Greentext

[Anonymous No.11712336]

Can someone with any amount of knowledge of linguistics break down the phenomena of greentexting?
>What is it?
>Why is it popular on 4chan?
>Why does it convey ideas so effectively?

[Anonymous No.11712350]

>>11712336
It makes nice colour and we like that

[Anonymous No.11712359]

>>11712336
Greentext disregard for grammar is really fascinating desu.

[Anonymous No.11712362]

>>11712336
Somebody on /lit/ has done it before, I can't be bothered to look it up just to be ignored and flooded over by shitposts sorry

[Anonymous No.11712363]

It is just a form of text emphasis like many others, e.g. scare quotes, italic, colored text, and special lineation. Breaking text into simple sentences is also effective, but you can do that without green text

[Anonymous No.11712365]

>>/lit/thread/S10724290

Higher level discourse in this thread than in some college courses.

[Anonymous No.11712433]

>>11712362
Alright what should I look up then. I'm curious.

[Anonymous No.11712442]

Using the greater-than symbol is the default signifier of a quotation online - on 4chan, on various
other websites, and in email.
Greentext is a mutation of that trait.
>How do we classify greentext as a grammatical construction?
This is me directly quoting you, in the traditional use of the symbol.
>Hurr, I'm an idiot and don't understand things.
This is me deliberately misquoting you, to communicate my interpretation of what you've said,
how it sounds to my ears.
(Just for the sake of discussion, of course; I don't actually think you're stupid).
>Being a moron
>implying this is a difficult question
These are two examples of me cutting to the chase and, instead of inventing a misquote, simply
describing what I feel you've done, what your words have implied.
>Be OP
>Ask a question on /lit/
>Enlightened by a genius
This is a full mutation into what we know as a greentext story, by now a sort of hybrid between
quotations and bullet-points.
Don't forget that greentext is essentially a quoting mechanism. It's a way to live or speak for the
other, so that even when you are talking about yourself in greentext, there is a dissociation
process involved (to the point that a story may begin wtih >be me).
The quoting evolved into not only speaking with the words of another, but to go beyond and
describe an action or to quote what is "between the lines"(>implying). In the same way that you
don't change a quoted text (it is just like it was in the original), the actions are also "unchanged".
That's why we use the gerund, you speak of the action not in the past sense, but you separate
that piece of present moment and replace it as it were. You are always reading the thread,
doing that, being that... I believe that's why including the year to the sarcasm works so well
(>doing this >2014), because you position that past action next to a reaffirmation of the present.
I think that the negative aspect is just a reflection of 4chan's general negativity. In the sense that
you'll only post to challenge, deny, criticize, deconstruct, refute, call names. So a lonely
greentext line (>reading my thread) is interpreted exclusively as a negative thing, in a "get a
load of this guy" way. That "in-built" aspect is because of 4chan. The Costanza ishygddt also helped elevate the greentext into this natural criticism. But see that this is also part of the
dissociation mechanism, because one is constantly pointing to what the other says, does,
implies, etc. To the extent that in order to prove your point, all you have to do is say >doing [the
opposite].
I don't know of any equivalent to greentext, but by understanding the way it works, you can try to
reach the same impression by other means.

[Anonymous No.11712445]

>bump
bump

[Anonymous No.11712468]

>>11712442
Good post

[Anonymous No.11712495]

Greentext is a spontaneous rebellion against phallogocentrism and an aporetic gesture of surfacing differance

Prove me wrong

[Anonymous No.11712497]

>>11712442
>implying this post is good
Nah great post

[Anonymous No.11712539]

>>11712495
> then why it look like a dick hmmmm?
>checkmate

[Anonymous No.11712544]

Greentexting is the act of reducing language to its minimal, axiomatic qualities.

[Anonymous No.11712681]

[Anonymous No.11712713]

so new new sincerity when?

[Anonymous No.11712724]

>>11712336
>effective
Reducing everything to a detached enumeration of events is not effective. it's flat. it's ironic in a really tired way

[Anonymous No.11712740]

do you think there could ever be a full length novel written solely in greentext?

[Anonymous No.11712755]

>>11712442
>not ending with "you can try to reach the same impression by other memes."

[Anonymous No.11712803]

>>11712336
I think it's a good way to clarify what you're actually replying to, what you think someone meant, what you derived or imposed. It often allows for succinct clarity. It's popularity may come from the low effort required and general memetic appeal. Greentexting can both be great and merely dismissive. It's easy to say
>t. <contextual thing implied to be negative or illegitimate>
to anything.

[Anonymous No.11713222]

>>11712495
lol

[Anonymous No.11713260]

>>11712713
You're posting in it, baby

[Anonymous No.11713592]

>>11712336
>before /pol/
>after /pol/

[Anonymous No.11713603]

>>11712336
they’re dishonest quotation marks

[Anonymous No.11713645]

>Holy
>Roman
>Empire

Is a great example of the power of greentext, but I still can't quite articulate what it means. It's we can't quite comprehend yet we all understand.

[Anonymous No.11713681]

>>11712442
>I don't know of any equivalent to greentext

Quotation marks

Paragraph indentation

Alternate font

Text box

Also, I don't see how greentext stories are a mutation of using it to quote somebody.

[Anonymous No.11713713]

In Ulysses and other works Joyce literally wrote quotations with a:

-At the start of every line of character dialogue
-Come on finch you filthy Jesuit

I found this practice rather similar to green texting

[Anonymous No.11713719]

>>11713713
This is the case in many European writers

[Anonymous No.11713731]

>>11713681
to expand on this,

there is no formatting that you can do on 4chan other than greentexting. so the greentext option fulfills multiple formatting purposes. it's not some incredibly complex thing, it's like a grammatic equivalent of a tenfold homophone.

you can discuss the grammar of greentext stories but they aren't reliant on greentexting.

look at OP for instance, the greentext arrow is simply fulfilling the function of what I would use bullet point or numbered list for if I was sending a work email on outlook. the fact that it also serves as a quotation device is not remarkable.

[Anonymous No.11713732]

>>11713713
Nope. This is just an em-dash and it's used by every single non-brainlet writer in the world.

[Anonymous No.11713785]

>>11713732
>not using quotation marks when you're quoting someone's speech

[Anonymous No.11713813]

>>11713785
>the specific punctuation you use is irrelevant, once you realise what it is supposed to be for and it is consistent, and if people in general started using the punctuation out of the agreed context

as I'm doing here

>you would no longer hear ~greentext voice~ because the pavlovian reaction would be broken

simply changing the form of quotation by using a text box, green text, alternate font or whatever is not interesting, the thing that is interesting is the actual concept that the punctuation/formatting is serving, i.e. the concept of quotation

[Anonymous No.11713839]

>>11712336
You're an idiot who needs everything spoonfed to you in sound bite format, which greentexting essentially is.

[Anonymous No.11713857]

>>11713839
>>>11713681
> to expand on this,
> there is no formatting that you can do on 4chan other than greentexting. so the greentext option fulfills multiple formatting purposes. it's not some incredibly complex thing, it's like a grammatic equivalent of a tenfold homophone.
> you can discuss the grammar of greentext stories but they aren't reliant on greentexting.
> look at OP for instance, the greentext arrow is simply fulfilling the function of what I would use bullet point or numbered list for if I was sending a work email on outlook. the fact that it also serves as a quotation device is not remarkable.
>>>
>Anonymous 08/31/18(Fri)14:58:22 No.11713732▶>>11713785
> >>11713713
> Nope. This is just an em-dash and it's used by every single non-brainlet writer in the world.
>>>
>Anonymous 08/31/18(Fri)15:10:31 No.11713785▶>>11713813
> >>11713732
> >not using quotation marks when you're quoting someone's speech
>>>
>Anonymous 08/31/18(Fri)15:15:35 No.11713813▶
> >>11713785
> >the specific punctuation you use is irrelevant, once you realise what it is supposed to be for and it is consistent, and if people in general started using the punctuation out of the agreed context
> as I'm doing here
> >you would no longer hear ~greentext voice~ because the pavlovian reaction would be broken
> simply changing the form of quotation by using a text box, green text, alternate font or whatever is not interesting, the thing that is interesting is the actual concept that the punctuation/formatting is serving, i.e. the concept of quotation
>>>
>Anonymous 08/31/18(Fri)15:22:26 No.11713839▶
> >>11712336 (OP)
> You're an idiot who needs everything spoonfed to you in sound bite format, which greentexting essentially is.

[Anonymous No.11713868]

>>11713857
>Anonymous 08/31/18(Fri)20:24:53 No.11713857>>11713839
>>>>11713681
>> to expand on this,
>> there is no formatting that you can do on 4chan other than greentexting. so the greentext option fulfills multiple formatting purposes. it's not some incredibly complex thing, it's like a grammatic equivalent of a tenfold homophone.
>> you can discuss the grammar of greentext stories but they aren't reliant on greentexting.
>> look at OP for instance, the greentext arrow is simply fulfilling the function of what I would use bullet point or numbered list for if I was sending a work email on outlook. the fact that it also serves as a quotation device is not remarkable.
>>>>
>>Anonymous 08/31/18(Fri)14:58:22 No.11713732▶>>11713785(You)
>> >>11713713
>> Nope. This is just an em-dash and it's used by every single non-brainlet writer in the world.
>>>>
>>Anonymous 08/31/18(Fri)15:10:31 No.11713785▶>>11713813
>> >>11713732
>> >not using quotation marks when you're quoting someone's speech
>>>>
>>Anonymous 08/31/18(Fri)15:15:35 No.11713813▶
>> >>11713785(You)
>> >the specific punctuation you use is irrelevant, once you realise what it is supposed to be for and it is consistent, and if people in general started using the punctuation out of the agreed context
>> as I'm doing here
>> >you would no longer hear ~greentext voice~ because the pavlovian reaction would be broken
>> simply changing the form of quotation by using a text box, green text, alternate font or whatever is not interesting, the thing that is interesting is the actual concept that the punctuation/formatting is serving, i.e. the concept of quotation
>>>>
>>Anonymous 08/31/18(Fri)15:22:26 No.11713839▶
>> >>11712336(OP) (OP)
>> You're an idiot who needs everything spoonfed to you in sound bite format, which greentexting essentially is.

[Anonymous No.11713876]

>>11713868
>implying

[Anonymous No.11713937]

>>11713719
I thought the French used << >> marks

[Anonymous No.11714080]

>>11713839
Yeah it's pretty sad and pathetic to ask people a question

[Anonymous No.11714188]

now the question is, do kitschy /x/ stories count as literature

[Anonymous No.11714238]

>>11712740
I think it would be too gimmicky and tiring to read. It could definitely be used for a chapter in a novel about someone who uses 4chan or a general internaut.

[Anonymous No.11714240]

>>11713937
They do for short quotations, but longer ones are usually marked in the same way that Joyce does.

[Anonymous No.11714949]

The greentext is the first thing you think of when you think of linguistic phenomena unique to 4chan and basically impossible to concisely explain to an outsider, and it's probably the most complex, but I think people overlook spoiler tags in these discussions. People rarely use them to actually tag spoilers, to the point where I've spoiled something for myself more than once because I didn't think the spoiler tag would actually have a spoiler, and the actual use is even harder to articulate than the use of the greentext.

[Anonymous No.11714994]

>>11712365
I came here to post this.

[Anonymous No.11714998]

>>11712495
in order for something to be disproven there must first actually be something to disprove

[Anonymous No.11715011]

>>11712336
the '>' sign was used on old internet to indent quotes when it was just very limited text based communication, on 4chan the '>' making text green was just a way to make quoting a bit more visual and intelligible

but as time went on people who weren't as well acquainted with old internet protocols used greentext for more diverse purposes than just quoting people

greentexting is kind of the same as bullet pointing out an idea or story, though it has developed its own codes and conventions over the years

[Anonymous No.11715026]

>>11714949
generally indicates that the content is whispered, something you "shouldn't be saying", something "people might not want to hear"

[Anonymous No.11715036]

>>11713713
>Joyce
this was done many times before and in a shit loads of books too

[Anonymous No.11715064]

>>11715026
But it's not just that, it can also indicate a joke, especially a lame one. The fact that it's revealed last of all is a linguistic device
That's fucking cool

[Anonymous No.11715103]

>>11712365
Green text seems to reflect the self loathing inner voice of most 4chan users. It is also fairly self aware which is one of the reasons that non-native 4chan users fail at it.

[Anonymous No.11715914]

>>11712365
that thread was fucking great.

[Anonymous No.11715964]

>>11712365
>tfw over six months later still no qt finnish gf
will the feels never end?

[Anonymous No.11716005]

Is it possible to use greentext irl? Like greenspeak or something?

[Anonymous No.11716014]

>>11716005
i don't think so, unless you're talking to another person who actually understands greentexting, but why would you even want to do that?
if you manage to do it, you should promptly kill yourself afterward for being such a fucking loser.