Violence of Action...Is bad grammar enough to distract one from the true meaning?

[User0331]

The term (and way of life) Violence of Action.....is bad grammar enough to distract one from the phrase's all too powerful meaning?



While watching a show on the History Channel about scout snipers, they explained the term "Violence of Action" and even felt it appropriate to flash the words "Violence of Action" across the screen. Being in the military, we hear this term constantly and it's meaning is well taken and understood. To the untrained, disgusting and otherwise useless civilian, "Violence of Action" is a grammatical nightmare. I have had the argument with several well educated individuals about this grammatical exception and while I agree that according to modern English this is grammatically incorrect, it doesn't make sense why the military would have started and then kept using a phrase that really doesn't make sense in the English language.

[The Fat Guy]

To the sheep mired in academia, it makes perfect sense to find fault with the grammar of the Sheep Dog so in the mind of the academic he has a legitimate reason for not partaking in the war against the wolf. That said, I really do not give a rat's shiny red ass whether or not they A, think it makes sense or B, is grammatically correct.

It makes perfect sense to both the wolf and the sheep dog. That is all that really matters.

[poison]

The term (and way of life) Violence of Action.....is bad grammar enough to distract one from the phrase's all too powerful meaning?



While watching a show on the History Channel about scout snipers, they explained the term "Violence of Action" and even felt it appropriate to flash the words "Violence of Action" across the screen. Being in the military, we hear this term constantly and it's meaning is well taken and understood. To the untrained, disgusting and otherwise useless civilian, "Violence of Action" is a grammatical nightmare. I have had the argument with several well educated individuals about this grammatical exception and while I agree that according to modern English this is grammatically incorrect, it doesn't make sense why the military would have started and then kept using a phrase that really doesn't make sense in the English language.

Hey, bro, watch this.

Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action Violence of Action


Wait, I heard something. It was a gasp of indignation.


Oh, and:

and while I agree that according to modern English this is grammatically incorrect, it doesn't make sense why the military would have started and then kept using a phrase that really doesn't make sense

Is that a grammatical exception?

[yojinbukai]

One valid demonstration would sttfu.

[Believeraz]

One valid demonstration would sttfu.

+1.

It's a nicer way to say it than saying "fuck the fucking fuckers before the fuckers fuck you", isn't it? :cool:

[Longrifle]

It's not grammatically incorrect unless it is being substituted for "violent action" in a sentence.

"Violent action" and "violence of action" are as different as "ignorant opinions" are from "the ignorance of their opinions."

Sounds to me those 'academics' have too much education and not enough intelligence.

[The Fat Guy]

+1.

It's a nicer way to say it than saying "fuck the fucking fuckers before the fuckers fuck you", isn't it? :cool:

You forgot one

"fuck the fucking fuckers before the fucking fuckers fuck you"

But your version did still have a nice ring to it.

[HighDragLowSpeed]

You forgot one

"fuck the fucking fuckers before the fucking fuckers fuck you"

But your version did still have a nice ring to it.

Hmm...you forgot one as well

"fuck the fucking fuckers before the fucking fuckers fuck fucking you"

Your version is the PC version only said around field grades and above :biggrin:

[RGR.Montcalm]

The next time you find yourself in the company of a double dry decaf espressowith vanilla soy swilling pole smoker that wants to argue the merits of proper grammar, smack him (or her) witha tack hammer and explain that you've just given them a practical example of

"Violence of Action"...;):biggrin:

[The Fat Guy]

The next time you find yourself in the company of a double dry decaf espresso with vanilla soy swilling pole smoker that wants to argue the merits of proper grammar, smack him (or her) with a tack hammer and explain that you've just given them a practical example of

"Violence of Action"...;):biggrin:

AND, I am sure that A, the grammar will make perfect sense to them and B, they will fully understand the meaning and C, they might even say Fuck.

In the words of an old team Sgt, who put these things so eloquently, "Sir, I can't be no plainer than that"

[Polypro]

You interact with people that grammatically dissect Military terms? Get a new job and quit hanging around with them.

P

[shady1]

Hmm...you forgot one as well

"fuck the fucking fuckers before the fucking fuckers fuck fucking you" :biggrin:

Could use one more gents.

"Fucking fuck the fucking fuckers before the fucking fuckers fuck fucking you ";)

[Baildog]

Actually, the beauty of the English language is its fungibility. Unlike French, there is no government Academy charged with defending English from evolving. When a new term is coined in English, and has a clear and utilitarian meaning, it is adopted into the vernacular, and communication is improved.

