What Does "Love On" Mean?
There is an impostor among us: a phrase, utterly devoid of precendent in English diction, subtly making its way to primacy in the Coram Deo community. Is it original? Or is the leaven of this linguistic idiosyncrasy imported from somewhere else (Iowa or Wyoming?) with malicious intent? Could it be a sinister attempt to poison the verbiage of the Coram Deo community? I’ll leave it to you to speculate, or to claim it (if the phrase is your very own invention). The phrase is love on. As in, “We want to love on people.” Or, as it was used in a prayer recently, “Jesus, we’re just here to love on you.”
I revile this phrase. I am crusading for its utter abolishment. A few reasons:
1) It is a misuse of the English language. The verb “love” is designed to be followed by a direct object, not a prepositional phrase. As in, “I love you.” (Contrast with “I want to love on you,” which sounds creepy.)
2) Love is an action or disposition expressed toward somebody, not upon them.
3) To “love on” seems to me to turn love into a commodity instead of an affection or disposition or action. I put maple syrup on my pancakes; I put art on my walls; I put love on a person? How exactly does that work?
4) To “love on” someone seems to make them an object instead of a person. Persons must be loved – for love is personal. But objects can be “loved on.”
On the other side of the argument, some might propose that the phrase has biblical background. Consider Deuteronomy 7:7-8:
“The Lord did not set His love on you nor choose you because you were more in number than any of the peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples, but because the Lord loved you and kept the oath which He swore to your forefathers, the Lord brought you out by a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.”
Though this verse uses the phrase “love on,” I think you can see from the context (synonym: choose) that this refers to God’s election of Israel, not to the ambiguous and creepy way in which some of us have used the phrase. God set his love on Israel the same way I set my love on my wife: choosing her above all others whom I could have loved, and choosing to set my love on her (i.e. remain faithful to her) no matter what. That has an entirely different connotation than saying that I want to "love on her," which suggests... well... we're trying to keep this blog PG, okay?
So you can't use the Bible to justify this creepy, strange, and logically inconsistent phrase.
I hereby suggest that the phrase to love on, and all of its cognates and related expressions, be banished to the outer darkness, to the Gehenna of the English language, to the same semantic Sheol which has consumed faddish terms like rad and NOT! Any disagreements?
I revile this phrase. I am crusading for its utter abolishment. A few reasons:
1) It is a misuse of the English language. The verb “love” is designed to be followed by a direct object, not a prepositional phrase. As in, “I love you.” (Contrast with “I want to love on you,” which sounds creepy.)
2) Love is an action or disposition expressed toward somebody, not upon them.
3) To “love on” seems to me to turn love into a commodity instead of an affection or disposition or action. I put maple syrup on my pancakes; I put art on my walls; I put love on a person? How exactly does that work?
4) To “love on” someone seems to make them an object instead of a person. Persons must be loved – for love is personal. But objects can be “loved on.”
On the other side of the argument, some might propose that the phrase has biblical background. Consider Deuteronomy 7:7-8:
“The Lord did not set His love on you nor choose you because you were more in number than any of the peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples, but because the Lord loved you and kept the oath which He swore to your forefathers, the Lord brought you out by a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.”
Though this verse uses the phrase “love on,” I think you can see from the context (synonym: choose) that this refers to God’s election of Israel, not to the ambiguous and creepy way in which some of us have used the phrase. God set his love on Israel the same way I set my love on my wife: choosing her above all others whom I could have loved, and choosing to set my love on her (i.e. remain faithful to her) no matter what. That has an entirely different connotation than saying that I want to "love on her," which suggests... well... we're trying to keep this blog PG, okay?
So you can't use the Bible to justify this creepy, strange, and logically inconsistent phrase.
I hereby suggest that the phrase to love on, and all of its cognates and related expressions, be banished to the outer darkness, to the Gehenna of the English language, to the same semantic Sheol which has consumed faddish terms like rad and NOT! Any disagreements?
posted by Bob | 10:28 AM
8 Comments:
I agree with the 'love on' thing, but I like 'rad.' I'm bringing it back.
- A friend of Coram Deo
I am sitting at Starbucks right now and I just heard a guy say "That'd be rad." So much for semantic Sheol. Dave, go ahead and bring it back!
Hilarious, and true. I'm with you on this. Oh, and rad is not coming back.
Could it be that Jesus, similar to the Human Torch, screamed "LOVE ON!" before he leapt into holy action?
Ev
oh, awesome post Ev, hilarious! I just scared my cubicle neighbor with my involuntary bark of laughter.
Well, Bob, there are several ways to look at this particular phrase. First and foremost, the use of it in the Bible is accurate grammar, because there the word 'love' is being used as a noun, not as a verb. The verb in the sentence is 'set,' not 'love' and we should treat it accordingly. "The Lord did not set His love-" there we go, a noun, not a verb. There are two different uses of the word love; one is a verb, implemented in phrases and sentences like 'I love you.' The other use is a noun, and could be implemented in a variety of ways. Phrases like 'I give you my love,' and the like are good ways. We need to keep these things clear when we're using this word, as it's very versatile and is able to be used in a variety of ways.
That clear, the 'love on' concept is a bit strange. While yes, the Bible does use that exact phrase, I'm not so sure the two-word combination should be treated like a holy way of speech or anything. Neither, however, should it be banished to the darkened corners of the English language. It is just a good example of a misused way of speaking that is attempting to become popular. All slang started that way, beginning with several people (or a single person, perhaps) shortening a word to make it easier to say. Others caught on and thought this was a neat development, and imitated the original user(s), and eventually Webster's Dictionary included it in their compilation of the English language. I'm rather afraid of looking at the dictionary sometimes, as I'd expect to find 'rad' and a host of other words that I'd rather not see included within it.
Heh, I should get to the point. I believe we should be perfectly free to use the phrase 'love on' as it was intended; with love being a noun and a verb being elsewhere in the sentence. God used it that way; there's absolutely no reason why we shouldn't. Yet, if other people want to push it forth in a different manner, their individual reasoning should be enough for the rest of us. If they do it to show something's different about them to non-believers, more power to them. Even if it just a stupid misuse of language, some people find that appealing. I certainly don't, but I'm terribly anal about what I say and write, so there.
Is it me or does the phrase make the person being "loved on" out to be kind of pathetic. That's when peopel say "love on" isn't it ... when someone is heart-broken or sick or lost? It's sort of a pity-love, I think. People do not get "loved on" when they are doing well. It's quite easy just to love them at that point. So, the sentiment that we need to "love on" people identifies said people as somehow less loveable than most, and therefore deserving of someone to compassionately and pitifully love on them. Perhaps our much too long discussion of this topic makes us just that kind of person.
Personally, it always made me feel like we are attacking the victim. Like getting beat on. Getting wailed on. Just love...don't love on someone.
Also, could be like hitting on someone. Most people dont like being hit on, at least in my experience. But, maybe people just don't like being hit on by me.
Post a Comment
<< Home