2016 2:34 pm UTC

Perhaps she is referring to a third child (or immortal Viking) named Me. "Me and Jack are going, and so am I".
He/Him/His Image

User avatar
Neil_Boekend
Posts: 3220
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 6:35 am UTC
Location: Yes.

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Neil_Boekend » Wed Mar 30, 2016 2:48 pm UTC

Jack and Jill are children. They may not know better yet.
Mikeski wrote:A "What If" update is never late. Nor is it early. It is posted precisely when it should be.

patzer's signature wrote:
flicky1991 wrote:I'm being quoted too much!

he/him/his

IndigoToyota
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 2:48 pm UTC

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby IndigoToyota » Wed Mar 30, 2016 3:04 pm UTC

Registered just to say that this type of hydrology isn't uncommon in dry areas, such as the western United States. The reason being that precipitation falls mostly at higher elevations, so small streams sometimes run dry as they leave the foothills, or for springs to be located halfway up a hillside with no flow further down. I'm from the northeast, so I found it just as counter-intuitive as Randall, but it's a real thing. So if Jack and Jill live in a valley near a mountain range, I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn that there's a spring up a hill.

Additionally, if you assume that this rhyme originated before modern water treatment technology, it makes plenty of sense to go uphill for your water for non-hydrology-based reasons. The biggest one being that even if you don't know much about germ theory, you're going to want to get your drinking water upstream from the field full of cow patties. Even if there's plenty of water at the bottom of the hill, the spring halfway up the hill is still the water you want to be drinking.

User avatar
Heimhenge
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 11:35 pm UTC

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Heimhenge » Wed Mar 30, 2016 3:30 pm UTC

DanAxtell wrote:My neighbor up the hill has an artesian well while we have a 400-foot drilled well. My reaction when I found out was, "What is going on with the hydrology around here?" (I don't use language as strong as Randall's.) Apparently, it's something to do with the geological folding in the aquifer that happened before we moved in.


Same thing happened to us when we sunk our well. My neighbor is 200 feet lower than where we drilled, and he had to go down 450 feet to hit water (we're in the AZ desert). The driller said to expect up to 600-700 feet of drilling, but we hit water at 350 feet. A geologist friend explained that a deep intrusion of quartz running through our hill backed up the aquifer and provided a "semi-artesian boost" (I think he made up that word ... but it kinda made sense to me). The driller was pissed because he was expecting more hours on the job. Poseidon was smiling on us that day.

nowhereman
Posts: 68
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 5:46 pm UTC

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby nowhereman » Wed Mar 30, 2016 3:45 pm UTC

Heimhenge wrote:
DanAxtell wrote:My neighbor up the hill has an artesian well while we have a 400-foot drilled well. My reaction when I found out was, "What is going on with the hydrology around here?" (I don't use language as strong as Randall's.) Apparently, it's something to do with the geological folding in the aquifer that happened before we moved in.


Same thing happened to us when we sunk our well. My neighbor is 200 feet lower than where we drilled, and he had to go down 450 feet to hit water (we're in the AZ desert). The driller said to expect up to 600-700 feet of drilling, but we hit water at 350 feet. A geologist friend explained that a deep intrusion of quartz running through our hill backed up the aquifer and provided a "semi-artesian boost" (I think he made up that word ... but it kinda made sense to me). The driller was pissed because he was expecting more hours on the job. Poseidon was smiling on us that day.


I used to live in the Nevada desert and can attest to all of this. However, since the rhyme is Germanic in origin (I think), it is probably moot.

A side question, I thought that Poseidon was god of the seas. So should you be thanking Poseidon for that luck or a different god? I think Hades was the god of the underground (and underworld). It is important to thank the proper god for your aquifer miracles. Otherwise you may find yourself digging a deeper well to combat both overuse and the god's disfavor.
"God does not play dice with... Yahtzee!" - Little known quote from Einstein

User avatar
Quizatzhaderac
Posts: 1568
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Space Florida

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Quizatzhaderac » Wed Mar 30, 2016 3:47 pm UTC

Also, the water insoluble bedrock is above sea level in Jack and Jill's village so the entire aquifer is unstable if you only account for gravity.

As it turns out, water is only good at flowing downhill on the outside of the hill, and it flows through the hill very slowly. The easiest way for the water to get down the hill is to flow outside the hill first and then down; which is why the literally proverbial spring is on the side of a hill.
The thing about recursion problems is that they tend to contain other recursion problems.

Eutychus
Posts: 437
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:01 am UTC
Location: France

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Eutychus » Wed Mar 30, 2016 4:16 pm UTC

Having spent most of today translating an eye-watering spreadsheet dealing with water ingress into Paris tunnels and aquifer dewatering, I'm really getting a kick out of these replies. Also it's been raining steadily here all day.
Be very careful about rectilinear assumptions. Raptors could be hiding there - ucim

User avatar
svenman
Posts: 570
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 2:09 pm UTC
Location: 680 km NNE of the Château d'If

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby svenman » Wed Mar 30, 2016 4:30 pm UTC

By a funny concidence, this morning I heard this song on the radio. Later today I saw the new comic, and since then the song has been playing non-stop in my head...
Mostly active on the One True Thread.
If you need help understanding what's going on there, the xkcd Time Wiki may be useful.

Addams didn't die! But will Addams have a place to live? You can help!

Randallspeed to all blitzers on the One True Thread!

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26453
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Mar 30, 2016 6:03 pm UTC

j-beda wrote:"Me and Jack are going..." could be rephrased as "Me is going and Jack is also going..." to more clearly highlight the subject/predicate/object mismatch. While it might be true that "English is as English does", the majority of native english speakers would say "Jack and I are going...".
Most of us would also capitalize "English", and no one parses "Jack and I are going" as "Jack is going and I is also going"...

While both "I" and "Me" are first person pronouns, they are not used identically. "Me" is the object pronoun, used as the object (or receiver) of the action of the verb ("Jack gave the pail to me.") "I" is the subject pronoun, used for the one "doing" the verb ("I went up the hill.")
I'm sure everyone who cares about this "mistake" knows the grade-school explanation of why it's a "mistake".
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2426
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Copper Bezel » Wed Mar 30, 2016 6:24 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:and no one parses "Jack and I are going" as "Jack is going and I is also going"...

*Like*
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her

User avatar
Steve the Pocket
Posts: 689
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:02 am UTC
Location: Going downtuuu in a Luleelurah!

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Steve the Pocket » Wed Mar 30, 2016 6:38 pm UTC

Reminds me of that one episode of Freeman's Mind where he has to pump the water out of that one room that's flooded. "Why was all this water down here anyway? I'm in the middle of the desert in New Mexico. Does that mean I'm below the water table? If so, good God, how deep am I right now?"
cephalopod9 wrote:Only on Xkcd can you start a topic involving Hitler and people spend the better part of half a dozen pages arguing about the quality of Operating Systems.

Baige.

User avatar
Heimhenge
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 11:35 pm UTC

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Heimhenge » Wed Mar 30, 2016 6:51 pm UTC

DanAxtell wrote:A side question, I thought that Poseidon was god of the seas. So should you be thanking Poseidon for that luck or a different god? I think Hades was the god of the underground (and underworld). It is important to thank the proper god for your aquifer miracles. Otherwise you may find yourself digging a deeper well to combat both overuse and the god's disfavor.


Yeah, the sea is Poseidon's main domain, but according to GreekMythology.com he had control over "all aquatic features." See:

http://www.greekmythology.com/Olympians ... eidon.html

User avatar
StClair
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 8:07 am UTC

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby StClair » Wed Mar 30, 2016 7:48 pm UTC

Story wrote:Maybe they have a wind trap to collect water on the hill.

Or a vaporator.

nowhereman wrote:A side question, I thought that Poseidon was god of the seas. So should you be thanking Poseidon for that luck or a different god? I think Hades was the god of the underground (and underworld). It is important to thank the proper god for your aquifer miracles. Otherwise you may find yourself digging a deeper well to combat both overuse and the god's disfavor.

Back when Titanic first came out, an acquaintance said of the scene where water bursts onto the bridge where Captain Smith is standing, "Poseidon claims his own." Another pointed out that this is the north Atlantic, not the east Mediterranean, and imagined Njord rolling up and informing his counterpart, "You're a long way from home, city boy."

rmsgrey
Posts: 3430
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby rmsgrey » Wed Mar 30, 2016 8:08 pm UTC

Heimhenge wrote:
DanAxtell wrote:A side question, I thought that Poseidon was god of the seas. So should you be thanking Poseidon for that luck or a different god? I think Hades was the god of the underground (and underworld). It is important to thank the proper god for your aquifer miracles. Otherwise you may find yourself digging a deeper well to combat both overuse and the god's disfavor.


Yeah, the sea is Poseidon's main domain, but according to GreekMythology.com he had control over "all aquatic features." See:

http://www.greekmythology.com/Olympians ... eidon.html


Though individual features often had their own patron spirits.

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2426
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Copper Bezel » Wed Mar 30, 2016 8:18 pm UTC

That's kinda weird. I really think the water table ought to be a chthonic thing. I mean, it's very much a geological ... thing.
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her

User avatar
Lazy Tommy
Posts: 89
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: New Jersey, USA

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Lazy Tommy » Thu Mar 31, 2016 12:01 am UTC

j-beda wrote:"Me and Jack are going..." could be rephrased as "Me is going and Jack is also going..." to more clearly highlight the subject/predicate/object mismatch. While it might be true that "English is as English does", the majority of native english speakers would say "Jack and I are going...".

While both "I" and "Me" are first person pronouns, they are not used identically. "Me" is the object pronoun, used as the object (or receiver) of the action of the verb ("Jack gave the pail to me.") "I" is the subject pronoun, used for the one "doing" the verb ("I went up the hill.")

http://www.learnersdictionary.com/qa/wh ... -to-use-me

Schoolhouse Rock - Mr Morton is the subject.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdUXxdmhIsw

This kind of pedantry reminds me of the classic xkcd strip Centrifugal Force.

If English teachers were a bit less zealous about insisting that "me" can never be the subject of a sentence, they could acknowledge that, sometimes, it is; that even though a strict grammar might be easier to teach or learn, sometimes a slightly messier grammar might be easier to use.

To put it another way, if nobody ever made these kinds of "mistakes," Italian would still be Latin.

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2426
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Copper Bezel » Thu Mar 31, 2016 12:57 am UTC

Well, it's practical skills vs. theory. If someone speaks and writes in an educated style, there are practical benefits that come with that - they're regarded as educated and might even communicate more clearly by accident - and it's completely independent of any understanding of linguistics. It's an unfortunate fact of the universe that doing the right thing for the wrong reason usually gets better results than doing the wrong thing for the right reason. It just seems like a different problem than the sciences or something, where engaging kids' interest in the subject matter and giving them a chance to explore things are really the most valuable things you can do, and they don't need to put those skills immediately into practice in quite the same way at a gradeschool level. It's possible to be interested in literature, or even linguistics, but grammar is just a rote skill, and the only kids who "like grammar" are the kids who enjoy feeling superior when they correct other kids. Presumably a lot of them grow up to become English teachers or traffic cops or something.

I liked grammar as a kid. I was an English teacher for a while, but at the college level. I enjoy nitpicking people's arguments on the internet.
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her

Brian-M
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 6:31 am UTC

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Brian-M » Thu Mar 31, 2016 2:10 am UTC

I'm reminded of a rhyme I heard years ago:
Jack and Jill went up the hill
To fetch a pail of water.

I don't know what they did up there,
But they came back with a daughter.


:P

Mikeski
Posts: 1033
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Mikeski » Thu Mar 31, 2016 2:31 am UTC

Brian-M wrote:I don't know what they did up there,
But they came back with a daughter.


They found a time machine, apparently.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 4874
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Pfhorrest » Thu Mar 31, 2016 3:04 am UTC

Lazy Tommy wrote:To put it another way, if nobody ever made these kinds of "mistakes," Italian would still be Latin.

As would French, Spanish, Portuguese, etc, and half of western Europe and the vast majority of the Americas (and more) would all be able to communicate with each other in their shared native language as easily as Canadians do with Australians, which would be awesome. The present lack of that potential awesomeness is due to mistakes like this.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3552
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Soupspoon » Thu Mar 31, 2016 3:15 am UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:communicate with each other in their shared native language as easily as Canadians do with Australians, which would be awesome.
That'd be bonzer, eh? They could all yabber aboot their Ute!

User avatar
Eternal Density
Posts: 5547
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Eternal Density » Thu Mar 31, 2016 4:29 am UTC

Fracking toasters!
Steve the Pocket wrote:Reminds me of that one episode of Freeman's Mind where he has to pump the water out of that one room that's flooded. "Why was all this water down here anyway? I'm in the middle of the desert in New Mexico. Does that mean I'm below the water table? If so, good God, how deep am I right now?"

Freeman's mind is a gem of the internet.
Play the game of Time! castle.chirpingmustard.com Hotdog Vending Supplier But what is this?
In the Marvel vs. DC film-making war, we're all winners.

spacecase0
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 4:35 am UTC

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby spacecase0 » Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:12 am UTC

dew ponds are built on the top of hills to work the best
many people refer to this has historical verification of dew ponds when and where jack and jill was written

xtifr
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 6:38 pm UTC

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby xtifr » Thu Mar 31, 2016 8:57 am UTC

j-beda wrote: the majority of native english speakers would say "Jack and I are going...".


[citation needed]. Or is this a case of "the lurkers support me in email"? I mean, do you have any actual evidence of what "the majority" would say? Do you personally know the majority of native English speakers? :shock:

I'll freely grant that most educated speakers (native or not) would agree that your phrasing is more formal, and arguably more "correct" (assuming we can figure out what that means).

But this is the sort of thing that even well-educated people seem to get wrong. And when they don't get it wrong, they tend to perform hypercorrection, and use "Jack and I" as an object. "The water was fetched by Jack and I."

