“Criticism” vs. “critique”
up vote
14
down vote
favorite
What is the difference in meaning between criticism and critique?
meaning differences nouns
add a comment |
up vote
14
down vote
favorite
What is the difference in meaning between criticism and critique?
meaning differences nouns
1
Also on en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique#Critique_vs_Criticism
– Pacerier
Mar 3 '16 at 5:07
add a comment |
up vote
14
down vote
favorite
up vote
14
down vote
favorite
What is the difference in meaning between criticism and critique?
meaning differences nouns
What is the difference in meaning between criticism and critique?
meaning differences nouns
meaning differences nouns
edited Apr 27 '14 at 11:54
RegDwigнt♦
82.5k31281377
82.5k31281377
asked Apr 26 '14 at 15:42
Aschente
77126
77126
1
Also on en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique#Critique_vs_Criticism
– Pacerier
Mar 3 '16 at 5:07
add a comment |
1
Also on en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique#Critique_vs_Criticism
– Pacerier
Mar 3 '16 at 5:07
1
1
Also on en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique#Critique_vs_Criticism
– Pacerier
Mar 3 '16 at 5:07
Also on en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique#Critique_vs_Criticism
– Pacerier
Mar 3 '16 at 5:07
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
up vote
12
down vote
accepted
At bottom there is no difference.
The terms critic, criticize, criticism have always had a double sense in English. The base meaning is “pass judgment on”, but in popular use the words have usually meant “pass a negative judgment on”, while in academic and literary use they have tended in the opposite direction, signifying close and dispassionate analysis which may or may not issue in a formal judgment.
The French version critique was adopted into English primarily as a noun, meaning an instance of criticism, a critical essay or notice; in many cases there is no evident distinction between critic(k) and critique in this sense until the 19th century. Around 1960 academics began using critique in both nominal and verbal senses more and more frequently—at a guess, as a desperate effort to drive into thick undergraduate heads the fact that the critical endeavour in literature, art, history and philosophy is not simply a matter of expressing negative opinions.
If that was the intention, it failed. Today critique in popular use is just as likely to mean ‘censure’ as ‘analyze’.
“Maybe we should be that way about the first gentleman also and really critique the way they look all the time, their choice of tie, or their hair style or whatever, or maybe their weight.” —Former first lady Laura Bush on CSPAN, Jan 27 2014
Yes, to hell with all of these left communists making criticisms! For as we all know the left has never done anything worth of critique! —Comment on a book review on The North Star, Apr 5 2014
Funding freeze critiqued A UK science-advocacy group says that a repeated freeze to the government's £4.6-billion (US$7-billion) science-research budget, announced on 26 June, will damage early-career researchers' work and drive them to other nations. —Nature online, 2013
He asked for meaning, not an etymological discussion and faulty prose from people without the necessary esoteric logic to formulate coherent structure. "You have to understand that people that are hurting are going to criticize." George H. W. Bush, Former President (Giggle! It is fun to comment like that!)
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 17:26
1
@APrejean I don't think you can characterize either Ms. Bush, an admirably articulate woman, or the editorial staff of one of the world's most prestigious academic journals, as lacking in logical discrimination. I have apparently not made myself clear: there are two meanings involved here, but they distinguish not two words, but the use of both words for different audiences.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 17:52
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
"Critique" is mainly used when literature or a work of art is concerned. "Criticism" is the general word.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
I had a teacher for Equine and Animal science that was a real hard ass, but I loved her very much. She always said to people "I'm not criticizing you, I'm critiquing you"
In other words she wasnt trying to hurt someone with everything they did wrong, she was pointing out specifically the things they needed to work on and how to do so. Even if it sounded harsh I believe critiquing always involves some sort of advice or reasoning to help a person grow from mistakes. While critics just say there opinion on how things are wrong. Whether it's what you say, do, how you write, think etc.
New contributor
add a comment |
up vote
-2
down vote
http://scribesalley.blogspot.com/2008/08/difference-between-critique-and.html
The Difference between Critique and Criticism
Criticism finds fault/Critique looks at structure
Criticism looks for what's lacking/Critique finds what's working
Criticism condemns what it doesn't understand/Critique asks for clarification
Criticism is spoken with a cruel wit and sarcastic tongue/Critique's voice is kind, honest, and objective
Criticism is negative/Critique is positive (even about what isn't working)
Criticism is vague and general/Critique is concrete and specific
Criticism has no sense of humor/Critique insists on laughter, too
Criticism looks for flaws in the writer as well as the writing/Critique addresses only what is on the page
Taken from Writing Alone, Writing Together; A Guide for Writers and
Writing Groups by Judy Reeves
2
This is an entirely idiolectal understanding of the terms which bears no relation to their actual use.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 16:15
If you all are going to pout about the answer because it is a quote, that is fine. But Judy Reeves and her published work are quite accepted and accredited, and this was her guide to use, not meaning. Your fiction was stated quite pleasantly, though.
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 16:52
2
I have no objections to quotations - I employ them myself. But Ms. Reeves describes herself as "writer, teacher, and writing practice provocateur", and I think this is one of her provocations, not serious criticism/critique.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 17:27
@StoneyB Even with your mischaracterization of her work, by your own quote it was "writing practice provocateur". She did not outline the difference in meaning (which OP requested) for a philosophical soliloquy, but for other people to use in their writing. At worst, you disagree with her, but thumbing me down on a post that has EXACT application to the question posed was improper. I gave an appropriate source and was on-topic. The OP may not be better off for my post, but you cannot argue that he is worse off for it, either.
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 17:34
add a comment |
up vote
-2
down vote
criticize is like when u know your kids talk something bad about someone not exactly backbiting but like
when he went to syria he saw people criticizing hazrat ali
criticize is talking bad about someone you know i dont care if thats not the correct answer cause i am just typing like crazy
critique means to censure/analyze
1
Your response would be more effective if you quoted and linked to third-party resources (such as dictionaries) that corroborate for the definitions you provide.
– Sven Yargs
Dec 30 '17 at 3:00
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
12
down vote
accepted
At bottom there is no difference.
The terms critic, criticize, criticism have always had a double sense in English. The base meaning is “pass judgment on”, but in popular use the words have usually meant “pass a negative judgment on”, while in academic and literary use they have tended in the opposite direction, signifying close and dispassionate analysis which may or may not issue in a formal judgment.
The French version critique was adopted into English primarily as a noun, meaning an instance of criticism, a critical essay or notice; in many cases there is no evident distinction between critic(k) and critique in this sense until the 19th century. Around 1960 academics began using critique in both nominal and verbal senses more and more frequently—at a guess, as a desperate effort to drive into thick undergraduate heads the fact that the critical endeavour in literature, art, history and philosophy is not simply a matter of expressing negative opinions.
If that was the intention, it failed. Today critique in popular use is just as likely to mean ‘censure’ as ‘analyze’.
“Maybe we should be that way about the first gentleman also and really critique the way they look all the time, their choice of tie, or their hair style or whatever, or maybe their weight.” —Former first lady Laura Bush on CSPAN, Jan 27 2014
Yes, to hell with all of these left communists making criticisms! For as we all know the left has never done anything worth of critique! —Comment on a book review on The North Star, Apr 5 2014
Funding freeze critiqued A UK science-advocacy group says that a repeated freeze to the government's £4.6-billion (US$7-billion) science-research budget, announced on 26 June, will damage early-career researchers' work and drive them to other nations. —Nature online, 2013
He asked for meaning, not an etymological discussion and faulty prose from people without the necessary esoteric logic to formulate coherent structure. "You have to understand that people that are hurting are going to criticize." George H. W. Bush, Former President (Giggle! It is fun to comment like that!)
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 17:26
1
@APrejean I don't think you can characterize either Ms. Bush, an admirably articulate woman, or the editorial staff of one of the world's most prestigious academic journals, as lacking in logical discrimination. I have apparently not made myself clear: there are two meanings involved here, but they distinguish not two words, but the use of both words for different audiences.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 17:52
add a comment |
up vote
12
down vote
accepted
At bottom there is no difference.
The terms critic, criticize, criticism have always had a double sense in English. The base meaning is “pass judgment on”, but in popular use the words have usually meant “pass a negative judgment on”, while in academic and literary use they have tended in the opposite direction, signifying close and dispassionate analysis which may or may not issue in a formal judgment.
