Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id PAA13475 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Sun, 13 May 2001 15:39:40 +0100 Subject: slangular memesis Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 10:35:39 -0400 x-sender: email@example.com x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, Claritas Est Veritas From: "Wade T.Smith" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: "Memetics Discussion List" <email@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Message-ID: <20010513143539.AAA4372@firstname.lastname@example.org> Sender: email@example.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
Hi Richard Brodie -
>What's the consensus on the use of the word "ain't"?
Ya know, I've had eyebrows and I've had who-cares? but, basically, I've
always liked 'ain't', mainly because of its folksie charm. I ain't
writin' papers here....
But also, I've affected it in a sort of similar way that Lord Peter
Wimsey, fictional character in british mystery fiction, did. It's
harmless, it's gentile (in the grammatical sense), and it pricks those
who perhaps deserve to be pricked if it pricks them at all.
But I don't think anyone is confused or baffled about what it means, what
it refers to, or what I intend to communicate and make understood when I
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun May 13 2001 - 15:43:19 BST