It helps your arguments that the part of the brain that reacts to religious symbols reacts the same to icons of corporations

(October 2, 2010 at 12:47 pm)Existentialist Wrote: 1. A restatement of a text or passage in another form or other words, often to clarify meaning.

Note the word "often". Put there to show the most common use of paraphrasing, but by no means the *only* use.

So in this case, it wasn't a misquote, it was a paraphrase. It would only be a misquote if you were attributing the exact quote to the person, rather than changing the quote to suit the conversation.

We've just been to see the movie "Despicable Me"

In one scene the antihero Gru goes to his bank to get funding for his latest nefarious scheme.

The sign out the front proclaims "THE BANK OF EVIL" and underneath in smaller writing "formerly Lehman Brothers"

I LOL'd

---

(October 2, 2010 at 10:55 am)Existentialist Wrote: By all means misquote Churchill, it's a free country!

The grumpy old right-winger needs the exercise anyway.

I wasn't actually quoting Churchill was I. Because he was talking about something completely different.

So I haven't misquoted him.

But I modified his original quote to make MY case whilst pointing out that the original was his.

Happy now?

(October 3, 2010 at 6:06 am)Zen Badger Wrote: The sign out the front proclaims "THE BANK OF EVIL" and underneath in smaller writing "formerly Lehman Brothers"

I LOL'd

Haha! Awesome

(October 3, 2010 at 12:07 am)Tiberius Wrote:

(October 2, 2010 at 12:47 pm)Existentialist Wrote: 1. A restatement of a text or passage in another form or other words, often to clarify meaning.

Note the word "often". Put there to show the most common use of paraphrasing, but by no means the *only* use.

So in this case, it wasn't a misquote, it was a paraphrase. It would only be a misquote if you were attributing the exact quote to the person, rather than changing the quote to suit the conversation.

(October 3, 2010 at 6:06 am)Zen Badger Wrote:

(October 2, 2010 at 10:55 am)Existentialist Wrote: By all means misquote Churchill, it's a free country! The grumpy old right-winger needs the exercise anyway.

I wasn't actually quoting Churchill was I. Because he was talking about something completely different. So I haven't misquoted him. But I modified his original quote to make MY case whilst pointing out that the original was his. Happy now?

Ok I give in, it's not a misquote. In your worlds anyway. However, in my world it is a misquote and I'm sure you wouldn't want me to stop sharing my world with everybody. Now let us re-visit the dictionary.

misquote [ˌmɪsˈkwəʊt]
vb
to quote (a text, speech, etc.) inaccurately*

Note the prefix "in-" for "inaccurately", which closely corresponds to the prefix "mis" in the word "misquote". Perhaps we need to look at the definition of the word "quote" to establish who's telling the absolute indisputable objective truth here.

quote (kwt)
v. quot·ed, quot·ing, quotes
v.tr.
1. To repeat or copy the words of (another), usually with acknowledgment of the source.
2. To cite or refer to for illustration or proof.
3. To repeat a brief passage or excerpt from: The saxophonist quoted a Duke Ellington melody in his solo.
4. To state (a price) for securities, goods, or services.

By using the word paraphrase, Zen Badger acknowledges that the source is not Churchill, so does not therefore acknowledge that source. But note in definition Number 1 the use of the word "usually" - put there to show the most common use of quote, but by no means the *only* use. So in order to establish whether Zen Badger is quoting Churchill it is only necessary to establish that if he "repeated" or "copied" the his words, with no requirement that the source of those (exact) words be acknowledged. So let's look again at the words used in each case to find out if Zen Badger repeated Churchill's words and then introduced any inaccuracies:-

"It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." - Churchill

"Capitalism is the worst system of all, apart from all the others." - Zen Badger

Zen Badger repeated some of the words of Churchill, ("is the worst", "of", "all the others") but not all of them. I concede that this could be a paraphrase, although personally I wouldn't use that word because to me it implies the restating of the original meaning. However it does seem to meet the dictionary definition of a quote. And because it is inaccurate, whether or not the inaccuracy as compared to the Churchill's original words is admitted by Zen Badger, it is not an accurate quote. Zen Badger quoted a text inaccurately.

Therefore by my own subjective interpretation and, apparently according to the dictionary which seems to have the same status among some atheists that the bible has among christians, it was a misquote.

Here endeth the judgment.

"By using the word paraphrase, Zen Badger acknowledges that the source is not Churchill, so does not therefore acknowledge that source."

No...because by using the word "paraphrase" he automatically acknowledges that the quote is his own. He acknowledges Churchill as the source of the original quote, which he is then modifying to create his own. Inaccuracy doesn't come into it...it's a completely new quote, created by Zen Badger...how can it be inaccurate?

If Zen Badger had said the quote, and then attributed it to Churchill directly, it would be a misquote. I'm completely with you on that point. However, he didn't do that at all. He said he was paraphrasing Churchill; taking Churchill's quote, and modifying it, using the same quote structure to convey a new meaning. At no point did he allude to Churchill believing the new quote, or that Churchill had ever said the new quote. If he had, it would be a misquote, since Churchill never said such a thing (as far as we know).

