Four cartoons from yesterday’s crop: a Zippy in a nameless diner; a Doonesbury on rumors; a One Big Happy on the spread of expressions and speech styles from the media; and another Bizarro collection of puns. The strips:
Archive for the ‘Lexical semantics’ Category
My morning mail on Wednesday the 4th brought me six suitable cartoons for this blog. Two I have already posted about: a Doonesbury with Duke hallucinating a lizard; and a Bizarro with a diner asking for eggs without any sense of style. The others: a One Big Happy on the attractions of “diet” versions of foods; a Zits on hearing and listening; a Zippy with (among other things) more better; and a Mother Goose and Grimm with a symbolic ambiguity.
Recommended reading: Lucy Knisley’s Relish: My Life in the Kitchen (First Second, 2013). It’s a graphic memoir (about Knisley’s growing up) combined with a gentle introduction to eating and cooking, tailored for kids but equally useful for inexperienced adults.
The cooking advice covers a range from American comfort food to more adventurous stuff (like making sushi at home).
This morning I discovered that yesterday was not only Cinco de Mayo, but also National Cartoonists Day. In honor of the occasion, three cartoons for today. Then some account of Cartoonists Day, which leads to the early newspaper cartoon featuring the Yellow Kid.
Yesterday’s Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal:
Lobbying is legal, bribery not, but in the U.S. the laws governing lobbying are complex enough that it’s not always clear when lobbying activities cross the line. The scheme in the cartoon is a transparent and cynical attempt to blur the line.
(Hat tip to Paul Armstrong.)
Two N-N compounds that came by me recently, one silly, one serious. Both are subsective: the referent of the compound as a whole is a subtype of the referent of the second (head) noun. But in neither case is the relationship between the two nouns straightforward.
First, today’s Bizarro:
Then there’s the N-N compound hope chest, heard dimly on some tv show as I was wakening from a nap.
A Zippy on lexical semantics, and a wry Zits on watching your language:
Define sup, and distinguish the referent from slurp. The proper names are, as usual for Zippy, entertaining, and the title is a separate bit of language play.
The joke here, of course, is that Jeremy censors not just his speech — that would be routine — but also his thoughts.
From Gregory Ward, a link to a piece by Jesse Bering in aeon magazine on perversions, “Atheists and homosexuals were called perverts once. Why do we still see perversion where no harm is done?” (excerpts from his new book, Perv: The Sexual Deviant in All of Us). The background:
In 1656, the British lexicographer Thomas Blount included the following entry for the verb ‘pervert’ in his Glossographia (a book also known by the more cumbersome title A Dictionary Interpreting the Hard Words of Whatsoever Language Now Used in Our Refined English Tongue): ‘to turn upside down, to debauch, or seduce’. … In Blount’s time, and for several hundred years after he was dead and buried, a pervert was simply a headstrong apostate who had turned his or her back on the draconian morality of the medieval Church, thereby ‘seducing’ others into a godless lifestyle.