|
15 Feb 10 - 11:55 AM (#2839981) Subject: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Murray MacLeod It appears to be the common mode of expression these days , particularly among women under the age of thirty, to say "I'm loving ...", instead of "I love..." For example, where once it would have been commonplace and normal for a girl to say to say "Hey, I love what you've done with your hair" nowadays it's almost guaranteed that the younger of the species will say "Hey, I'm loving what you've done with your hair". (Not that they ever say that to me, you understand, not these days anyway, I'm just taking an example) What I'm curious about is when did this fashion start ? I am quite sure I never heard this mode of expression any earlier than three or four years ago. Is it media inspired? Is it Valley-girl speak ? Is it down to McDonalds, and their advert with the jingle "I'm loving it " ? I'm not railing against the fashion, I actually think it sounds quite cute, but I would like to know how and when it originated. |
|
15 Feb 10 - 12:10 PM (#2839991) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: greg stephens Well, it's certainly not standard English usage from England. In recent times, the most obvious sources of non-standard English expression that catch on tend to be be black American expressions. So I'd have a guess at that, on no evidence whatsoever. |
|
15 Feb 10 - 12:14 PM (#2839995) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: John MacKenzie More linguistic dumbing down. Mutter mutter mutter! |
|
15 Feb 10 - 12:14 PM (#2839996) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: olddude It like kinda like ... like wow your hair is great ... or like we went out to the club and like it was so much fun ... only stronger if you say I loving going out to the club!! |
|
15 Feb 10 - 12:28 PM (#2840015) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Amos It just an evolution in the vernacular, probably from teenspeak, and I would guess it was an effort to avoid the clichŽd sentiment "I love..." which has been so overused as to take on overtones of sheer hypocrisy. It sounds a bit more dynamic and "of the moment". and stands in distinction to the insincerity of "I love...", at least originally. It is probably worn into its own clichŽd rut by now, though. A |
|
15 Feb 10 - 12:32 PM (#2840017) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Emma B MacDonald's does seem to be culpable in this instance for the "I'm lovin' it" American English expression. According to the Language Log site they adapted the "i'm lovin' it" slogan for marketing campaigns in many other countries, but were somewhat less sucessful in being able to 'push the boundaries of formal language'! |
|
15 Feb 10 - 12:36 PM (#2840020) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Bonnie Shaljean Well, whoever started it, I'm hating it. It falls into the same category as someone saying "at the present moment in time" when they mean "now". The first person I heard use the present-moment phrase was Nixon. Is he responsible for that atrocity too? |
|
15 Feb 10 - 12:50 PM (#2840034) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: MGM·Lion Perhaps he is. I'm wondering it. |
|
15 Feb 10 - 12:53 PM (#2840036) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: catspaw49 Well Bonnie, regarding Nixon, and not like I'm liking it but at this moment in time, I believe you are correst......or not as I am now at THIS moment instead.........aw shit, there it went so now I think.....DAMN! Already gone............ Spaw |
|
15 Feb 10 - 01:01 PM (#2840047) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Emma B Oliver Kamm, the journalist, writing about clichés "In the Asterix books, an economist, chosen by Caesar to disrupt the Gauls' way of life, explains his nefarious plan. He signals that his exposition will be impenetrable by beginning: "At this present moment in time . . . ." hmmm can't blame Nixon then - most politicians are 'reliable users of cliché' including the present incumbent of the Oval Office. |
|
15 Feb 10 - 01:03 PM (#2840048) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Murray MacLeod I'm not sure that it really qualifies as "linguistic dumbing down", Giok. Is there any logic or reason other than custom governing the idiomatic use of the present tense rather than the use of the participle? After all, "I'm thinking ..." is pretty well interchangeable with "I think ...", "I'm hoping ..." wouldn't raise any eyebrows used instead of "I hope ..." and so on. I'm loving ..." does sound unusual to an older pair of ears, however. |
|
15 Feb 10 - 01:13 PM (#2840057) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: VirginiaTam groovy don't be so square daddy-o like all this stuff has been hashed and rehashed before gotta chill and just go with flow ya know what I mean? |
|
