I have another OEDILF question that of course CJ and I are at odds with (what else is new? ) I posted (and Bob became my co-author) the following limerick, and CJ says we have used the word "lame" wrong. Have we?

While an amateur's new at his game,
He's imagining fortune and fame
In his golf or his tennis
That he plays with such menace,
Though his chance for success is quite lame.

The second definition on MW is "lacking needful or desirable substance : WEAK." Doesn't that work?

Stick to your guns.
I'd say that while its not the perfect use its legitimate. (I would though wouldn't I, I'm the co-author )

PS

How do you feel about "Both his aim and his game are quite lame." ?

CJ's a sucker for internal rhymes.

Or even, "...It's a shame that his aim is so lame..."

Bob, you are right. You are the co-author, and I will suggest your line. However, at this point I took CJ's suggestion, something about "what a shame."

I am not good at "sticking to my guns" there. I always seem to give in. There is another that I did stick up for though:

You're exhausted; you're paler and paler.
You seem to be frailer and frailer.
Anemia's tirin',
You need much more iron.
Try spinach, like Popeye the Sailor!

It has been changed slightly now, but they didn't think "tirin'" and "iron" were perfect rhymes, so the suggestion was for: L3 & L4 to read: "You're anemic and slow;
'Cause your iron is low."

I loved "iron" and "tirin'" and refused to change it, so it is standing. However, I suppose it may not be included in the publication...though I won't be around then anyway, I am sure!

I really like "tirin" and "iron" - it adds humor to the whole verse!

I like your use of lame, but I do like Bob's variant last line better - it, again, adds to the humor for me.

Good though the thought is the rhyme is suspect. I never got to workshop this one; had I done so then I might have suggested:

Anaemia's tiring -
It's iron you're requiring

and then I'd have stuck with the Popeye line.

tirin' - iron ?

Add a usage note to say you read it in a Popeye voice and it works fine!

Popeye - makes me think of one of the jokes I tell the kids . . .

What did the sweet potato say to the turkey?

Here I yam!

For those of you who don't read OEDILF, here is one of mine that evolved more than I could believe:

My original:

There once was a man from Poughkeepsie
Whose alcohol made him quite tipsy.
His eyesight was blurry;
His speech was all slurry:
"Gimme a drink or I'll rips ye!"

Nobody, but me, liked the last line. I could just see this drunk, blurry eyesight, slurred speech, demanding a drink. Maybe it's the nurse in me who has seen more than my share of alcoholics. Now, nobody liked L5. Later, I thought I could have changed it to: "Gimme a drink and no lip, see?", but I didn't have a chance.

It evolved to this:

There once was a man from Poughkeepsie
Whose alcohol made him quite tipsy.
He dressed with more flair,
Bought a big dancing bear,
Then went out to find work as a gypsy.

Needless to say, it was CJ who wrote L3-5. I still like the first 2 lines, so I am going to be second author.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Kalleh,

The last line has too many syllables. If it is going to be used at all, it should be

Then went to find work as a gypsy.

As a person who is 1/4 gypsy (my father was born in Bohemia) I find the connection between alcohol abuse, dancing bears, and gypsy offensive.

I much prefer your original and think you should have stuck with it.

gypsy

I believe you'll find most Roma prefer not to be called gypsies, tinkers, or the like.

Yes, the discussion definitely was around "gypsies," and some found it offensive. Yet, CJ said that this is a joke. I think we have talked about "gypsies" here before, but remind me...why is it offensive?

Jo, I didn't like the meter either, and I like yours better. However, here is how he is seeing it:

Then went OUT to find WORK as a GYPsy.

It matters not how he is seeing the meter. that is not proper limerick meter. One of the reasons I don't write for the OEDILF anymore is that matters of rhyme and rhythm seem more dependent upon who you are than on any consistent rule set. Sorry, but that's how I feel.

As to why gypsy is offensive. The word itself is not at all offensive. What is offensive is the setting. Gypsies are constantly being stereotyped as associating with dancing bears, drinking, thieving, etc.

I really hate seeing the stereotype being put forth once again.

K., some, but not all Roma find the ethnonym Gygpsy to be offensive. I was not addressing any stereotypes. Speaking of which and here's an etymology: to gyp as in to fraud or swindle < Gypsy (which word may be from Egyptian as Europeans were confused where the Roma came from which ultimately was India).

Gypsies are constantly being stereotyped as associating with dancing bears, drinking, thieving, etc.

Really? Gypsies are associated with dancing bears and drinking? I had no idea! What is the association with dancing bears?

I just thought CJ was being silly in the limerick, but evidently "dancing bears" really meant something.

K., there are all kinds of tales about the Roma. They also were the victims of the Nazis during the Holocaust.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jo:
It matters not how he is seeing the meter. that is not proper limerick meter. One of the reasons I don't write for the OEDILF anymore is that matters of rhyme and rhythm seem more dependent upon who you are than on any consistent rule set. Sorry, but that's how I feel.

---

Just goes to show. I feel the exact opposite.
One of the reasons I haven't been as active there recently is that I think there's too much attention payed to a very limited set of rules. I know I started it to some extent by posting about anapests and iambs and such like but as I've mentioned in a workshop on one of mine in speech there is no such thing as a syllable. We elide and split words, emphasise "wrong syllables" add or subtract syllables from words like "fire" and "world" and generally twist the language into pretzels all the time. I guarantee that (almost) every one of my limericks works just fine when I recite it regardless of what it looks like on the page.

Actually the main reason I don't do much there is the same as the main reason I don't do much here - time. My social life has dropped to zero and almost all of my little pleasures have been severely restricted by the insane schedule I'm being asked to work. The over fussiness about stress and metre is a bit demotivating though.

Sorry CJ if you're reading but that's just the way it is.

Kalleh,

It was your limerick. You should not be relegated to second author. If you agree to changes suggested by CJ, then he would be a contributing author, at best. You are still the principle author. I like your original ... except for the last line. I don't like CJ's version. I didn't understand the connection between the first two lines and the third and fourth lines (I do now, but still don't like them). The last line, though, very clearly associates gypsy with alcoholism, which I find unsettling. CJ may say it was just a joke, but try substituting any other group name for the word "gypsy," and see how he likes it.

I don't post limericks for three main reasons. I'm not good at writing them and I don't have the time to spend. And I don't want someone rewriting any limerick I would submit. It appears that in your case CJ is not only rewriting part of your limerick, but he is also claiming ownership!

Tinman

Especially in Europe, the Rom were associated with traveling carnivals. Dancing bears were a major attraction in these carnivals. Unfortunately, thievery and trickery of various sorts was also a part of these traveling shows. Like so many stereotypes, the one of gypsies as thieves and charlatans has a basis in fact. However, the stereotype is no longer appropos; nevertheless the vision of the gypsy with the strange head covering and abundant hair, wife dripping beads and bangles, and the collared dancing bear -- all as a cover for dirty tricks -- has continued.

Wow, I didn't know that at all, Jo. Now I am not sure that I want to be associated with that limerick any more.

To be honest, I hope CJ is too busy to be reading this thread. I don't want to offend him, but I want to weigh in too.

First, as to Tinman's point. They didn't like L5 of my limerick, and then CJ rewrote it that way. I no longer felt like I owned it as, obviously, I never would have said anything about "gypsies" or "dancing bears." However, I did like L1 and L2 so I suggested he take first author. Perhaps I should just give up on L1 and L2 and let him have it. Now, what annoyed me a little was that 2 other workshoppers took off on that limerick, too, and wrote their own. Being from academia, I am very sensitive to plagiarism. I am trying to be collaborative and cooperative, and yet when I think that my limerick wasn't accepted, but 3 workshoppers got limericks from it...well...I get a little angry.

As for Bob's and Jo's comments, I do absolutely agree that it depends on who you are, Jo. I suppose that's only fair since it is CJ's site. And, I think there is too much attention to the "rules," too. I can't tell you how many times I have added a comma or taken away a comma (in the same place!) to please one workshopper versus another. Grammar is a big part of it, and we all know that grammatical rules aren't always black or white. I remember going back and forth many times about an em dash versus an ellipsis, when, really, it made no difference which I used. The sense of individual style doesn't seem to be allowed. I have tried to argue with the workshoppers about that, and every so often I win.

I am still posting limericks there because I do love writing them...and, I have recently been promoted to a workshopper. Believe me, I don't plan to be so prescriptive! I will mainly focus on the definitions of the words, particularly the medical words.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Kalleh,

quote:

---

Originally posted by jo:
It matters not how he is seeing the meter. that is not proper limerick meter. One of the reasons I don't write for the OEDILF anymore is that matters of rhyme and rhythm seem more dependent upon who you are than on any consistent rule set. Sorry, but that's how I feel.

---

The line, "Then went out to find work as a gypsy," can be accented in two ways. Accenting "went" results in the flawed meter you've described. Accenting "out" yields three perfect anapests (plus a trailing unstressed syllable to match the ends of lines one and two).

Much of the attention to meter that I've observed has concentrated on removing these ambiguities. If you have to read a line twice to see how the author intended it to be pronounced, then the limerick is less than perfect. That doesn't mean it won't be accepted. When you've written a limerick, it's very easy to read it the way you intended it and not realise how awkward it seems to an independent reader.

Matters of rhyme and rhythm must depend heavily on who you are, because we all speak English with different accents. I accept that if I write a limerick in Australian English that it will be criticised if it doesn't scan or rhyme correctly for US readers.

Even without differences in accents, each author in the OEDILF has a subtly different rule set and a different level of tolerance to rule breakage. For instance, I feel that lines 3-5 of a limerick should flow continuously with no missing unstressed syllables (from the first stressed beat in line 3 to the end)
i.e. da da Dum da da Dum / da da Dum da da Dum / da da Dum da da Dum da da Dum
Many people prefer an iambic start to all lines of a limerick (only one unstressed syllable at the start of each line). Do I break my own rules? Yes. To me they are just guidelines to make a good limerick. If I workshop a limerick, I'll try to suggest ways that improvements can be made, but I don't expect they'll always be adopted.

These differences will show up in the workshop comments. There is no obligation to accept all input. If you don't think a particular piece of advice improves your work, then stick to your guns. If you find that sticking to your guns prevents a good limerick being approved by CJ, then maybe there are irreconcilable differences in the definitions of a good limerick. (Of course, I'd rather those differences were discussed and understood rather than assumed.)

If a profusion of dissenting opinions in a workshop is something you find off-putting, then the style we've adopted in the OEDILF will remain a barrier and I can fully understand your reluctance to contribute.

I'll reply over on the OEDILF if that's OK Virge.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: BobHale,

quote:

---

Originally posted by BobHale:
I'll reply over on toe OEDILF if that's OK Virge.

---

That's the best place for it. Feel free to quote any/all of my post if it helps to frame the discussion.

That's the best place for it.

I think wordcraft is appropriate, too, since the project started here and many of our members post there. Hopefully, each of our boards enhances the other.

I will put in my 2 cents here. In fact, I have been very verbal over on OEDILF, and perhaps too much so. Any day now I expect to be banned from their site, especially because my most recent ranting (which I somewhat regret).

The fact is, it is a great site with wonderfully talented people, and they are trying very hard, each day, to make it better. The project is so enormous, and with people from all over the world, one wonders how it has ever gotten this far. The accents mean that limericks work for some groups, but not for others. There are some real punctuation Nazis over there (jheem would have a field day!), and yet there are those who are more laissez-faire, such as I (or is it me?). At first I balked at the workshoppers putting commas after every other word or changing ellipses (surely everyone here knows how much I love ellipses!) to em dashes, etc. However, I have learned to do what I am asked. A comma here and there that I don't agree with...well there are more important things in life. Yes, there are controversies over there, but aren't there on every good Internet site? Didn't we just have one? Good sites deal with them and move on. The bad sites either don't deal with them at all (I used to post on a site like that), or they delete everything immediately so no one sees the problems, which eventually fester.

Sure, the process of workshopping could be more organized. But, we have lots of things that could be changed here too (would I ever love a spellcheck...or immediate notification when we receive a PM). Generally, they are doing a fantastic job, and I highly recommend the site to any of our registrants. For those of you who would like to view it, the URL is www.oedilf.com. Bob, I will pop over there to see what you had to say.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Kalleh,

BTW, I haven't been able to accsess OEDILF for the last couple of days, with a "cannot find server" kind of display. Does anyone know if the server is down or something?

The server was down yesterday.
It looks as if its been down for a while. I just logged in to find no new posts at all which is really unusual.

It seems to be OK now though.

A post by Virge in the OEDILF forum:

quote:

---

Apologies for the lack of a forum yesterday. The server's power supply died.

I hope the lack of a forum didn't encourage anybody to get involved in too many real-life activities.

---

real life activities? Do you all have real-life activities? Sheesh - I KNEW I was missing SOMEthing . . .

My younger but more experienced friends tell me that the so-called "real" life activities are for those who can't handle the complexities of life in the Wonderful World of the Internet.

I wonder if most of us have the same type of relationships with our Internet friends as our real life friends. I tend to think so, but then I have seen some very odd situations happen on forums, the likes of which I haven't seen in real life.

I'm generally brutally honest and outgoing.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kalleh:
I wonder if most of us have the same type of relationships with our Internet friends as our _real life_ friends. I tend to think so, but then I have seen some very odd situations happen on forums, the likes of which I haven't seen in _real life_.

---

In both real life and on the net I have a wide variety of types of relationship. They range from casual acquaintances to very close friends. The differences in relationship style between the communication modes are small compared with the spread of relationship depths within any one domain.

Forums have their own dynamics. A disagreement in real life will typically only have one or two observers. The observers will usually already know the participants and will be able to read body language during the disagreement. In a forum there are usually many more observers, and the bare text of the disagreement remains on record for future observers. People are usually sensitive enough about how others see them to want to "set the record straight." If each participant understood that about the other, there would be fewer odd situations. Instead, many forum users make unfounded assumptions about the emotions that drive the responses.

Virge I totally agree with you. Well put!

Yes, I agree, CW. Virge, as usual, has explained it well.

I have met a fair number of people who post on forums, and in almost every situation, they are exactly as I would have expected...only better! That surprised me a bit, actually.

We were talking about "gypsies" further up in this thread. I had vaguely heard of them, but really hadn't known the political incorrectness of the word. However, I learned differently this weekend in Orlando. Several times people cautioned me about the "gypsies" (obviously a very negative connotation to them) who drive cabs there. These people weren't just random strangers...one was the hotel concierge and another was at the Orlando Information Booth. I was taken aback at their rudeness and insensitivity.

Unlicensed cabbies seem to be a problem everywhere and typically those who operate unlicenced cabs are immigrants or other "fringe" workers. The suspicion most have is that, because cab fares are almost always cash transactions, taxi-driving is a job that can be done without there being significant risk of many illegal workers' being traced.

In London (where, as those who have followed my recent discourse will know, "proper" cabs are very highly regulated) there are many unlicensed cabs operating illegally. In the past few weeks there has been a clampdown and large numbers of illegal operators were arrested and in several cases had their vehicles confiscated as they were not roadworthy.

I suspect I was just lucky when I was in Florida recently, although I did get into one cab that was at least fifteen years old and scruffy - but it got me back to my hotel safely and at a fair price so that was OK.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kalleh:
We were talking about "gypsies" further up in this thread.

---

Wikipedia has some information about gypsies. I have no idea how accurate it is.

Tinman