Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations Rhinorhino on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
"Contemporary" does not mean modern or up-to-date 2
- Thread starter MeGustaXL
- Start date
You hear it that way becaue that is its secondary meaning: marked by characteristics of the present period, modern, current (Merriam-Webster), following modern ideas in style or design (Oxford Dictionaries), belonging to the present time (Longman), conforming to modern or current ideas in style, fashion, design, etc (Collins)
It's all about context.
Can you give an example of where contemporary would be used to describe something as "Up-To-Date"?
As for Modern, again, such a relative term. What did you mean by modern?
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
Can you give an example of where contemporary would be used to describe something as "Up-To-Date"?
As for Modern, again, such a relative term. What did you mean by modern?
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
Annihilannic
MIS
Contemporary just means "of the same time". When you talk of William Shakespeare's contemporaries, you refer to the people who were around when he was. If you describe something as simply "contemporary", it is implicitly referring to ourselves or our time, therefore something recent (or "modern"! 
).
Annihilannic
[small]tgmlify - code syntax highlighting for your tek-tips posts[/small]
).Annihilannic
[small]tgmlify - code syntax highlighting for your tek-tips posts[/small]
- Thread starter
- #7
Annihilannic
MIS
They sound fine to me!
Annihilannic
[small]tgmlify - code syntax highlighting for your tek-tips posts[/small]
Annihilannic
[small]tgmlify - code syntax highlighting for your tek-tips posts[/small]
-
2
- #9
For the first example about the drapes, the feel can be from any tIme that is contemporary with the decor
For the second, contemporary adds nothIng to the sentence and can be eliminated
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
For the second, contemporary adds nothIng to the sentence and can be eliminated
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
@strongm if your last was directed at me. I disagree
Contemporary simply allocates a timeframe relationship between 2 or more people or things
Drapes can be contemporary with any decor where the style identifiable with the decor
The word new in the second example defines the timeframe so contemporary is redundant and adds nothing to the sentence
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
Contemporary simply allocates a timeframe relationship between 2 or more people or things
Drapes can be contemporary with any decor where the style identifiable with the decor
The word new in the second example defines the timeframe so contemporary is redundant and adds nothing to the sentence
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
>Contemporary simply allocates a timeframe relationship between 2 or more people or things
No it doesn't. This is an example of exactly what I was talking about; you continue to only want your own personal definition. I have already provided numerous dictionary definitions that clearly demonstrate that this not the only definition.
>Drapes can be contemporary with any decor where the style identifiable with the decor
The drapes may also give an old-fashioed room a more modern and up-to-date look or feel specifically because they are NOT of the same period as the decor
>The word new in the second example defines the timeframe so contemporary is redundant and adds nothing to the sentence
So, let's just check: you are suggesting that a new band will always create a contemporary sound?
No it doesn't. This is an example of exactly what I was talking about; you continue to only want your own personal definition. I have already provided numerous dictionary definitions that clearly demonstrate that this not the only definition.
>Drapes can be contemporary with any decor where the style identifiable with the decor
The drapes may also give an old-fashioed room a more modern and up-to-date look or feel specifically because they are NOT of the same period as the decor
>The word new in the second example defines the timeframe so contemporary is redundant and adds nothing to the sentence
So, let's just check: you are suggesting that a new band will always create a contemporary sound?
@Stromgm - I hesitate to suggest this, but I suspect that your bias is blinding you to what I am saying.
The temporal relationship does not need to be the same, true, but it can be and clues within the structure allow us to differentiate which might be meant.
Contemporary is a relative term and the relationship should be clear.
"Those drapes give this room such a contemporary look and feel" can be either. Choosing one or the other is up to the context. There is not enough context in this sentence alone to indicate which is which. This is all I have said.
"This new band put a contemporary twist on jive standards" vs "This new band put a twist on jive standards"
My version does not suggest that "(I am) suggesting that a new band will always create a contemporary sound". Frankly, I am very confused as to how you came about that conclusion which is why I am suggesting that you are bringing your own bias to bare. My version says exactly what the old says, as contemporary is redundant.
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
The temporal relationship does not need to be the same, true, but it can be and clues within the structure allow us to differentiate which might be meant.
Contemporary is a relative term and the relationship should be clear.
"Those drapes give this room such a contemporary look and feel" can be either. Choosing one or the other is up to the context. There is not enough context in this sentence alone to indicate which is which. This is all I have said.
"This new band put a contemporary twist on jive standards" vs "This new band put a twist on jive standards"
My version does not suggest that "(I am) suggesting that a new band will always create a contemporary sound". Frankly, I am very confused as to how you came about that conclusion which is why I am suggesting that you are bringing your own bias to bare. My version says exactly what the old says, as contemporary is redundant.
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
>your bias
Bias? That I accept, as you do not, that 'contemporary' has a wider definition than "simply allocates a timeframe relationship between 2 or more people or things" to include, inter alia, current/modern/up-to-date.
>clues within the structure allow us to differentiate which might be meant
I agree.
>My version says exactly what the old says, as contemporary is redundant
No. Your version assumes that contemporary is the redundant, understood position for all properties ascribed to the band. And it is redundant for all properties because the band is new. My contention is that you cannot make that assumption. As a result, your version leaves the reader with no idea what sort of a twist the band has put on jive.
I'd accept that it could be redundant in a statement such as
"They are a new, contemporary band"
but even there the particular context may require its use. And yes, you are right, context is of course important.
"A new production of Hamlet in contemporary costume" or "Contemporary critics of Shakespreare" are both ambiguous and either need more context, or to be reworded, in order to make their meaning clear (although you'll no doubt try to argue that contemporary is redundant in the former statement, since it is a new production ...)
Bias? That I accept, as you do not, that 'contemporary' has a wider definition than "simply allocates a timeframe relationship between 2 or more people or things" to include, inter alia, current/modern/up-to-date.
>clues within the structure allow us to differentiate which might be meant
I agree.
>My version says exactly what the old says, as contemporary is redundant
No. Your version assumes that contemporary is the redundant, understood position for all properties ascribed to the band. And it is redundant for all properties because the band is new. My contention is that you cannot make that assumption. As a result, your version leaves the reader with no idea what sort of a twist the band has put on jive.
I'd accept that it could be redundant in a statement such as
"They are a new, contemporary band"
but even there the particular context may require its use. And yes, you are right, context is of course important.
"A new production of Hamlet in contemporary costume" or "Contemporary critics of Shakespreare" are both ambiguous and either need more context, or to be reworded, in order to make their meaning clear (although you'll no doubt try to argue that contemporary is redundant in the former statement, since it is a new production ...)
@strongm, I will accept that you make some valid points. Where you fail in your argument is by rewording my argument to suit your needs and then claiming that I have stated things That I have not. I will leave you now with the fact that I will consider your intent and reflect on that.
One question before I go:
Can you give Tme an example of a sentence that is contextually sound with the original whereby a "New Band" would not be considered contemporary?
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
One question before I go:
Can you give Tme an example of a sentence that is contextually sound with the original whereby a "New Band" would not be considered contemporary?
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
- Thread starter
- #17
Whoa! As the late Michael Winner might have said "Calm down dear, it's only a friendly discussion!"
I posed the original question because it grates on me when I hear TV presenters describing something as having a "contemporary feel", or saying BS like "adding ketchup to the mince makes these burgers so contemporary". That usage just annoys me whenever I hear it, but I was quite prepared to be told that, yes, I am the one who is wrong. This was confirmed by strongm in his first post, and I thought the matter was closed by his 3rd: "...I should have said this in my first post: Afraid so".
The two examples I gave were just plucked from my mind to satisfy kwbmitel's request; "Can you give an example of where contemporary would be used to describe something as 'Up-To-Date'?" I wasn't suggesting that they were actual real world examples, or that they were (in)correct... just a couple of illustrations of the kind of thing that irritates me.
I now accept that I'm a bit hypercritical of this word, and that it does, indeed, have secondary (and probably tertiary![[wink]](/data/assets/smilies/wink.gif "[wink] [wink]")
) meanings I hadn't considered before.
Now please can we all shake hands and draw a line under this?
![[peace]](/data/assets/smilies/peace.gif "[peace] [peace]")
Chris
Someday I'll know what I'm donig...damn!
I posed the original question because it grates on me when I hear TV presenters describing something as having a "contemporary feel", or saying BS like "adding ketchup to the mince makes these burgers so contemporary". That usage just annoys me whenever I hear it, but I was quite prepared to be told that, yes, I am the one who is wrong. This was confirmed by strongm in his first post, and I thought the matter was closed by his 3rd: "...I should have said this in my first post: Afraid so".
The two examples I gave were just plucked from my mind to satisfy kwbmitel's request; "Can you give an example of where contemporary would be used to describe something as 'Up-To-Date'?" I wasn't suggesting that they were actual real world examples, or that they were (in)correct... just a couple of illustrations of the kind of thing that irritates me.
I now accept that I'm a bit hypercritical of this word, and that it does, indeed, have secondary (and probably tertiary
) meanings I hadn't considered before.Now please can we all shake hands and draw a line under this?
Chris
Someday I'll know what I'm donig...damn!
@MeGustaXL
A few tips
Once a conversation is started It is over when people tire of it. It's sometimes quite interesting to see where things end up. Having your answer is good and all but other questions were raised. Enjoy the ride
Don't assume that people who disagree are hostile. Respect, first and foremost. I rarely disagree with Strongm as he is better at the basics by a long shot. This case was very specific and I had a competing viewpoint on the examples that I thought to share
I've declined to continue not because I think I'm wrong or because I think I'm right but because I can't think of a way to continue without simply repeating myself (usually that means I'm wrong btw, but I hold hope otherwise)
Finally, and I'm making an assumPtion here based On your user name, this is not reddit. The people here are scary smart(I don't rank yet). Argue at your peril, be willing to learn a thing or 2.
Enjoy and welcome to the forum
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
A few tips
Once a conversation is started It is over when people tire of it. It's sometimes quite interesting to see where things end up. Having your answer is good and all but other questions were raised. Enjoy the ride
Don't assume that people who disagree are hostile. Respect, first and foremost. I rarely disagree with Strongm as he is better at the basics by a long shot. This case was very specific and I had a competing viewpoint on the examples that I thought to share
I've declined to continue not because I think I'm wrong or because I think I'm right but because I can't think of a way to continue without simply repeating myself (usually that means I'm wrong btw, but I hold hope otherwise)
Finally, and I'm making an assumPtion here based On your user name, this is not reddit. The people here are scary smart(I don't rank yet). Argue at your peril, be willing to learn a thing or 2.
Enjoy and welcome to the forum
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
One other thing for everybody,
My typing has taken a serious downturn as most of the time I'm using a smartphone left handed (I'm a rightie)
I have a Karate injury - distal bicep tendon tear - for those more curious
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
My typing has taken a serious downturn as most of the time I'm using a smartphone left handed (I'm a rightie)
I have a Karate injury - distal bicep tendon tear - for those more curious
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
As kwbMittel says, we (er, as a group, rather than solely kwbMittel and myself ;-) ) often have discussions in here that can sometimes become heated and fiercely argued. But we normally manage to keep it civil rather than hostile. And we still talk to each other afterwards
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