The fact is that there's something funny about these compound forms that trips people up. My own personal suspicion is that the "...and I" construction has become associated with formality, while the "me and..." formation has become associated with informality, and this is something it's easier for people to instinctively feel.

Of course, I'm the kind of person who, when noticing that people tend to say something in a strange or "wrong" way, get intrigued, rather than indignant, and want to start running tests and collecting more data. Because science! 8-)
"[T]he author has followed the usual practice of contemporary books on graph theory, namely to use words that are similar but not identical to the terms used in other books on graph theory."
-- Donald Knuth, The Art of Computer Programming, Vol I, 3rd ed.

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2426
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Copper Bezel » Thu Mar 31, 2016 9:41 am UTC

xtifr wrote:But this is the sort of thing that even well-educated people seem to get wrong. And when they don't get it wrong, they tend to perform hypercorrection, and use "Jack and I" as an object. "The water was fetched by Jack and I."
That hypercorrection is built into the formal rules in the classic case of "It is I." Ostensibly because the verb of being or the passive voice doesn't have an object, or someshit? Apparently they have two subjects instead, because I don't think the same grammar wankers would much approve of "Me is it"; possibly the entire concept of English as an SVO language is temporarily suspended when and only when answering the telephone. English is an SVS language when answering the telephone.

That single case is really the best illustration to me that regardless of anything else they might say, the people who wank to grammar do not care in the slightest about clarity or logical self-consistency and are motivated by the same and only the same forces that cause some socially handicapped children to refuse to eat bologna sandwiches cut along the wrong axis. I will happily take irregardless over that shit.
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her

User avatar
The Moomin
Posts: 343
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 6:59 am UTC
Location: Yorkshire

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby The Moomin » Thu Mar 31, 2016 9:58 am UTC

The hill has a needle on the top to puncture rainclouds as they drift past.

As hills are higher than shorter not-hill objects, you need a shorter needle, so it makes sense.
I possibly don't pay enough attention to what's going on.
I help make architect's dreams flesh.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2956
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby orthogon » Thu Mar 31, 2016 10:49 am UTC

Copper Bezel wrote:That hypercorrection is built into the formal rules in the classic case of "It is I." Ostensibly because the verb of being or the passive voice doesn't have an object, or someshit? Apparently they have two subjects instead, because I don't think the same grammar wankers would much approve of "Me is it"; possibly the entire concept of English as an SVO language is temporarily suspended when and only when answering the telephone. English is an SVS language when answering the telephone.

I suppose there is something special about being: at least in some cases (i.e. with a definite object) it's expressing an equality or equivalence relationship that's completely symmetrical ("Everest is the tallest mountain in the world/The tallest mountain in the world is Everest"), and the syntactical requirement for a subject and object is somewhat at odds with the semantic symmetry. Also you can't put be into the passive voice, can you? You'd have to say "* Everest is been the tallest mountain in the world". Maybe that's for the same reason.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
eran_rathan
Mostly Wrong
Posts: 1810
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in your ceiling, judging you

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby eran_rathan » Thu Mar 31, 2016 12:37 pm UTC

nowhereman wrote: However, since the rhyme is Germanic in origin (I think), it is probably moot.



I see what you did there...
"Does this smell like chloroform to you?"
"Google tells me you are not unique. You are, however, wrong."
nɒʜƚɒɿ_nɒɿɘ

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9990
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby addams » Thu Mar 31, 2016 1:53 pm UTC

Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water.
Jack fell down and broke his crown and Jill came tumbling, after.

uh-oh...This was triggered by That.
"A man's work is from Sun to Sun.
A woman's work is never done."
Spoiler:
What is woman's work, Ma' Ma'?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2426
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: 1662: "Jack and Jill"

Postby Copper Bezel » Thu Mar 31, 2016 2:15 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:I suppose there is something special about being: at least in some cases (i.e. with a definite object) it's expressing an equality or equivalence relationship that's completely symmetrical ("Everest is the tallest mountain in the world/The tallest mountain in the world is Everest"), and the syntactical requirement for a subject and object is somewhat at odds with the semantic symmetry.

Yeah, the predicate nominative works differently from a direct object and looks more like the structure for a predicate adjective, so that they're both considered "subject complements". I guess it mostly bothers me because direct objects are not the only kind of objects. Indirect objects and objects of prepositions (the "actor" in most passive constructions) still take the objective case. Subject complements are very clearly an extension on the same logic.

Also you can't put be into the passive voice, can you? You'd have to say "* Everest is been the tallest mountain in the world". Maybe that's for the same reason.

Hmm, interesting. I'm also trying to figure out what that would actually be meant to mean; something like "Angry was been by Stan" is equally broken-sounding but does have a parsable meaning, and yet "is been" sounds like a contradiction in tense, which makes me wonder if the basic point is that the verb of being does not have a participle form in the first place.
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests