Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Did * actually use a 4- or 5-syllable word? Correctly?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
floridaguy Donating Member (751 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-01-04 10:14 AM
Original message
Did * actually use a 4- or 5-syllable word? Correctly?
When speakers lack a decent vocabulary, they are often given a word by coaches to slide in somewhere. It's supposed to make them look "pretty darn smart". Now, somewhere * used the word vociferous or vociferously. Now, I know * hasn't a clue what that means, so I'm wondering at what point he said it, and if he actually put it in the right context.

Anyone catch it or see it in the transcript? Now, he's pretty good at repeating stuff, e.g., hard work, it's hard work, it's really hard work, so I'm just wondering if the parot got it right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BlueEyedSon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-01-04 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
1. I think he used it WRONG
In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. You know why? Because an enemy realizes the stakes. The enemy understands a free Iraq will be a major defeat in their ideology of hatred. That's why they're fighting so vociferously.

They showed up in Afghanistan when they were there, because they tried to beat us and they didn't. And they're showing up in Iraq for the same reason. They're trying to defeat us.

http://www.katu.com/news/story.asp?ID=71504
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilmywoodNCparalegal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-01-04 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. I heard it like "ferciferously"
since I'm not a native English speaker, I seem to detect mispronounciations more... There is a major difference between the sounds of "vociferously" and "fercifrously" and to me it sounded like * said "ferciferously"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoyalWickedness Donating Member (245 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-01-04 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Sounded like that to me, too
And even if he meant "vociferously," it was the wrong word to use in that context: "vociferously" means marked by or given to vehement insistent outcry. I don't think the Iraqi insurgents are merely being vociferous; they are bombing, shooting, and beheading, not yelling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carpediem Donating Member (700 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-01-04 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. completely wrong. I laughed really hard when I heard him
misuse it like that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joy Anne Donating Member (830 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-01-04 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. WRONG
I had to wait for the transcript because I couldn't believe my ears.
Here's my LTTE posted elsewhere:

President Bush said last night: "The enemy understands a free Iraq will be a major defeat in their ideology of hatred. That's why they're fighting so vociferously."
I and the dictionary understand "vociferous" as "clamorous, strident," not as "violent" or "relentless," which by the context is apparently what the president means.
Perhaps the dictionary and I, on the one hand, and the president on the other hand understand lots of words differently. For example, he keeps talking about how he's preserving our freedoms and giving freedoms to Iraqis, while he and Mr. Ashcroft are busily shredding our Bill of Rights (my definition of freedom), and he and Mr. Rumsfeld keep shutting down independent newspapers and shutting up foreign correspondents (my guess at how Iraqis define freedom).
Then there's the word "Christian." I figure as a Christian I'm a follower of Jesus, that guy who told us to turn the other cheek and forgive our debtors. I don't know what George W. Bush means by it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cmf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-01-04 10:25 AM
Response to Original message
5. I think his handlers gave him "Hot Words for the SAT" to memorize
so that he could look smarter. Unfortunately he used all of the big words wrong. Um, vociferously? I guess you could say that the insurgents are fighting with loud protest to the US presence, but I think it's a little worse than that. Transshipment of information and WMD? Close, little Chimpy, but I think the work you were looking for was transfer or transport. Transship means the actual movement from ship to ship or other form of conveyance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmylips Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-01-04 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
7. He was using simplistic slogans and here comes....
'vociferous.' I thought that was the name of one of bush's aids, his new mullahs.

Gawd-oh-mighty...the world got to see what a dry-drunk, sneaky bastard sounds like.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MasonJar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-01-04 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
8. I noticed at the time that Bush misused the word vociferous; he
Edited on Fri Oct-01-04 10:43 AM by MasonJar
probably meant ferocious. I also assumed that the Rovers had given him a word. It seems unlikely that it would vociferous, which would be much harder to fit into the subject matter of the debate. What a __ck up another malapropism from the king of malaprops.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rkc3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-01-04 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
9. he also said "trans-shipment" when they talked about nukular
proliferation. And I'm not sure if he even said the words nuclear proliferation - I think Kerry said it was the biggest threat to the world only to remind America how stupid the prez is since he can't say nuclear and would probably fumble over proflieration.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 09:00 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC