You’ve reminded me . . . ‘Disney’ is the anglicized version of ‘D’Igney’.
That or something quite similar.
Can’t find anything online, but I’m quite sure this is mentioned at the Disney Museum here in San Francisco.

Never brought this up before as I had no recollection of where I heard it. We artsy, phony types can feel quite the cognoscenti pronouncing Kurt Weill’s name the German way - ‘Vile’. But one of the hosts on our local classical music station just today related the same story I’d heard. That is, when ...

That’s it! Once again I am indebted to you for a contribution to my lexicon of rhetoric. Thanks, really.

What a surprise! You’re right. It’s a similar construction, but not at all the same thing. Now, maybe I can learn a new word which applies to my erroneous examples!

Hi. Perhaps an over-enthusiastic remark on my part. The latter ‘say’ is meant to be taken in the sense of ‘dictate’, not merely ‘utter’. I think that constitutes a zeugma . . . ? The earlier one I’ve mentioned before, (obliquely referred to) is in the lyric “I’ll sparkle and gleam so, Make somebody ...

Thanks to you both. A friend once referred to ‘Broadway Street’, talking about the one here in San Francisco.

But wait . . .

Heard on public radio, July 5, 2023: VIN number.



Is this thing on . . . ?

“. . . they housed extraordinary tubeworm reefs like those found nowhere else.” Narration in a documentary from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, presumably composed and reviewed before recording. In the same film, a U of Alaska ‘wildlife ecologist’ refers to lichen as a ‘species’. I want my ...

Thanks. Their antecedents are similar. Could they be related?
The uses are not so different.

Here’s the passage which brought to mind this cutie from my menagerie of pet peeves: We’d experimentally demonstrated rapid, adaptive evolution in nature (needless to say, that was the last time I used homemade graph paper to look at preliminary data. In my defense, the differences in leg length amo...

Thanks. Your example is spot on. I consider it illogical. A semicolon seems more appropriate.
Your point on the header is taken.

Do you find this construction problematic? I’ve seen it numerous times.
I have an example from an e-book at hand, if you’d like to see it.

Xxxx . . . xx (xxx . . . . Xxx).

In other (well, actual) words, a full stop and new sentence within a parenthesis.

I came across an image* which brought Keats to mind: A thing of beauty is a joy for ever and wondered if splitting ‘forever’ was an artistic choice. It was in common usage both ways in his time. It seems to me - possibly because ‘for ever’ is now uncommon - that, as written, it’s much more powerful....

Per Leo Rosten’s The Joys of Yiddish, it’s from the Hebrew for ‘under’.

When I was young, ‘black’ was a vile word . . . like ‘queer’!