₦airaland Forum

jayworld15:
It must have been I quoted you instead of someone. From that guy's point of view, he's wrong and he knows it. The Ihords or whatever name he is is just trying to grapple on the world of sensible people with his insensibility. I speak Yoruba, understand Yoruba and write Yoruba (I emphasize on the language). If he's spoken about "gazelle garagara" as neologism, maybe people would see it from a broad perspective or narrow it to social sarcasm. I could remember "buhari"(noun), "buharify" (verb), etc were constructed by some Nigerians at one time like that (the new words found their way into the comic social parlance of the people at the time, it was understandable how they were formed). I guess I quoted you wrongly instead of the person that put metaphoric sentences as denotative and simile as connotative.

The guy is saying rubbish. We all know that. However, to your point, I don't think you quoted the wrong person. You quoted me (except if there's someone else that talked about connotation and denotation as I'm not reading the thread). And you probably mixed it up. What I associated with connotation is metaphor. That is because in many cases, metaphors are connotative in nature. That an expression is metaphorical doesn't imply the meaning it can't be connotative. "Tunde is a pig" is a metaphorical statement and the meaning of pig here is the connotation of being dirty.

That said, your understanding of Yoruba and the Yoruba culture makes you an authority in this argument because the Tinubu defender can no longer say "in yoruba culture, gazelle depicts pride". And that's the point I was trying to make to the other guy. It's not sufficient to say gazelle can never depict pride because Gazelle could actually depict anything in different cultures, but you have to be part of that culture to authoritatively say "no, this is not true".

Felixamos:
These were my exact words as they were when you quoted it in front page and tried to correct me.

There’s no dictionary anywhere in the world that would define Gazelle as a “boastful or proud animal” and I challenge anybody to prove me wrong.

Please how am I wrong? I clearly said "dictionary".. Or do you know of any dictionary anywhere that defines a gazelle as proud and boastful?

Felixamos:
Except that the word gazelle was used together with gagaraga in a single sentence. Hence in order for the sentence to make any sense, you have to be able to harmonize the both words for better understanding of the sentence..

If I say; I will change you from a dog ogbolo to a resourceful person". Does the sentence make any sense to you?

Of course dog has its meaning and same as ogbolo locally(used for cooking draw soup).. But putting them together the way I did and trying to make a meaning out of the sentence would be nothing short of error.

And in my post which you quoted to correct me, I clearly said and I quote; "
they may have their separate meanings/definitions but putting them together and trying to make an unrelated meaning out of it is a mockery to both English language and the intellect of any right thinking human."

You're now approaching the argument from the angle of considering the whole expression together which is also what I did to refute his claims. However, when you said "There’s no dictionary anywhere in the world that would define Gazelle as a “boastful or proud animal” and I challenge anybody to prove me wrong", it watered down your argument because dictionaries don't define words to include the different connotations it might have. Connotations are people specific. So the guy could easily say it denotes "proud" in his region or ethnic group and that would be valid argument until refuted by someone who is from that region or ethnic group. Nobody is saying there is a dictionary that defines gazelle as proud, I am saying dictionaries don't have to define gazelle as proud before that association could be made. In other words, approaching the debate from a dictionary meaning perspective creates a soft landing for the Tinubu defender.

etrange:
You're now approaching the argument from the angle of considering the whole expression together which is also what I did to refute his claims. However, when you said "There’s no dictionary anywhere in the world that would define Gazelle as a “boastful or proud animal” and I challenge anybody to prove me wrong", it watered down your argument because dictionaries don't define words to include the different connotations it might have. Connotations are people specific. So the guy could easily say it denotes "proud" in his region or ethnic group and that would be valid argument until refuted by someone who is from that region or ethnic group. Nobody is saying there is a dictionary that defines gazelle as proud, I am saying dictionaries don't have to define gazelle as proud before that association could be made. In other words, approaching the debate from a dictionary meaning perspective creates a soft landing for the Tinubu defender.

You are agreeing with me and at the same time, disagreeing..

If the guy had said the meaning he was referring to wasn't based off of the dictionary connotation, you think we would be having this argument?

I made it clear I was basing my definition/meaning from the dictionary. Right?

