Attack of the J's
Misc: Erika Hammerschmidt @ Wednesday 22 February 2006 - 20:13:32
For as long as I can remember, I have gotten a strange satisfaction out of wording things slightly differently from how other people say them. It's a little obsessive, I think. I will go significantly out of my way to do it and "get away with it"-- when other people call me on it, commenting that it's an unusual way of saying it, I get very uncomfortable and disappointed.
For example, I once wanted one of my aunt's flowerpots to grow a spider plant in, so I asked her, "Can I use one of your flowerpots?"
I knew she expected me to say "can I have" instead of "can I use," because I wanted to keep the flowerpot instead of just borrow it. But I didn't think it mattered how I said it. Saying "Can I use one of your flowerpots?" is like saying "Can I use one of your Kleenexes?"-- it's mutually understood that you're not going to give it back. When you get a flowerpot you keep it permanently, or at least until your plant outgrows it, which can take years. I just wanted to say "use" because it was slightly different from what I was expected to say.
So when she replied "Yes, you can have one of my flowerpots," with a strong emphasis on have, I felt really annoyed and unhappy.
I've been aware of my unusually worded phrases, and my desire to use them, ever since I was a small child. As a kid, I somehow associated them with the letter J... I felt there should be a word for them that began with J, but I never came up with one, so I've always just thought of them as "J's." This may be of interest to the logodaeli community.
On a related note-- I will also often go out of my way to avoid saying words that I am not completely sure people will understand. For some reason I would rather avoid them than define them.
This happens even in situations where it would make much more sense just to use the word and explain what it means. For instance, when I try to explain the Smarties test-- the theory-of-mind test that involves a Smarties candy container-- I have been known to avoid using the word "Smarties."
This is because I'm from the US, and when Americans hear "Smarties" they are likely to think of the American candy called Smarties, which is a completely different candy and couldn't be used in that test because it comes in a clear plastic wrapper instead of a reusable container. I've lived in Europe so I know what the European Smarties are, but I have this fear that other Americans won't.
So I substitute "candy" for "Smarties." I even did this once when recounting how the test was used in "Dog in the Night-time"... which meant I had to use indirect quotes to avoid being actually inaccurate. Instead of saying "The kid said 'There are Smarties inside,' " I had to say "The kid said that there was candy inside"... because the kid didn't say "There is candy inside" but he did say that there was candy inside, although he didn't say it in those words, he specified the kind of candy. (I know that's complicated, but it illustrates how much thought I put my mind through in order to satisfy this weird urge.)
The silliest part is that I did this on Aspies For Freedom, where I would have realized (if I'd thought about it) that a lot of people would already have heard of the Smarties test, and therefore I should have known that someone would comment on my not saying "Smarties." But then when someone did mention it, I got just as embarrassed and frustrated as I did with the flowerpot incident.
It's weird because when I use these strange ways of saying things, there isn't a clear pattern to which things people will comment on and which things they won't. If I say "candy" instead of "Smarties," people call me on it, but if I say "a Smarties container" instead of "a Smarties tube" (which is how it was described in the book), people won't comment, even though it's the same idea (Smarties are a kind of candy, and a tube is a kind of container).
I don't know... I guess we're all weird in some way.
For example, I once wanted one of my aunt's flowerpots to grow a spider plant in, so I asked her, "Can I use one of your flowerpots?"
I knew she expected me to say "can I have" instead of "can I use," because I wanted to keep the flowerpot instead of just borrow it. But I didn't think it mattered how I said it. Saying "Can I use one of your flowerpots?" is like saying "Can I use one of your Kleenexes?"-- it's mutually understood that you're not going to give it back. When you get a flowerpot you keep it permanently, or at least until your plant outgrows it, which can take years. I just wanted to say "use" because it was slightly different from what I was expected to say.
So when she replied "Yes, you can have one of my flowerpots," with a strong emphasis on have, I felt really annoyed and unhappy.
I've been aware of my unusually worded phrases, and my desire to use them, ever since I was a small child. As a kid, I somehow associated them with the letter J... I felt there should be a word for them that began with J, but I never came up with one, so I've always just thought of them as "J's." This may be of interest to the logodaeli community.
On a related note-- I will also often go out of my way to avoid saying words that I am not completely sure people will understand. For some reason I would rather avoid them than define them.
This happens even in situations where it would make much more sense just to use the word and explain what it means. For instance, when I try to explain the Smarties test-- the theory-of-mind test that involves a Smarties candy container-- I have been known to avoid using the word "Smarties."
This is because I'm from the US, and when Americans hear "Smarties" they are likely to think of the American candy called Smarties, which is a completely different candy and couldn't be used in that test because it comes in a clear plastic wrapper instead of a reusable container. I've lived in Europe so I know what the European Smarties are, but I have this fear that other Americans won't.
So I substitute "candy" for "Smarties." I even did this once when recounting how the test was used in "Dog in the Night-time"... which meant I had to use indirect quotes to avoid being actually inaccurate. Instead of saying "The kid said 'There are Smarties inside,' " I had to say "The kid said that there was candy inside"... because the kid didn't say "There is candy inside" but he did say that there was candy inside, although he didn't say it in those words, he specified the kind of candy. (I know that's complicated, but it illustrates how much thought I put my mind through in order to satisfy this weird urge.)
The silliest part is that I did this on Aspies For Freedom, where I would have realized (if I'd thought about it) that a lot of people would already have heard of the Smarties test, and therefore I should have known that someone would comment on my not saying "Smarties." But then when someone did mention it, I got just as embarrassed and frustrated as I did with the flowerpot incident.
It's weird because when I use these strange ways of saying things, there isn't a clear pattern to which things people will comment on and which things they won't. If I say "candy" instead of "Smarties," people call me on it, but if I say "a Smarties container" instead of "a Smarties tube" (which is how it was described in the book), people won't comment, even though it's the same idea (Smarties are a kind of candy, and a tube is a kind of container).
I don't know... I guess we're all weird in some way.
News Categories
