is it pronounced "gif" or "gif"

Salix Babylonika · 2015-12-02 03:24:26

real discussion only plx

Obā-san · 2015-12-02 03:26:07

it's pronounces jaiph

Princess Alice · 2015-12-02 03:26:25

I seem to be the only one who actually gets angry that people won't respect the developers' original pronunciation

I dunno why, more people should feel this way

Klinotaxis · 2015-12-02 03:27:10

fuck the developers, it's obviously pronounced 'gif', not 'gif'. death of the author i say. death of the developer. gif

Salix Babylonika · 2015-12-02 03:27:43

Central Avenue said:
I seem to be the only one who actually gets angry that people won't respect the developers' original pronunciation

I dunno why, more people should feel this way

I'm sorry Centy

but this gets the demon stance

Odradek · 2015-12-02 03:28:21

Shem, Ham, and Gif

glennmagusharvey · 2015-12-02 03:29:13

___ item plox

___fy lube

___ well with

Tre · 2015-12-02 03:53:10

I feel like it's everyone's right to pronounce or mispronounce it as they see fit. I'm fine with people saying it as "jif," it's just a little weird after getting used to it with a hard "g".

My preference is the latter, given that it's more natural to me and makes it less ambiguous what's being referred to (unlike "jif", which has other possible applications-- peanut butter, a short amount of time, that one place you get your oil changed, etc.)

Calica · 2015-12-02 05:08:43

anyone who says "jraphics" as a joke is bad because nobody does acronyms like that. if they did, jpeg would be pronounced "jfeg"

Corvina · 2015-12-02 05:17:30

Calica said:
anyone who says "jraphics" as a joke is bad because nobody does acronyms like that. if they did, jpeg would be pronounced "jfeg"

Thank you I've been making this point for a long time because this argument pisses me off

Tachyon · 2015-12-02 09:45:19

Central Avenue said:
I seem to be the only one who actually gets angry that people won't respect the developers' original pronunciation

I dunno why, more people should feel this way

this isn't how language works, and i'm fairly sure individual words are not under copyright

i was pronouncing it with the hard "g" before the developer went and said it was the other way, it would feel weird to switch now

if enough people are using a word and recognizing it as a word, that's all that's necessary for it to be correct, it doesn't need to be approved by an authority figure

Tachyon · 2015-12-02 09:50:18

. . . idk what i'm so irritable about

this isn't important, they're both 100% fine

One-Winged Eagle · 2015-12-02 09:50:52

Being angry about the "creator's" feelings not being respected is just an irrational thing in general.

Which I get, I understand, I sympathize, but it's still hard-g.

Calica · 2015-12-02 15:57:41

Central Avenue said:
I seem to be the only one who actually gets angry that people won't respect the developers' original pronunciation

I dunno why, more people should feel this way

i get a little annoyed when people use a hard g to avoid making a reference to a peanut butter brand that the developers were explicitly referencing but that's it

well, that and the fucking jraphics thing

Fossilmaiden · 2015-12-02 16:01:51

Giraffic World would have been a far better movie.

Princess Alice · 2015-12-02 16:18:14

It's like when people say "I think this song is about drugs even though the songwriter says it's not." Fuck you, the creator is objectively right and you're an obnoxious nitwit for continuing to insist that your interpretation is somehow as valid as the songwriter's.

Calica · 2015-12-02 16:28:51

the drugs thing is mostly obnoxious because people talk about it like they're accessing ~forbidden knowledge~

also "death of the author" is this whole literary theory thing, you know that, right?

Princess Alice · 2015-12-02 16:51:05

I always just assumed "death of the author" was some nonsense made up by people who don't want to accept that their interpretations of media are objectively wrong when they contradict the author's interpretation.

Calica · 2015-12-02 16:56:09

i can't tell if you're being serious or not here

Fossilmaiden · 2015-12-02 17:00:32

Central Avenue said:
the creator is objectively right

Wikimedia Foundation said:
We're a small non-profit

Tachyon · 2015-12-02 17:24:17

Central Avenue said:
It's like when people say "I think this song is about drugs even though the songwriter says it's not." Fuck you, the creator is objectively right and you're an obnoxious nitwit for continuing to insist that your interpretation is somehow as valid as the songwriter's.

