[General] Sentence Correction

[SBhargav]

Hi,
Is the following sentence correct ?

" I hate the idea of hate, per se."

Is the usage of "per se" valid ?
Please suggest.

Thanks.

 

[5jj]

Is the usage of "per se" valid ?

I think it is. I use per se, but some people find it a little pretentious. Except in more formal speech or writing, 'in itself' might be more generally acceptable.

 

[Khosro]

I think it is. I use per se, but some people find it a little pretentious. Except in more formal speech or writing, 'in itself' might be more generally acceptable.

What about "as such"? Once I read a book by an American in which he frequently used "as such" at the end of the sentences and just after an abstract concept. However, I admit that "as such" could be ambigious sometimes.

Oh, by the way, Hello SBhargav and welcome board!

 

[5jj]

What about "as such"?

I think it's fine. Could you give an example of when you think it might be ambiguous?

 

[Khosro]

I think it's fine. Could you give an example of when you think it might be ambiguous?

1. being exactly what is mentioned or suggested There's no dining room as such, but we've made a dining area just outside the kitchen.
2. considered alone or by itself The size of their family as such is not a factor in our decision to give them financial aid. (www.thefreedictionary.com)

Am I right to say "in itself" and "per se" corresponds to the second meaning?

Well, I give you two examples:

This one from the book I mentioned earlier:

"What it seems at least fair to say is that Weimar gave Brecht an unalloyed exprience of modernity as such - from Lindbergh to the great industrial city, from radio to nightclubs and cabarets, from unemployment to theatrical experiment, from an older Western bourgeoisie to the brand-new Soviet experiment next door."

And this one again from the same book, here about character in a play:

"Baal the monster, in other words, but the monster of appetite as such, which seems to me a more satisfactory word than the current "desire" "

it sounds to me that in the first example "as such" refers to the first meaning and in the second one it refers to the second meaning. So is it correct to replace it with "per se"?

the problem rose when I started to translate it.

 

[Khosro]

... but the second meaning also pushes into the first example and the first meaning to the second example and I can't easily tell them apart.

 

[5jj]

1. being exactly what is mentioned or suggested There's no dining room as such, but we've made a dining area just outside the kitchen.
2. considered alone or by itself The size of their family as such is not a factor in our decision to give them financial aid. (www.thefreedictionary.com)

I don't see any difference in the meaning of 'as such' in those two sentences or in the Brech sentence that follows the OALD definition. I could accept per se in all three.

The Oxford ALD gives: 'as the word is usually understood; in the exact sense of the word'. That definition is close to my own idea.

"What it seems at least fair to say is that Weimar gave Brecht an unalloyed experience of modernity as such - from Lindbergh to the great industrial city, from [...]"

I am not clear what the writer is trying saying in your last example. Does the 'as such' go with 'appetite' or 'monster of appetite'? In either case, I am still not clear what is meant.

"Baal the monster, in other words, but the monster of appetite as such, which seems to me a more satisfactory word than the current "desire" "

5

 

[Khosro]

Sorry, is the OALD difinition for "as such" or it is for "per se"? If it is for "as such" then it does not cover the second meaning I took from the online dictionary. You don't see any difference in the meaning of "as such" in those two sentences but I do. Perhaps as a native English speaker you have a certain feeling about it. I should check "as such" and "per se" and "in itself" and perhaps "by itself" in 2-3 different dictionary. Thank you very much.

And, "as such" goes with "appetite" I think, because the author contrasts it with "desire", though I am not sure about this either !