The French version critique was adopted into English primarily as a noun, meaning an instance of criticism, a critical essay or notice; in many cases there is no evident distinction between critic(k) and critique in this sense until the 19th century. Around 1960 academics began using critique in both nominal and verbal senses more and more frequently—at a guess, as a desperate effort to drive into thick undergraduate heads the fact that the critical endeavour in literature, art, history and philosophy is not simply a matter of expressing negative opinions.
If that was the intention, it failed. Today critique in popular use is just as likely to mean ‘censure’ as ‘analyze’.
“Maybe we should be that way about the first gentleman also and really critique the way they look all the time, their choice of tie, or their hair style or whatever, or maybe their weight.” —Former first lady Laura Bush on CSPAN, Jan 27 2014
Yes, to hell with all of these left communists making criticisms! For as we all know the left has never done anything worth of critique! —Comment on a book review on The North Star, Apr 5 2014
Funding freeze critiqued A UK science-advocacy group says that a repeated freeze to the government's £4.6-billion (US$7-billion) science-research budget, announced on 26 June, will damage early-career researchers' work and drive them to other nations. —Nature online, 2013
He asked for meaning, not an etymological discussion and faulty prose from people without the necessary esoteric logic to formulate coherent structure. "You have to understand that people that are hurting are going to criticize." George H. W. Bush, Former President (Giggle! It is fun to comment like that!)
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 17:26
1
@APrejean I don't think you can characterize either Ms. Bush, an admirably articulate woman, or the editorial staff of one of the world's most prestigious academic journals, as lacking in logical discrimination. I have apparently not made myself clear: there are two meanings involved here, but they distinguish not two words, but the use of both words for different audiences.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 17:52
add a comment |
up vote
12
down vote
accepted
up vote
12
down vote
accepted
At bottom there is no difference.
The terms critic, criticize, criticism have always had a double sense in English. The base meaning is “pass judgment on”, but in popular use the words have usually meant “pass a negative judgment on”, while in academic and literary use they have tended in the opposite direction, signifying close and dispassionate analysis which may or may not issue in a formal judgment.
The French version critique was adopted into English primarily as a noun, meaning an instance of criticism, a critical essay or notice; in many cases there is no evident distinction between critic(k) and critique in this sense until the 19th century. Around 1960 academics began using critique in both nominal and verbal senses more and more frequently—at a guess, as a desperate effort to drive into thick undergraduate heads the fact that the critical endeavour in literature, art, history and philosophy is not simply a matter of expressing negative opinions.
If that was the intention, it failed. Today critique in popular use is just as likely to mean ‘censure’ as ‘analyze’.
“Maybe we should be that way about the first gentleman also and really critique the way they look all the time, their choice of tie, or their hair style or whatever, or maybe their weight.” —Former first lady Laura Bush on CSPAN, Jan 27 2014
Yes, to hell with all of these left communists making criticisms! For as we all know the left has never done anything worth of critique! —Comment on a book review on The North Star, Apr 5 2014
Funding freeze critiqued A UK science-advocacy group says that a repeated freeze to the government's £4.6-billion (US$7-billion) science-research budget, announced on 26 June, will damage early-career researchers' work and drive them to other nations. —Nature online, 2013
At bottom there is no difference.
The terms critic, criticize, criticism have always had a double sense in English. The base meaning is “pass judgment on”, but in popular use the words have usually meant “pass a negative judgment on”, while in academic and literary use they have tended in the opposite direction, signifying close and dispassionate analysis which may or may not issue in a formal judgment.
The French version critique was adopted into English primarily as a noun, meaning an instance of criticism, a critical essay or notice; in many cases there is no evident distinction between critic(k) and critique in this sense until the 19th century. Around 1960 academics began using critique in both nominal and verbal senses more and more frequently—at a guess, as a desperate effort to drive into thick undergraduate heads the fact that the critical endeavour in literature, art, history and philosophy is not simply a matter of expressing negative opinions.
If that was the intention, it failed. Today critique in popular use is just as likely to mean ‘censure’ as ‘analyze’.
“Maybe we should be that way about the first gentleman also and really critique the way they look all the time, their choice of tie, or their hair style or whatever, or maybe their weight.” —Former first lady Laura Bush on CSPAN, Jan 27 2014
Yes, to hell with all of these left communists making criticisms! For as we all know the left has never done anything worth of critique! —Comment on a book review on The North Star, Apr 5 2014
Funding freeze critiqued A UK science-advocacy group says that a repeated freeze to the government's £4.6-billion (US$7-billion) science-research budget, announced on 26 June, will damage early-career researchers' work and drive them to other nations. —Nature online, 2013
edited Apr 26 '14 at 18:26
answered Apr 26 '14 at 17:21
StoneyB
64.1k3110211
64.1k3110211
He asked for meaning, not an etymological discussion and faulty prose from people without the necessary esoteric logic to formulate coherent structure. "You have to understand that people that are hurting are going to criticize." George H. W. Bush, Former President (Giggle! It is fun to comment like that!)
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 17:26
1
@APrejean I don't think you can characterize either Ms. Bush, an admirably articulate woman, or the editorial staff of one of the world's most prestigious academic journals, as lacking in logical discrimination. I have apparently not made myself clear: there are two meanings involved here, but they distinguish not two words, but the use of both words for different audiences.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 17:52
add a comment |
He asked for meaning, not an etymological discussion and faulty prose from people without the necessary esoteric logic to formulate coherent structure. "You have to understand that people that are hurting are going to criticize." George H. W. Bush, Former President (Giggle! It is fun to comment like that!)
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 17:26
1
@APrejean I don't think you can characterize either Ms. Bush, an admirably articulate woman, or the editorial staff of one of the world's most prestigious academic journals, as lacking in logical discrimination. I have apparently not made myself clear: there are two meanings involved here, but they distinguish not two words, but the use of both words for different audiences.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 17:52
He asked for meaning, not an etymological discussion and faulty prose from people without the necessary esoteric logic to formulate coherent structure. "You have to understand that people that are hurting are going to criticize." George H. W. Bush, Former President (Giggle! It is fun to comment like that!)
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 17:26
He asked for meaning, not an etymological discussion and faulty prose from people without the necessary esoteric logic to formulate coherent structure. "You have to understand that people that are hurting are going to criticize." George H. W. Bush, Former President (Giggle! It is fun to comment like that!)
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 17:26
1
1
@APrejean I don't think you can characterize either Ms. Bush, an admirably articulate woman, or the editorial staff of one of the world's most prestigious academic journals, as lacking in logical discrimination. I have apparently not made myself clear: there are two meanings involved here, but they distinguish not two words, but the use of both words for different audiences.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 17:52
@APrejean I don't think you can characterize either Ms. Bush, an admirably articulate woman, or the editorial staff of one of the world's most prestigious academic journals, as lacking in logical discrimination. I have apparently not made myself clear: there are two meanings involved here, but they distinguish not two words, but the use of both words for different audiences.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 17:52
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
"Critique" is mainly used when literature or a work of art is concerned. "Criticism" is the general word.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
"Critique" is mainly used when literature or a work of art is concerned. "Criticism" is the general word.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
"Critique" is mainly used when literature or a work of art is concerned. "Criticism" is the general word.
"Critique" is mainly used when literature or a work of art is concerned. "Criticism" is the general word.
edited Apr 27 '14 at 11:54
RegDwigнt♦
82.5k31281377
82.5k31281377
answered Apr 26 '14 at 21:13
rogermue
11.7k41647
11.7k41647
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
I had a teacher for Equine and Animal science that was a real hard ass, but I loved her very much. She always said to people "I'm not criticizing you, I'm critiquing you"
In other words she wasnt trying to hurt someone with everything they did wrong, she was pointing out specifically the things they needed to work on and how to do so. Even if it sounded harsh I believe critiquing always involves some sort of advice or reasoning to help a person grow from mistakes. While critics just say there opinion on how things are wrong. Whether it's what you say, do, how you write, think etc.
New contributor
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
I had a teacher for Equine and Animal science that was a real hard ass, but I loved her very much. She always said to people "I'm not criticizing you, I'm critiquing you"
In other words she wasnt trying to hurt someone with everything they did wrong, she was pointing out specifically the things they needed to work on and how to do so. Even if it sounded harsh I believe critiquing always involves some sort of advice or reasoning to help a person grow from mistakes. While critics just say there opinion on how things are wrong. Whether it's what you say, do, how you write, think etc.
New contributor
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
I had a teacher for Equine and Animal science that was a real hard ass, but I loved her very much. She always said to people "I'm not criticizing you, I'm critiquing you"
In other words she wasnt trying to hurt someone with everything they did wrong, she was pointing out specifically the things they needed to work on and how to do so. Even if it sounded harsh I believe critiquing always involves some sort of advice or reasoning to help a person grow from mistakes. While critics just say there opinion on how things are wrong. Whether it's what you say, do, how you write, think etc.
New contributor
I had a teacher for Equine and Animal science that was a real hard ass, but I loved her very much. She always said to people "I'm not criticizing you, I'm critiquing you"
In other words she wasnt trying to hurt someone with everything they did wrong, she was pointing out specifically the things they needed to work on and how to do so. Even if it sounded harsh I believe critiquing always involves some sort of advice or reasoning to help a person grow from mistakes. While critics just say there opinion on how things are wrong. Whether it's what you say, do, how you write, think etc.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 1 hour ago
Shelby Breckenridge
1
1
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
-2
down vote
http://scribesalley.blogspot.com/2008/08/difference-between-critique-and.html
The Difference between Critique and Criticism
Criticism finds fault/Critique looks at structure
Criticism looks for what's lacking/Critique finds what's working
Criticism condemns what it doesn't understand/Critique asks for clarification
Criticism is spoken with a cruel wit and sarcastic tongue/Critique's voice is kind, honest, and objective
Criticism is negative/Critique is positive (even about what isn't working)
Criticism is vague and general/Critique is concrete and specific
Criticism has no sense of humor/Critique insists on laughter, too
Criticism looks for flaws in the writer as well as the writing/Critique addresses only what is on the page
Taken from Writing Alone, Writing Together; A Guide for Writers and
Writing Groups by Judy Reeves
2
This is an entirely idiolectal understanding of the terms which bears no relation to their actual use.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 16:15
If you all are going to pout about the answer because it is a quote, that is fine. But Judy Reeves and her published work are quite accepted and accredited, and this was her guide to use, not meaning. Your fiction was stated quite pleasantly, though.
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 16:52
2
I have no objections to quotations - I employ them myself. But Ms. Reeves describes herself as "writer, teacher, and writing practice provocateur", and I think this is one of her provocations, not serious criticism/critique.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 17:27
@StoneyB Even with your mischaracterization of her work, by your own quote it was "writing practice provocateur". She did not outline the difference in meaning (which OP requested) for a philosophical soliloquy, but for other people to use in their writing. At worst, you disagree with her, but thumbing me down on a post that has EXACT application to the question posed was improper. I gave an appropriate source and was on-topic. The OP may not be better off for my post, but you cannot argue that he is worse off for it, either.
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 17:34
add a comment |
up vote
-2
down vote
http://scribesalley.blogspot.com/2008/08/difference-between-critique-and.html
The Difference between Critique and Criticism
Criticism finds fault/Critique looks at structure
Criticism looks for what's lacking/Critique finds what's working
Criticism condemns what it doesn't understand/Critique asks for clarification
Criticism is spoken with a cruel wit and sarcastic tongue/Critique's voice is kind, honest, and objective
Criticism is negative/Critique is positive (even about what isn't working)
Criticism is vague and general/Critique is concrete and specific
Criticism has no sense of humor/Critique insists on laughter, too
Criticism looks for flaws in the writer as well as the writing/Critique addresses only what is on the page
Taken from Writing Alone, Writing Together; A Guide for Writers and
Writing Groups by Judy Reeves
2
This is an entirely idiolectal understanding of the terms which bears no relation to their actual use.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 16:15
If you all are going to pout about the answer because it is a quote, that is fine. But Judy Reeves and her published work are quite accepted and accredited, and this was her guide to use, not meaning. Your fiction was stated quite pleasantly, though.
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 16:52
2
I have no objections to quotations - I employ them myself. But Ms. Reeves describes herself as "writer, teacher, and writing practice provocateur", and I think this is one of her provocations, not serious criticism/critique.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 17:27
@StoneyB Even with your mischaracterization of her work, by your own quote it was "writing practice provocateur". She did not outline the difference in meaning (which OP requested) for a philosophical soliloquy, but for other people to use in their writing. At worst, you disagree with her, but thumbing me down on a post that has EXACT application to the question posed was improper. I gave an appropriate source and was on-topic. The OP may not be better off for my post, but you cannot argue that he is worse off for it, either.
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 17:34
add a comment |
up vote
-2
down vote
up vote
-2
down vote
http://scribesalley.blogspot.com/2008/08/difference-between-critique-and.html
The Difference between Critique and Criticism
Criticism finds fault/Critique looks at structure
Criticism looks for what's lacking/Critique finds what's working
Criticism condemns what it doesn't understand/Critique asks for clarification
Criticism is spoken with a cruel wit and sarcastic tongue/Critique's voice is kind, honest, and objective
Criticism is negative/Critique is positive (even about what isn't working)
Criticism is vague and general/Critique is concrete and specific
Criticism has no sense of humor/Critique insists on laughter, too
Criticism looks for flaws in the writer as well as the writing/Critique addresses only what is on the page
Taken from Writing Alone, Writing Together; A Guide for Writers and
Writing Groups by Judy Reeves
http://scribesalley.blogspot.com/2008/08/difference-between-critique-and.html
The Difference between Critique and Criticism
Criticism finds fault/Critique looks at structure
Criticism looks for what's lacking/Critique finds what's working
Criticism condemns what it doesn't understand/Critique asks for clarification
Criticism is spoken with a cruel wit and sarcastic tongue/Critique's voice is kind, honest, and objective
Criticism is negative/Critique is positive (even about what isn't working)
Criticism is vague and general/Critique is concrete and specific
Criticism has no sense of humor/Critique insists on laughter, too
Criticism looks for flaws in the writer as well as the writing/Critique addresses only what is on the page
Taken from Writing Alone, Writing Together; A Guide for Writers and
Writing Groups by Judy Reeves
answered Apr 26 '14 at 15:46
Apple Freejeans
51825
51825
2
This is an entirely idiolectal understanding of the terms which bears no relation to their actual use.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 16:15
If you all are going to pout about the answer because it is a quote, that is fine. But Judy Reeves and her published work are quite accepted and accredited, and this was her guide to use, not meaning. Your fiction was stated quite pleasantly, though.
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 16:52
2
I have no objections to quotations - I employ them myself. But Ms. Reeves describes herself as "writer, teacher, and writing practice provocateur", and I think this is one of her provocations, not serious criticism/critique.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 17:27
@StoneyB Even with your mischaracterization of her work, by your own quote it was "writing practice provocateur". She did not outline the difference in meaning (which OP requested) for a philosophical soliloquy, but for other people to use in their writing. At worst, you disagree with her, but thumbing me down on a post that has EXACT application to the question posed was improper. I gave an appropriate source and was on-topic. The OP may not be better off for my post, but you cannot argue that he is worse off for it, either.
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 17:34
add a comment |
2
This is an entirely idiolectal understanding of the terms which bears no relation to their actual use.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 16:15
If you all are going to pout about the answer because it is a quote, that is fine. But Judy Reeves and her published work are quite accepted and accredited, and this was her guide to use, not meaning. Your fiction was stated quite pleasantly, though.
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 16:52
2
I have no objections to quotations - I employ them myself. But Ms. Reeves describes herself as "writer, teacher, and writing practice provocateur", and I think this is one of her provocations, not serious criticism/critique.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 17:27
@StoneyB Even with your mischaracterization of her work, by your own quote it was "writing practice provocateur". She did not outline the difference in meaning (which OP requested) for a philosophical soliloquy, but for other people to use in their writing. At worst, you disagree with her, but thumbing me down on a post that has EXACT application to the question posed was improper. I gave an appropriate source and was on-topic. The OP may not be better off for my post, but you cannot argue that he is worse off for it, either.
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 17:34
2
2
This is an entirely idiolectal understanding of the terms which bears no relation to their actual use.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 16:15
This is an entirely idiolectal understanding of the terms which bears no relation to their actual use.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 16:15
If you all are going to pout about the answer because it is a quote, that is fine. But Judy Reeves and her published work are quite accepted and accredited, and this was her guide to use, not meaning. Your fiction was stated quite pleasantly, though.