I don't speak yoruba hence I wouldn't have argued with him if he had said; his own meaning of "gazelle" was peculiar to a local imagination or folklore in Lagos.. But as long as English is concerned, you cannot attribute "proud and boastful" to "gazelle".. This is an insane argument for crying out loud!

But the fact that he kept on attributing its meaning to the one in the dictionary? C'mon na!

You cannot say an English word and expect us to automatically assume you were referring to a native connotative meaning.. That can only happen when the word is spoken in that particular dialect..

[quote author=etrange post=119823757][/quote]So if I create a folklore about a lion in my village for instance, and in the folklore, describe the lion as a very weak and fragile animal. When speaking in a formal gathering of scholars, I can attribute weakness to a lion and they would take it hook line and sinker, neglecting it's dennotative and connotative definition in the dictionary which is standard English, and accepting the one I created in my village right?

In reality, is a lion weak?
In reality is a "gazelle "proud and boastful"?

*

lhordspy:
I think i am starting the call the comprehension level of most of the users of this forum in question. Most of you dont read to understand.

At the beginning of the main writeup. I made a statement about how the news emanated from gazzettengr. I was even defendinf what Tinubu said like you stated. I was defending what gazzettengr reported that Tinubu said. I lifted a part from their report and posted it exactly how it is written there without adding or subtracting anything.

All i did was proved it right. It is more like saying 'if' this is actually what Tinubu said then it is very right.

I havent even watched the clip yet. I only saw the report by gazettengr. And i reacted to the quote from the reported. At one time in the writeup i even post the link to the gazzette thread.

So of you are just so pathetic. Whenever you hear Tinubu you go so low that you lose all your sense of reasoning and just want to attack Both tinubu and the person reporting or defending, irrespective of what the message is even portraying.

Very sad. I am not engaging in this thread anymore. This is may be my last statement here. The creator of the thread is a very silly person. Not really because of the thread- writeup but of his subsequent mode of argument. Very shallow and annoying. Even a 4years old child will do better. (With all due respect to him)

I will advice you to stop speaking at this point.

We are already convinced about your stupidity.

Felixamos:
You are agreeing with me and at the same time, disagreeing..

If the guy had said the meaning he was referring to wasn't based off of the dictionary connotation, you think we would be having this argument?

I made it clear I was basing my definition/meaning from the dictionary. Right?

I don't speak yoruba hence I wouldn't have argued with him if he had said; his own meaning of "gazelle" was peculiar to a local imagination or folklore in Lagos.. But as long as English is concerned, you cannot attribute "proud and boastful" to "gazelle".. This is an insane argument for crying out loud!

But the fact that he kept on attributing its meaning to the one in the dictionary? C'mon na!

You cannot say an English word and expect us to automatically assume you were referring to a native connotative meaning.. That can only happen when the word is spoken in that particular dialect..

My response was to your post. And according to your post, the guy didn't mention dictionary definition or otherwise. He went straight to say what gazelle depicts (with "depict," being the keyword).

Felixamos:
This was his argument: “when we use the word gazelle to refer to person or group of people. It means Proud person, something that dont stay one place easily, something that changes location swiftly. Reason why when we say someone is growing gazelle horn ' it means the person is becoming proud".

From your own post above, it's very obvious he was referring to the connotative meaning because denotatively, we all know it's just a wild animal. Yes, he didn't say this connotation is for Yorubas or for Kano people or Ogun people, but one thing we know for sure is that he was saying what gazelle connotes. You assumed he was referring to the dictionary meaning. It is that assumption that caught my interest. As soon as I read you talking about dictionaries, I knew you weren't on the same page as the person you were arguing with and you were giving him an escape route. That the guy used an English word doesn't change the fact that it was very clear he wasn't referring to the dictionary definition of the word. He used an English word simply because the conversation was taking place in English language.

A counter argument would be, in what culture or to what group of people does gazelle depict "proud" and even of that is true, there are other factors to consider.

Felixamos:
So if I create a folklore about a lion in my village for instance, and in the folklore, describe the lion as a very weak and fragile animal. When speaking in a formal gathering of scholars, I can attribute weakness to a lion and they would take it hook line and sinker, neglecting it's dennotative and connotative definition in the dictionary which is standard English, and accepting the one I created in my village right?

In reality, is a lion weak?
In reality is a "gazelle "proud and boastful"?

First, you cannot create a folklore. A folklore is the traditional beliefs, customs, and stories of a community, passed through the generations by word of mouth. Second, how animals are depicted in folklores depends on which aspect of the animal the people are considering (behavior, appearance, events, etc.). Two different group of people could view gazelle from two different perspectives. To one group, it's all about the speed, to another group, it's all about the majestic horns on its head. The reason peacock is associated with pride is because of its majestic feathers. So it wouldn't be mind-blowing if a group of people also associates the gazelle with pride because of its majestic horns. Again, I'm not saying this is the case, but it's not impossible.

Felixamos:
I liked the fact that ihordspy made his post without adding any insult to it but trying to force the definition of another word on "gazelle" is really sad and laughable.. and even more sad, is the fact that such error was pushed to the front page by a mod who's "supposed to know better(supposedly)". you know how shameful it is? a foreigner could read that and assume that's how low the IQ of Nigerians are(God Forbid!).

How good is your Education.. There are things called figures of speech. You don't just go to dictionary looking up a gazelle, try to get the full context. You know the word Amazon or Iroko.. If i say wow the man is an Iroko.. So you will go to dictionary and come back to tell me I said the man is a tree? Omo illiterate full this Nairaland oo.. Go and learn your figures of speech oga

etrange:
A counter argument would be, in what culture or to what group of people does gazelle depict "proud" and even of that is true, there are other factors to consider.

You don't get! He said it's English language.. That Tinubu was referring to only the horn of the gazelle and not the entire body.. Should I screenshot the statement or what?

And I still stand by my words.. As long as there is a standard definition of a word in English, when someone is referencing that word to an English speaking audience, the person must refer to its English meaning or be specific about the tribe or region he chooses to reference if it's not English. That's the standard or right thing to do..

For instance: there's an English definition of a "Lion" connotatively and denotatively..

If we have let's say 27 tribes in Nigeria and the 27 tribes all have their various definitions of a "lion" which is in no way related to the standard English definition of "lion" but rather based on folklore.. Would it make any sense if I come to a mixed gathering to say; "a lion talks very well" probably based on my tribe's folklore.. knowing, that "lion" has 27 more definitions and the rest of the other tribe may not understand what I mean?

Should the standard thing not have been to describe the lion as "brave" which everyone can easily relate to because it's either connotatively or dennotatively connected to its dictionary meaning?

pquaver:
How good is your Education.. There are things called figures of speech. You don't just go to dictionary looking up a gazelle, try to get the full context. You know the word Amazon or Iroko.. If i say wow the man is an Iroko.. So you will go to dictionary and come back to tell me I said the man is a tree? Omo illiterate full this Nairaland oo.. Go and learn your figures of speech oga

"the man is an iroko" what figure of speech is that?

"I'll change yahoo yahoo Boys from a gazelle gagaraga to producing micro chips". What figure of speech is that?

Please I'm okay with the guy I'm arguing with.. He understands his English. We're just having conflict coming to an agreement.. You? Nah... go look for person wey dey intelligent like you okay? ..

etrange:
First, you cannot create a folklore. A folklore is the traditional beliefs, customs, and stories of a community, passed through the generations by word of mouth. Second, how animals are depicted in folklores depends on which aspect of the animal the people are considering (behavior, appearance, events, etc.). Two different group of people could view gazelle from two different perspectives. To one group, it's all about the speed, to another group, it's all about the majestic horns on its head. The reason peacock is associated with pride is because of its majestic feathers. So it wouldn't be mind-blowing if a group of people also associates the gazelle with pride because of its majestic horns. Again, I'm not saying this is the case, but it's not impossible.

I don't think we can ever come to an agreement because my emphasis is based on the "gazelle" noun and how it was wrongly given a meaning not related to any dictionary meaning.. Like I said, it would have been a different thing if the gazelle was spoken in a dialect, used or referenced properly..

And thanks for the correction on the creation of folklore thingy..

Great conversation and if it gives you any joy, "you won the argument".. Can we drop it here please?

Enjoy the rest of your day...

Felixamos:
You don't get! He said it's English language.. That Tinubu was referring to only the horn of the gazelle and not the entire body.. Should I screenshot the statement or what?

