Young people today are studying more “practical” fields such as
sociology and economics in order to secure a well-paid place in
France’s precarious job market.
But Darcos’ plan to revive interest in the French classics is seen by
some as a failure:
Traditionalists believe that the initiative is already doomed
because of the widely held view among the brightest students that
literary studies are a soft option for no-hopers. This trend is an
affront to the rich literary heritage that has produced writers such
as Molière, Voltaire and Victor Hugo, they say. There is also
resentment that intellectual literati are losing their privileged
status in Gallic society that they say is being corrupted by
television, the internet and globalisation.
Sounds pretty grim. But the teachers of France are not surprised -
according to Jean-François Guennoc, a lecturer at Paris University:
“The average is 10 to 12 mistakes but I’ve counted up to 50 in a degree
paper.”
Quelle horreur!
]]>The Plain English Campaign, which “fights for the effective use of
English” also had problems with signs such as “Warning: Platform ends
here” on rail station platforms, and “May cause drowsiness” on
sleeping pills.
“It’s a phenomenon we noticed in recent years — a kind of talking
in a vacuum. There are so many examples,” said a spokesman, citing
notably packets of nuts labelled ‘Warning: contains nuts.’”
“The ‘best’ one I have come across was a sign reading ‘Caution: water
on road during rain.’
“They assume a lack of intelligence on the part of the reader. ‘Do
not commit crime. Pay for your fuel’ is hardly a deterrent to a
criminal who has every intention of driving off without paying.”
But if these self-evident slogans seem to cater to the stupid, that’s
because they do. That annoying label on McDonald’s coffee that reads
‘Warning: Hot’ appeared after a lawsuit filed by a woman who spilled
her cup of drive-through coffee on her lap and wanted reparations,
apparently unaware that the hot coffee she ordered would be so….
hot.
To end, here are some of the best signs that Plain English folks are
lamenting :
– “May irritate eyes” — on a can of self-defence pepper spray;
– “Do not open door while airborne except in emergency” — on
emergency exit doors in planes;
– “Removing the wheel can influence the performance of the bicycle”
– from a Dutch bicycle manual;
– “Do not iron clothes on body” — from packaging on a steam iron.
]]>It wasn’t so long ago that dozens spoke Elem Pomo. When Kelsey was
a child in the 1950s and ’60s, her parents and many other elders in
the 250-member tribe were fluent, and her mother spoke no English.
But as the older folks died off and the younger ones forayed into the
broader society around them to make a living, many native ways were
lost. It was a disintegration that was millennia in coming.
Now, with the help of her nephew, Robert Geary, and recordings of Elem
Pomo made by UC Berkeley linguistic students from the 1940s through
the 1960s, Kelsey hopes to help ensure a future for her native tongue.
What’s interesting is the fact that she hasn’t spoken much Elem Pomo
for decades, Kelsey remembers it fluently. At 59, she’s working
methodically to record the language before she dies by writing a
dictionary and phrase handbook, and conducting language camps for her
tribe.
Let’s hope the revival succeeds!
So it was especially satisfying to pick up the Brooklyn Eagle and find
an article by Henrik Krogius bemoaning the frequent misuse of
who and whom by prominent writers, including the Times’
Gail Collins.
Krogius writes:
Commenting on the recent death of Leona Helmsley, New York Times
columnist Gail Collins referred to Harry Helmsley, “who she wed…”
Ms. Collins may have been signaling that she was too cool to obey
grammatical strictures, unless she simply didn’t know the difference.
And her copy editor, who likely knew the difference, may have felt
constrained about messing with the sacrosant copy of an op-ed page
regular. It may also be that “whom” has become altogether too
difficult a concept for a world in which the subject, predicate and
object are totally alien notions.
Take that! He goes on to tear apart novelist Emily Mitchell (The
Last Summer of the World), who apparently likes to sound smart by
saying “whom” when she should say “who.” All in all, a snarky piece,
but it’s somewhat redeemed by the fact that it reminds us of the
who/whom rule in fairly simple terms:
Failing to understand that “who” is the subject of a clause while
“whom” is the object of a verb or preposition, too many writers get
thrown off by modifiers places between this pronoun and the verb. The
modifiers don’t alter the basic grammatical structure.
Tonya Reiman, the purported expert, watched video clips of Clinton
laughing at different moments during her recent interview with Chris
Wallace on Fox News Sunday, and concluded that she “saw some
evil laughter.”
The entire article, which includes the idiotic transcript, is
definitely worth reading in its entirety. Get it here !
But just for kicks, I’ll also excerpt some of it below:
O’REILLY: Well, she looked like she’s having a swell time.
REIMAN: Oh, contrived, contrived. That was the first word that came to mind.
O’REILLY: They — you mean, those laughs weren’t genuine?
REIMAN: They — some of those — I saw some evil laughter.