15 Feb 10 - 01:16 PM (#2840061) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: kendall Just more geek speak. Like instead of such as, or, all of a sudden instead of suddenly, particuly instead of particularly. Intragal instead of integral.Artic instead of Arctic. Oragutang instead of Orangutan, prostrate gland instead of prostate gland. Unfortunately, the list is endless. |
|
15 Feb 10 - 01:16 PM (#2840062) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Bill D I was usta be disregarding it, but now I'm hearing it and suffering it. |
|
15 Feb 10 - 01:36 PM (#2840086) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: artbrooks I don't think "I'm loving" has polluted my ears just yet. |
|
15 Feb 10 - 01:43 PM (#2840093) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Murray MacLeod I really don't think you can equate the emergence of a hitherto unheard idiom such as "I'm loving" with the blatantly ignorant misuse of the language typified by "intragal", "prostrate gland" (and don't forget GWB's favorite, "nucular") |
|
15 Feb 10 - 01:45 PM (#2840096) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Smedley Honestly, you lot sound like you want teenagers to talk as if it was still 1950. (I wonder if this use of 'loving' has a part-origin in gay slang, that's certainly where I first heard it.) |
|
15 Feb 10 - 01:48 PM (#2840100) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Murray MacLeod you could be right there, Smedley. it sounds just like the sort of thing you would hear on "Will and Grace". |
|
15 Feb 10 - 01:55 PM (#2840106) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: catspaw49 Seriously Murray.....Two questions. -Does this shit really bother you? -If so, do you have the clap or something? I mean, like, you know, I'm loving this thread and all but if it bothers you I could be like, stopping it during ou threading sessions here. LMAO Spaw |
|
15 Feb 10 - 02:00 PM (#2840112) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Murray MacLeod Actually, now that I think about it, I am convinced that Smedley has hit on it. When I think back, the first time I remember hearing the expression was from a twenty-something aspiring fashion designer, who by definition must have been accustomed to being surrounded by a gay entourage. The other times I recollect hearing it have been on "house makeover" shows on daytime TV (my wife watches these, I have to suffer them occasionally) and the male presenters on these shows are all gay , so yes, I think we have nailed the origin of the expression. |
|
15 Feb 10 - 02:03 PM (#2840115) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Murray MacLeod HEY SPAW, I am like intensely interested in linguistic research. In a previous incarnation, I firmly believe I was Dr Samuel Johnston, dude. |
|
15 Feb 10 - 02:15 PM (#2840126) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Amos Man, if teenagers talked like it was 1950, man, it would be all like "Thank you!! I'd enjoy that very much...." and "Excuse me, do you have any openings for honest work?" and, like, "I am reading Moby Dick and finding it very interesting...". You really want that? Dragsville, man, strictly for squares. A |
|
15 Feb 10 - 02:31 PM (#2840136) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: fat B****rd OMG ! Cool, Daddio ! Straightfrom the fridge !! |
|
15 Feb 10 - 02:34 PM (#2840139) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Murray MacLeod Hey Amos, get with it, daddy-o. James Dean was just as inarticulate as today's teenagers (or rather the persona he represented was ). |
|
15 Feb 10 - 02:44 PM (#2840154) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: catspaw49 Amos you're really from Weirdsville. Like, you got a warped groove man......But I can dig it as long as your karma doesn't run over my dogma........ Spaw |
|
15 Feb 10 - 02:56 PM (#2840165) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Richard Bridge See you later alligator. |
|
15 Feb 10 - 03:14 PM (#2840177) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: GUEST,mauvepink One of the greatest lines ever spoken in Ally McBeal was from one female lawyer to another who was competing for a man... "I love what you're trying to do with your hair..."! lol mp |
|
15 Feb 10 - 03:24 PM (#2840188) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Jeri Kendall it's not a mistake like ... as the examples you gave, it's just unusual. Nukular instead of nuclear, defribulator instead of defibrillator, tin-EYE-tus instead of TIN-it-us are wrong. (The medical lingo bothers me because I spent 20 years working in a medical career field. I'm more sphincterfied about that than about music.) I say it's not wrong because, it would be perfectly appropriate if you asked a person "How are you currently feeling about that lobster you're consuming?" and they answered, "I'm (currently) loving it." What it does NOT mean is that they have felt this way before or feel this way tomorrow. It's a reflection on the fleeting whims of people, on the impermanence of tastes. Primarily, I think it's a fad. Humans do fads, and it may or may not 'stick'. |
|
15 Feb 10 - 03:25 PM (#2840190) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: VirginiaTam Man I'm hip to scene. Digging way back to the stone age, when the chicks wore bobby socks and the cats wore fur coats, drove jalopies and said "That's the cat's pajamas!" |
|
15 Feb 10 - 04:51 PM (#2840296) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: open mike i think it must be Utah Phillips fault.."I Remember Loving You".... |
|
15 Feb 10 - 05:14 PM (#2840334) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Here you go, like, guys, this will duh, so have you in like absolute stitches, like, girlfriend! ;0) Chalkie's a SPY? Totally not, like!! "How are you" "Oh, I'm well good. How are you?" |
|
15 Feb 10 - 05:20 PM (#2840338) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: KT Cat's pajamas? I thought it was the bee's knees! This thread totally rocks! Can't wait to see a little Bobertese in here. |
|
16 Feb 10 - 12:47 AM (#2840612) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: MGM·Lion 'Cat's whiskers?' |
|
16 Feb 10 - 01:07 AM (#2840617) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Don Firth Like, at this point in time, I'm loving it, and at the end of the day, that's the bottom line! Don Firth P. S. I thought I'd run that up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes it. |
|
16 Feb 10 - 09:17 AM (#2840825) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Amos LOVE As soon go kindle fire with snow, as seek to quench the fire of love with words. William Shakespeare |
|
16 Feb 10 - 09:37 AM (#2840839) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Uncle_DaveO Just more geek speak. Like instead of such as, or, all of a sudden instead of suddenly. . . I'm not sure what time frame you put on "geek speak", but "all of a sudden" is absolutely not just current language fad or fashion. "All of a sudden" was very common, in children's, teens', and adult talk when I went through the first two of those, seventy years ago. Dave Oesterreich |
|
16 Feb 10 - 10:13 AM (#2840857) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Dave the Gnome Cat's pajamas? Bee's knees! Cat's whiskers? What's wrong with the good old fasioned Dog's bollocks? :D (eG) |
|
16 Feb 10 - 11:15 AM (#2840913) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: MGM·Lion Nothing wrong with it, D. The more alternative locutions, the merrier [literally!]. |
|
16 Feb 10 - 04:10 PM (#2841226) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: mousethief You're out running. Your cell phone rings. You answer. "What are you doing?" the voice says. You answer: 1. "I'm running." or 2. "I run." "I'm loving" is just natural evolution of elements already common in the language. The normal present tense in English is the combination of the present tense of "to be" and the present participle of the verb in question. Maybe you haven't noticed. O..O =o= |
|
16 Feb 10 - 05:18 PM (#2841290) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Don Firth I think there is a, perhaps, subtle difference in meaning. "I love Shakespeare," seems to indicate a general, more-or-less permanent state. Yesterday, today, and on into the foreseeable future. "I'm loving Shakespeare," tends to imply that this may be a temporary state, but at the moment, I'm reading Shakespeare's plays or sonnets and "I'm loving it." Yeah. I think it's legit. Don Firth |
|
16 Feb 10 - 05:19 PM (#2841292) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: Murray MacLeod The group of verbs which would normally take the present tense of the verb to be plus the present participle as the normal present tense tend to be verbs of action, which could all be answers to the question "what are you doing ? " nobody would answer "I garden " or "I weed" or "I paint my house" in response to the question. These verbs which customarily take this form in the present tense differ from verbs which express a more cerebral or emotional state, such as "I love", "I hate", "I detest", "I fear", "I distrust" which sound strange when expressed as "I am ... + present participle". Maybe you hadn't noticed, Alex ... |
|
16 Feb 10 - 09:18 PM (#2841553) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: GUEST,999 "In a previous incarnation, I firmly believe I was Dr Samuel Johnston, dude." No offence, but I really was Dr Johnson in a previous incarnation, and there was NO 't' in my name. It helped the Dictionary sales, lotz. |
|
16 Feb 10 - 11:36 PM (#2841608) Subject: RE: BS: Question about 'loving' From: GUEST,999 Of course, for the mean things Johnson said about the Scots, maybe with the 't' is good. |