And I still stand by my words.. As long as there is a standard definition of a word in English, when someone is referencing that word to an English speaking audience, the person must refer to its English meaning or be specific about the tribe or region he chooses to reference if it's not English. That's the standard or right thing to do..

For instance: there's an English definition of a "Lion" connotatively and denotatively..

If we have let's say 27 tribes in Nigeria and the 27 tribes all have their various definitions of a "lion" which is in no way related to the standard English definition of "lion" but rather based on folklore.. Would it make any sense if I come to a mixed gathering to say; "a lion talks very well" probably based on my tribe's folklore.. knowing, that "lion" has 27 more definitions and the rest of the other tribe may not understand what I mean?

Should the standard thing not have been to describe the lion as "brave" which everyone can easily relate to because it's either connotatively or dennotatively connected to its dictionary meaning?

First, I replied your post and not that of the defender, and I gave my response based on what you have in your post. So if you have a screenshot of him saying "in the English language...", let it be from your post I replied. Second, Tinubu was speaking to a specific group of people, so he could have as well used a connotation that applies to that group alone.

Above all, like I said earlier, even if he erroneously used the connotative meaning of the word to one group to address the 27 groups, then you can only accuse him of ineffective communication and not that he uttered rubbish. However, we all know he actually uttered rubbish. Again, this is why I said going down the lane of dictionary definition gave the guy an escape route and he took it.

etrange:
First, I replied your post and not that of the defender, and I gave my response based on what you have in your post. So if you have a screenshot of him saying "in the English language...", let it be from your post I replied. Second, Tinubu was speaking to a specific group of people, so he could have as well used a connotation that applies to that group alone.

Above all, like I said earlier, even if he erroneously used the connotative meaning of the word to one group to address the 27 groups, then you can only accuse him of ineffective communication and not that he uttered rubbish. However, we all know he actually uttered rubbish. Again, this is why I said going down the lane of dictionary definition gave the guy an escape route and he took it.

There was no where I accused him of talking rubbish.. I said gazelle does not have a dictionary meaning and though "gazelle and gagaraga" might have their separate meanings/definitions, putting them together and trying to make a meaning of it is wrong and dosen't make any sense.. Hence the statement tinubu made has no reasonable meaning because English words were wrongly placed and used.. Just wanted to clarify that.. And you can look it up on the front page for confirmation..

Having said that, thanks for your engagement.. I am so tired of typing in response to this particular topic. So at this juncture I would say; do have a nice day.. And I was glad we had the argument cause I did learn a thing or two so thank you..

Felixamos:
I don't think we can ever come to an agreement because my emphasis is based on the "gazelle" noun and how it was wrongly given a meaning not related to any dictionary meaning.. Like I said, it would have been a different thing if the gazelle was spoken in a dialect, used or referenced properly..

And thanks for the correction on the creation of folklore thingy..

Great conversation and if it gives you any joy, "you won the argument".. Can we drop it here please?

Enjoy the rest of your day...

Recall when I said I wasn't inclined to continue the conversation, but you asked me to because "you wanted to learn"? Now you're turning it on its head to imply I continued because I wanted to win. Well, I'm not in any way fazed by those tactics. I know that when you want to stop, you will. And this also applies to me.

So in the meantime, back to the topic. The use of gazelle in the statement was obviously connotative and, therefore, could mean many things based on how the perceive the animal. So you cannot say the meaning is unrelated to the animal if you do not know how the animal is perceived in thar community or group. Again, that he said the word in English isn't really a bad argument because I don't think he'd use a Yoruba affective to qualify an English word (I made this argument in very first post), but this doesn't change the fact that talking about dictionary when discussing what a word depicts to a people isn't a very smart argument.

Felixamos:
There was no where I accused him of talking rubbish.. I said gazelle does not have a dictionary meaning and though "gazelle and gagaraga" might have their separate meanings/definitions, putting them together and trying to make a meaning of it is wrong and dosen't make any sense.. Hence the statement tinubu made has no reasonable meaning because English words were wrongly placed and used.. Just wanted to clarify that.. And you can look it up on the front page for confirmation..

