my

Aug. 13th, 2006 01:33 pm
pants_of_doom: (blue green yellow spiral)
First person singular possessive, but no variation in degree: my book, my friend, my arm.

Ownership and use: my cup, as in a cup I own, my cup, as in the cup I'm using. My cup that my friend owns. My cup that's my friend's cup for this meal. You can talk about who's using it and who owns it without confusion: "Hey, pass me my cup." "Where did you get these cups?" the first is to the user, the second the owner, and you knew that.

Things that are mine that cannot be used by someone else: my arm. Inalienable? How about my kidney? My blood? Difficulty in transferrence? My heart could be donated for transplantation if I died, but is more essential to my life than my arm, which can't be transplanted. Things that are mine that are obviously mine and, while alienable, not alienable without permanent damage? Blood donation is only temporary damage. Saliva and (other) sexual fluids not even damaging, but still obviously mine.

My book could be mine because I wrote it or because it's in my possession. Even if I loan it to someone? Technical versus strict possession, as with the cups. My authorship is more like my kidney than like my cup. Once given away, I still painted my paintings. Once given away, I still - created? grew? housed? what? - my kidney. Blood fades to the new owner quickly except in case of uncaught blood-borne disease, in which case it will always be associated with the donor, rejection of ownership as rejection of responsibility.

My possessions are temporary, and will be given to new owners on my death. My body is temporary and can be given to science or for parts on my death. I can choose to burn my body, and I most likely will. I can choose to burn my possessions, and my sketchbooks will most likely be cremated with me. My unpublished brain hardcopy may be more mine because I don't let other people see it. Is something more mine when only I know about it, or is it more mine when everyone knows it's mine? Is something more or less alienable according to whether people know about it? Or only according to their actions?

My friends are a relationship I possess jointly with other people. Mine (and theirs) because we agree on it, written in our pasts and actions, sometimes in bright hopes for the future, or things that almost were. Alienable in ways other than books and kidneys and blood. Alienable instead via time and distance and change. Not transferrable, not something only one person can have, not something tangible to keep on shelves or in pockets though it has been known to keep me warm at night. My crushes are a one-sided version, my enemies can but don't have to be a joint relationship.

There is also my cat, who I think of as a relationship and other people may think of as a possession. As a disturbing number of people still think about their partners and children.

This is also some of the question with music, whether my copy of Surfer Rosa is something I own or something I only own the right to use. And now this is degenerating so I will stop.

my

Aug. 13th, 2006 01:33 pm
pants_of_doom: (Default)
First person singular possessive, but no variation in degree: my book, my friend, my arm.

Ownership and use: my cup, as in a cup I own, my cup, as in the cup I'm using. My cup that my friend owns. My cup that's my friend's cup for this meal. You can talk about who's using it and who owns it without confusion: "Hey, pass me my cup." "Where did you get these cups?" the first is to the user, the second the owner, and you knew that.

Things that are mine that cannot be used by someone else: my arm. Inalienable? How about my kidney? My blood? Difficulty in transferrence? My heart could be donated for transplantation if I died, but is more essential to my life than my arm, which can't be transplanted. Things that are mine that are obviously mine and, while alienable, not alienable without permanent damage? Blood donation is only temporary damage. Saliva and (other) sexual fluids not even damaging, but still obviously mine.

My book could be mine because I wrote it or because it's in my possession. Even if I loan it to someone? Technical versus strict possession, as with the cups. My authorship is more like my kidney than like my cup. Once given away, I still painted my paintings. Once given away, I still - created? grew? housed? what? - my kidney. Blood fades to the new owner quickly except in case of uncaught blood-borne disease, in which case it will always be associated with the donor, rejection of ownership as rejection of responsibility.

My possessions are temporary, and will be given to new owners on my death. My body is temporary and can be given to science or for parts on my death. I can choose to burn my body, and I most likely will. I can choose to burn my possessions, and my sketchbooks will most likely be cremated with me. My unpublished brain hardcopy may be more mine because I don't let other people see it. Is something more mine when only I know about it, or is it more mine when everyone knows it's mine? Is something more or less alienable according to whether people know about it? Or only according to their actions?

My friends are a relationship I possess jointly with other people. Mine (and theirs) because we agree on it, written in our pasts and actions, sometimes in bright hopes for the future, or things that almost were. Alienable in ways other than books and kidneys and blood. Alienable instead via time and distance and change. Not transferrable, not something only one person can have, not something tangible to keep on shelves or in pockets though it has been known to keep me warm at night. My crushes are a one-sided version, my enemies can but don't have to be a joint relationship.

There is also my cat, who I think of as a relationship and other people may think of as a possession. As a disturbing number of people still think about their partners and children.

This is also some of the question with music, whether my copy of Surfer Rosa is something I own or something I only own the right to use. And now this is degenerating so I will stop.
pants_of_doom: (brown and blue watercolor)
Skies kind of weirds me out. There's one sky. We talk about skies meaning the same thing at different times.

Data is a plural. Science Commons is one of the only places I've ever seen use it as a plural.

Catholic means universal, as in having catholic tastes. I'm only thinking of this because [livejournal.com profile] riotdorrrk sent me some Frank Black lovin' for my birthday, but whenever I think of it I'm always surprised. On a semantic tangent, I think my birthday lasts as long as I'm still getting presents for it.
pants_of_doom: (Default)
Skies kind of weirds me out. There's one sky. We talk about skies meaning the same thing at different times.

Data is a plural. Science Commons is one of the only places I've ever seen use it as a plural.

Catholic means universal, as in having catholic tastes. I'm only thinking of this because [livejournal.com profile] riotdorrrk sent me some Frank Black lovin' for my birthday, but whenever I think of it I'm always surprised. On a semantic tangent, I think my birthday lasts as long as I'm still getting presents for it.

May 2017

S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
212223242526 27
28293031   

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags