Yes. You are misreading it.
As I said. The statement, as presented, is self-cancelling. That's why I hate it.
For the purposes of this argument, the fact that it does mean something that doesn't reflect the grammatical structure of the sentence isn't important - it's not what I'm attempting to point out. I understand what it means, and what it's supposed to convey, it's just one of those things I read and go ugh because my mind wants to see it's absolute meaning instead of it's intended meaning.
Fair enough. But a lot of these saying are written specifically to convey said (sometimes complicated) wisdom in the most simplistic way possible; and in this sense: it is very effective. A lot of things are written, more-so, to be impactful rather than sensical. Apple's famous "Think Different." slogan comes to mind. In fact, I'm pretty sure there's a technical term for this practice, that they teach in high school, that I've long-since forgotten.
My point, in is essence, if I had to boil it down to such: would be that language can be used as an artful tool, just as much as any other medium. You can use its structures and methods (arguably improperly) to create new and valid things. The construction of metaphors is a practice in doing exactly this— not necessarily in the deconstruction of grammar, but in the purposeful manipulation of meaning.
I fully agree. It's simply a statement that's been used over time to mean something, for so long, that it no longer reflects the actual structure of the statement. It's like saying "The proof is in the pudding." That's not the original statement, but we all know what it's supposed to mean.
But the thread this was posted in was "What sayings do you hate?" That one, and that's why. Again, nothing more.
(post is archived)