Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests to win things like this Logitech Harmony Ultimate Remote and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Is it BARE in mind or BEAR in mind?


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#1 of 43 Chazz_S

Chazz_S

    Supporting Actor

  • 501 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 08 2002

Posted March 28 2004 - 07:46 AM

I've always thought it was 'bare'. It just seemed to make more sense to me, although I didn't know for sure. I read a post on another forum where someone corrected a person who used bare. Which is it??!





#2 of 43 Rob Gillespie

Rob Gillespie

    Producer

  • 3,634 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 17 1998

Posted March 28 2004 - 07:59 AM

Bear. As In 'bearing'. Not as in GRRRRRRR.

Bare In Mind = Kate Winslet.
  • Aaron Silverman likes this
No longer here.

#3 of 43 Chazz_S

Chazz_S

    Supporting Actor

  • 501 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 08 2002

Posted March 28 2004 - 08:02 AM

Excellent thanks!

#4 of 43 Christ Reynolds

Christ Reynolds

    Producer

  • 3,597 posts
  • Join Date: May 06 2002

Posted March 28 2004 - 08:03 AM

Quote:
Bare In Mind = Kate Winslet
hey how did you know what i was thinking of!

CJ
And then when I feel so stuffed I can't eat anymore, I just use the restroom! And then I CAN eat more!

#5 of 43 Ricardo C

Ricardo C

    Producer

  • 5,060 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 14 2002

Posted March 28 2004 - 08:08 AM

Quote:
I've always thought it was 'bare'. It just seemed to make more sense to me, although I didn't know for sure. I read a post on another forum where someone corrected a person who used bare. Which is it??!

It didn't ever occur to you how "bare in mind" makes no sense whatsoever?

Man, an hour wasted on this sig! Thanks, Toshiba! :P

#6 of 43 Keith Mickunas

Keith Mickunas

    Screenwriter

  • 2,044 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 15 1998

Posted March 28 2004 - 08:20 AM

Quote:
It didn't ever occur to you how "bare in mind" makes no sense whatsoever?

I had to think about it a moment. I see "bear" and think only of the animal and not its other meanings. Which is strange, why does the name of an animal have so many meanings?

#7 of 43 Rob Gillespie

Rob Gillespie

    Producer

  • 3,634 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 17 1998

Posted March 28 2004 - 08:22 AM

Quote:
It didn't ever occur to you how "bare in mind" makes no sense whatsoever?

It does if you're thinking about Kate Winslet.
No longer here.

#8 of 43 Ricardo C

Ricardo C

    Producer

  • 5,060 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 14 2002

Posted March 28 2004 - 08:46 AM

*can't type rebuttal, too busy looking for copy of "Jude"*

:b

Man, an hour wasted on this sig! Thanks, Toshiba! :P

#9 of 43 Patrick_S

Patrick_S

    Screenwriter

  • 2,970 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 01 2000

Posted March 28 2004 - 10:13 AM

Quote:
Bare In Mind = Kate Winslet.
Ok, I'm a little slow today so what is this in referring to?

#10 of 43 Richard Travale

Richard Travale

    Producer

  • 3,401 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 27 2001
  • Real Name:Richard Travale
  • LocationVancouver Island, Canada

Posted March 28 2004 - 11:27 AM

that she is not a bright gal...
 "Cock your hat - angles are attitudes. "
- Frank Sinatra 

#11 of 43 Christ Reynolds

Christ Reynolds

    Producer

  • 3,597 posts
  • Join Date: May 06 2002

Posted March 28 2004 - 01:25 PM

Quote:
that she is not a bright gal...
or it could be that you are thinking of her bare (naked) in your mind. at least thats what i thought it was at first.

CJ
And then when I feel so stuffed I can't eat anymore, I just use the restroom! And then I CAN eat more!

#12 of 43 Joseph DeMartino

Joseph DeMartino

    Lead Actor

  • 8,301 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969
  • Real Name:Joseph DeMartino
  • LocationFlorida

Posted March 28 2004 - 02:13 PM

Quote:
Which is strange, why does the name of an animal have so many meanings?


The name of the animal doesn't have many meanings. The spelling/pronunciation combination "bear" is used to denote many unrelated meanings. It is more-or-less happenstance that they came to share the same sound and spelling. English has an unsual number of such homonyms because it borrows volcabularly from so many sources. (In part because England was such a popular destination for invaders and conquerers for much of the Middle Ages. Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Norman French - who were originaly Vikings, that is "Norsemen", from Scandanavia - actual Vikings direct from Scandanavia, you name it.)

Words that end up being spelled and spoken alike come into our language by completely different routes and have nothing in common in sense or origin except the accident of how they sound and how that sound became standardized in spelling when moveable type was introduced. (Prior to which spelling was gloriously idiosyncratic and much more apt to reflect the actual sound of a word - as least as spoken by that particular writer.)

The verb "bear" used in "bear (that is, "carry") in mind" finds its way into modern English from Middle and Old English (beren, beran) via words meaning "to carry" that go back through old High German (beran), Norse (bera), the Latin ferre, the Greek pherein , all of which are ultimately related to the Sanskrit bharati, "he carries"

The noun "bear" is a more purely English word, and derives from the word for the color "brown" in various Germanic languages. The word, not unnaturally, became attached to the big brown animal that folks encountered in the forest. (Brown bears probably being the only type that would be seen in northern Europe.)