This is . . . mildly offensive to me, i guess?

i mean i don't want to kick up a fuss here but, like, there's a whole complex theoretical underpinning to this stuff and you're brushing the whole thing aside with a 'fuck you'.

One-Winged Eagle · 2015-12-02 17:27:38

The crux of Death of the Author is that a lot of the time, the Author is either wrong, or doesn't matter. What they put out is what they put out, and what we received is what we received, and at times interfering with the differing thing we received is wrong.

So yes, the song is about drugs because that's what I heard in it. And it's a hard-g because that's how I say it. And I'm also objectively right, because as an audience, I can create my own object.

Tachyon · 2015-12-02 17:29:54

i'll note that a lot of the 'guessing the teacher's password' type stuff that people hate about middle/high school lit classes comes about as a logical consequence of the teacher rejecting the death of the author offhand

Yarrun XIX · 2015-12-02 17:31:34

Ray Bradbury insisted and still insists that Fahrenheit 451 was supposed to be about the effect of television on the American populace. Literally everyone else interprets it as a diatribe against censorship in the McCarthy era.

Death of the Author allows us to take what was originally an old man yelling about newfangled inventions and use it to embody an era's fear over the erasure of free thought

Princess Alice · 2015-12-02 17:32:14

So...what incentive is there for me to create anything ever if other people's perversions of it will be considered equally valid as my stated intent?

Fossilmaiden · 2015-12-02 17:33:29

Yarrun XIX said:
Ray Bradbury insisted and still insists that Fahrenheit 451 was supposed to be about the effect of television on the American populace. Literally everyone else interprets it as a diatribe against censorship in the McCarthy era.

Death of the Author allows us to take what was originally an old man yelling about newfangled inventions and use it to embody an era's fear over the erasure of free thought

See also: Isao Takahata's claims that Grave of the Fireflies isn't anti-war.

Yarrun XIX · 2015-12-02 17:34:07

Hell, if we're not supposed to disagree with the artist about their work, then what's the point of criticism? What's the point of discussion? What's even the point of the art? Why not just let the artist write their opinions down on paper and let it be that?

Tachyon · 2015-12-02 17:35:20

like, i'm not saying it's not open for discussion, there are valid objections that can be raised to DOTA, but 'F you of course your interpretation isn't valid you obnoxious nitwit' is just dismissive and rude

One-Winged Eagle · 2015-12-02 17:35:32

If you can't bear to have people receive your intention with anything less than a 100% accuracy, then you shouldn't create at all.

But that's also really boring. Alternative interpretations are fun, exciting, interesting. They look at alternative perspectives, different circumstances, and varied angles. Death of the Author allows people to look at something and say; "What if?"

And that's just appreciation, interaction, and experience. There's also the criticism factors, which are even more complicated and interesting.

Yarrun XIX · 2015-12-02 17:36:44

Central Avenue said:
So...what incentive is there for me to create anything ever if other people's perversions of it will be considered equally valid as my stated intent?

Look, the artist's interpretation isn't inherently better than conflicting interpretations by others. That doesn't mean it can't have staying power. It just means that you have to work for it.

The Great Gatsby, as considered by both modern academia and pop-culture, is pretty close to how Fitzgerald thought of it. Because he wrote in a way that successfully communicated his intentions.

Princess Alice · 2015-12-02 17:38:37

So how do you propose we determine which interpretation of a work is the objectively correct one, if we're not giving the author that power?

Fossilmaiden · 2015-12-02 17:38:51

Central Avenue said:
So...what incentive is there for me to create anything ever if other people's perversions of it will be considered equally valid as my stated intent?

Do you also consider fanfiction invalid perversions of a story?

