Cycling UK Forum

While making legitimate use of this forum, to learn about obscure inner tubes as it happens, I noticed a most respected long-time informant of these pages refer to a "complete pedant" being the type of person who might do X. The phrase "complete pedant" crops up elsewhere on these hallowed threads, and I've heard it used verbally also (usually as abuse, which naturally would not happen here).

But I have to ask - can a (human) pedant ever be complete?

I’m wondering whether the question is self-answering.

I thought it was a quotation from somewhere, but when I put "complete pedant" into Google, it came back with:

Did you mean: "complete pendant"?

Talk about irony.

Isn't it an oxymoron.

If you define pedantry as being rigorous in the correct use of English language,i.e.grammar,I,ve seen little evidence of this despite there being many examples,in these columns, of the same.However,if you take a broader definition to mean discussing the merits of 1xgearing v 2x ad infinitum for instance then I suppose you might.Surely that is the nature of the beast ?,particularly in the technical columns.Can a pedant ever be "complete"?Sorry,too deep for me.

The answer lies in the Blake Edwards movies with Peter Sellars, heard in the opening credits...

Ped-ant ped-ant ped-ant ped-ant ped-ant ped-ant ped-ant............... ped-ant...

cyclop wrote: ↑1 Feb 2024, 6:40am If you define pedantry as being rigorous in the correct use of English language,i.e.grammar...

You might get away with eg there, but not ie. Because there's also syntax, semantics, punctuation, style, pragmatics...

Jonathan

AndyK wrote: ↑31 Jan 2024, 10:59pm I thought it was a quotation from somewhere...

I wondered about that too.

Of course there's always the trope The Compleat Anything...

Jonathan

I was going to join the Pedants Society but they hadn't set up the rules correctly.

MartinC wrote: ↑1 Feb 2024, 8:53am I was going to join the Pedants Society but they hadn't set up the rules correctly.

Have you tried the Anarchists?

Jonathan

Jdsk wrote: ↑1 Feb 2024, 8:55am

MartinC wrote: ↑1 Feb 2024, 8:53am I was going to join the Pedants Society but they hadn't set up the rules correctly.

Have you tried the Anarchists?

Jonathan

You might have to check in with every one o' them, one at a time. Also, they will all dispute about whether the others are really anarchists or not.

Personally I enjoy pedantry - both the giving & receiving. On the other hand, it depends on the subject matter. And some styles of pedantry seem unable to get to the point. Or the point is itself pointless, although only according to my personally preferred variety of pedantry.

Good efforts all round, but the winner is the person who reported this thread on the grounds that it should be in the Tea Shop.

slowster wrote: ↑1 Feb 2024, 11:35am Good efforts all round, but the winner is the person who reported this thread on the grounds that it should be in the Tea Shop.

cyclop wrote: ↑1 Feb 2024, 6:40am If you define pedantry as being rigorous in the correct use of English language,i.e.grammar,I,ve seen little evidence of this despite there being many examples,in these columns, of the same.However,if you take a broader definition

Yes, I take a broader definition. Definitely not restricted to speeling and/or grammar.

GideonReade wrote: ↑31 Jan 2024, 10:27pm
But I have to ask - can a (human) pedant ever be complete?

I challenge the validity of this question. The common usage of "complete pedant" is of the same form as phrases like "complete wazzock". "complete" merely acts as a modifier, indicating a better, or perhaps more dedicated pedant (or wazzock).

One poster's accuracy is another's pedantry.

I am an incomplete pedant.

That is to say, I only engage in pedantry regarding things that are incomplete.