In the English language, dog idioms have existed for centuries in the vocabulary, and their meanings and connotations have transformed over time. Traditional idioms like
“Sick as a Dog” and “Dog’s Life” were recorded and used from the mid 1600’s-1700’s and existed as a negative connotation, even though dogs can be considered as a man’s best friend in the modern-day. For centuries, dogs were mainly wild animals that roamed human settlements eating scarps, fighting with each other, and spreading diseases. Phrases like “Dog Eat Dog,” got its term during the medieval Europe when dogs were seen as the lowly regarded animal and used as a labor. However, the idiomatic use of the word Dog for a good companion gained its identity and developed during
…show more content…
When a Latin proverb articulates that even dogs don't’ eat other dogs, indicating that humans are most likely to kill one another than an animal, this impression has been changed in the English language during the 1700’s. So the idiom became “Dogs are hard drove when they eat dogs" meaning that those who act callously are difficult to conquer (Lee, Fuller). Now, the shortened idiomatic phrase “Dog Eat Dog” is characterized as an adjective used to describe a situation in which people compete with each other for success in a cruel and selfish way. This phrase is often used during political debates and modern business world to describe a highly fierce competition. On the Politico article, the author regarded the uptight presidential debate against Obama and Romney as the “dog-eat-dog world of the 2012 presidential campaign got a little nastier” (1, Lee). Other negative idiomatic language like “Die Like a Dog” means that a dog’s life is miserable and cruel, and has to die in a manner that is unpleasant and demeaning. There is a book written by Lesley Martin called “To Die Like a Dog,” which is about her personal account of what she did to cause her mother’s death, and it was up to her to make sure her mother who experience cancer didn’t die. However, later on, she was charged with attempted murder. A dog’s life and death are degrading, and to the author’s …show more content…
Phrases like Dogs of War, meaning the way to describe the destruction and chaos caused by war, the dog’s determination can be seen relating to military usage (Grammaristdictionary.com) “The dogs of war” first originated in a phrase spoken in William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar Act 3 Scene 1 when Caesars body was assassinated and Mark Antony yelling for revenge, “Cry Havoc! Let slip the dogs of war.” Haov means it's a military order after victory; in addition, “dogs of war” can figuratively indicate the wild pack of soldiers and political restraints against war. This idiom suggests a strong sense of commitment that dogs are regarded as historical roles to protect the society. There is also a famous movie entitled “Dogs of War” focusing on a solider that ends up at prison fighting for freedom to complete his
Have you ever wondered how much it costs to have and maintain a pet? Burkhard Bilger, the author of “The Last Meow”, explains how Americans spend a lot of money on their pets and that people's “love affair” with their pets has gotten out of control. An observation I have made is that in many movies dogs are treated very well. When I was younger, I watched a movie called Bratz and one character would always have her dog inside a dog purse and they would even get manicures and pedicures together. The dog always had shiny clothes on and it was always very clean. Therefore, I agree with Bilger's argument that Americans “love affair” with their pets has gotten out of control.
A dog is just that, a dog, until someone comes along and makes it into a monster. A dog may be bred to do something, and can be trained to do an entirely different thing. For example, pit bulls have been bred to be nanny dogs. They are supposed to protect babies and ultimately care for them like they would their own pups. Some people have taken this instinct and turned it into something horrid.
According to the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), there is a “great deal of confusion associated with the label ‘Pit Bull,’” as it does not refer to a single breed of dog, but rather to a group of breeds with similar characteristics1. These characteristics include short hair, a wide skull and shoulders, muscle definition, stocky build and a deep jawline, the combination of which create a dog that manages to strike fear into a perfect stranger. The term ‘Pit Bull’ is derived from the bulldog, which was originally bred as a hunting dog for large game, but has since developed into a “loyal companion rather than a working dog.”1 Their history as “gripping dogs” for hunters follows them into modern society, as many of these dogs have been inhumanely pitted against one another as well as other animals for sport and for human entertainment1. It is because of these illegal fighting rings that ‘Pit Bull’ type breeds have become the subje...
“Let Them Eat Dog” talks about how in many countries it is completely normal to eat the family pet. I personally could not eat my pet. Foer quotes George Orwell saying “all animals are equal but some are more equal than others”(2). In my opinion this means
The poem above speaks volumes about the nature of man’s best friend. Dogs are not inherently bad, but are rather “a product of their environment”. The same principle applies to the world’s most misunderstood breed of dog. When you hear the phrase “pit bull”, what do you think? A savage beast, murdered out of cold blood?
Before the fifteen dogs received human intelligence they would assume their position as the dominant or submissive dog by physical superiority without giving it much thought. With the introduction of language, the dogs with lower status became conscious to the cruel treatment they were receiving from the higher status dogs in the pack, which lead to them separating from the pack. Once the dogs with lower status were gone, there were only dogs left that were used to dominating others. In brief, the uncertainty of position lead to constant fighting for dominance between the dogs that all believed they were of higher status than the others. This emulates the need for more power in our society, to strive for social and personal advances. It is practically a human instinct to want to prove yourself to others and achieve higher status than those around
Dogs have impacted the lives of 44% of American families and homes. People use dogs for much more than just a family friend. Dogs are used for special needs, assisting police, and hunting and tracking. Dogs should be appreciated and never taught to fight or be neglected. Dog fighting is unethical because man’s best friend shouldn’t have to fight for their lives.
When the American Pit Bull is discussed, the subject of nature versus nurture is often the primary topic. Over the last ten to twenty years, thoughts have changed greatly in respect to dog fighting. Throughout history, several different types of dogs have been used for dogfighting. Ancient Romans had displays of dog fights, as well as gladiators, in their great arenas long before the bully breed ever came into existence (Hsu & Sun, 2010). Thankfully, society has evolved, and so has the ideas behind the fight of dogs. Fighting is no longer thought of as just a game or entertainment by the majority of humans. The descendants of those various animals once used so barbarically, have now evolved to be therapy dogs, service dogs, and beloved family pets (Preis, 2014).
The New York Times (2006, February 13). Dogs Like Us. Retrieved March 21, 2014, from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/13/opinion/13kerasote.html?pagewanted=print&action=click&module=Search®ion=searchResults%234&version=&url=http%3A%2F%2Fquery.nytimes.com%2Fsearch%2Fsitesearch%2F%23%2Fpuppy%2Bmill%2Fsince1851%2Fallresults%2F5%2F
I have never considered that a book about a dog could be so appealing and full of deep thoughts. But I changed my viewpoint after reading the autobiographical novel “Marley & Me” written by John Grogan which depicts an astonishing story about the neurotic and loyal, clumsy and loving dog named Marley. In fact, as the author mentioned in some interviews, he intended to write the “dog story”, but soon after he realized that it was impossible to do so without including the family life [2]. That is why the title “Marley & Me” encapsulates the main topic of the book such as the relationship between a human and a pet. To start with let me introduce main characters: John, Jenny, and Marley.
A dreadful thing had happened — a dog, come goodness knows whence, had appeared in the yard. It came bounding among us with a loud volley of barks, and leapt round us wagging its whole body, wild with glee at finding so many human beings together. It was a large woolly dog, half Airedale, half pariah. For a moment it pranced round us, and then, before anyone could stop it, it had made a dash for the prisoner, and jumping up tried to lick his face. Everyone stood aghast, too taken aback even to grab at the dog.
Dog’s Death instantly captured my attention because of the tone that was set with the opening line. “She must have been kicked unseen or brushed by a car” (Updike, 1953). The line ultimately lets the reader know that the poem is about to be sad, and you are going to feel one or more emotions before you are done with the poem. “Notice how particular details in Frost's and Updike's poems about dogs are used to evoke initial feelings—feelings that set the stage for thinking that eventually touches profoundly on matters beyond the welfare of animals” (Clugston, 2010). Along with the tone, Updike draws on your imagination to bring the images to the forefront. For example, “To use the newspapers spread on the kitchen floor and to win, wetting there, the words, "Good dog! Good dog!" (Updike, 1953).
In Jonathan Safran Foer’s “Let Them Eat Dog”, he discusses a controversial, yet debatable topic. The topic concerns the eating of dogs, and whether or not it is moral and right. This is an issue that has two sides to consider; it is either completely right or completely wrong, there is no in-between. The argument to eat dog is presented with the use of ethos, pathos, and logos. Foer has a number of important arguments why eating dogs is moral and unmoral, in the end he leaves it to the judgment of the reader as to which side they come down on.
Ricky Gervais see dogs as ‘man’s best friend’ and to them, they cannot fathom why one would brutally butcher dogs and consider dog meat as a gourmet dish. They judge and disapprove of the harsh acts of the Yulin locals simply because of the difference in beliefs. Brought up in an American culture, he absorbs a certain set of behaviour and belief. When exposed to Yulin’s culture, Ricky has difficulty understanding their behaviour in their viewpoint and does not see dog-eating as a norm at
“That dog is so futile! All he does is sniff, bark, and whine! I can’t tolerate with such a dog!” I sighed to myself as my beagle, Puddles, circumnavigated around me, twitching his tail. I pushed him away and perambulated off to my room. I am not friends with animals, and even though I live on an old farm with my grandfather and grandmother, animals are not one of my interests. Puddles, was an old dog but with much energy. He was constantly jumping up and down on people with his muddy, and feculent paws.