[KidA]

Aeschylus would have never mangled his native language to prove a point. :biggrin:

As longrifle pointed out, however, "violence of action" is not incorrect depending upon usage.

[Hopeless Civilian]

The next time you find yourself in the company of a double dry decaf espressowith vanilla soy swilling pole smoker that wants to argue the merits of proper grammar, smack him (or her) witha tack hammer and explain that you've just given them a practical example of

"Violence of Action"...;):biggrin:

SGM, I think you just won the prize for Sig Line of the day.:biggrin:

[poison]

rofl, much win here!

[eltrane]

Could use one more gents.

"Fucking fuck the fucking fuckers before the fucking fuckers fuck fucking you ";)

Who the fuck needs iambic pentameter on the SOCnet?

[shady1]

Who the fuck needs iambic pentameter on the SOCnet?:eek::eek::eek:

Grade this one professor.

"I stand a midst the fields where war was raged
and thank the gods my vict'ry they have waged
to represent my father's blood this day
avenging wrongs; their warriors I did slay";)

[Greenhat]

It's not grammatically incorrect unless it is being substituted for "violent action" in a sentence.

"Violent action" and "violence of action" are as different as "ignorant opinions" are from "the ignorance of their opinions."

Sounds to me those 'academics' have too much education and not enough intelligence.

+ 1

[RAT]

I see your from Houston.

So what academic school are you talking about?

Univ of Houston, Rice, HBU, UH DT, UH CL, UH Systems, HCC, SHSU, Lonestar College, College of the Main Land, San Jac?

Post it up and what department and I'll go have a talk.

Also, you might want to have some of your people come on down to Rice's Baker institute and discuss this. There is a little get together about VoA.

RO!!!

[Outofcontrol]

Rat,

When is that get together? I might be able to swing a trip.

Oh, and PM inbound...

OOC, out

[User0331]

The individuals trying to dissect this phrase were engineers, english teachers and a few other well educated (institutionalized) service members. No firm academic representation was present during the discussion.

[RGR.Montcalm]

The individuals trying to dissect this phrase were engineers, english teachers and a few other well educated (institutionalized) service members. No firm academic representation was present during the discussion.

Were they all wearing matching white jackets with REALLY long sleeves??? :biggrin:

[Princeps Belli]

Violence of action. It seems to be a genitive of description. Both terms come into English through an Old French root, and subsequently, they are derived from Latin (New American Oxford Dictionary). The word is an actual Latin word in its present progressive participial form. Whitaker's words has it that it comes from violare (violate).The "nt" suffix at the end of a word represents a present progressive participle in Latin. What that essentially means is that the verb becomes an adjective, which can become a noun or an adverb. That may seem complicated, but it's much like the way that the "ing" suffix in English functions. Therefore, a killing can be a noun, or flying becomes an adjective, as in the "flying man." Therefore, violence of action is more like using the word action in a descriptive manner, and violence already implies an action, not an abstraction. It would be better to say the violence of an action. I don't see anything which is technically wrong with it, but military language, business language, and bureaucratic language can often have a roundabout way of getting to an idea. I think that it is because the idea has a more colorful display when it is the "violence of action," but academics seem to like to argue about nothing, as in my attempt to describe something that I am completely unsure about, but it was a good "force of effort"......Ha ha.....:cool:;)

[RGR.Montcalm]

...your post...

Thank you, CPT Confusion, for making my head hurt by reading that post.

I think I'll go grab a cup of joe at the on post Starbucks...

cross points?

[ender_wiggins]

So I guess we ought to be grateful that Paul Revere yelled "The British are coming!" as opposed to "The British be coming!"

[poison]

"force of effort"


LOL! You know the OP is off having 'force of effort' examined by his professor friends now.

[Tango Chaser]

Just when you think the military condensed an entire paragraph of explainations to 3 words, you find out a zipper is a "metal slide fastener".

[USArmyTC]

One of the toughest Drill Sergeants I ever had back in Basic Training would say "Violence of Action" ALL the time. He would say it so fast that it became two words. "Violensive Action". I swear all of us thought that was what he was saying for the longest time.

[RGR.Montcalm]

Just when you think the military condensed an entire paragraph of explainations to 3 words, you find out a zipper is a "metal slide fastener".

