2 of 3
2
WOTY selfie
Posted: 26 November 2013 08:43 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  825
Joined  2007-03-01

LH, is it the word selfie qua word that you dislike, or the thing? I loathe the thing - the presumption that one is so inherently fascinating that virtually every experience in life justifies the taking of one’s own photograph and posting it up for the admiring world to enjoy. But as the thing exists, it has to have a name and selfie seems as good as another. It’s only a truncation of self-portrait, when all’s said and done.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 November 2013 07:16 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3100
Joined  2007-02-26
Syntinen Laulu - 26 November 2013 08:43 AM

LH, is it the word selfie qua word that you dislike, or the thing? I loathe the thing - .

When my wife was away she regularly sent me selfies and I was happy to get them. When not in the company of friends, it is a reasonable option for obtaining pictures of oneself. What’s to loathe?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 November 2013 11:33 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  197
Joined  2013-10-14

It’s only a truncation of self-portrait, when all’s said and done.

Yes, I agree that it is synonymous, but does it have etymological value. (Perhaps Dave, or someone, can clarify this for me.)

The word Self is almost always compounded, and ie has no intrinsic significance for the meaning of the word, unless I am missing something.  For this reason I wonder how such a word gains credence by lexicographers to be eventually entered into dictionaries.

I suppose a word is entered into a dictionary more for its popularity rather than its etymological derivation.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 November 2013 02:32 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  246
Joined  2007-02-16

SL:  ‘ But as the thing exists, it has to have a name and selfie seems as good as another. It’s only a truncation of self-portrait, when all’s said and done.’

To my mind, ‘Selfie’ sits more comfortably on the tongue if one thinks of it as a truncation of ‘self-image’ - ‘’selfi[mage]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 November 2013 03:15 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2331
Joined  2007-01-30

Sure, it has as much right to existence as any other word, but I’m with lh on this. I like it not.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 November 2013 03:35 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4742
Joined  2007-01-03

A selfie carries some connotations that self-portrait does not. A selfie is usually informal, posted to social media for the world to see, is strongly associated with duck face, and is taken with a camera-phone. (It’s not always these things, but most often it is.)

If I set my 35mm SLR camera on a tripod, carefully adjusted the lighting, and snapped a picture of myself using a timer or remote shutter, that would be a self-portrait, but not a selfie.

I myself have no objection to selfie, either the word or the practice. I do, however, strongly object to duck face—the practice, not the word, which is appropriate.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 November 2013 04:38 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1178
Joined  2007-02-14

I have probably taken more selfies with my P&S camera than with my cell phone.  They are all or almost all for social media and generally have at least some message to impart other than my overblown self-image.  For example, I have taken selfies in my portrayal of a local figure from the late 19th early 20th century in a local history ghost-walk endeavor and one of me wearing my Bismarck town team baseball cap from the team in the mid ‘30s for a Facebook profile pic while issuing a friend request to the author of a book on the team during that period.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 November 2013 08:01 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3498
Joined  2007-01-29

LH, is it the word selfie qua word that you dislike, or the thing?

The word.  I have no feelings one way or the other about the thing; it is part of a whole world of online sharing in which I take no more part than I can help (I finally started a Twitter account after being nagged by enough LH readers, but it exists only to link to successive LH posts so people can follow LH that way, and I never visit it or follow anyone else).  And I don’t know why I dislike the word; it’s perfectly well formed and not ugly in any evident way.  I imagine it’s just fear and loathing of the new and unaccustomed; by this time next year I’ll probably have gotten over it.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 November 2013 12:20 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  710
Joined  2007-02-07
Logophile - 26 November 2013 11:33 PM

Yes, I agree that it is synonymous, but does it have etymological value. (Perhaps Dave, or someone, can clarify this for me.)

The word Self is almost always compounded, and ie has no intrinsic significance for the meaning of the word, unless I am missing something.  For this reason I wonder how such a word gains credence by lexicographers to be eventually entered into dictionaries.

I suppose a word is entered into a dictionary more for its popularity rather than its etymological derivation.

Isn’t usage is the only legitimacy that any word can ever have? Etymological derivation may be interesting, but it’s nothing more than entertainment. It certainly isn’t an issue for the masses of people actually using the word.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 November 2013 01:34 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4742
Joined  2007-01-03

The word Self is almost always compounded, and ie has no intrinsic significance for the meaning of the word, unless I am missing something.

I’m not sure what this means. Self does indeed have distinct meaning and is used on its own, not compounded. If you mean that that it doesn’t affect the meaning the compound, then that’s patently false. A self-portrait is distinct from a portrait.

If you mean that the sense of self-portrait is evident and does not require a separate entry for someone to understand what it means, then that might be a factor for small dictionaries with limited space and that focus on words that people will likely need to look up. But it’s not going to impact a dictionary like the OED. Although a self-evident definition may mean it gets a sub-heading under either self or portrait rather than an entry of its own, depending on the editorial policy of that particular dictionary.

For this reason I wonder how such a word gains credence by lexicographers to be eventually entered into dictionaries. I suppose a word is entered into a dictionary more for its popularity rather than its etymological derivation.

The standards for inclusion vary from dictionary to dictionary and depend on what the aims of the particular dictionary are. But at the core, use is always a factor. Rare words are less likely to make their way into dictionaries. But it’s not just rarity. A hapax legomenon used by Shakespeare is very likely to make it into a dictionary, where one in the self-published autobiography of Arthur Plotnik of East Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania is not likely to.

Other than specialized etymological dictionaries, the etymology is rarely a factor in whether or not a word is included.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 November 2013 03:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3100
Joined  2007-02-26

I had no idea Arthur Plotnik had moved to East Stroudsburg.
http://www.artplotnik.com/Biography.html

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 November 2013 04:31 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4742
Joined  2007-01-03

Too funny. My apologies to Mr. Plotnik if he ever reads this. The lesson here is when making up a name, Google it first.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 November 2013 06:25 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3100
Joined  2007-02-26

I mean he is something of a writer on language, so I half-thought that maybe you were referring to someone you knew.
http://www.amazon.com/Arthur-Plotnik/e/B000APZZW8

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 November 2013 07:09 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  246
Joined  2007-02-16

Isn’t that an amazon’ coincidence?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 November 2013 10:34 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  197
Joined  2013-10-14
Dave Wilton - 27 November 2013 01:34 PM

The word Self is almost always compounded, and ie has no intrinsic significance for the meaning of the word, unless I am missing something.

I’m not sure what this means. Self does indeed have distinct meaning and is used on its own, not compounded. If you mean that that it doesn’t affect the meaning the compound, then that’s patently false. A self-portrait is distinct from a portrait.

No, what I said, and perhaps you can enlighten me, was that IE seems to have no significance to the meaning of the word Selfie. “unless I am missing something.”

I do understand that self does indeed have a distinct meaning, even though used alone seems to be a less popular usage, ( again, I might be mistaken).

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 3
2
 
‹‹ Canadian suburbs      Anagrams ››