1) For all the gaps and years between their individual heydays on the program, it may be said (with few, and no really important, reservations) that all seven of the children had managed to answer over the air a prodigious number of alternately deadly-bookish and deadly-cute questions with a freshness, an aplomb, that was considered unique in commercial radio.

Frannie and Zooey

J. D. Salinger

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Franny_and_Zooey/jaSiDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22a+freshness+an+aplomb%22&pg=PT37&printsec=frontcover

https://tinyurl.com/3vp6ze9m

My problem, which is not a major one, is with the last phrase:
"with a freshness, an aplomb, that was considered unique in commercial radio."

It seems to ma that 'an aplomb' is in apposition to 'a freshness'. They are the same thing, and that thing was considered unique in commercial radio. (The verb is in the singular, so we are talking about one thing.)

So, basically the freshness is the aplomb, But I am not sure I can see how the two words could be considered synonymous. Does 'freshness' mean 'impudence here?

--
Gratefully,
Navi

Lost in the Twilight Zone of the English language
Interested in strange structures
Obsessed with ambiguity

After serious thinking navi wrote :
> 1) For all the gaps and years between their individual heydays on the
> program, it may be said (with few, and no really important, reservations)
> that all seven of the children had managed to answer over the air a
> prodigious number of alternately deadly-bookish and deadly-cute questions
> with a freshness, an aplomb, that was considered unique in commercial radio.
>
> Frannie and Zooey
>
> J. D. Salinger
>
>
> https://www.google.com/books/edition/Franny_and_Zooey/jaSiDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22a+freshness+an+aplomb%22&pg=PT37&printsec=frontcover
>
> https://tinyurl.com/3vp6ze9m
>
> My problem, which is not a major one, is with the last phrase:
> "with a freshness, an aplomb, that was considered unique in commercial
> radio."
>
> It seems to ma that 'an aplomb' is in apposition to 'a freshness'. They are
> the same thing, and that thing was considered unique in commercial radio.
> (The verb is in the singular, so we are talking about one thing.)
>
> So, basically the freshness is the aplomb, But I am not sure I can see how
> the two words could be considered synonymous. Does 'freshness' mean
> 'impudence here?

No ... it means "not stale", just as it would for bread. The answers
weren't stale or just another reading of the same old script.

/dps

--
Killing a mouse was hardly a Nobel Prize-worthy exercise, and Lawrence
went apopleptic when he learned a lousy rodent had peed away all his
precious heavy water.
_The Disappearing Spoon_, Sam Kean

navi wrote:

> 1) For all the gaps and years between their individual heydays on the
> program, it may be said (with few, and no really important,
> reservations) that all seven of the children had managed to answer
> over the air a prodigious number of alternately deadly-bookish and
> deadly-cute questions with a freshness, an aplomb, that was
> considered unique in commercial radio.

> My problem, which is not a major one, is with the last phrase:
> "with a freshness, an aplomb, that was considered unique in commercial radio."
>
> It seems to ma that 'an aplomb' is in apposition to 'a freshness'.

No. Oxford Learner's Dictionaries writes:

aplomb
if somebody does something with aplomb, they do it in a confident
and successful way, often in a difficult situation

"Freshness" about a person means they are easy, unproblematic,
unconcerned.

> So, basically the freshness is the aplomb

Yes.

--
Bertel, Denmark

Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:

> navi wrote:

>> 1) For all the gaps and years between their individual heydays on the
>> program, it may be said (with few, and no really important,
>> reservations) that all seven of the children had managed to answer
>> over the air a prodigious number of alternately deadly-bookish and
>> deadly-cute questions with a freshness, an aplomb, that was
>> considered unique in commercial radio.

>> My problem, which is not a major one, is with the last phrase:
>> "with a freshness, an aplomb, that was considered unique in commercial radio."
>>
>> It seems to ma that 'an aplomb' is in apposition to 'a freshness'.

> No. Oxford Learner's Dictionaries writes:

> aplomb
> if somebody does something with aplomb, they do it in a confident
> and successful way, often in a difficult situation

> "Freshness" about a person means they are easy, unproblematic,
> unconcerned.

I disagree. The freshness of their answers is originality, lack of
triteness.

>> So, basically the freshness is the aplomb

> Yes.

I'd say no. Though it looks like an apposition, t's a concise,
belle-lettristic way of saying "the freshness and the aplomb".

--
Jerry Friedman

Thank you all very much,

Jerry, at first I read the sentence exactly as you have, since an apposition doesn't really make sense given the two words. But the verb is in the singular. Let alone the fact that 'that' has been used after a comma. If we have an apposition, then the 'that-clause' can still be considered defining (restrictive). But if we don't have apposition could the comma be justified.

