Hello everybody! I'm back for round two in 2019. Finally.
I was definitely amused by today's theme. We get common questions from common parlance in our mother tongue, reinterpreted as being asked to various professionals, thus twisting the original meaning. Some of these work very well, others not as well, to wit:
WHATSEATINGHIM, as a question posed to a parasitologist becomes a literal interpretation, in an enjoyably gross twist. WHOSCRYINGNOW, asked of a harried maternity room nurse, in my imagination, as he deals with a room of wailing infants. HOWSITHANGING, asks the museum worker as she situates the painting, to a judging curator. These are very good.
On the other hand, ISTHATAFACT doesn't change that much when asked of a copy editor. Both the figurative and the literal interpretation POSITED by the reinterpretation are essentially asking if something is true. WHERESTHEPARTY just doesn't make much sense when asked of a political strategist. Is it asking literally where the (democratic) party is geographically at this moment? Is it asking how the (republican) party is leaning on a particular subject? In either case it doesn't have the same impact as some of the others.
And what exactly is going on with WHOSESIDEAREYOUON? Is the line judge being accused of bias towards one team? Is she being asked literally, if she is on the Chiefs' sideline or the Patriots' sideline? I think the latter, but I'm not sure.
|Tellement plein de couleur, le franc Suisse|
P.S. Debut alert! Welcome, Mr. Crowe, and a wonderful first (published) effort.