I have taken several English Grammar classes that explained the tiny differences between sentences that mean almost the same thing but not quite, and I've always wondered about this one:
At the end of the movie "Bridget Jones' Diary", she takes a pen and scratches out the words "Bridget Jones' Diary" to replace them with "Diary of Bridget Jones". Is there any difference in meaning between the two forms?
2006-07-05 08:18:49 · 8 answers · asked by nellierslmm 4 in Education & Reference ➔ Words & Wordplay
I feel that it reflects her change and evolvement as a person.
The first version (Bridget Jones' Diary) could be interpreted in two ways. The Diary belonging to Bridget Jones in the singular or Bridget Jones in the plural.
Maybe she felt before that there was more than one aspect of her personality or that she was so confused about who she was that there were many Bridget Joneses within her, and now she has evolved to the point where she is no longer feeling that confusion. She now has a better sense of who she is.
The second version (The Diary of Bridget Jones) seems to reflect the thoughts of someone no longer existing. She may feel that she has evolved as a person and the person she was when she recorded those feelings no longer exists, that she is a new person now.
2006-07-08 09:10:37 · answer #1 · answered by LindaLou 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Maybe a change in attitude towards the diary because of the experiences she has faced, she feels different and like she's grown in some ways. It's hard to put a title on a paper, or story, or diary, before it's finished, because you really don't know where it is going. Maybe she started off just writing in some diary, but after all is said and done, it is not longer Bridget Jones' Diary, but THE Diary OF Bridget Jones, almost to be taken more seriously. I don't know, maybe I just looked a little too into it...I over analyze everything! Maybe it just sounded better to her. Who knows. But there really is not difference between the two, but the title is there to set the mood for the rest of the story, or diary, so that should be taken into account too.
2006-07-05 15:24:44 · answer #2 · answered by ac 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO, there is no difference in the possessive; the difference is in the position of the words. By placing her names first, Bridget is claiming control of her life...the diary belongs to Bridget rather than Bridget's life being produced by her diary. With her identity as primary, the notes are secondary rather then primary. Bridget is the motivation; she is not the victim of what happens in her life. She is the author of her own destiny, not a pawn to be moved around. Carpe diem.
2006-07-05 15:25:11 · answer #3 · answered by cmpbush 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Exactly it has to do with possession. " Bridget Jones' relates to this being her diary and her entries by her writing. Now the name "Diary of Bridget Jones" implies the past and also an account by someone else.
2006-07-05 15:23:04 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
My guess would be that she's not sure if it should be Bridget Jones' or Bridget Jones's, so she avoids the issue by writing "diary of Bridget Jones".
2006-07-05 18:51:50 · answer #5 · answered by Goddess of Grammar 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
there is no ifference in the meaning, however, by writing the "Diary of Bridget Jones", the name rollsmore freely off the tongue ... rather than wanting to say "Jones's" when "Bridget Jones' Diary", is written
2006-07-05 15:21:51 · answer #6 · answered by slenderhippo2006 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's about ownership. The first she owns her diary in the second her diary- story of her life- owns her. It is who she has become.
She has quite trying to manipulate her life and let her life lead her down the road to success and happiness. She has embraced herself basically.
2006-07-05 15:23:50 · answer #7 · answered by bootsjeansnpearls 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
None that I can see.
2006-07-05 15:21:51 · answer #8 · answered by jayfer1976 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