Dangling modifiers and literal minds

Here's another one:

I caught covid kissing Santa Clause.

No I still don't understand it?

missing modifier = while

I caught covid WHILE kissing Santa Clause. It was just on the cheek but I still caught it.

••

Otherwise it means, well, it means just what its says, that I caught covid kissing Santa Clause - in flagrante delicto!.

Mrs Clause must have been out of town. Now I can bribe him for presents! mwahaha

"thanks IB well expressed."

she said, raising the lid and peering into the roiling water full of appreciation.

hardy har har!

But..

to be clear, this kind 'splaining, for me, can be gender neutral.  I generally don't say man-splain,

I say " 'splain" and conjugate as in explain. (Thanks Ricky)

bingo!

TheCatWoman said:

its all part and parcel of being autistic.

It does seem odd that some are having a go at my autistic behaviour on a forum for autistic people to be themselves.

All part of life's rich tapestry I guess.

Thanks for the vote of support - I will be more mindful of responding in ways that may grow an arguement on my posts though.

No don't do that Iain, I'd miss you! I dont' read the room very well either, its all part and parcel of being autistic.

I Sperg said:

I don't think you read the room corerectly Iain. 

That is definitely the message I'm getting.

Maybe I should take a sabatical.

Ouch! he says, who put that there?

I don't think you read the room corerectly Iain. 

(Reading the room being a thing us Autists are really well known for excelling at, of course).

Uhane said:

An unsolicited Ted talk is not an answer.

so mainsplaining is an explanation that gives more than the absolute minimium for an explanation?

Kind of like what you just did there?

Am I understanding this correctly?

I believe the difference comes in if there is a query before the 'splaining commences or not and, if there were a query, the extent to which the 'splaining goes on above and beyond what's absolutely needed. Also whether or not the 'splainer is listening or watching for signs of response or repartee attempts from the 'splainee. 

Basically it's a question of reading the room.

Or. Unless...it's Lucy, in which case she has a lot of it do, according to Ricky. But in that case, everyone has a little chuckle, Ricky never does get a Lucy-splaination but no one cares. [pipe in the canned laughs here]

An answer is not a Ted Talk.

An unsolicited Ted talk is not an answer.

TheCatWoman said:

you can explain, but not mansplain.

Can you explain the difference between these two please?

"no sire, refrain. No. Sully not the sleeping waters, nor stir the dust before ye!"

and.

Here's one for you to finish..

"a dangling participle walks into a bar....

Sorry, too obtuse, perhaps. I was mix 'n matching metaphors and a dangling modifier for fun.

I think not keeping up well with this thread is a bit of an understatement, I don't understand it at all.

You're right, please don't mansplain, you can explain, but not mansplain. But I think I will just leave this thread to those who do understand it.

I can see that you are not keeping up well with this thread, and would like to.

What little empathy I do possess, is strongly instructing me to go and "mansplain" it to you so as you can enjoy the thread..

I've come to believe however, "based on the way things are in the real world" that is likely to make your experience worse.

However, I see a wisdom and intent that may or may not lie behnd this thread, it certainly like those optical illusion pictures where you can see either a young or older woman depicted shows how sometimes two people can read the same sentence and get completely different meanings.

It certainly makes us focus a bit more on how we use and interpret words.

I think I'll go and add some stars...

OOH I just got the dead horse comment!

I SOOoo want to "mansplain" it!!

What dead horse and why is it wondering?

Well there ya go. We'll leave this dead horse wondering.

OK, sort of understand it, but not really.

We never did grammar at school, we were supposed to pick it up by osmosis, reading books and other literature was supposed to make us pick it up intuitively, only for many of us it didn' tand left us confused over anything other than a full stop or a question mark.

OK, sort of understand it, but not really.

We never did grammar at school, we were supposed to pick it up by osmosis, reading books and other literature was supposed to make us pick it up intuitively, only for many of us it didn' tand left us confused over anything other than a full stop or a question mark.

"thanks IB well expressed."

she said, raising the lid and peering into the roiling water full of appreciation.

hardy har har!

But..

to be clear, this kind 'splaining, for me, can be gender neutral.  I generally don't say man-splain,

I say " 'splain" and conjugate as in explain. (Thanks Ricky)

bingo!

TheCatWoman said:

its all part and parcel of being autistic.

It does seem odd that some are having a go at my autistic behaviour on a forum for autistic people to be themselves.

All part of life's rich tapestry I guess.

Thanks for the vote of support - I will be more mindful of responding in ways that may grow an arguement on my posts though.

No don't do that Iain, I'd miss you! I dont' read the room very well either, its all part and parcel of being autistic.

I Sperg said:

I don't think you read the room corerectly Iain. 

That is definitely the message I'm getting.

Maybe I should take a sabatical.

Ouch! he says, who put that there?

I don't think you read the room corerectly Iain. 

(Reading the room being a thing us Autists are really well known for excelling at, of course).

Uhane said:

An unsolicited Ted talk is not an answer.

so mainsplaining is an explanation that gives more than the absolute minimium for an explanation?

Kind of like what you just did there?

Am I understanding this correctly?

I believe the difference comes in if there is a query before the 'splaining commences or not and, if there were a query, the extent to which the 'splaining goes on above and beyond what's absolutely needed. Also whether or not the 'splainer is listening or watching for signs of response or repartee attempts from the 'splainee. 

Basically it's a question of reading the room.

Or. Unless...it's Lucy, in which case she has a lot of it do, according to Ricky. But in that case, everyone has a little chuckle, Ricky never does get a Lucy-splaination but no one cares. [pipe in the canned laughs here]

An answer is not a Ted Talk.

An unsolicited Ted talk is not an answer.

TheCatWoman said:

you can explain, but not mansplain.

Can you explain the difference between these two please?

"no sire, refrain. No. Sully not the sleeping waters, nor stir the dust before ye!"

and.

Here's one for you to finish..

"a dangling participle walks into a bar....

Sorry, too obtuse, perhaps. I was mix 'n matching metaphors and a dangling modifier for fun.

I think not keeping up well with this thread is a bit of an understatement, I don't understand it at all.

You're right, please don't mansplain, you can explain, but not mansplain. But I think I will just leave this thread to those who do understand it.

I can see that you are not keeping up well with this thread, and would like to.

What little empathy I do possess, is strongly instructing me to go and "mansplain" it to you so as you can enjoy the thread..

I've come to believe however, "based on the way things are in the real world" that is likely to make your experience worse.

However, I see a wisdom and intent that may or may not lie behnd this thread, it certainly like those optical illusion pictures where you can see either a young or older woman depicted shows how sometimes two people can read the same sentence and get completely different meanings.

It certainly makes us focus a bit more on how we use and interpret words.

I think I'll go and add some stars...

OOH I just got the dead horse comment!

I SOOoo want to "mansplain" it!!

What dead horse and why is it wondering?

Well there ya go. We'll leave this dead horse wondering.