Having said that, thanks for your engagement.. I am so tired of typing in response to this particular topic. So at this juncture I would say; do have a nice day.. And I was glad we had the argument cause I did learn a thing or two..

Lol... I knew you weren't going anywhere. I know your type. Yes, the argument you made above is good. The word combination, the context, the culture, etc all good. The only thing I pointed out is that hammering on dictionary definition when it was obvious the word was used connotatively opened up your argument for attack because in as much as connotative meanings take thier roots from the dictionary definitions, they could be just about anything depending on the perspective of the people. And the person you were arguing with clearly took advantage of that by saying "y'all are not Yorubas".

etrange:
Recall when I said I wasn't inclined to continue the conversation, but you asked me to because "you wanted to learn"? Now you're turning it on its head to imply I continued because I wanted to win. Well, I'm not in any way fazed by those tactics. I know that when you want to stop, you will. And this also applies to me.

So in the meantime, back to the topic. The use of gazelle in the statement was obviously connotative and, therefore, could mean many things based on how the perceive the animal. So you cannot say the meaning is unrelated to the animal if you do not know how the animal is perceived in thar community or group. Again, that he said the word in English isn't really a bad argument because I don't think he'd use a Yoruba affective to qualify an English word (I made this argument in very first post), but this doesn't change the fact that talking about dictionary when discussing what a word depicts to a people isn't a very smart argument.

Okay Sir, I've heard you. I have a number of screenshots in my phone that could prove your comment wrong but then again, I'm tired of the argument so no need posting. which means if a "lion" means weak to my tribe, I can use it in a public gathering cause applying the dictionary meaning outside my tribe isn't very smart... I get your point Sir..

Sorry I overstretched the conversation.. Enjoy the rest of your day.. I'm honestly tired of typing..

etrange:
Lol... I knew you weren't going anywhere. I know your type. Yes, the argument you made above is good. The word combination, the context, the culture, etc all good. The only thing I pointed out is that hammering on dictionary definition when it was obvious the word was used connotatively opened up your argument for attack because in as much as connotative meanings take thier roots from the dictionary definitions, they could be just about anything depending on the perspective of the people. And the person you were arguing with clearly took advantage of that by saying "y'all are not Yorubas".

Okay Sir...

Felixamos:
"the man is an iroko" what figure of speech is that?

"I'll change yahoo yahoo Boys from a gazelle gagaraga to producing micro chips". What figure of speech is that?

Please I'm okay with the guy I'm arguing with.. He understands his English. We're just having conflict coming to an agreement.. You? Nah... go look for person wey dey intelligent like you okay? ..

It is your fault na.. You acted like just looking up a word in a dictionary give the whole meaning of the word how it can be used in a context.. That is why I replied you.. So now you have shown it's personal BTW the 2 of u.. I take my leave. By the way it is a Metaphor @ d bolded..

etrange:
The guy is saying rubbish. We all know that. However, to your point, I don't think you quoted the wrong person. You quoted me (except if there's someone else that talked about connotation and denotation as I'm not reading the thread). And you probably mixed it up. What I associated with connotation is metaphor. That is because in many cases, metaphors are connotative in nature. That an expression is metaphorical doesn't imply the meaning it can't be connotative. "Tunde is a pig" is a metaphorical statement and the meaning of pig here is the connotation of being dirty.

That said, your understanding of Yoruba and the Yoruba culture makes you an authority in this argument because the Tinubu defender can no longer say "in yoruba culture, gazelle depicts pride". And that's the point I was trying to make to the other guy. It's not sufficient to say gazelle can never depict pride because Gazelle could actually depict anything in different cultures, but you have to be part of that culture to authoritatively say "no, this is not true".

If Tinubu had used only "gazelle", different meanings would have been read to it, but "gazelle garagara" is a different thing entirely. The gazelle (noun modifier) tells more about the whole rather than as a separate i.e. car race, church mortuary etc. In car race, we're not talking about just any race or car as we all know what a car or a race is, but we're talking about a specific one, defined by its nature. The same can be said concerning mortuary or church. There are a thousand churches or mortuary (literarily speaking) but church mortuary is specific in nature, because we're talking about a mortuary which has affiliation with a church. If we add the church's name to it, or subtite church to the its name like St. James or St. Peter Catholic mortuary, Godnews Church mortuary, our specificity changes and so does its meaning. Now the question are:

What is a gazelle?
What is a garagara?

Gazelle: A small, slender antelope that typically has curved horns and a fawn-coloured coat with white underparts, found in open country in Africa and Asia.


Gara gara: Showing off, drawing attention to yourself (according to online definition).

Now, those two definitions are the text. There's anything in communication: context which is divided into context of situation and context of time.

Having said that, juxtaposing Tinubu's statement would mean total nonsense because the context is wrong. Jargons are specific to a particular area or profession. They're not nonsense if an individual belongs to that area. That is contextual meaning of words, sentences, paragraphs or essays. So we have literal meaning and contextual meaning.

jayworld15:
If Tinubu had used only "gazelle", different meanings would have been read to it, but "gazelle garagara" is a different thing entirely. The gazelle (noun modifier) tells more about the whole rather than as a separate i.e. car race, church mortuary etc. In car race, we're not talking about just any race or car as we all know what a car or a race is, but we're talking about a specific one, defined by its nature. The same can be said concerning mortuary or church. There are a thousand churches or mortuary (literarily speaking) but church mortuary is specific in nature, because we're talking about a mortuary which has affiliation with a church. If we add the church's name to it, or subtite church to the its name like St. James or St. Peter Catholic mortuary, Godnews Church mortuary, our specificity changes and so does its meaning. Now the question are:

What is a gazelle?
What is a garagara?

Gazelle: A small, slender antelope that typically has curved horns and a fawn-coloured coat with white underparts, found in open country in Africa and Asia.


Gara gara: Showing off, drawing attention to yourself (according to online definition).

Now, those two definitions are the text. There's anything in communication: context which is divided into context of situation and context of time.

Having said that, juxtaposing Tinubu's statement would mean total nonsense because the context is wrong. Jargons are specific to a particular area or profession. They're not nonsense if an individual belongs to that area. That is contextual meaning of words, sentences, paragraphs or essays. So we have literal meaning and contextual meaning.

It could also mean he turns them from the show offs, loud noisy attention seekers.. the are into hard-working micro chips producers.
Now the second definition tells alot about most Yahoo people we know Abi na lie? Anyway I would expect u to be objective.. About it..

jayworld15:
If Tinubu had used only "gazelle", different meanings would have been read to it, but "gazelle garagara" is a different thing entirely. The gazelle (noun modifier) tells more about the whole rather than as a separate i.e. car race, church mortuary etc. In car race, we're not talking about just any race or car as we all know what a car or a race is, but we're talking about a specific one, defined by its nature. The same can be said concerning mortuary or church. There are a thousand churches or mortuary (literarily speaking) but church mortuary is specific in nature, because we're talking about a mortuary which has affiliation with a church. If we add the church's name to it, or subtite church to the its name like St. James or St. Peter Catholic mortuary, Godnews Church mortuary, our specificity changes and so does its meaning. Now the question are:

What is a gazelle?
What is a garagara?

Gazelle: A small, slender antelope that typically has curved horns and a fawn-coloured coat with white underparts, found in open country in Africa and Asia.


Gara gara: Showing off, drawing attention to yourself (according to online definition).

Now, those two definitions are the text. There's anything in communication: context which is divided into context of situation and context of time.

Having said that, juxtaposing Tinubu's statement would mean total nonsense because the context is wrong. Jargons are specific to a particular area or profession. They're not nonsense if an individual belongs to that area. That is contextual meaning of words, sentences, paragraphs or essays. So we have literal meaning and contextual meaning.

So much points were made here. The counter argument of the defender is that gazelle is used to refer to a proud person in thier culture (thus going beyond the dictionary definition of the animal). My first take is to acknowledge the possibility of animals meaning different things in different cultures (which is what I was trying to explain to the OP). I don't know the culture enough to argue with guy, however, there are many other factors that alludes to the fact that Tinubu was just saying rubbish. The word arrangement, the language mix, the implied tautology, etc. all points to the fact that he wasn't making sense.

Felixamos:
Okay Sir, I've heard you. I have a number of screenshots in my phone that could prove your comment wrong but then again, I'm tired of the argument so no need posting. which means if a "lion" means weak to my tribe, I can use it in a public gathering cause applying the dictionary meaning outside my tribe isn't very smart... I get your point Sir..

Sorry I overstretched the conversation.. Enjoy the rest of your day.. I'm honestly tired of typing..

Don't forget you said gazelle can never connote pride. And I just explained to you that it can depending on the interpretation of the people. So if your argument is that he used his own people's connotation to address a different crowd, well... that's a good point even though it's debatable. For example, someone might ask, how can you be sure that the crowd he was talking to doesn't share the same connotative meaning if you aren't from the same place as the crowd? But I'm not really interested in that because I am convinced he wasn't making any sense.

akakurukukaku:
In English, there is something called denotative and connotative meaning of words.

The denotative meaning is the literal meaning. But the connotative meaning, means something totally different from the actual meaning.

Denotatively, gazelle can mean any of the definitions the OP gave above. However, connotatively, gazelle can mean anything else. Depending on how it is used in the sentence. It can mean, wisdom, smartness, craftiness, overzealousness, pride, etc. You cannot find such meanings in the dictionary.

Don't also forget that it is what we speak that are added to the dictionary and not the other way round.

So Tinubu has given gazelle a new meaning?
I weep for Nigeria.
All of you deserve the country you have.

pquaver:
It could also mean he turns them from the show offs, loud noisy attention seekers.. the are into hard-working micro chips producers.
Now the second definition tells alot about most Yahoo people we know Abi na lie? Anyway I would expect u to be objective.. About it..

Turn them from being shown off? Really? Can you elucidate on that because "showing off" is not a language of tend to understand? It's like when one should use words that have "fasting to death" and "fallen down from the sky" as their respective meaning when talking about how he's going to develop a city through industrialization So, the context to some persons should be "he'd make us fast to death by jumping from the sky". Really? That's unintelligible to me. A mistake is a mistake; no one can be absolve from it because three things makes us human:

1) Our mistakes or errors or falls (and our plan in correcting them)
2) Our emotions (including our speech or written forms of language)
3) Our death (procession and beliefs).

etrange:
So much points were made here. The counter argument of the defender is that gazelle is used to refer to a proud person in thier culture (thus going beyond the dictionary definition of the animal). My first take is to acknowledge the possibility of animals meaning different things in different cultures (which is what I was trying to explain to the OP). I don't know the culture enough to argue with guy, however, there are many other factors that alludes to the fact that Tinubu was just saying rubbish. The word arrangement, the language mix, the implied tautology, etc. all points to the fact that he wasn't making sense.

I appreciate your effort. We're all learning and we try as much as possible to understand things. This is just my perspective; OP's own was his, I believe. The same can be said concerning everyone, but one thing is sure - to share knowledge.

plaindealer:
Pandora supporters no even get time for pandora anymore, his mata don taya dem, an so so rubbish den dey run after all over the place.

I mean, na obsession with gazelle remain...shy na gazelle you losers go carry go poling station.


A classic definition of laboring in vain..

I'm waiting for the day sense will fall on you. Your contribution on any thread is always childish and makes no meaning. Please, if you are still a baby, try and grow up. I hate nonsense. Mr Plantain dealer.

etrange:
Don't forget you said gazelle can never connote pride. And I just explained to you that it can depending on the interpretation of the people. So if your argument is that he used his own people's connotation to address a different crowd, well... that's a good point even though it's debatable. For example, someone might ask, how can you be sure that the crowd he was talking to doesn't share the same connotative meaning if you aren't from the same place as the crowd? But I'm not really interested in that because I am convinced he wasn't making any sense.

Okay Sir....

..

jayworld15:
Turn them from being shown off? Really? Can you elucidate on that because "showing off" is not a language of tend to understand? It's like when one should use words that have "fasting to death" and "fallen down from the sky" as their respective meaning when talking about how he's going to develop a city through industrialization So, the context to some persons should be "he'd make us fast to death by jumping from the sky". Really? That's unintelligible to me. A mistake is a mistake; no one can be absolve from it because three things makes us human:

1) Our mistakes or errors or falls (and our plan in correcting them)
2) Our emotions (including our speech or written forms of language)
3) Our death (procession and beliefs).

Stop being clever by half.. Name the attributes 9ja yahoo boys are know for or please end the conversation..