I am not disagreeing with you (would I even dare?), but I am truly confused.

--
Gratefully,
Navi

Lost in the Twilight Zone of the English language
Interested in strange structures
Obsessed with ambiguity

Le 02/03/2024 à 00:53, navi a écrit :
>
> 1) For all the gaps and years between their individual heydays on the
> program, it may be said (with few, and no really important,
> reservations) that all seven of the children had managed to answer over
> the air a prodigious number of alternately deadly-bookish and
> deadly-cute questions with a freshness, an aplomb, that was considered
> unique in commercial radio.
> Frannie and Zooey
>
> J. D. Salinger
>
>
> https://www.google.com/books/edition/Franny_and_Zooey/jaSiDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22a+freshness+an+aplomb%22&pg=PT37&printsec=frontcover
>
> https://tinyurl.com/3vp6ze9m
>
> My problem, which is not a major one, is with the last phrase:
> "with a freshness, an aplomb, that was considered unique in commercial
> radio."
>
> It seems to ma that 'an aplomb' is in apposition to 'a freshness'. They
> are the same thing, and that thing was considered unique in commercial
> radio. (The verb is in the singular, so we are talking about one thing.)
>
> So, basically the freshness is the aplomb, But I am not sure I can see
> how the two words could be considered synonymous. Does 'freshness' mean
> 'impudence here?

I think I'd read it as "with a freshness and an aplomb that were
considered unique...." Salinger's formulation seems a bit clumsy.

Writers can be good without being perfect - none is in fact perfect,
none is superhuman. Books are often written to deadlines and the process
is often exhausting, so there will be less-than-ideal wording in every
text - perhaps - whisper it - even in Shakespeare. Works of art are
abandoned, not finished.

I could quibble with Salinger, anyway. Isn't aplomb commonplace in
commercial radio? I suspect it would be better to omit the aplomb: "with
a freshness that was considered unique...."

Thank you very much, Hibou,

Yes. I agree. One cannot expect people never to make any mistake. The sentence does read well and the 'mistake' (assuming there is one) is hard to spot.

Respectfully,
Navi

In article <uru07h$1hnpj$1@dont-email.me>,
gadekryds@lundhansen.dk says...
>
> navi wrote:
>
> > 1) For all the gaps and years between their individual heydays on the
> > program, it may be said (with few, and no really important,
> > reservations) that all seven of the children had managed to answer
> > over the air a prodigious number of alternately deadly-bookish and
> > deadly-cute questions with a freshness, an aplomb, that was
> > considered unique in commercial radio.
>
> > My problem, which is not a major one, is with the last phrase:
> > "with a freshness, an aplomb, that was considered unique in commercial radio."
> >
> > It seems to ma that 'an aplomb' is in apposition to 'a freshness'.

No. The author has used two words to convey two
different qualities.

> No. Oxford Learner's Dictionaries writes:
>
> aplomb
> if somebody does something with aplomb, they do it in a confident
> and successful way, often in a difficult situation
>
> "Freshness" about a person means they are easy, unproblematic,
> unconcerned.
>
> > So, basically the freshness is the aplomb
>
> Yes.

Not at all.

Aplomb means self-assurance, confidence.
Freshness (in this context ) means originality, novelty.

Two words, different meanings, describing the
childrens responses.

Commercial radio interviews are often memorable for
nervous people mumbling trite banalities and stale
platitudes.

Janet

On 2024-03-02 01:01, Hibou wrote:
> Le 02/03/2024 à 00:53, navi a écrit :
>>
>> 1) For all the gaps and years between their individual heydays on the
>> program, it may be said (with few, and no really important,
>> reservations) that all seven of the children had managed to answer
>> over the air a prodigious number of alternately deadly-bookish and
>> deadly-cute questions with a freshness, an aplomb, that was considered
>> unique in commercial radio.
>> Frannie and Zooey
>>
>> J. D. Salinger
>>
>>
>> https://www.google.com/books/edition/Franny_and_Zooey/jaSiDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22a+freshness+an+aplomb%22&pg=PT37&printsec=frontcover
>>
>> https://tinyurl.com/3vp6ze9m
>>
>> My problem, which is not a major one, is with the last phrase:
>> "with a freshness, an aplomb, that was considered unique in commercial
>> radio."
>>
>> It seems to ma that 'an aplomb' is in apposition to 'a freshness'.
>> They are the same thing, and that thing was considered unique in
>> commercial radio. (The verb is in the singular, so we are talking
>> about one thing.)
>>
>> So, basically the freshness is the aplomb, But I am not sure I can see
>> how the two words could be considered synonymous. Does 'freshness'
>> mean 'impudence here?
>
> I think I'd read it as "with a freshness and an aplomb that were
> considered unique...." Salinger's formulation seems a bit clumsy.
>
> Writers can be good without being perfect - none is in fact perfect,
> none is superhuman. Books are often written to deadlines and the process
> is often exhausting, so there will be less-than-ideal wording in every
> text - perhaps - whisper it - even in Shakespeare. Works of art are
> abandoned, not finished.
>
> I could quibble with Salinger, anyway. Isn't aplomb commonplace in
> commercial radio? I suspect it would be better to omit the aplomb: "with
> a freshness that was considered unique...."

Aplomb may be commonplace among radio professionals, but among children,
not so much.

--
I ate alphabet soup. Now I have strong vowel movement.

navi wrote:

> Thank you all very much,

> Jerry, at first I read the sentence exactly as you have, since an apposition doesn't really make sense given the two words. But the verb is in the singular. Let alone the fact that 'that' has been used after a comma. If we have an apposition, then the 'that-clause' can still be considered defining (restrictive). But if we don't have apposition could the comma be justified.

> I am not disagreeing with you (would I even dare?), but I am truly confused.

Yes, the singular verb is odd. On the other hand, there's "All this data... is..." below
What was going on at the /New Yorker/, the Holy of prescriptive Holies? How could
there be two passive verbs in one sentence at the literary home of E. B. White?
Could these be deliberate errors or infelicities that Salinger gave to his narrator?

--
Jerry Friedman

Thank you very much, Jerry,

I think you have a very good point. I hadn't noticed the other mistake and noticing two passive verbs in the same sentence is above my paygrade. I am not bothered by passive verbs.

I think the style of this section of the novel is a bit too elaborate. At times, it seems a bit artificial to me (not that my opinion is worth much). And if I am not mistaken, once or twice the narrator accuses himself of being verbose. So I think it is very likely that Salinger might have tried to distance himself from his narrator. The narrator is not in total control of his style, because it is too elaborate for him. He is aiming too high.

Thanks again.

Respectfully,
Navi

On 03/03/24 16:33, navi wrote:

> He is aiming too high.

Like a short story in Esperanto I once read. A singer was trying to win
the heart of a princess, but his attempt to impress failed. "Li shtrebis
je tro alta picho."

The author was obviously trying to say "He was aiming at too high a
pitch". Evidently he didn't know that picho doesn't mean "pitch". It
means "cunt".

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

Le 02/03/2024 à 22:12, lar3ryca a écrit :
> On 2024-03-02 01:01, Hibou wrote:
>> Le 02/03/2024 à 00:53, navi a écrit :
>>>
>>> 1) For all the gaps and years between their individual heydays on the
>>> program, it may be said (with few, and no really important,
>>> reservations) that all seven of the children had managed to answer
>>> over the air a prodigious number of alternately deadly-bookish and
>>> deadly-cute questions with a freshness, an aplomb, that was
>>> considered unique in commercial radio. [...]
>>
>> I could quibble with Salinger, anyway. Isn't aplomb commonplace in
>> commercial radio? I suspect it would be better to omit the aplomb:
>> "with a freshness that was considered unique...."
>
> Aplomb may be commonplace among radio professionals, but among children,
> not so much.

Yes, but the statement is: "the children had managed to answer [...]
with a freshness, an aplomb, that was considered unique in commercial
radio." In commercial radio, not among children.

I think that is spelt 'piĉo' in Esperanto. Although I guess the pronunciation might be the same.

But what's the difference? When one aims too hight, it's too high...

Respectfully,
Navi

On 03/03/24 19:20, navi wrote:

> I think that is spelt 'piĉo' in Esperanto. Although I guess the
> pronunciation might be the same.

You're quite right. I was too lazy to work out how to type the accented
characters. Esperanto has a few characters like that, not always
supported by extended keyboard codes. So a lot of people have the habit
of using either 'h' or 'x' to indicate an accented character when
writing in Esperanto.

> But what's the difference? When one aims too hight, it's too high...

Very true.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

Le 03/03/2024 à 10:01, Peter Moylan a écrit :
> On 03/03/24 19:20, navi wrote:
>>
>> I think that is spelt 'piĉo' in Esperanto. Although I guess the
>> pronunciation might be the same.
>
> You're quite right. I was too lazy to work out how to type the accented
> characters. Esperanto has a few characters like that, not always
> supported by extended keyboard codes. So a lot of people have the habit
> of using either 'h' or 'x' to indicate an accented character when
> writing in Esperanto.

Accents on characters were fine during the age of the pen, but are not
suited to keyboards and computers. There are problems typing them and
sorting them. Should é come before or after ê? It's better to use
combinations of letters: fuehrer not führer, etc..

Hibou wrote:

> Accents on characters were fine during the age of the pen, but are not
> suited to keyboards and computers. There are problems typing them and
> sorting them. Should é come before or after ê?

The Danish rule is simple:

They are sorted like "e". If a clean e and an accented e is the only
difference between two words, the the clean e comes first.

This means that é and ê are randomly sorted?

> It's better to use combinations of letters: fuehrer not führer, etc..

Ü is sorted like y (ä - æ, ö - ø), and the same subrule applies.

--
Bertel, Denmark

On 2024-03-03 02:16, Hibou wrote:
> Le 02/03/2024 à 22:12, lar3ryca a écrit :
>> On 2024-03-02 01:01, Hibou wrote:
>>> Le 02/03/2024 à 00:53, navi a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> 1) For all the gaps and years between their individual heydays on
>>>> the program, it may be said (with few, and no really important,
>>>> reservations) that all seven of the children had managed to answer
>>>> over the air a prodigious number of alternately deadly-bookish and
>>>> deadly-cute questions with a freshness, an aplomb, that was
>>>> considered unique in commercial radio. [...]
>>>
>>> I could quibble with Salinger, anyway. Isn't aplomb commonplace in
>>> commercial radio? I suspect it would be better to omit the aplomb:
>>> "with a freshness that was considered unique...."
>>
>> Aplomb may be commonplace among radio professionals, but among
>> children, not so much.
>
> Yes, but the statement is: "the children had managed to answer [...]
> with a freshness, an aplomb, that was considered unique in commercial
> radio." In commercial radio, not among children.

--
In the Canadian curling championships, the teams are divided into
two pools; Pool A and Pool B.
Would francophones be offended at being Pool A?

On 2024-03-03 02:16, Hibou wrote:
> Le 02/03/2024 à 22:12, lar3ryca a écrit :
>> On 2024-03-02 01:01, Hibou wrote:
>>> Le 02/03/2024 à 00:53, navi a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> 1) For all the gaps and years between their individual heydays on
>>>> the program, it may be said (with few, and no really important,
>>>> reservations) that all seven of the children had managed to answer
>>>> over the air a prodigious number of alternately deadly-bookish and
>>>> deadly-cute questions with a freshness, an aplomb, that was
>>>> considered unique in commercial radio. [...]
>>>
>>> I could quibble with Salinger, anyway. Isn't aplomb commonplace in
>>> commercial radio? I suspect it would be better to omit the aplomb:
>>> "with a freshness that was considered unique...."
>>
>> Aplomb may be commonplace among radio professionals, but among
>> children, not so much.
>
> Yes, but the statement is: "the children had managed to answer [...]
> with a freshness, an aplomb, that was considered unique in commercial
> radio." In commercial radio, not among children.

oops. Forgot the body.

You can parse it that way, but since they are speaking of children, I
feel it is just as valid to consider that the children are a subset of
those who are not allied with commercial radio, and that it is that
subgroup that normally do not speak with freshness or aplomb.

--
At first I was confused about why they wanted me to carry a geiger
counter, but then it clicked.

Hibou hat am 03.03.2024 um 11:13 geschrieben:
> Accents on characters were fine during the age of the pen, but are not
> suited to keyboards and computers.

Laughing out very loud. I'll tell you a secret: there are other
languages in the world and 100,000,000s people type every day accents
and other diacritics with their keyboards. I am just one of them.

Extreme example: Vietnamese. Just a few lines for your education:
Tất cả mọi người sinh ra đều được tự do và bình đẳng về nhân phẩm và
quyền. Mọi con người đều được tạo hoá ban cho lý trí và lương tâm và cần
phải đối xử với nhau trong tình bằng hữu.

Le 03/03/2024 à 16:55, Silvano a écrit :
> Hibou hat am 03.03.2024 um 11:13 geschrieben:
>>
>> Accents on characters were fine during the age of the pen, but are not
>> suited to keyboards and computers.
>
> Laughing out very loud. I'll tell you a secret: there are other
> languages in the world and 100,000,000s people type every day accents
> and other diacritics with their keyboards. I am just one of them.
>
> Extreme example: Vietnamese. Just a few lines for your education:
> Tất cả mọi người sinh ra đều được tự do và bình đẳng về nhân phẩm và
> quyền. Mọi con người đều được tạo hoá ban cho lý trí và lương tâm và cần
> phải đối xử với nhau trong tình bằng hữu.

I'm glad I've amused you - but I didn't quite follow your refutation.

Since I muck about in French, I also routinely type accented characters
- and they are a pain in the arse. The ê in être takes three keystrokes,
ALT-GR ^ e, requires a wee dance on the keyboard. With a pen, the accent
is just a lightning squiggle. Once upon a time, the French spelled the
word être estre, so it is perfectly possible to do without the accent,
as it is in fuehrer, and with a keyboard estre would be easier and
quicker to type.

That's only one language. Other languages, such as your Vietnamese, use
a gamut of accented characters. It would be impossible to design an
international keyboard that could enter them all while avoiding the
fingersome reel.

So I stand by my statement.

Le 03/03/2024 à 17:17, Hibou a écrit :
> Le 03/03/2024 à 16:55, Silvano a écrit :
>> Hibou hat am 03.03.2024 um 11:13 geschrieben:
>>>
>>> Accents on characters were fine during the age of the pen, but are not
>>> suited to keyboards and computers.
>>
>> Laughing out very loud. I'll tell you a secret: there are other
>> languages in the world and 100,000,000s people type every day accents
>> and other diacritics with their keyboards. I am just one of them.
>>
>> Extreme example: Vietnamese. Just a few lines for your education:
>> Tất cả mọi người sinh ra đều được tự do và bình đẳng về nhân phẩm và
>> quyền. Mọi con người đều được tạo hoá ban cho lý trí và lương tâm và cần
>> phải đối xử với nhau trong tình bằng hữu.
>
> I'm glad I've amused you - but I didn't quite follow your refutation.
>
> Since I muck about in French, I also routinely type accented characters
> - and they are a pain in the arse. The ê in être takes three keystrokes,
> ALT-GR ^ e, requires a wee dance on the keyboard.

Correction: /four/ keystrokes. I must press SHIFT to get to ^.

On the bright side, at least dancing counts as exercise.

> With a pen, the accent
> is just a lightning squiggle. Once upon a time, the French spelled the
> word être estre, so it is perfectly possible to do without the accent,
> as it is in fuehrer, and with a keyboard estre would be easier and
> quicker to type.
>
> That's only one language. Other languages, such as your Vietnamese, use
> a gamut of accented characters. It would be impossible to design an
> international keyboard that could enter them all while avoiding the
> fingersome reel.
>
> So I stand by my statement.

Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote or quoted:
>word être estre, so it is perfectly possible to do without the accent,

Software like AHK allows you to customize your keybord to map
any key sequence and/or combination to anything. It can be
used in combination with some registry modifications under
Windows to remap keys as seen fit.

It can change "estre" into "être" after you have typed it (but then
"restreint" will also become "rêtreint"!) or "e1" into "ê". So, often
one can replace straining key sequences with more pleasant ones.

Hibou hat am 03.03.2024 um 18:17 geschrieben:
> Le 03/03/2024 à 16:55, Silvano a écrit :
>> Hibou hat am 03.03.2024 um 11:13 geschrieben:
>>>
>>> Accents on characters were fine during the age of the pen, but are not
>>> suited to keyboards and computers.
>>
>> Laughing out very loud. I'll tell you a secret: there are other
>> languages in the world and 100,000,000s people type every day accents
>> and other diacritics with their keyboards. I am just one of them.
>>
>> Extreme example: Vietnamese. Just a few lines for your education:
>> Tất cả mọi người sinh ra đều được tự do và bình đẳng về nhân phẩm và
>> quyền. Mọi con người đều được tạo hoá ban cho lý trí và lương tâm và cần
>> phải đối xử với nhau trong tình bằng hữu.
>
> I'm glad I've amused you - but I didn't quite follow your refutation.
>
> Since I muck about in French, I also routinely type accented characters
> - and they are a pain in the arse. The ê in être takes three keystrokes,
> ALT-GR ^ e, requires a wee dance on the keyboard.

Foreign computer keyboards have existed for decades, foreign typewriters
for well over 100 years.
With the German keyboard I'm using to type this posting I need exactly
one stroke for äöüß, two for ÄÖÜáéíóúê and three (the same plus Shift)
for àèìòù.
If what's shown here <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AZERTY> is correct,
you need exactly one stroke for àèéùç and two for ê.

Hibou wrote:

> Correction: /four/ keystrokes. I must press SHIFT to get to ^.

It takes three keystrokes on my keyboard, Shift+^. ä, ö and ü take two.
I use them in the German language group, but there are also Danish names
with them. They are not found in ordinary words.

--
Bertel, Denmark