An adjective qualifies a thing or person referred to by a noun.This is true. But what is intriguing is that adjectives are sometimes misleading, and ironical,too. When we speak at a condolence meeting we often use adjectives to glorify the person dead,although we know we are lying. Thus we may describe a ruthless autocrat as a benevolent dictator and a corrupt statesman as an honest politician.
We may eulogise a cruel usurer as a helpful man with the hope of getting benefit from him through sycophancy.Politicians often have sycophants as the kings did have during the feudal days. The court poets of kings were good examples of sycophants.
Adjectives like "great" , "gracious", etc, are often used by way of sycophancy and overstatement.Sometimes adjectives are used ironically as in the sentence-I am blessed that I am in such a terrible condition. Here the adjective(past participle) is used ironically to mean "cursed". So,we must be cautious when we encounter adjectives.
Quarrel over importance
I am Noun.Remember, the baby first of all knows me.
Don't be so proud, Mr.Noun. You have started your boasting using 'Me'.Everyone knows 'I' is a pronoun. You have also used another pronoun 'me' in the second sentence.On the other hand,you see, I can well go without you . I could even avoid naming you in the third sentence.
You are used instead of me,and without reference to me you are hollow,Mr.Pronoun.
Why don't you understand that people are reluctant to use you repeatedly.They don't say,'Ram lost Ram's pen.' Rather they say,'Ram lost his pen.'
That's right, but 'his' here refers to 'Ram', the noun.
So, you cannot boast of being all important.As pronoun I am not like that.I understand we are equal- I need you and you need me.Well,I agree.
Don't be so proud, Mr.Noun. You have started your boasting using 'Me'.Everyone knows 'I' is a pronoun. You have also used another pronoun 'me' in the second sentence.On the other hand,you see, I can well go without you . I could even avoid naming you in the third sentence.
You are used instead of me,and without reference to me you are hollow,Mr.Pronoun.
Why don't you understand that people are reluctant to use you repeatedly.They don't say,'Ram lost Ram's pen.' Rather they say,'Ram lost his pen.'
That's right, but 'his' here refers to 'Ram', the noun.
So, you cannot boast of being all important.As pronoun I am not like that.I understand we are equal- I need you and you need me.Well,I agree.
Comrade
The term COMRADE bears political overtones.Congress President Sonia Gandhi has used the term as an adjunct to late communist patriarch Jyoti Basu.This may yield political controversy . In the context we may look up the word in the dictionary for a fair idea about it.
According to The Pocket Oxford Dictionary, Comrade is 'mate or fellow in work or play or fighting, equal with whom one is on familiar terms.'
Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary says,Comrade is 'a person who is a member of the same trade union as oneself, or of the same socialist or communist political party,etc.'
While the first meaning is wider,the second one is restricted. We don't know in what sense Ms Gandhi has used the word in reference to the late communist leader.
As society evolves, our behaviour also evolves.Speech also is a kind of behaviour.The meaning,connotation,overtone and undertone of a word undergo changes over time.Besides,it is a fact that words frequently have several meanings and meanings change in time,just like other elements in language.Thus,in Old English 'tartness' could be attributed to winter and could encompass such possibilities as freezing to death. Today the meaning has changed considerably.
Samuel Johnson in his dictionary defines a 'humanist' as 'a philologer,a grammarian'. We now know these meanings have changed considerably.In Frank Norris's 'Octopus'(1901),a '...typewriter rose and withdrew,thrusting her pencil into the coil of her hair',in the 1990s 'typists' rather than tywriters engage in such activities.In brief,meanings change.
According to The Pocket Oxford Dictionary, Comrade is 'mate or fellow in work or play or fighting, equal with whom one is on familiar terms.'
Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary says,Comrade is 'a person who is a member of the same trade union as oneself, or of the same socialist or communist political party,etc.'
While the first meaning is wider,the second one is restricted. We don't know in what sense Ms Gandhi has used the word in reference to the late communist leader.
As society evolves, our behaviour also evolves.Speech also is a kind of behaviour.The meaning,connotation,overtone and undertone of a word undergo changes over time.Besides,it is a fact that words frequently have several meanings and meanings change in time,just like other elements in language.Thus,in Old English 'tartness' could be attributed to winter and could encompass such possibilities as freezing to death. Today the meaning has changed considerably.
Samuel Johnson in his dictionary defines a 'humanist' as 'a philologer,a grammarian'. We now know these meanings have changed considerably.In Frank Norris's 'Octopus'(1901),a '...typewriter rose and withdrew,thrusting her pencil into the coil of her hair',in the 1990s 'typists' rather than tywriters engage in such activities.In brief,meanings change.
Dialogue
How would you assess his rise to power?
It is simply brilliant.
Is it? How?
He is a master manipulator.He wants only success,whatever be the means.
If it is brilliant,what is not?
That I can't say,and nor am I bothered.
Morality does not count?
It is of many hues.There is political morality,business morality,professional morality,and what not.
If you wade through blood to power,what kind of morality is it?
Don't forget politics is for power,and it is only power that counts.
So,there is bankruptcy in every field.
When you are in power, you command respect and awe because you can punish and reward.
You have power sans authority.
That matters little when you are in a position of power to enjoy life at the expense of the public and can dole out favours as well as award punishment at will.
Is it morally correct?
People,by and large, accept it.Those who are against it stoically remain passive-they are a miniscule minority.
Then we should live with it?
Let's see.
It is simply brilliant.
Is it? How?
He is a master manipulator.He wants only success,whatever be the means.
If it is brilliant,what is not?
That I can't say,and nor am I bothered.
Morality does not count?
It is of many hues.There is political morality,business morality,professional morality,and what not.
If you wade through blood to power,what kind of morality is it?
Don't forget politics is for power,and it is only power that counts.
So,there is bankruptcy in every field.
When you are in power, you command respect and awe because you can punish and reward.
You have power sans authority.
That matters little when you are in a position of power to enjoy life at the expense of the public and can dole out favours as well as award punishment at will.
Is it morally correct?
People,by and large, accept it.Those who are against it stoically remain passive-they are a miniscule minority.
Then we should live with it?
Let's see.
Honesty is casualty
Honesty is now-a-days the casualty.Why?To answer is,perhaps,difficult.Maybe we are,by and large, dishonest,more or less.Most of us try to have quick gains,anyhow.We don't have the mind to go by the Gandhian teaching : the goal must be noble,and also the means.Rather we find it convenient to follow Machiavelli :end determines the means. It appears,everywhere it is the go of the day.The honest people are the victims of circumstances.
With honesty is linked the personality.What is personality? To-day most people confuse personality with street smartness.A well-dressed person talking fluently and cunningly is taken to be a man of personality.Is it so? Then what about Socrates,Plato,Aristotle,Tagore ,Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose and Mahatma Gandhi?Were they not men of personality? If they were,then honesty in thought and action were the dominant attribute of their character.
But now such people are rare and often suppressed.They are not respected and talked about openly.Their honesty is often taken to be their weakness.We measure the worth of a man by his money and muscle power.Honest people cannot be wealthy overnight ,and they don't flex muscle to be respected.They are in the habit of calling a spade a spade,and this is their nemesis. They don't call a bad man good,a vice a virtue.We are equivocators,and,therefore,cannot appreciate plain talk.We are for tall talk,hollow talk.We clap when someone makes hollow promises. This is the irony of the situation in which honest people are undone.We have Iagos, all around , reigning.Honesty is,therefore,the casualty.
With honesty is linked the personality.What is personality? To-day most people confuse personality with street smartness.A well-dressed person talking fluently and cunningly is taken to be a man of personality.Is it so? Then what about Socrates,Plato,Aristotle,Tagore ,Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose and Mahatma Gandhi?Were they not men of personality? If they were,then honesty in thought and action were the dominant attribute of their character.
But now such people are rare and often suppressed.They are not respected and talked about openly.Their honesty is often taken to be their weakness.We measure the worth of a man by his money and muscle power.Honest people cannot be wealthy overnight ,and they don't flex muscle to be respected.They are in the habit of calling a spade a spade,and this is their nemesis. They don't call a bad man good,a vice a virtue.We are equivocators,and,therefore,cannot appreciate plain talk.We are for tall talk,hollow talk.We clap when someone makes hollow promises. This is the irony of the situation in which honest people are undone.We have Iagos, all around , reigning.Honesty is,therefore,the casualty.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)