Discussion Main / BuffySpeak

Seemed transparent to me, and I first read the trope page long before I ever saw Buffy the Vampire Slayer. The thing is, Whedon didn't come up with the name "Buffy" by accident — it's a name that evokes, for many, the image of a California Valley Girl. So "Buffy Speak", even for people who haven't seen the show, suggests a variation on Valley Girl Speech. Which is what the trope is. So it's a pretty good name for the trope. (And, incidentally, most people don't talk that way on a regular basis. If the people around you do, it may be a regional thing... such as the Valley Girl speech that Buffy Speak is derived from.)

No, it really isn't a good name.

It reeks of myopia because TV Tropes was originally a collection of Whedon fans. But it has evolved past that point and trying to attribute it to him with that assumption bothers me on a number of levels.

It's the same problem I have with "Jossed." Many trope names have been cut out to be more universal but for some reason these continue to be spared because the Whedon worship here is rather creepy.

As someone who just went around the wiki for months thinking this probably redirected to Like Is, Like, a Comma, I have to agree that this name is about as clear as concrete.

I also agree, it's a bit of a dodgy trope name. And if it evokes California Valley Girl, then it's in the wrong trope - Buffy Speak has nothing to do with California or valley girls except by coincidence.

Actually, this seems like Realistic Diction Is Unrealistic. Hmmm.

Going by this page one would think any language without laserlike precision is Buffy Speak. The "trope" where people use "that thing," or the word "doohickey"/"whatchamacallit"/"whatzit" at all ever in any context, is People Sit On Chairs.

This trope seems to be referring to a case where someone's speech is so stumbling and vague that it conveys no information. But, as per usual with this kind of trope, the examples ... well ... they're kind of all over the place, and since where you draw the line is subjective I'm not sure it can be fixed.

The term Buffyspeak in the fandom isn't even the same as this trope. According to the Buffy RPG it incorporates pop culture references (especially) superhero references, calling things "Mister" this or "Miss" that, Britishisms (!?), hyperbole, compound words, staccato delivery, stuttering transparent lies, adding the letter "y" to the ends of nouns, adding "-age" to the end of words, self-description, wordplay and slang.

An RPG isn't canon, but ... the section lists example after example of what is very clearly Buffyspeak but does not fit the definition applied to this trope. What's more, Googling "Buffyspeak" also comes up with page after page that includes this trope but doesn't match it.

So basically ... not only is the word "Buffyspeak" meaningless to anyone outside this fandom, but what this trope is describing isn't even Buffyspeak within that fandom's definition.

A better definition for Buffyspeak would be: A style of speech marked by heavy use of slang and pop culture references, the coining of nonce words, and twisted syntax.

A real Buffyspeak trope wouldn't have many examples, though. Buffy itself, Clueless, maybe Abed from Community, and Terry Pratchett.

As for this trope ... Comedic Stammering? I don't know. It IS part of Buffy Speak, but it's not the most obvious or the most significant part (which would probably be bizarre syntax).

I agree that this should be renamed, however in the trope repair shop "There are 288 threads open in this forum. The limit is 100. We won't be taking new items here until some threads are closed. You can make a note for yourself about the issue you are thinking of on your To Do List.". It sounds like we won't be able to make a discussion for it.

No.

I agree. It's a bad name.

That said, it's got to be Grandfather-claused since it's got to be... so ridiculously deeply wicked.

Plus I can't think of a better name offhand so it's not like there's an obvious BETTER example.

I might be 4 years late to the party, but seeing as nothing has been done since then, I'm going to say it again: this is still a bad title. And the (apparent) consensus that this is a poor title is spilling over onto the actual page itself. I quote the last paragraph of the page, before the examples begin:

"For some reason, this trope is named for the speech patterns of the teenage characters in Buffy the Vampire Slayer, which ran from 1997 - 2003. The show's creator, Joss Whedon, is often credited with "creating" this form of writing (also called Whedonspeak). However, there are instances of this type of language from writers like William Shakespeare, Charles Dickens, H.P. Lovecraft, and P. G. Wodehouse, making this trope significantly Older Than They Think. This type of speech has existed for as long as language itself, and is actually Older Than Dirt."

This is essentially a dissent on naming this page "Buffy Speak", illustrating why the name "Buffy Speak" is poorly thought out, myopic, confusing, and is more than a little incorrect. I mean, the only reason this paragraph even exists is to point out the problems stemming from the name of the page. This paragraph is informative, sure, but it also clutters the page, and dissent on the page name on the page itself is unprofessional. Not a funny or endearing kind of 'unprofessional' either; it's messy, and it looks bad.

The title of this page should be changed.

It won't be changed, folks. There are over 3000 pages that would need to be edited and we don't have the manpower to make such a big change unless there is some urgent problem to fix.

Not all people are familiar with the meanings, so I would think "yes, it's necessary".

That might also be Shaped Like Itself or Incredibly Lame Pun, depending on how she meant it.

Speaking of, every republican quote there sounds like perfectly normal english to me. I literally don't understand what's being criticized.

I'd like to posit that the opposite of Buffyspeak is Marspeak, after Veronica Mars. Yaknow, the show where high school kids don't talk like high school kids, and junk?

Having attempted to do so, it seems like it can't actually be done. Perhaps the redirect is too long?