Regards,

Joe
  • nara likes this

#13 of 43 Hunter P

Hunter P

    Screenwriter

  • 1,483 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 05 2002

Posted March 28 2004 - 06:09 PM

Which is strange, why does the name of an animal have so many meanings?
The name of the animal doesn't have many meanings. The spelling/pronunciation combination "bear" is used to denote many unrelated meanings. It is more-or-less happenstance that they came to share the same sound and spelling.
Thank you, Dr. Joseph, but that is totally wrong. Our ancient ancestors used to push, pull, kick, or throw objects to move them from once place to another. Dragging one's food home was very common practice in the old days. Unfortunately, this caused one's food to become very dirty and unsanitary afterwards. This was soon revolutionized by an observant man coming home after dragging his food home from a hunting and gathering excursion.

He saw a bear in the river catching fish. The bear caught a fish and wanted to bring it to shore to eat. Instead of tossing it like any smart man would do, it put it in its teeth and carried the fish to shore! Eureka!

And thus was invented yet another way of moving objects from one way to another: bearing it.Posted Image
GIR, UNLEASH THE MONKEY!
MONKEY!
"I am the Doctor of Death, and I have come to cure you of your life." --Endless Mike, The Adventures of Pete and Pete

#14 of 43 Nathan*W

Nathan*W

    Screenwriter

  • 1,069 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 09 2001

Posted March 28 2004 - 11:47 PM

Hunter, that answer is so full of crap, I can hardly bear it! Posted Image Posted Image
 

#15 of 43 LaMarcus

LaMarcus

    Screenwriter

  • 1,620 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 07 2002

Posted March 29 2004 - 07:35 AM

That was hilarious.

#16 of 43 Erik.Ha

Erik.Ha

    Supporting Actor

  • 697 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 24 2003

Posted March 29 2004 - 09:54 AM

I heard the conection between the english word "bear" (the animal) and the verb (to carry) had something to do with the constelations Ursa Major and Minor (the big and little "Bears") or as they have been refered to popularly (and which they much more closely resemble than any animal), the "Big and little dippers" (aka water "Bearers")

Of course, that could just be bullshit...
"I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV..."

#17 of 43 Rob Gillespie

Rob Gillespie

    Producer

  • 3,634 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 17 1998

Posted March 29 2004 - 09:58 AM

Perahps they just ran out of words at the time.
No longer here.

#18 of 43 MarkHastings

MarkHastings

    Executive Producer

  • 12,013 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 27 2003

Posted March 30 2004 - 04:46 AM

Quote:
or it could be that you are thinking of her bare (naked) in your mind. at least thats what i thought it was at first.
Me too. I guess we all know who saw Titanic. :b

#19 of 43 Rex Bachmann

Rex Bachmann

    Screenwriter

  • 1,975 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 10 2001
  • Real Name:Rex Bachmann

Posted March 31 2004 - 08:59 AM

Eric.Ha. wrote (post #16):

Quote:
. . . .Of course, that could just be bullshit...

Bingo!


Joseph De Martino wrote (post #12):

Quote:
Words that end up being spelled and spoken alike come into our language by completely different routes and have nothing in common in sense or origin except the accident of how they sound and how that sound became standardized in spelling when moveable type was introduced. (Prior to which spelling was gloriously idiosyncratic and much more apt to reflect the actual sound of a word - as least as spoken by that particular writer.)

Two words: homonomy and homophony ('sounds alike and is spelled alike' and 'only sounds alike', respectively).


Quote:
The noun "bear" is a more purely English word, and derives from the word for the color "brown" in various Germanic languages. The word, not unnaturally, became attached to the big brown animal that folks encountered in the forest. (Brown bears probably being the only type that would be seen in northern Europe.)

Actually, both the verb bear and the noun bear are native words inherited from proto-Germanic, the common ancestral language of English, Dutch (Anglo-Frisian dialects), High German (German standard dialect), and the Scandinavian languages, which itself goes back farther still to Proto-Indo-European. It's not so clear that the noun for the animal is from the root for 'brown' (which, by the way, is supposed to also underlie the word for 'beaver'), although that's the standard etymology (word history derivation). It's also possible that it comes from the root that means 'wild animal' *gh'wer- found in Latin ferus 'wild; wild beast' (whence English ferocious), Greek the:r 'wild beast' (as opposed to domesticated animals), as well as the Sanskrit verb hvar- 'to walk in a bent fashion (i.e., on all fours)'.

By the way, the [r] in bare 'naked', goes back to an [s]-sound, so it has nothing historically in common with either the verb or the name of the animal. There are doubtless still dialects where all these words are not homophonous.

"Delenda est . . . . "

 


#20 of 43 Nathan*W

Nathan*W

    Screenwriter

  • 1,069 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 09 2001

Posted April 01 2004 - 12:13 AM

Crap, someone smart is in the thread. DISPERSE! DISPERSE!
 


Back to After Hours Lounge


3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users


Forum Nav Content I Follow