Tachyon · 2015-12-02 17:39:06

Central Avenue said:
So...what incentive is there for me to create anything ever if other people's perversions of it will be considered equally valid as my stated intent?

Is that your sole reason for creating something? So that you have total control over how people will read it?

Because if so, well, a) in practice you won't, so what you're demanding really only amounts to the right to call other people's interpretations 'invalid', so like, it's just a word, that's all it is, an insult, 'invalid', the interpretations will still exist

and b) have you given a thought to other reasons to create things? The simple joy of creating? What about putting something out there and knowing that people will read it and get something out of it, is that not a reason to make something?

Tachyon · 2015-12-02 17:39:51

Central Avenue said:
So how do you propose we determine which interpretation of a work is the objectively correct one, if we're not giving the author that power?

We don't. Texts are, by their very nature, open to interpretation.

One-Winged Eagle · 2015-12-02 17:40:11

You can't get 100% intention received in any circumstance, because people come into your work with their own knowledge, processes, and prejudices.

But you can come pretty damn close. How? By doing it well. Execution matters a great deal.

Tachyon · 2015-12-02 17:42:42

Mm, even so, the text is always going to be open to multiple interpretations. Certain readings might predominate, certain factors will probably be common to all or most interpretations, but every story will be interpreted in the mind of its audience and no two readers are identical.

Tachyon · 2015-12-02 17:43:48

naney made a comment before about Undertale being an instance of the 'posthumous booby-trap of the author'

it is and it isn't, but it's an interesting point that might be brought to bear on this debate

One-Winged Eagle · 2015-12-02 17:46:03

Central, Let me draw you a picture.

This is a basic model of social communication. The Sender has an intention, and they Encode it into the Message. The Message is Decoded by the Receiver, and Feedback is sent.

The Sender's intention is right, but their Encoding is always imperfect. The Receiver's understanding is also right, because their decoding is also always imperfect.

So, everyone's right. And everyone's wrong.

Tachyon · 2015-12-02 17:48:03

. . . i'm not sure how to proceed on the Undertale point without massive spoilers

basically Undertale initially presents you with the kind of freedom you expect from a game of its genre, but then - via a combination of clever writing and mechanical trickery - basically pressures you away from certain approaches and towards others

this doesn't stop the overall narrative being open to some degree of interpretation, but it does kinda constrain the interpretation in certain ways

Yarrun XIX · 2015-12-02 17:49:00

Central Avenue said:
So how do you propose we determine which interpretation of a work is the objectively correct one, if we're not giving the author that power?

While there is no proper answer to that, the best I can give you is 'whichever interpretation seems to be more thought out and resonates with more people'

There are people who take Twilight, 50 Shades of Grey, and the Inheritance Cycle at face value. But I find that more critical interpretations fit these works better.

But that's not a general answer. That's my answer because that's how I judge interpretations.

Tachyon · 2015-12-02 17:50:15

MachSpeed said:
Central, Let me draw you a picture.

This is a basic model of social communication. The Sender has an intention, and they Encode it into the Message. The Message is Decoded by the Receiver, and Feedback is sent.

The Sender's intention is right, but their Encoding is always imperfect. The Receiver's understanding is also right, because their decoding is also always imperfect.

So, everyone's right. And everyone's wrong.

i remember in the introduction to English lit the lecturer described it as 'a subject in which there are no right answers, but many wrong answers'

Obā-san · 2015-12-02 17:51:58

Central Avenue said:
I always just assumed "death of the author" was some nonsense made up by people who don't want to accept that their interpretations of media are objectively wrong when they contradict the author's interpretation.

ah

um

aaaahhhhh

Klinotaxis · 2015-12-02 17:56:57

ah Christ I remember those from comm 102

also, what inane said

One-Winged Eagle · 2015-12-02 17:57:03

Tachyon said:
i remember in the introduction to English lit the lecturer described it as 'a subject in which there are no right answers, but many wrong answers'

That's cool, I like it.

