tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33159158.post7238723340426039486..comments2024-02-25T20:07:56.114-06:00Comments on Mr. Verb: "You people"Mr. Verbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04048931596146402872noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33159158.post-34717370409368297402012-07-20T04:57:52.313-05:002012-07-20T04:57:52.313-05:00Andy, I remember something about dialect coming up...Andy, I remember something about dialect coming up with Perot, maybe this point, but don't know more. <br /><br />Oregon Guy, not off topic but to the context, certainly. I listened to the full quote a set of times and didn't get that sense, but that is, like Jan's point, a reading that would soften this.Mr. Verbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04048931596146402872noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33159158.post-3140881882748869332012-07-20T00:08:24.678-05:002012-07-20T00:08:24.678-05:00Very slightly off-topic for which I apologize, but...Very slightly off-topic for which I apologize, but I wonder about the later part of the sentence. <br /><br />" . . . all you people need to know" is the usual version quoted, which of course carries an implication of high-handed know-betterism. But doesn't the fuller quotation, " . . . all you people need to know and understand about our financial situation . . . ", remove that implication? With the fuller quotation, doesn't the particle "to" in "need to know" emerge pretty clearly as meaning "for the purpose of"? If Ms. Romney had said, "all you [people] need for the purpose of knowing and understanding about our financial situation," wouldn't this be understood in a much more benign and neutral way? <br /><br />I'm not a language expert and I'm certainly no partisan of the Romneys. But I would be grateful for your opinions on this. Thank you!<br /><br />Oregon Guy Who Rarely PostsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33159158.post-58558789797838085022012-07-19T17:42:26.765-05:002012-07-19T17:42:26.765-05:00I believe "you people" is used in some d...I believe "you people" is used in some dialects (including Perot's East Texas dialect) as a 2nd person plural pronoun similar to "you all/y'all" and (ironically) is considered to be a polite form in contrast to the familiar "y'all".Andyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06297427020753718979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33159158.post-49204956084759291132012-07-19T16:21:24.050-05:002012-07-19T16:21:24.050-05:00That is a really generous interpretation. The '...That is a really generous interpretation. The 'you' does sound kinda half swallowed and I wondered if that was typical for her prosody, which I'm not very familiar with. <br /><br />Thanks!Mr. Verbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04048931596146402872noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33159158.post-70826586896597068892012-07-19T16:19:53.549-05:002012-07-19T16:19:53.549-05:00Or she could be saying "you" because she...Or she could be saying "you" because she's been using "you" in previous parts of the answer, then trying to emend it to "people" on the fly -- it sounds as if she half-swallows the "you."Janhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03173219179480606941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33159158.post-71435492429798827462012-07-19T14:48:51.250-05:002012-07-19T14:48:51.250-05:00Thanks. I'm sure I hear it, but somebody will ...Thanks. I'm sure I hear it, but somebody will no doubt confirm acoustically. If not on the Log, maybe one of the local folks.Mr. Verbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04048931596146402872noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33159158.post-67707604498191175892012-07-19T14:45:43.517-05:002012-07-19T14:45:43.517-05:00Also, it looks like there is a video of the interv...Also, it looks like there is a video of the interview on the page you linked to. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFX7jqUW1-8" rel="nofollow">Here's the direct link to it on YouTube</a>. <br /><br />But did she actually say "you people"? I watched the video a few times, and I'm not sure there's actually a "you" in there. If there is, it sounds kind of clipped. Paging Mark Liberman?Jonathonhttp://www.arrantpedantry.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33159158.post-21241747529414239742012-07-19T14:40:10.914-05:002012-07-19T14:40:10.914-05:00I'd never seen that clip, thanks! Yeah, maybe ...I'd never seen that clip, thanks! Yeah, maybe a slap at the journos, but that wouldn't change my reading of the statement either.Mr. Verbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04048931596146402872noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33159158.post-57425443629621427662012-07-19T14:38:04.626-05:002012-07-19T14:38:04.626-05:00I don't know anything about the history of the...I don't know anything about the history of the phrase used in a derogatory manner, but just last night I rewatched the <i>Community</i> episode "Interpretive Dance", which featured <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAZiNAdPc4w" rel="nofollow">this relevant scene</a>.<br /><br />I read a comment somewhere that Anne Romney may have intended it to mean something like "you journalists", but even then it still has a definite classist vibe to me.Jonathonhttp://www.arrantpedantry.comnoreply@blogger.com