ShadowBorn Posted July 18, 2021 Moderator Posted July 18, 2021 On 7/16/2021 at 10:02 PM, JKH said: Native Americans, not to mention ancient peoples in Eurasia, might take offense, since they've had possibly hundreds of descriptive proper names for them for millennia. Don't forget most white folks in North America just caught on in the last several decades. Others knew and named them before, it just wasn't news. JKH I respect what the Native Americans call them. I have no problem with their name. I am just saying that in my own preference I call them a creature. Since this is the way that I see them and describe them.
JKH Posted July 19, 2021 Posted July 19, 2021 That's cool, I get it. Don't mind me, I'm just a word nerd. 1
Grandcherokee Posted July 19, 2021 Posted July 19, 2021 On 7/14/2021 at 4:29 PM, hiflier said: Primarily? Sasquatch. Sometimes? Bigfoot. In the past few years of my writing I've also used THE Sasquatch or THE Bigfoot which I like even better as I think it somehow seems more respectful, like a proper name or title, and less like a common animal? But that's only a preference, not a habit......yet. For example: I research Sasquatch, or I research THE Sasquatch (or THE Bigfoot). The latter is definitely more formal which might help change an outsiders perspective on the creature and the credibility of the researcher? True! It lends a sense of depth in referring to the creature as Sasquatch, over Bigfoot. In a way it is like walking through a forest and have someone ask."What is that?" And you answer,"That's a tree!" Well, that is a conversation ender right there! However, if you are walking through a forest and someone asks,"What is that?" And you reply," That is called a tree!" Right away that leaves the conversation open to lean more about this large thing . Such as,"Why is it called a tree? What function does it serve?" So if someone sees you reading a book and asks,"What are you reading?" And you reply,"It is a book about Bigfoot!". The emotion is flat! But if someone asks,"What are you reading?" And you reply "It is a book about the Sasquatch!" Right away this evokes an interest in, what is a Sasquatch? Because the subject now has a proper name which classifieds it as a separate creature. And a serious subject! 1
hiflier Posted July 19, 2021 Posted July 19, 2021 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Grandcherokee said: However, if you are walking through a forest and someone asks,"What is that?" And you reply," That is called a tree!" Oh it gets better than that, GC. What if the answer is "That is called THE tree."? It serves to raise the status of a tree even more. Granted, it's just words, but you're right in saying it opens the door to why THE tree has become something with a more formal reference. As in something worthy of higher respect. And IMHO, the Sasquatch is ALL of that. I have yet to become desensitized to its many-leveled importance in the world or the impact of its official recognition because it has deserved it's place in Nature many times over. Edited July 19, 2021 by hiflier
Grandcherokee Posted July 19, 2021 Posted July 19, 2021 8 minutes ago, hiflier said: Oh it gets better than that, GC. What if the answer is "That is called THE tree."? It serves to raise the status of a tree even more. Granted, it's just words, but you're right in saying it opens the door to why THE tree has become something with a more formal reference. As in something worthy of higher respect. And IMHO, the Sasquatch is ALL of that. I have yet to become desensitized to its many-leveled importance in the world or the impact of its official recognition because it has deserved it's place in Nature many times over. Well said! 1
Foxhill Posted July 22, 2021 BFF Patron Posted July 22, 2021 I like Bigfeets.....as in dem Bigfeets is com'in for ya!
Recommended Posts