There's actually a difference between the 'slide fastener on the M1950 weapons container (I'm ASSuming you are referring to this) and a zipper.

A slide fastener releases and separates when the pull tab is pulled to the top of the 'teeth, where as a zipper holds fast until it is unzipped (like your pants before pissing)

Thak god we have zippers instead of slide fasteners on pants- I'd have a helluva time fixing my pants after about 10 beers...;):biggrin:

[theWookie]

Violence of Action is something that we used to preach at CQB school. It is on the back of the school shirts written in Latin.

http://i987.photobucket.com/albums/ae359/thewookie_photos/100_1105.jpg

Surprise, Speed, and Violence of Action.

Semper Fi, Marines.

["TheSiatonist"]

The term (and way of life) Violence of Action.....is bad grammar enough to distract one from the phrase's all too powerful meaning?


While watching a show on the History Channel about scout snipers, they explained the term "Violence of Action" and even felt it appropriate to flash the words "Violence of Action" across the screen. Being in the military, we hear this term constantly and it's meaning is well taken and understood. To the untrained, disgusting and otherwise useless civilian, "Violence of Action" is a grammatical nightmare. I have had the argument with several well educated individuals about this grammatical exception and while I agree that according to modern English this is grammatically incorrect, it doesn't make sense why the military would have started and then kept using a phrase that really doesn't make sense in the English language.

Pretty sure that was quite a boring discussion/argument.... unless there was alcohol involved, of course.

[Baildog]

btw, it would be "poor grammar," not "bad grammar." :tongue:

[Princeps Belli]

Thank you, CPT Confusion, for making my head hurt by reading that post.

I think I'll go grab a cup of joe at the on post Starbucks...

cross points? I just couldn't resist trying for this one. It was bad grammar and a pithy academic debate about nonsense. I felt the thread calling my name.

On a side note, I did get into a conversation once where professors were making fun of my use of the terms ORM, and military language in general, so I tried to explain the idea on the basis of conciseness, practicability, and its general ability to be taught (something they probably don't understand very well). They said that there was already a word for ORM; it was called prudence, and it was shorter to use. I replied that the acronym was actually shorter to use. Plus, you know that some LT out there probably got a NAM for going, "guess what guys...ORM." I used to have conversations like this when I was fifteen and smoked weed, "Hey....Bro....did..you ever think that the words that you're using really mean anything, or are they alive, moving around our head......"

I'll only suggest on this one that Violence of Action is something that we used to preach at CQB school. It is on the back of the school shirts written in Latin.
.........there is the gerundive or future passive participle in the "nd" part of the operandi. That's a whole different ball game, but it probably is making a play at modus operandi. I have no idea how that helps. Unless, of course, you want to be like me and get on an internet thread, and go, "oooh oooh. Guess what? I got to talk about the perfect progressive participle and future passive participle..." Yeah. Probably doesn't help. Plus, if I had to make a split second decision......I'm sure violence of action would be perfectly fine. Oh....I still won't pretend to give an answer to the correctness in the use of grammar. The previous post was written to show maybe one of the many lines that those guys were arguing. Then again, they may have simply eaten some hallucinogenic cacti. Professors are known to do that kind of stuff in the name of good science.

[User0331]

Thank god for socnet.

[Blackjack7]

The next time you find yourself in the company of a double dry decaf espressowith vanilla soy swilling pole smoker that wants to argue the merits of proper grammar, smack him (or her) witha tack hammer and explain that you've just given them a practical example of

"Violence of Action"...;):biggrin:

A descriptive masterpiece! Outstanding! I laughed so hard I almost puked.

[Massgrunt]

:eek::eek::eek:

Grade this one professor.

"I stand a midst the fields where war was raged
and thank the gods my vict'ry they have waged
to represent my father's blood this day
avenging wrongs; their warriors I did slay";)

Where is this from? Google came up dry.

[shady1]

Where is this from? Google came up dry.

C'mon dude, everyone remembers that one from Iambic Pentameter class.:confused:

Alright, I googled that one.;) I'm sure as many others had to.

Parameters : Iambic Pentameter Military

http://languageisavirus.com/questions/how-in-the-world-am-i-supposed-to-use-iambic-pentameter

[Psi Brr]

:eek::eek::eek:

Grade this one professor.

"I stand a midst the fields where war was raged
and thank the gods my vict'ry they have waged
to represent my father's blood this day
avenging wrongs; their warriors I did slay";)
Isn't it "amidst?"