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 16:52
If you all are going to pout about the answer because it is a quote, that is fine. But Judy Reeves and her published work are quite accepted and accredited, and this was her guide to use, not meaning. Your fiction was stated quite pleasantly, though.
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 16:52
2
2
I have no objections to quotations - I employ them myself. But Ms. Reeves describes herself as "writer, teacher, and writing practice provocateur", and I think this is one of her provocations, not serious criticism/critique.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 17:27
I have no objections to quotations - I employ them myself. But Ms. Reeves describes herself as "writer, teacher, and writing practice provocateur", and I think this is one of her provocations, not serious criticism/critique.
– StoneyB
Apr 26 '14 at 17:27
@StoneyB Even with your mischaracterization of her work, by your own quote it was "writing practice provocateur". She did not outline the difference in meaning (which OP requested) for a philosophical soliloquy, but for other people to use in their writing. At worst, you disagree with her, but thumbing me down on a post that has EXACT application to the question posed was improper. I gave an appropriate source and was on-topic. The OP may not be better off for my post, but you cannot argue that he is worse off for it, either.
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 17:34
@StoneyB Even with your mischaracterization of her work, by your own quote it was "writing practice provocateur". She did not outline the difference in meaning (which OP requested) for a philosophical soliloquy, but for other people to use in their writing. At worst, you disagree with her, but thumbing me down on a post that has EXACT application to the question posed was improper. I gave an appropriate source and was on-topic. The OP may not be better off for my post, but you cannot argue that he is worse off for it, either.
– Apple Freejeans
Apr 26 '14 at 17:34
add a comment |
up vote
-2
down vote
criticize is like when u know your kids talk something bad about someone not exactly backbiting but like
when he went to syria he saw people criticizing hazrat ali
criticize is talking bad about someone you know i dont care if thats not the correct answer cause i am just typing like crazy
critique means to censure/analyze
1
Your response would be more effective if you quoted and linked to third-party resources (such as dictionaries) that corroborate for the definitions you provide.
– Sven Yargs
Dec 30 '17 at 3:00
add a comment |
up vote
-2
down vote
criticize is like when u know your kids talk something bad about someone not exactly backbiting but like
when he went to syria he saw people criticizing hazrat ali
criticize is talking bad about someone you know i dont care if thats not the correct answer cause i am just typing like crazy
critique means to censure/analyze
1
Your response would be more effective if you quoted and linked to third-party resources (such as dictionaries) that corroborate for the definitions you provide.
– Sven Yargs
Dec 30 '17 at 3:00
add a comment |
up vote
-2
down vote
up vote
-2
down vote
criticize is like when u know your kids talk something bad about someone not exactly backbiting but like
when he went to syria he saw people criticizing hazrat ali
criticize is talking bad about someone you know i dont care if thats not the correct answer cause i am just typing like crazy
critique means to censure/analyze
criticize is like when u know your kids talk something bad about someone not exactly backbiting but like
when he went to syria he saw people criticizing hazrat ali
criticize is talking bad about someone you know i dont care if thats not the correct answer cause i am just typing like crazy
critique means to censure/analyze
answered Dec 30 '17 at 1:57
Allahisgreat22
1
1
1
Your response would be more effective if you quoted and linked to third-party resources (such as dictionaries) that corroborate for the definitions you provide.
– Sven Yargs
Dec 30 '17 at 3:00
add a comment |
1
Your response would be more effective if you quoted and linked to third-party resources (such as dictionaries) that corroborate for the definitions you provide.
– Sven Yargs
Dec 30 '17 at 3:00
1
1
Your response would be more effective if you quoted and linked to third-party resources (such as dictionaries) that corroborate for the definitions you provide.
– Sven Yargs
Dec 30 '17 at 3:00
Your response would be more effective if you quoted and linked to third-party resources (such as dictionaries) that corroborate for the definitions you provide.
– Sven Yargs
Dec 30 '17 at 3:00
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f166404%2fcriticism-vs-critique%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Also on en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique#Critique_vs_Criticism
– Pacerier
Mar 3 '16 at 5:07