Who call a song a "beat"

[pHz]

bottom line ...

... call them what you like - theyre still the same thing ...

... words have no fixed meaning so use them how you like

slainte rob

[1-2-Many]

Degradation is a negative connotation for a process (the evolution of language) which cannot be negative in nature.

I didn't respond to that earlier? Or did you just casually disregard my response?

You have many opinions. I am labelling one of them as eletist. I am not labelling all of them. What's so hard to understand about that? If you wish to continue in your fallacious reasoning, by insinuating that I am labelling you, the person who holds this opinion, as eletist, then carry on. I have explained myself fully.

My use of the the term degradation was meant to apply in the simple sense,not overall sense that you applied it. ( It's also inaccurate and unfair for you to say you labelled "One" of my opinions as elitist when you actually made a blanket statement, and did not identify any one particular opinion, but let's drop that for the sake of conversation.)

For example, consider the term food which becomes, "eats", Grindage, Monjai!, etc...hence the concept is temporarily degraded by use of those terms, as it cannot be generally or readily encoded/decoded. Therefore, slang often serves to introduce "Noise" into the communications bandwith.

As for the evolution/devolution of language, I think it does niether. It just shifts about. And while we're on that topic, isn't your persistance at saying it evolves an elitist stance? Through the connotation of "evolve", (which encompasses the newer is better fallacy) you're basically saying that the way we speak today is better than how people spoke in the past - which is incorrect as the language of the day is best suited to portray the ideas of that particular time and society.


.
.

[1-2-Many]

...attention must be paid to the utility of a word. An it is here, in the mechanics of language, that a new term (slang) will either live or die. If the term simply replaces another without adding a new connotation or nuance to the established idea, it is interference noise, and is most often disgarded by the machine. Should it serve to identify a unique aspect or property it is most often retained.

As for the term Beats, BeatZ, or B34TZ, I think it is successful at identifying music which consist primarily of drum and rhythym components.

I think Seperitoth's annoyance was that this term was being used ubiquitously to identify all kinds of music, merely because it was the hip new phrase.


.

[Sepheritoh]

The American Heritage Dictionary gives its origin as Middle English.

What I was trying to say before the server so rudely gave me another 404.

It makes sense, as the english used to play some music while they "beat" each other up. I think that is the origin of the english horn, the bugals and those doodling bagpipe thingies as well

[jones-y]

My use of the the term degradation was meant to apply in the simple sense,not overall sense that you applied it.

Degradation:

1 The act or process of degrading.
2 The state of being degraded; degeneration.
3 A decline to a lower condition, quality, or level.

No negative connotation there? If not, then you could definitely choose a better word (lol, that's what this is all about huh?)

( It's also inaccurate and unfair for you to say you labelled "One" of my opinions as elitist when you actually made a blanket statement, and did not identify any one particular opinion, but let's drop that for the sake of conversation.)

Hmm, I thought I was clear.

Your opinion, 1-2 (and yes, it is only an opinion) is rather elitist.

The opinion of yours to which I refer is not explicit in the above quote, no. But it is implicit (and very clear) within the conversation, the context of your original post, and the context of my reply. So that either makes your quote above a lie, or an honest mistake.

The only way for you to not know what "opinion" of yours I am talking about is deliberately. Do I need to specify everything all of the time, or can we ever have a situation where we know what we're talking about?

So again. I called one opinion of yours eletist. I did not call you eletist. I never made any attempt to do that.

Are we clear now?

For example, consider the term food which becomes, "eats", Grindage, Monjai!, etc...hence the concept is temporarily degraded by use of those terms, as it cannot be generally or readily encoded/decoded. Therefore, slang often serves to introduce "Noise" into the communications bandwith.

There is no loss of ability to communicate. That's preposterous. Therefore there is no "lowering of the condition" of a language in this case. That, sir is totally eletist.

Communication itself is a set of conventions attributed to arbitrary signals. If my friend and I decide to clap to greet eachother instead of saying hello, that in no way compromises our ability to communicate with eachother and others. In other words, if I decide to change the convention, and I do so, and others understand the idea I am expressing, there can be no negative connotation, there is no decline to a lower condition. There is only a change. Adding a positive or negative connotation is pure opinion.

As for the evolution/devolution of language, I think it does niether. It just shifts about. And while we're on that topic, isn't your persistance at saying it evolves an elitist stance? Through the connotation of "evolve", (which encompasses the newer is better fallacy) you're basically saying that the way we speak today is better than how people spoke in the past - which is incorrect as the language of the day is best suited to portray the ideas of that particular time and society.

No. Your implication is that I am attempting to apply a positive connotation to the evolution of language, to counter your negative connotation on slang as an evolution of language.

You know, evolution as in a constant and gradual change?

[1-2-Many]

My use of the the term degradation was meant to apply in the simple sense,not overall sense that you applied it.

Degradation:

1 The act or process of degrading.
2 The state of being degraded; degeneration.
3 A decline to a lower condition, quality, or level.

No negative connotation there? If not, then you could definitely choose a better word (lol, that's what this is all about huh?)

( It's also inaccurate and unfair for you to say you labelled "One" of my opinions as elitist when you actually made a blanket statement, and did not identify any one particular opinion, but let's drop that for the sake of conversation.)

Hmm, I thought I was clear.

Your opinion, 1-2 (and yes, it is only an opinion) is rather elitist.

The opinion of yours to which I refer is not explicit in the above quote, no. But it is implicit (and very clear) within the conversation, the context of your original post, and the context of my reply.

The only way for you to not know what "opinion" of yours I am talking about is deliberately. Do I need to specify everything all of the time, or can we ever have a situation where we know what we're talking about?

So again. I called one opinion of yours eletist. I did not call you eletist. I never made any attempt to do that.

Are we clear now?

For example, consider the term food which becomes, "eats", Grindage, Monjai!, etc...hence the concept is temporarily degraded by use of those terms, as it cannot be generally or readily encoded/decoded. Therefore, slang often serves to introduce "Noise" into the communications bandwith.

There is no loss of ability to communicate. That's preposterous. Therefore there is no "lowering of the condition" of a language in this case. That, sir is totally eletist.

Communication itself is a set of conventions attributed to arbitrary signals. If my friend and I decide to clap to greet eachother instead of saying hello, that in no way compromises our ability to communicate with eachother and others. In other words, if I decide to change the convention, and I do so, and others understand the idea I am expressing, there can be no negative connotation, there is no decline to a lower condition. There is only a change. Adding a positive or negative connotation is pure opinion.

As for the evolution/devolution of language, I think it does niether. It just shifts about. And while we're on that topic, isn't your persistance at saying it evolves an elitist stance? Through the connotation of "evolve", (which encompasses the newer is better fallacy) you're basically saying that the way we speak today is better than how people spoke in the past - which is incorrect as the language of the day is best suited to portray the ideas of that particular time and society.

No. Your implication is that I am attempting to apply a positive connotation to the evolution of language, to counter your negative connotation on slang as an evolution of language.

So much to respond to here - suffice it to say I think you are more interested in addressing the speaker rather than the ideas. You have ascribed many ideas to me that I have not said (straw men). I think you need to re-read my post, not with the intent to confute them, but with the intent to understand what I'm saying. For by reading my post with this filter, you are only prone to looking for sticking points that you can contend with, many of which I did not say.

Two points I will address:

I think that degradation still applies to the specific case I stated.

Clapping hands as a greeting is fine for you and your friends, but would appear as confusing and odd behavior by others (if or until it caught on). Hence a "degradation" in general communications, as you behavior fails to communicate the meaning to a thrid party observer - AND you and your pals look like a bunch of weirdos in the meatime, bucking social convention....you webels!

.

[jones-y]

So much to respond to here - suffice it to say I think you are more interested in addressing the speaker rather than the ideas.

Likewise.

You seem to have a desire to discredit me by labelling me a slanderer. And you have yet to acknowledge that I did not personally attack you or label you.

You have ascribed many ideas to me that I have not said (straw men).

Care to back up that claim?

Degradation is negative. No matter how innocently you claim to use it.

I think you need to re-read my post, not with the intent to confute them, but with the intent to understand what I'm saying.

Your implication is that by me being in disagreement, I misunderstood. I read, understood, and disagreed with your statements. As is my right.

And the word you're looking for is refute.

For by reading my post with this filter, you are only prone to looking for sticking points that you can contend with, many of which I did not say.

Can't take the filter away. Do you have the ability to remove your filter and view everything absolutely objectively? Well, good sir, you are now a higher life form than I.

But wait, you haven't really demonstrated that....

Two points I will address:

I think that degradation still applies to the specific case I stated.

Can I still communicate with another person? Do you know what a 'beat' is? Well then how has my ability to communicate been degraded? And if you don't, a simple explanation is in order. No loss of ability to communicate.

