TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Ambiguous Name: Two Words Obvious Trope

Go To

troacctid (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#26: Oct 5th 2013 at 10:04:14 PM

This is a little too close to being a Stock Phrase. Closer than I'm comfortable with. Any legitimate uses should be covered by Punctuated! For! Emphasis! and/or Dramatic Pause, which almost always accompany this one and, in such cases, are more directly responsible for the emphasis anyway. It's not the same trope, but it scoops up enough of the examples that they won't go undocumented.

Whatever else we do, I like faux-redlinking it. Anyone using it as a Pothole Magnet isn't paying attention to where the link points, so redirecting wouldn't do much.

[Edited for clarity]

edited 6th Oct '13 1:39:51 PM by troacctid

MikuruFan from Away Since: Nov, 2012
#27: Oct 5th 2013 at 10:06:52 PM

I don't think either of those deal with the "Three words" aspect.

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#28: Oct 6th 2013 at 12:43:23 AM

Yeah, I'm not sure how you could mistaken Word Count For Emphasis as a line of dialogue, or how specifying the number of words you're going to say in order to emphasize their importance is covered by punctuation or pauses.

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
troacctid (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#29: Oct 6th 2013 at 1:33:02 PM

My point is I don't think it's tropeworthy. tongue

Rethkir Since: Mar, 2013
#30: Oct 6th 2013 at 1:40:14 PM

33If we do rename, I'd say Two Words: ... Nothing more.

edited 6th Oct '13 1:40:23 PM by Rethkir

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#31: Oct 6th 2013 at 4:23:07 PM

[up][up]How is it any less tropeworthy than, say, Punctuated! For! Emphasis! or This Is for Emphasis, Bitch!? It's a particular way of speaking in order to put emphasis on what you're saying.

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
MikuruFan from Away Since: Nov, 2012
#32: Oct 6th 2013 at 4:30:29 PM

Yeah. It's a Stock Phrase. I didn't think we get rid of existing Stock Phrases.

edited 6th Oct '13 4:30:35 PM by MikuruFan

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#33: Oct 6th 2013 at 11:39:56 PM

Being a Stock Phrase is actually a reason for cutting. However, this one seems less like a Stock Phrase and more like a word structure that storytelling uses to convey emphasis.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
MikuruFan from Away Since: Nov, 2012
#34: Oct 7th 2013 at 4:17:24 PM

Could work.

Any more for a rename?

MikuruFan from Away Since: Nov, 2012
#35: Oct 11th 2013 at 9:52:30 PM

My ideas:

While it is a little spoonsy, I like Word Count For Wmphasis. Maybe if the other type is split off, Wrong Word Count could work.

I would make a crowner by now, but I am not sure if the other variant (the comedic wrong word count one) should be split off. Their uses are a little different, but basically they're similar.

edited 11th Oct '13 9:59:10 PM by MikuruFan

troacctid (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#36: Oct 12th 2013 at 1:15:46 AM

Word Count For Emphasis sounds clunky and awkward. [tdown]

Anything with "Word Count" in it doesn't appeal to me, really. It's an awkward-sounding phrase, and the more common usage of it is for, like, essays or whatever. "Two Words" sounds better and is crystal-clear.

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#37: Oct 12th 2013 at 1:54:56 AM

I'd say that the fact that the trope doesn't necessarily use two words is more important than the fact that you think "two words" sounds better than "word count". The trope is "telling someone the number of words you're going to say in order to emphasize the importance of those words". Word Count For Emphasis isn't the wittiest title ever, but it's no worse than Punctuated! For! Emphasis! or This Is for Emphasis, Bitch!, and it's going to be hard to find anything clearer or more concise. If you want to get in the two key concepts (the fact that you're saying the number of words, and the fact that you're doing it to emphasize them), then the alternatives are something like Number Of Words For Emphasis or Emphasizing With Number Of Words, which are both longer and don't flow as well.

edited 12th Oct '13 1:57:29 AM by NativeJovian

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#38: Oct 12th 2013 at 2:48:52 AM

Emphasizing Shortness or Short For Emphasis.

Also, I'll probably ask for a rename crowner.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Madrugada Since: Jan, 2001
#39: Oct 12th 2013 at 5:41:01 AM

But it's not simply that the answer is short. The trope is "giving the word count of the answer before actually giving the answer."

Willbyr Hi (Y2K) Relationship Status: With my statistically significant other
Hi
#41: Oct 12th 2013 at 7:48:13 AM

I hooked the suggested crowner, but should this have been a single prop, or are there other options that are going to be added?

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#42: Oct 12th 2013 at 7:49:02 AM

I asked for a multiprop because of what @26 had to say.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
MikuruFan from Away Since: Nov, 2012
#43: Oct 12th 2013 at 11:30:16 AM

The issue of splitting the wrong word count variant.

I do not think this is discussed enough. Would it count as a separate trope?

Madrugada Since: Jan, 2001
#44: Oct 12th 2013 at 1:43:43 PM

I think yes. There's no functional difference between "One word: 'No.'", "Two words: 'No way.'", "Three words: 'Not gonna happen.'" and "Four words: 'Not while I'm around.'" They all say the same thing with roughly the same amount of emphasis. They aren't different tropes.

A miscount on the number of words, like "Two words: 'No way in hell!'" does have a different use — it makes the scene or character using it somewhat comic just by being there.

edited 12th Oct '13 1:44:49 PM by Madrugada

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#45: Oct 12th 2013 at 2:30:32 PM

Added "split wrong-number-of-words variant" option to the crowner.

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
mikurufan from Away Since: Nov, 2012
#46: Oct 12th 2013 at 4:09:40 PM

And these options are not mutually exclusive?

Madrugada Since: Jan, 2001
#47: Oct 12th 2013 at 5:52:48 PM

No. There's no reason that both can't be done.

Odd1 Still just awesome like that from Nowhere Land Since: Sep, 2013 Relationship Status: And here's to you, Mrs. Robinson
Still just awesome like that
#48: Oct 13th 2013 at 10:52:49 PM

But it's not simply that the answer is short. The trope is "giving the word count of the answer before actually giving the answer."
"Word Count: Answer", perhaps?

Insert witty 'n clever quip here.
StarSword Captain of USS Bajor from somewhere in deep space Since: Sep, 2011
NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#50: Oct 16th 2013 at 11:55:31 AM

Looks like we need a rename crowner. Can we get the page action crowner called? The rename option is at 9:3 and the split option is at 10:0.

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.

PageAction: TwoWordsObviousTrope
12th Oct '13 3:00:01 AM

Crown Description:

Items are not mutually exclusive.

Total posts: 87
Top