| re: 'Do' anything? | |
|
Posted by: |
bpmolder 12:41 pm UTC 02/22/08 |
| In reply to: | 'Do' anything? - EvilNickname 10:01 am UTC 02/22/08 |
| Let me see if I can try to explain this to you in a way that you can understand and hopefully help you avoid going down an unnecessary path. According to the rules of context in a language, spoken or written, sentences with in paragraph or verse are associated with each other in different ways. They are tied together by different things such as common nouns, verbs, cases, etc. In this case, those rules of context dictate that the negatives pair the phrases that contain them. "I'll NEVER stop dreaming of you every night of my life, NO WAY!" and "I WON'T do that." Are negatives in the same places in each sentence, therefore context dictates that the phrases are connected and one references the other. Now that I have taken pains to explain these basic things to you that you should have learned very early on in school and making it childishly simple, hopefully you will decide that the quandary that you are presenting is one that is only in your head. You are grasping for straws. I don't expect you to accept these things though because you are so close to making this presentation and I don't suspect that there is any way in hell that you would be willing to abandon your entire thesis right before trying to make your point, no matter how contrived you know that point is. Maybe what I am saying can do someone else some good though. > For tonight's presentation on "What Meat Loaf won't do for > love", I'm still kicking around a few possibilities for > the final conclusion. > > I'm not convinced that the 'that' is said explicitly in > the song. Sure, he'd 'never stop dreaming', 'forget the > way you feel' or 'screw around' sooner or later, but are > that things you'd do for love? Would you screw > around for love? Would you keep dreaming of someone for > love? You might not screw around, because (for) love, you > might dream of someone on account of love, but do those > things for love? > > If I forget about the official explanations by Jim and > Meat (both have a history of not being all too factual > when it suits them), and look at it again, it might be a > case of a superbly play on words. > Compare "I would do anything for love (But I won't do > that)" with "I would do anything for love, but I won't do > that." If I'm not mistaken, both versions have exactly the > same meaning. What if the parentheses in the title are > there just to throw you off? > Sure, he would do 'anything for love', but he > won't do that. > He would do anything for love, but he just ain't gonna do > it. > > Thoughts? | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: 'Do' anything? - EvilNickname 02:01 pm UTC 02/22/08 |
| Next: | re: 'Do' anything? - EvilNickname 01:59 pm UTC 02/22/08 |
| Thread: |
|