Clapping hands as a greeting is fine for you and your friends, but would appear as confusing and odd behavior by others (if or until it caught on). Hence a "degradation" in general communications, as you behavior fails to communicate the meaning to a thrid party observer - AND you and your pals look like a bunch of weirdos in the meatime, bucking social convention....you webels!

Well, I guess it would then fall into the area of cryptography. Besides I still have the word "hello" in my vocabulary for when I encounter others. So no, my communication skills have not been degraded if I and my friends decide to clap instead of saying hello.

[1-2-Many]

Likewise.

You seem to have a desire to discredit me by labelling me a slanderer. And you have yet to acknowledge that I did not personally attack you or label you.

If the shoe fits.....You did label me an elitist pal, just as if I had said, you're opinion on this matter is full of logical fallacies - (which I just have ) I am therefore saying - You my friend are prone to commit many a fallacy error when conversing a point, therefore anything you say should be interpreted through the filter that you are logically challenged and disabled by the need to be right, and protect you're fragile ego rather then consider the facts.
There! Ad- Hominem back at cha!

You have ascribed many ideas to me that I have not said (straw men).

Care to back up that claim?

I did not call degradation either a negative or positive term - you did and then ascribed it to me! I also never referred to you as a slanderer, as you've ascribed above - there are many others but not worth the time. You have a penchant for coloring my words - more straw man behavior. Just as on more example, I never claimed to be innocently using degradation as you imply in the following quote – but I will – read on.

Degradation is negative. No matter how innocently you claim to use it.

Wrong - without degradation we would not have wine, cheese, or life on planet earth for that matter. I have never called degradation bad or good - you did. I think it can be either, and serves it's purpose as many other things.

And the word you're looking for is refute.

NO - I meant confute - look it up moron! (More ad - hominem for ya! )

Well, I guess it would then fall into the area of cryptography. Besides I still have the word "hello" in my vocabulary for when I encounter others. So no, my communication skills have not been degraded if I and my friends decide to clap instead of saying hello.

Exactly, you just made my point... that you would have to resort to the established word hello for those outside your circle, hence your hand clapping greeting is a degraded limited esoteric form of communication = Slang.

And NOTE by calling slang degraded in no means says that it doesn’t have its place in language, or can be fun or useful.

One more case in point: Kick the VIZ to da Curb and romp da insane jacked tude, cause we reck ya'll be chimp clappin with ya primes. Nigs to tha hatez and softz on the 3go perp, and w3 tote be co-path.

Just some slang I made up - did you understand what I said - my guess it NO. Hence communication is Degraded.

....

[pHz]

One more case in point: Kick the VIZ to da Curb and romp da insane jacked tude, cause we reck ya'll be chimp clappin with ya primes. Nigs to tha hatez and softz on the 3go perp, and w3 tote be co-path.
Just some slang I made up - did you understand what I said - my guess it NO. Hence communication is Degraded.
....

or is just difficult ...

... cant you 2 just quit this pedantry ??? it has LONG since ceased to be useful or even entertaining ...

... like it or not the ACCEPTED meaning of degradation implies a negative effect whether you meant it or not ...

... or am i the only one seeing the irony here ???

slainte rob

[jones-y]

dbl

[jones-y]

Likewise.

You seem to have a desire to discredit me by labelling me a slanderer. And you have yet to acknowledge that I did not personally attack you or label you.

If the shoe fits.....You did label me an elitist pal, just as if I had said, you're opinion on this matter is full of logical fallacies - (which I just have ) I am therefore saying - You my friend are prone to commit many a fallacy error when conversing a point, therefore anything you say should be interpreted through the filter that you are logically challenged and disabled by the need to be right, and protect you're fragile ego rather then consider the facts.
There! Ad- Hominem back at cha!

Yeah yeah.... So then, by your logic, all disagreemens are personal attacks...

Because if I can't single out one of your opinions and label it (which is clearly what I did), without labelling the carrier of the opinion as well (which is clearly what I didn't do), then the whole notion of civil debate has just been tossed out the window.

In other words, bullshit, and you can't admit it. I can live with that. Anybody who cares enough to read our dialogue will clearly see that.

Carry on.

You have ascribed many ideas to me that I have not said (straw men).

Care to back up that claim?

I did not call degradation either a negative or positive term - you did and then ascribed it to me! I also never referred to you as a slanderer, as you've ascribed above - there are many others but not worth the time. You have a penchant for coloring my words - more straw man behavior. Just as on more example, I never claimed to be innocently using degradation as you imply in the following quote – but I will – read on.

Actually, the dictionary connotes degradation in a negative manner. And by using the term, you demonstrate awareness of its definition...

You didn't call me a slanderer, explicitly. But you have repeated ad-nauseum the "factTM" that I called you an eletist. Me applying a false label to you in order to damage your reputation makes me a: Slander.

I suggest you reference your dictionary, my friend.

Degradation is negative. No matter how innocently you claim to use it.

Wrong - without degradation we would not have wine, cheese, or life on planet earth for that matter. I have never called degradation bad or good - you did. I think it can be either, and serves it's purpose as many other things.

1. Decomposition is the more accurate term for what you describe. Degradation is a synonym for decomposition, which means it is not necessarily exactly the same in meaning.

2. Let's look at context. How can "degradation of language" ever be a good thing? In any form?

Follow me now:

Degradation = A decline to a lower condition, quality, or level. (per the dictionary)

Language = Communication of thoughts and feelings (per the dictionary)

Therefore:

degradation of language = a decline to a lower condition of the ability to communicate.

Argue with Webster if you have a problem with that.

And the word you're looking for is refute.

NO - I meant confute - look it up moron! (More ad - hominem for ya! )

Nope. Refute is the right word.

Refute = To prove to be false or erroneous; overthrow by argument or proof.
Confute = refute decisively.

Its impossible to be totally decisive in areas of opinion. That's why its called opinion... I believe the better word, in this case, is refute...

I can play the dictionary game all day long.

Well, I guess it would then fall into the area of cryptography. Besides I still have the word "hello" in my vocabulary for when I encounter others. So no, my communication skills have not been degraded if I and my friends decide to clap instead of saying hello.

Exactly, you just made my point... that you would have to resort to the established word hello for those outside your circle, hence your hand clapping greeting is a degraded limited esoteric form of communication = Slang.

And NOTE by calling slang degraded in no means says that it doesn’t have its place in language, or can be fun or useful.

One more case in point: Kick the VIZ to da Curb and romp da insane jacked tude, cause we reck ya'll be chimp clappin with ya primes. Nigs to tha hatez and softz on the 3go perp, and w3 tote be co-path.

Just some slang I made up - did you understand what I said - my guess it NO. Hence communication is Degraded.

....

There exists, in communication, an implicit desire to express an idea. If I can express it by clapping my hand, then I'll do so. If not, then I'll find another means. The only time a degradation is experienced is when I have the inability to express my idea.

You just admitted that you purposefully made up a phrase to demonstrate a point. Were you trying to express an idea within that phrase? If so, then your error is one of knowing who you're talking to and how to effectively communicate with that other person, not a disability to express what you want to say. If it had no intended meaning, then you just wasted your time, and didn't prove anything.

[jones-y]

just as if I had said, you're opinion on this matter is full of logical fallacies - (which I just have ) I am therefore saying - You my friend are prone to commit many a fallacy error when conversing a point, therefore anything you say should be interpreted through the filter that you are logically challenged and disabled by the need to be right, and protect you're fragile ego rather then consider the facts.
There! Ad- Hominem back at cha!

What's funny is that I was thinking that your argument was rather illogical. I wouldn't think that of your whole being. Because I don't know you.

And you've just identified yourself as quite the hypocrite.

You have a penchant for coloring my words - more straw man behavior. Just as on more example, I never claimed to be innocently using degradation as you imply in the following quote – but I will – read on.

I read your classification of your use of degradation, and saw it for what it was, and called you on it. And you proved me right in your reply...

[Gargoyle]

This is rather like the closing rounds of a particularly bruising heavyweight contest.

Although one boxer is declared the "winner", both of them are utterly mashed to pieces, and the sport of boxing is brought into disrepute.

It's clear you're not going to agree. Why not touch gloves and go into neutral corners....

[Mr Arkadin]

jens wrote (some time back):

why is 'tunes' considered wrong by some of you?

Being German you won't have come across this phenomenon (i hope for your country's sake you never do), but when you're in a club and some 15-year old Chav pricks up his ears at the next cut, shakes his fist in the air and shouts "Chooooooooon!!!!!!!!", then you'll understand.

Mr A

[licasto2]

Do any of you assholes actually sell records and tour
or do you all bitch about stupid f**king shit and post
links to sorry excuses for music. You motherfuckers are
kids. I'm going back to gearslutz.