O’REILLY: Evil?
REIMAN: Evil laughter.
O’REILLY: Whoa! How did — what’s evil laughter?
REIMAN: Yeah, you know, just the way her face contorted — the
different shifts in her face — and then the length of time that you
laugh and smile. You can kind of tell a lot from the length of time
that someone branches out with a smile. Real, genuine smiles are
quick. They flash. She went into a full body laughter, which is
bizarre for this kind of an interview.
The case in question also deleted explicit passages from a husband’s
account of his wife’s alleged unnatural sexual demands.
According to the India Times,
The man, who cited these demands as an infliction of “mental
cruelty,” wanted out on these grounds. His wife maintained that the
descriptions in his petition were “scandalous, torturous, indecent and
traumatic” and should be struck off the record. The family court in
Mumbai rejected her plea, but the Bombay high court was more
understanding.
The high court held that a court of law should not permit a divorce
proceeding “to be converted into a source of continued embarassment
and harassment to a party” and struck off the offensive portions from
the written plea. “The judgment will help bring sobriety into nasty
courtroom divorce dramas where dirty linen gets washed,” said a
lawyer.
In courts, “actions and abusive words are reproduced verbatim even in
vernacular languages. This adds to the humiliation of the spouse who
is at the receiving end, irrespective of gender.”
In other news, Britney Spears has said that she hates L.A. and will be
moving to Atlanta, Georgia. Perhaps she should consider India.
Definition:
In a nutshell, the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis states that language
doesn’t just describe reality – it shapes the way we perceive it. As
anthropologist Edward Sapir put it in 1929: “Language is a guide to
’social reality’…. The fact of the matter is that the ‘real world’ is
to a large extent unconsciously built upon the language habits of the
group. No two languages are ever sufficiently similar to be
considered as representing the same social reality.”
In the Japanese language, for example, the word for self is jibun.
This word is made up of two parts, ji, which means part, and bun,
which means group. Put together, jibun literally means part of a
group. This has profound implications for the way the Japanese
typically conceive of the self. Unlike Western culture, which
emphasizes an individual’s autonomy, Japanese culture views people
always within the context of a group.
He goes on to define some fancy Costa Rican soccer moves, and to
explain the sociological importance of their names. La
plancha, for example, is literally defined as an iron to remove
wrinkles, but in soccer means a “straight-legged, cleats-up tackle.
Because there is a single word that describes this type of tackle,
Spanish-speakers are more likely to be aware of the offense (and thus
take offense at it being employed against them.)”
Keyes goes further in his explanation of the reality created by
language — read his blog.
I can’t decide if this is a good thing or if it just means we’re all
getting stupider.
In any case, here’s what Rep. Braley had to say:
“Anyone who’s done their own taxes knows the headache of trying to
understand pages and pages of confusing forms and instructions,” Rep.
Braley said. “There is no reason why the federal government can’t
write these forms and other public documents in a way we can all
understand.
“Writing government documents in plain language will increase
government accountability and will save Americans time and money.
Plain, straightforward language makes it easy for taxpayers to
understand what the federal government is doing and what services it
is offering.
“I’m proud to introduce this bill to make it easier for Americans to
work with and understand their government.”
And here are the Federal Plain Language Guidelines for writing talk
that’s simple-like:
*Use short, simple words
*Use “you” and other pronouns to speak directly to readers
*Use short sentences and paragraphs
*Avoid legal, foreign, and technical jargon
*Avoid double negatives
And just in case you’re dying to see Plain Language in action, go to
plainlanguage.gov to see before-and-after examples.
Yeehaw.
The kit is already offered in English, Spanish, and, as of last year,
Chinese, and is currently developing a Creole kit for the Haitian
community in New York. These five languages apparently reflect the
ones for which the Office of Mental Health receives the most requests.
But what we really want to know, of course, is whether these languages
also reflect the highest rates of suicide. Jill Daniels, the
spokeswoman for OMH, says no:
The kits [are] not being offered because of a higher preponderance
of suicides among those ethnic groups. “We’re trying to make it
available to all communities in their languages.”
Pat Singer of the Brighton Neighborhood Association, which provides
social and quality of life services to the Russian population in
Brooklyn’s Brighton Beach area, said that in her 30 years as founder
and executive director of the association she had never been aware of
a suicide.
Alcoholism and smoking are very evident among the population, she
said, as is some depression among the middle-aged. Her clients tend
to be emotional “but not to the point of killing themselves,” Singer
added. “They’re survivors. They’re a tough group of people.”
So out of the 1,300 New Yorkers who kill themselves yearly,
none of them are Russian? Impressive. Daniels also claimed
that there was no information regarding the rates of suicide among
different ethnicities in the city, which seems like a big fat lie.
Any ideas? Which ethnic group here is throwing in the towel at the
highest rate? Comments welcome!