(October 3, 2010 at 7:24 am)Existentialist Wrote:

---

(October 3, 2010 at 12:07 am)Tiberius Wrote:

(October 2, 2010 at 12:47 pm)Existentialist Wrote: 1. A restatement of a text or passage in another form or other words, often to clarify meaning.

Note the word "often". Put there to show the most common use of paraphrasing, but by no means the *only* use.

So in this case, it wasn't a misquote, it was a paraphrase. It would only be a misquote if you were attributing the exact quote to the person, rather than changing the quote to suit the conversation.

(October 3, 2010 at 6:06 am)Zen Badger Wrote:

(October 2, 2010 at 10:55 am)Existentialist Wrote: By all means misquote Churchill, it's a free country! The grumpy old right-winger needs the exercise anyway.

I wasn't actually quoting Churchill was I. Because he was talking about something completely different. So I haven't misquoted him. But I modified his original quote to make MY case whilst pointing out that the original was his. Happy now?

Ok I give in, it's not a misquote. In your worlds anyway. However, in my world it is a misquote and I'm sure you wouldn't want me to stop sharing my world with everybody. Now let us re-visit the dictionary.

misquote [ˌmɪsˈkwəʊt]
vb
to quote (a text, speech, etc.) inaccurately*

Note the prefix "in-" for "inaccurately", which closely corresponds to the prefix "mis" in the word "misquote". Perhaps we need to look at the definition of the word "quote" to establish who's telling the absolute indisputable objective truth here.

quote (kwt)
v. quot·ed, quot·ing, quotes
v.tr.
1. To repeat or copy the words of (another), usually with acknowledgment of the source.
2. To cite or refer to for illustration or proof.
3. To repeat a brief passage or excerpt from: The saxophonist quoted a Duke Ellington melody in his solo.
4. To state (a price) for securities, goods, or services.

By using the word paraphrase, Zen Badger acknowledges that the source is not Churchill, so does not therefore acknowledge that source. But note in definition Number 1 the use of the word "usually" - put there to show the most common use of quote, but by no means the *only* use. So in order to establish whether Zen Badger is quoting Churchill it is only necessary to establish that if he "repeated" or "copied" the his words, with no requirement that the source of those (exact) words be acknowledged. So let's look again at the words used in each case to find out if Zen Badger repeated Churchill's words and then introduced any inaccuracies:-

"It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." - Churchill

"Capitalism is the worst system of all, apart from all the others." - Zen Badger

Zen Badger repeated some of the words of Churchill, ("is the worst", "of", "all the others") but not all of them. I concede that this could be a paraphrase, although personally I wouldn't use that word because to me it implies the restating of the original meaning. However it does seem to meet the dictionary definition of a quote. And because it is inaccurate, whether or not the inaccuracy as compared to the Churchill's original words is admitted by Zen Badger, it is not an accurate quote. Zen Badger quoted a text inaccurately.

Therefore by my own subjective interpretation and, apparently according to the dictionary which seems to have the same status among some atheists that the bible has among christians, it was a misquote.

Here endeth the judgment.

---

Did I state or imply that Churchill made this statement?

No, therefore I have not misquoted him.

If I had said "as Churchill said, Capitalism is the worst system of all, apart from all the others."

Then yes that is misquoting him as I've given the impression that he said these words,

but since I haven't I'm only paraphrasing him.

P.s stop being such a grammar nazi

(October 3, 2010 at 7:37 am)Tiberius Wrote: ... If Zen Badger had said the quote, and then attributed it to Churchill directly, it would be a misquote. I'm completely with you on that point. However, he didn't do that at all. He said he was paraphrasing Churchill; taking Churchill's quote, and modifying it, using the same quote structure to convey a new meaning. At no point did he allude to Churchill believing the new quote, or that Churchill had ever said the new quote. If he had, it would be a misquote, since Churchill never said such a thing (as far as we know).

But Adrian, you keep introducing new concepts that aren't in the dictionary - things like the need for the original source to "believe" the misquote and the fact that Zen Badger said he was "paraphrasing". Have you taken leave of your senses? These are purely personal, subjective, stylistic preferences - they are not mentioned in the dictionary. And the dictionary, as we all know, is infallible!

A misquote is a quote that is inaccurate; in other words, it is attributed to someone, yet that person didn't actually say it. If Zen Badger had attributed the quote to Churchill, it would be a misquote. He didn't. He said he was paraphrasing, which automatically puts the attribution onto the person saying the quote, not the quote's originator.

Now we've all had a lesson in using the dictionary (which isn't infallible; it's just agreed upon by rational people), you can stop with the trolling. The next time you do it, it won't be a verbal warning you get.

This image always springs to mind whenever I think of Capitalism...