Is it possible that this structure can be used for another potential purpose that's more focused on explaining the progression of the speaker's thought? Perhaps if I have realized something, I will then wish to convey the distinguishing point of that realization? I don't think this is the primary purpose of the structure in these examples and in advertising. I'm just considering how casual speech (especially face to face or between speakers who know each other) may use the same structure for slightly different reasons.
I think this structure or similar also makes sense in storytelling or poetry where the speaker is not manipulating the reader, but slowly revealing their experience. Which likely contains unknown information to the reader, so it's for the sake of suspense rather than to create a hierarchy.
In casual speech, could it also indicate a difference in style where the conclusion comes at the end rather than at the beginning of communication, building up to the point? Though when speaking in person, there is more context to warrant this structure. On social media, the speaker addresses an unknown listener. They could be specifically intending to talk to those who need to hear or would benefit from hearing this, but it also happens to be the case that the comment will be read by those who don't. I think it could also be for the sake of relatability rather than always intending to share information. I think there are more reasons to speak like this even on social media. Advertising, however, specializes in this hostile use of it.
yes, what you say makes sense. There can be many different reasons for this structure, and it can land differently with different audiences and different contexts. It is only really through overuse that it becomes irritating, which is when you notice it is being deployed reflexively or at cross purposes to why you yourself are reading
I don't spend all that much time on social media, so I don't encounter these kinds of tactics very often, except in ads. But ever since reading, I've been paying closer to attention to any comments I see. And it certainly is a common tactic. I guess people who are looking for attention or to assert themselves are going to be most likely to comment in general, and certainly in ways that reflect their intentions for doing so. Social media is a less costly place for the individual to engage in social behaviors/communication that would otherwise be socially punished in the presence of other people, so it becomes excessive. Do you feel there is a difference in the frequency of structures such as this based on the social media platform?
I have not done any systematic comparison! It seems like the commercial platforms have more of this (presumably because the algorithmic feed rewards it). I've noticed an uptick on substack (the short post bit, not the newsletters) recently.
Ha! Fantastic - I’m sure that’s it. Like I said, I only heard him say it once, and it turns out I must have misheard. Well he’s still brilliant with words, even if this one wasn’t original to him
Is it possible that this structure can be used for another potential purpose that's more focused on explaining the progression of the speaker's thought? Perhaps if I have realized something, I will then wish to convey the distinguishing point of that realization? I don't think this is the primary purpose of the structure in these examples and in advertising. I'm just considering how casual speech (especially face to face or between speakers who know each other) may use the same structure for slightly different reasons.
I think this structure or similar also makes sense in storytelling or poetry where the speaker is not manipulating the reader, but slowly revealing their experience. Which likely contains unknown information to the reader, so it's for the sake of suspense rather than to create a hierarchy.
In casual speech, could it also indicate a difference in style where the conclusion comes at the end rather than at the beginning of communication, building up to the point? Though when speaking in person, there is more context to warrant this structure. On social media, the speaker addresses an unknown listener. They could be specifically intending to talk to those who need to hear or would benefit from hearing this, but it also happens to be the case that the comment will be read by those who don't. I think it could also be for the sake of relatability rather than always intending to share information. I think there are more reasons to speak like this even on social media. Advertising, however, specializes in this hostile use of it.
yes, what you say makes sense. There can be many different reasons for this structure, and it can land differently with different audiences and different contexts. It is only really through overuse that it becomes irritating, which is when you notice it is being deployed reflexively or at cross purposes to why you yourself are reading
I don't spend all that much time on social media, so I don't encounter these kinds of tactics very often, except in ads. But ever since reading, I've been paying closer to attention to any comments I see. And it certainly is a common tactic. I guess people who are looking for attention or to assert themselves are going to be most likely to comment in general, and certainly in ways that reflect their intentions for doing so. Social media is a less costly place for the individual to engage in social behaviors/communication that would otherwise be socially punished in the presence of other people, so it becomes excessive. Do you feel there is a difference in the frequency of structures such as this based on the social media platform?
I have not done any systematic comparison! It seems like the commercial platforms have more of this (presumably because the algorithmic feed rewards it). I've noticed an uptick on substack (the short post bit, not the newsletters) recently.
Respectfully, because this _is_ a great post, might your friend have said "interpellation" instead of "interpolation"? [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpellation_(philosophy)]
Ha! Fantastic - I’m sure that’s it. Like I said, I only heard him say it once, and it turns out I must have misheard. Well he’s still brilliant with words, even if this one wasn’t original to him
Thank you and I loved this whole post!
Thanks Hollis, much appreciated!