Like by my guess, the point of that class is to learn how to analyze and find the vague stuff that they want you to look for, and if you've got a fuzzy hold on something, it's good. Because they don't want you to reach and conjure stuff that isn't there.

Odradek · 2015-12-02 17:59:59

Central, what is your opinion on George Lucas editing the original movies and making the original cuts hard to get?

Yarrun XIX · 2015-12-02 18:00:33

There's also the fact that, sometimes, people reading your work in a different light can make it better.

Take the Fahrenheit 451 example again. Today, that book is being used around the globe as a symbol against the erasure of free thought. Bradbury didn't mean to do that, and he doesn't like that it's doing that, but look how much good it's doing!

Or, perhaps, take the whole 'reinterpret bad movies as comedies' thing that started with MST3K. Movies that were hopelessly inept at their initial purpose, like Manos the Hands of Fate or The Room, can be repurposed in a way that makes them enjoyable for viewers. Heck, Wiseau recognized that what was a crappy drama film was a decent black comedy film, and now he's making bank money off of it.

One of the few poems I've ever gotten published was considered 'Kafakaesque', and while I didn't initially agree with that opinion, I did later realize that I have a good feel for Kafka's 'crap goes wrong for reasons that are never fully explained'.

Fossilmaiden · 2015-12-02 18:05:24

Yarrun XIX said:
Bradbury didn't mean to do that, and he doesn't like that it's doing that, but look how much good it's doing!

To be fair, there were quite a lot of things Bradbury didn't like. He was kind of a grumpy old man in his later years.

...I wonder why that's so common with sci-fi authors.

Tachyon · 2015-12-02 18:15:19

MachSpeed said:

Tachyon said:
i remember in the introduction to English lit the lecturer described it as 'a subject in which there are no right answers, but many wrong answers'
That's cool, I like it.

Like by my guess, the point of that class is to learn how to analyze and find the vague stuff that they want you to look for, and if you've got a fuzzy hold on something, it's good. Because they don't want you to reach and conjure stuff that isn't there.

More or less, yeah.

Although that was perhaps more how the subject was around the middle of the 20th century. By the views of most contemporary theorists, what's 'there' is itself dependent on context, due to the nature of language. But it's open to debate. There are different approaches which look for different things.

Princess Alice · 2015-12-02 18:22:47

Fossilmaiden said:

Central Avenue said:
So...what incentive is there for me to create anything ever if other people's perversions of it will be considered equally valid as my stated intent?
Do you also consider fanfiction invalid perversions of a story?

Fanfiction is fine, as long as you acknowledge that it's fanfiction.

To me, insisting that your interpretation of a work is valid even if it differs from the author's stated intent is more equivalent to...say, insisting that your fanfiction is canon. It shows absolutely no respect for the author.

Tachyon said:

Central Avenue said:
So...what incentive is there for me to create anything ever if other people's perversions of it will be considered equally valid as my stated intent?
Is that your sole reason for creating something? So that you have total control over how people will read it?

Because if so, well, a) in practice you won't, so what you're demanding really only amounts to the right to call other people's interpretations 'invalid', so like, it's just a word, that's all it is, an insult, 'invalid', the interpretations will still exist

and b) have you given a thought to other reasons to create things? The simple joy of creating? What about putting something out there and knowing that people will read it and get something out of it, is that not a reason to make something?

So what am I to do in a situation like this?

"Ooh, I like that thing you wrote. It's a metaphor for domestic violence!"

"...Uh, no. It's not. It's not actually a metaphor at all."

"Too bad, death of the author! My interpretation is just as correct as yours!"

I mean, shouldn't I be allowed to say "no, you're wrong" in that scenario?

Princess Alice · 2015-12-02 18:25:20

Really this bothers me on a deep level because it seems to imply that reality is subjective, that there can be no "right" meaning to a work because multiple interpretations can be valid.

Whereas the way I've always thought of it reality is objective, because the only meaning of the work is the one the author says it is.

Klinotaxis · 2015-12-02 18:25:38

you can, and then we can ignore you

is it pronounced "gif" or "gif"

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories