|
|
Post by Noelia on Jul 12, 2007 19:32:42 GMT -3
I heard this in a movie (where else, I dont read books) and I found it very very interesting. This couple was fighting and they said:
- No! I want you to talk to me
- I *AM* talking to you
- No Simon, you are talking AT me
Which made me aware of the difference of talking to someone and at someone. It seems that "at" has the meaning of being something kind of negative, maybe agressive that you do to other people, against the interactivity that "to" means
- cursing at you (the other one does not reply)
- laughing at you (the other one does not laugh back)
Is this the meaning of "at" in these cases or I made up a new rule out of nothing?
|
|
|
|
Post by sendai on Jul 12, 2007 20:31:51 GMT -3
|
|
|
|
Post by Robie on Jul 12, 2007 22:15:04 GMT -3
To me, a classic example is that sometimes I think parents talk AT their kids instead of TO them. So instead of opening lines of interactive communication as you said, it's more of a lecture.
But I see it a little different than what Paul said if I understand his sentence right. I think of this as a negative thing on the part of the talker and not of the listener. But maybe we're saying the same thing - maybe he's saying the person talking isn't giving the other person a chance to talk back and he's not referencing the listener specifically in the statement "....not paying attention to what the other person says....".
Robie
|
|
|
|
Post by Noelia on Jul 12, 2007 22:40:00 GMT -3
Ok so you can use it both ways...
- No you're not talking to me, you're talking at me <--- meaning you don't listen to me
- No I'm not talking to you, I'm talking at you <------ meaning the listener is not participating at all
Is that what you mean?
|
|
|
|
Post by Robie on Jul 13, 2007 1:08:31 GMT -3
No, what I'm trying to say is that the "problem" is always with the speaker and not the listener. At least in how I would use it. - No you're not talking to me, you're talking at me <--- meaning I hear you saying things but you don't give me a chance to answer because you don't really want to interact with me. - No I'm not talking to you, I'm talking at you <------ I can't imagine ever saying this - at least not without a lot of sarcasm because this implies something negative against me and that I'm doing something wrong. Since I'm as perfect as you  , of course, I would never admit this! What I was trying to say earlier is that when I first read Paul's statement: "It implies that you aren't paying any attention to what the other person says...." I thought he was implying that there was something negative related to the listener since it's the listener who is usually the person expected to be paying attention. But as I read it closer and checked out the links, I see that he was really talking about the speaker as I am. Meaning that the speaker isn't paying attention to what the listener might want to say if the listener were allowed to speak. It's a lecture or at least a one-way conversation. Sorry if I confused you! |
|
|
|
Post by Noelia on Jul 19, 2007 12:48:39 GMT -3
Perdon que insista con este tema, pero necesito entenderlo bien.
Ayer, en la misma pelicula escuche esta frase:
- "... you should see the things people say at us"
Y por el contexto de la película, eso que la gente decía sí eran insultos, entonces, para recapitular...
Si dijeran "... people say to us" serían consejos
Pero si dicen "... say at us" entonces son insultos, o por lo menos una manera no amigable de de decir algo no?
|
|
|
|
Post by Robie on Jul 19, 2007 15:25:29 GMT -3
Qué interesante. Me suena mal 'at us' en este contexto. No lo diría.
|
|
|
|
Post by Noelia on Jul 19, 2007 18:42:07 GMT -3
Mmm ahora me hiciste dudar como era la frase..... voy a ver la pelicula de nuevo y la voy a escribir.
|
|
|
|
Post by sendai on Jul 19, 2007 19:09:29 GMT -3
Estoy con Robie. Me suena rarísisma.
Quizás era "say about us"?
|
|
|
|
Post by Noelia on Jul 19, 2007 21:02:46 GMT -3
No no, tienen razon, era "say to us" Me traicionó mi oido, es que lo pronunció tan suavemente que el "to" me sonó a "at" pero me fijé en los subtitulos y es "to" Otra cosa con la que me engaña el oído es "times have changed" porque me suena a "times are changed" ...Puedo adivinarlo con las leyes de la gramática pero significa que no puedo confiar 100% en lo que escucho  |
|
, of course, I would never admit this!