TV Tropes Org

Forums

search forum titles
google site search
Total posts: [137]  1
2
 3  4  5 6

Merge and Rename (Alt Titles Crowner 2013-01-15): I Will Definitely Protect You get usage counts

 26 Ramidel, Sat, 6th Oct '12 5:58:07 PM Relationship Status: Above such petty unnecessities
The thing is that this statement does not just have one meaning. It has three separate meanings, and the listener can't tell the difference except from context.

I personally think that the trope is in the misunderstanding, not the individual meanings.

 27 nrjxll, Sat, 6th Oct '12 6:32:28 PM Relationship Status: Not war
[up][up]From King Zeal's description, this doesn't really sound like the kind of concept that would easily cross culture lines. But I'll concede the point that the examples should speak for themselves if the description is clarified (and the trope is renamed).

someone
[up][up] I'd say that if we are gonna have a trope page, we shouldn't have all those meanings together like this. When it comes to dialogue, tropes are what the line means, not the line itself.
something
 29 Noaqiyeum, Sun, 7th Oct '12 1:32:30 PM from out of the night from pole to pole Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
the it-thingy
Well... not exactly. I think the earlier point that a significant part of the trope is the aptitude for confusion of the meanings is important.
We dance around in a ring and suppose,
But the Secret sits in the middle and knows.
- Robert Frost
someone
Well, the whole "this thing can have multiple meanings depending on context" has led to people putting any instance of this line of dialogue. It's just a stock phrase because of that.

Really, many, many things can have different meanings based on context. We shouldn't lump together things simply because they contain the same phrase. That's not what this site is for.
something
 31 Noaqiyeum, Mon, 8th Oct '12 7:06:02 PM from out of the night from pole to pole Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
the it-thingy
I don't think that the individual meanings of the phrase are a trope rather than a stock phrase any more than the phrase itself is a trope rather than a stock phrase, though.
We dance around in a ring and suppose,
But the Secret sits in the middle and knows.
- Robert Frost
someone
[up] Um... wha?
something
 33 Another Duck, Mon, 8th Oct '12 10:07:08 PM from Stockholm Relationship Status: In season
No, the other one.
[up]I think he means, "I don't think the individual meanings of the phrase are more of actual tropes than the phrase itself is an actual trope (as opposed to just a Stock Phrase)." Basically comparing the individual meanings to the phrase itself, and not in favour of the individual meanings.

edited 8th Oct '12 10:08:02 PM by AnotherDuck

Check out my fanfiction!
 34 Noaqiyeum, Tue, 9th Oct '12 5:50:32 PM from out of the night from pole to pole Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
the it-thingy
Right. To my understanding, meanings A, B, and C are three stock phrases (which happen to all be the same sentence) rather than tropes, in much the same way as the sentence is a stock phrase (albeit one with three possible interpretations) rather than a trope.
We dance around in a ring and suppose,
But the Secret sits in the middle and knows.
- Robert Frost
I don't know if those are "meanings" so much as methods of delivering the line. The A/B/C variations seem to be otherwise pointless to the overall trope.

What the trope is, from what I've gathered from Japanese media, is that it's romantic undertones that arise from someone declaring that they will protect someone else, whether or not said undertones were intentional or reciprocated.

someone
[up] [up] So, you agree with the "Not Tropeworthy" description?

[up] Well, if you write it about the romantic connotations of the line, it basically becomes "the JAPANESE way of saying something romantic", and that's... uh...

edited 10th Oct '12 6:26:34 PM by ThatHuman

something
Not really.

As I already said, the description can be about the incident and not the line. The line itself really doesn't matter.

 38 Noaqiyeum, Thu, 11th Oct '12 5:16:11 PM from out of the night from pole to pole Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
the it-thingy
[up][up] As the arguments stand right now, yes.

[up] I'm sure we have a trope on Mixed Signals or something along those lines that such examples can be added to.
We dance around in a ring and suppose,
But the Secret sits in the middle and knows.
- Robert Frost
 40 Noaqiyeum, Fri, 12th Oct '12 8:42:23 AM from out of the night from pole to pole Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
the it-thingy
Perhaps. I'm not sure that the proposed three tropes herein are as distinct from each other as your analogy, though.
We dance around in a ring and suppose,
But the Secret sits in the middle and knows.
- Robert Frost
I'm not proposing three tropes, though. Just one. I agree that there's not really an distinction between the delivery of the line.

someone
If anybody intends to make the page about the specific romantic misunderstanding: are there even enough examples of that specifically occuring? The example list doesn't have much of that.
something
I counted at least 8 examples just this morning, including this one I made for a page image:

That's more than enough to trope with.

someone
Unless there's something to tie those examples together besides the choice of words, I'm not seeing anything here. It's not exactly hard to find instances of people saying "I will protect you" and so on.
something
Again:

It's not the words. The words have nothing to do with it. The point to the trope is that vowing to protect a woman has romantic connotations in Japan.

 46 Septimus Heap, Tue, 27th Nov '12 1:27:57 PM from Zurich, Switzerland Relationship Status: Mu
Then it needs a rename, since as current it's a Stock Phrase.

Are we sure it's a Japanese trope?

I'm fairly sure. It may have counterparts elsewhere, but it's more of a "thing" in Japan by far.

I would definitely support a rename, though.

edited 27th Nov '12 1:36:00 PM by KingZeal

Piffy
Romantic Protectorate Declaration?
Because underscores break everything: Working link to my Troper page
We should probably do a page action crowner before we start thinking of names.

So far we have:

  • Cut: Not tropeworthy or too similar to I Will Protect Her.
  • Redefine: Redefine the trope to be primarily about the romantic connotations of declaring to protect someone. Must be validated in-universe by the receiving party or another witness.
  • Rename: Not exclusive to second option. Rename to sound less like a Stock Phrase.

In all cases, move any examples without the romantic undertones to I Will Protect Her if they are not there already.

edited 7th Dec '12 12:06:57 PM by KingZeal

Rename definitely to avoid Zero-Context Example of a stock phrase. A redefinition will help hammer this point in

edited 1st Dec '12 11:00:22 PM by ChaoticNovelist

 

Alternative Titles: I Will Protect Her
15th Jan '13 8:12:17 AM
Vote up names you like, vote down names you don't. Whether or not the name will actually be changed is determined with a different kind of Crowner (the Single Proposition crowner). This one just collects and ranks alternative names.
At issue:
The previous crowner voted to merge I Will Definitely Protect You and I Will Protect Her, with a new, non-dialog title. Please propose and vote for new titles to represent the combined trope, which is about a person swearing to protect another person.
Total posts: 137
 1
2
 3  4  5 6


TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy