The beginning of Wednesday . . .
Kacey texted: "What is the word for when you attribute human characteristics to something that isn't human, or possibly even inanimate? Nathan and I tried to think of it for an hour last night and we couldn't come up with anything."
And because I'm a good mommy, which you know by now, because I tell you all the time, I answered: "Personification"
She replied: "Are you sure?" (Am I sure? Does she KNOW to whom she is speaking? Of course I'm sure! Even when I'm wrong, I'm sure!)
"Yes," I stated, "Personification is a figure of speech in which inanimate objects or abstractions are endowed with human qualities or are represented as possessing human form, as in 'Hunger sat shivering on the road.' "
She retorted, "No, I just googled it, and the term for which I was searching is ANTHROPOMORPHISM: The attribution of human motivation, characteristics, or behavior to inanimate objects, animals, or natural phenomena . . . BooYah!"
"NOT the same thing," I argued, "as anthropomorphism is a basic cognitive process in which some entity comes to stand for or represent something else. It is more sociological in nature, whereas personification is more literary."
Her reply: "Is TOO the same thing. But Nathan says he was thinking of your word anyway, so it doesn't matter." :o)
Then we discussed her brother dressing up like a log.
3 comments:
If she said, "the term for which I was searching is," then I'm quite proud of you both!
Good grammar is SO hard to find. I cringe when I read the Sunday paper here in Atlanta. Simply pathetic...
Of course she did! This conversation is 100% accurate, as I would never take creative license for the purpose of entertainment. :o)
I cringe when I watch Sportcenter with my husband. Any person who commonly uses the phrases "should of" and "could of" just needs to go back to kindergarten.
And as I remember it, mother...that is exactly how our conversation occurred. :-)
Post a Comment