A Question for My Beloved Grammarians...

[elise_wanderer]

I was reading an article today in the LA Times about the "crisis" in television comedies (i.e., there aren't very many of them that are succeeding right now).  The author made reference to "the so-called 'single-camera' comedies."  They are "so-called" because are shot with a single camera instead of with multiple cameras

Comments

[mundungus42]

"So-called" is like "sanguine;" it has two commonly used definitions that are somewhat contradictory. The usage you and are I more familiar with implies that the "so-called" thing is false or a misnomer, but the LAT is using it to mean "commonly known as," which is also a completely legitimate usage.

In my own writing and reading, I try to avoid words like this for precisely this reason. Unless I'm making a pun, like referring to a vampire with a sanguine disposition...

PS And why do you want more multiple-camera shows?

[elise_wanderer]

THANK YOU! That makes quite a bit of sense, including just avoiding using phrases/words with several different meanings. I just kept looking at it and frowning

[mundungus42]

Or perhaps I should say "so-called 'theatre rats'" just to be safe....

*sporfle*

Also, this is fascinating. I never would have guessed the reason for your preference for multi-camera sitcom work, but now that you've laid them out, it makes complete sense. In that case, I want there to be more multi-camera shows for a live audience, too!

[kittylefish]

well, i have to say that even though this usage is correct, as was pointed out above, i find the phrase completely unnecessary in this context and personally would have cut it were i the editor, lol. ;)

[dickgloucester]

Mr D heard a radio report in which some oik expressed the opinion that we need more "mutual self-respect"... I despair for the English language.

[elise_wanderer]

Mutual self-respect sounds like the definition of a circle jerk.

I despair, as well! ;))))

[corianderpie]

Neither necessary nor helpful. When one of a term's two main definitions is this loaded, be extra careful when you use it. This is the antithesis of careful use, though not criminal.

But enough about that! Why DO you want multicamera shows to have a comeback?

[elise_wanderer]

See my reply to Mudungus42, above for an answer to the really IMPORTANT part of this discussion!

[corianderpie]

I thought there might be a practical type reason like this. So, yes, I agree there should be more multiple camera shows. I also think you should be cast in a recurring role that ends only when you are cast in another one, and so on. Yes indeed.

[dacian_goddess]

Quick question - because I raptly read your reply to Mun and it was infinitely more fascinating than rehashing how wrongwrongwrong the author was in their 'so-called' usage - does that free participation in the table read you mentioned allow you to adapt your comedic timing via giving you a feel for the folks you'll be working with... or is the outcome too dependent on the directing et al for that to make a significant difference?

(...In my head this made sense; should that fail to be the case - oh well, I just really like asking stuff ^_^ )

Also, do you have any favourite table read stories?

[elise_wanderer]

Usually, that "free" participation is the chance for the people who cast you to (a) make sure they didn't make a mistake and (b) show everybody else who they found to fill the spot. So it means you need to do pretty much what got you the job in the first place and hope everybody comes away happy. The table read is NOT the time to try something brand new