There's an interesting thing that I've noticed about going out and doing things and being productive - I feel more accomplished if I'm going out and doing stuff. I've started volunteering at a historical building that's about half an hour away from where I live, but it's still a situation where I have to go out and do something at a specific time. There's a preferred dress code and I'll have to deal with people on a daily basis. I have to do things! I must confer information! I need to make sure people are satisfied in less than half an hour! (That can be construed the wrong way in the wrong context.)
But there's something about going off and doing things that makes the day better. And I like it.
Monday, July 28, 2014
Sunday, July 27, 2014
BOOK REVIEW: "The Professor and the Madman" by Scott Westerfield
Right, I know this is really late, but it's not as late as the Hitchhiker's Guide review. I should probably not judge as harshly until something is promised for a full month until it is delivered upon.
Anyway, this is the review of The Professor and the Madman: a Tale of Murder, Insanity, and the Making of the Oxford English Dictionary by Scott Westerfield. Don't be daunted by the title. It's probably the most incomprehensibly rambling part of the book. The book is, indeed, about a bit of murder, a good chunk of insanity, and pretty much entirely about how those two things contribute to the Oxford English Dictionary.
The Madman (also the murderer, but that's not important.... not really, anyway) is Dr. William Chester Minor, an American who served in the Civil War as an army surgeon. The madness led him to delusions, which led him to the unfortunate path of murder and being subsequently locked up in an insane asylum for most of the rest of his life.
The Professor is James Murray, who eventually takes on the project of defining all the words in the English language. Not some of the words. Not the super rare words that are only interesting for people who want to sound smart. Not the remotely vague words for people who need to learn new things. The goal of the project he took one was to locate and define every single word in the English language. This includes regular words, new words, old words, words that are super obscure, and words that came about in 888 AD and were never seen again after 1000 AD. Though the project's editor kept saying, "Oh yes, it'll be done in ten or eleven years," you can see why he had to say that seven times over.
How these two relate is interesting. The professor sent out a general call for assistance; after all, defining every single word ever in the English Language is not something to be taken on alone. Dr. Minor saw the summons and, since he was one of patients that got really nice treatment (he got several rooms, lots of visiting hours, and was allowed to have a whole bunch of books with him), he responded to it. That's the short story, anyway. Read the book for the full story; it's really interesting.
I really liked this book. Westerfield puts the story in a narrative sort of style; he tells this as a story instead of a series of facts. I don't know if this is standard for a history book, but my familiarity is more with textbooks that do the series-of-facts approach. As a cool addition to the narrative, Westerfield starts every chapter with one or two vocabulary words in the form of a dictionary entry; frequently these words (or some action associated with them) show up int the chapter. My new favorite word came from one of these entries - sesquipedalian (it means "polysyllabic" or "loquacious," depending on the context.) I appreciate this book mostly because it contextualizes the massive effort it would have taken to write a dictionary. People don't normally think of dictionaries as being written; they just seem to be there, and then you add words like "selfie" to them, but Shakespeare didn't have any dictionaries to look up new words. (This could be why Shakespeare made up so many new words).
In all, I would definitely recommend this book for anyone who is interested in gaining a new appreciation for the English language and dictionaries as a whole.
Anyway, this is the review of The Professor and the Madman: a Tale of Murder, Insanity, and the Making of the Oxford English Dictionary by Scott Westerfield. Don't be daunted by the title. It's probably the most incomprehensibly rambling part of the book. The book is, indeed, about a bit of murder, a good chunk of insanity, and pretty much entirely about how those two things contribute to the Oxford English Dictionary.
The Madman (also the murderer, but that's not important.... not really, anyway) is Dr. William Chester Minor, an American who served in the Civil War as an army surgeon. The madness led him to delusions, which led him to the unfortunate path of murder and being subsequently locked up in an insane asylum for most of the rest of his life.
The Professor is James Murray, who eventually takes on the project of defining all the words in the English language. Not some of the words. Not the super rare words that are only interesting for people who want to sound smart. Not the remotely vague words for people who need to learn new things. The goal of the project he took one was to locate and define every single word in the English language. This includes regular words, new words, old words, words that are super obscure, and words that came about in 888 AD and were never seen again after 1000 AD. Though the project's editor kept saying, "Oh yes, it'll be done in ten or eleven years," you can see why he had to say that seven times over.
How these two relate is interesting. The professor sent out a general call for assistance; after all, defining every single word ever in the English Language is not something to be taken on alone. Dr. Minor saw the summons and, since he was one of patients that got really nice treatment (he got several rooms, lots of visiting hours, and was allowed to have a whole bunch of books with him), he responded to it. That's the short story, anyway. Read the book for the full story; it's really interesting.
I really liked this book. Westerfield puts the story in a narrative sort of style; he tells this as a story instead of a series of facts. I don't know if this is standard for a history book, but my familiarity is more with textbooks that do the series-of-facts approach. As a cool addition to the narrative, Westerfield starts every chapter with one or two vocabulary words in the form of a dictionary entry; frequently these words (or some action associated with them) show up int the chapter. My new favorite word came from one of these entries - sesquipedalian (it means "polysyllabic" or "loquacious," depending on the context.) I appreciate this book mostly because it contextualizes the massive effort it would have taken to write a dictionary. People don't normally think of dictionaries as being written; they just seem to be there, and then you add words like "selfie" to them, but Shakespeare didn't have any dictionaries to look up new words. (This could be why Shakespeare made up so many new words).
In all, I would definitely recommend this book for anyone who is interested in gaining a new appreciation for the English language and dictionaries as a whole.
Wednesday, July 23, 2014
Old Friends in New Places
Today I went to a slightly different area from where I live to go check out some possible places to work/ volunteer for the rest of the summer. (If any of you have any ideas, please let me know.) It's not terribly far; only about half an hour by public transportation.
It was a long day. I got a lot of pretty yarn, two new books, an interesting lunch, and a tour of a historical place where I may volunteer later this summer. (Before you get on my back for buying new books, I did finish the book for this week. The review will be on Friday.)
The book shop was the last place I went - it was a spur of the moment sort of thing. I didn't know whether they were hiring. They hadn't posted anything saying they were. This was the first time I'd ever been in that used book shop in my life. I decided it was worth a shot because... well... USED BOOKS! It turned out to be a tiny store cramped with more books than could probably fit in the space. Well, let me rephrase that. Barnes and Noble probably has more books than this place, but this local shop is doing its level best to show how it can make up the difference. It's tiny, it's cramped, and I got two good-looking books for under $10 because USED BOOKS! (I may sell back old books there, actually).
Anyway, they don't need any help around there, but as I was finally heading back to the subway, someone said my name. Turns out it was one of my friends from the Turkey trip. By that, I don't mean he's a kid from my church or a kid from my college. He's from Turkey. He showed us around Istanbul last summer. And he's staying not terribly far away from me for a while during the summer.
It was one of the spectacular moments where I realized that if I hadn't taken the exact amount of time in the book shop that I did - if I hadn't gone into the bookstore at all - then I would have had no idea that he would be anywhere near me. THIS IS CRAZY.
That is my story for today. I hope you like it.
It was a long day. I got a lot of pretty yarn, two new books, an interesting lunch, and a tour of a historical place where I may volunteer later this summer. (Before you get on my back for buying new books, I did finish the book for this week. The review will be on Friday.)
The book shop was the last place I went - it was a spur of the moment sort of thing. I didn't know whether they were hiring. They hadn't posted anything saying they were. This was the first time I'd ever been in that used book shop in my life. I decided it was worth a shot because... well... USED BOOKS! It turned out to be a tiny store cramped with more books than could probably fit in the space. Well, let me rephrase that. Barnes and Noble probably has more books than this place, but this local shop is doing its level best to show how it can make up the difference. It's tiny, it's cramped, and I got two good-looking books for under $10 because USED BOOKS! (I may sell back old books there, actually).
Anyway, they don't need any help around there, but as I was finally heading back to the subway, someone said my name. Turns out it was one of my friends from the Turkey trip. By that, I don't mean he's a kid from my church or a kid from my college. He's from Turkey. He showed us around Istanbul last summer. And he's staying not terribly far away from me for a while during the summer.
It was one of the spectacular moments where I realized that if I hadn't taken the exact amount of time in the book shop that I did - if I hadn't gone into the bookstore at all - then I would have had no idea that he would be anywhere near me. THIS IS CRAZY.
That is my story for today. I hope you like it.
Monday, July 21, 2014
On Emotions and Stuff
Emotions are weird sometimes. Things happen. Big things happen. Little things happen. Sometimes these things can mess up a day/ weekend/ week/ month/ year/ life. (hopefully those last few don't happen. If they do, please seek help). I did have some super-huge emotional things to deal with this weekend (including breakups and engagements happening within 15 hours of each other), so that's the main reason I didn't post on Friday. This is the last week I'll be trying for the three-posts-a-week deal, since that's obviously not working out well.
Hopefully from here until NaNoWriMo, it'll be Monday's Rants and Friday's Book Review. Hopefully. We'll see how this goes.
My apologies for the exceedingly short post.
Hopefully from here until NaNoWriMo, it'll be Monday's Rants and Friday's Book Review. Hopefully. We'll see how this goes.
My apologies for the exceedingly short post.
Thursday, July 17, 2014
SUPER LATE IN THE WEEK POST
My apologies for not posting at all this week. I've just been lazy. Also, finals are this week, so this is the time when I say WHAT I LEARNED THIS TERM.
ACADEMIC
1. Show up to class on time.
2. Second-person pronouns are fascinating. Especially in Middle English.
3. The debate about stuff that is condonable by Christianity has been going on forever. In Old English, the debate was whether it was religiously acceptable to translate the Bible into English from Latin. On the plus side, you could reach a lot more people with scripture. On the down side, THE LATIN TEXT IS SACRED, DAMMIT. (Ignoring, of course, that the text under debate was originally in Hebrew and Greek, not Latin).
4. The environment is messed up.
5. Humans most likely caused the environment to be messed up.
6. There's a thing called the Precautionary Principle. It basically states that the lack of scientific certainty that something is messed up should not be an excuse to do absolutely nothing about a possible issue. Alternatively, this means that if there is a possible issue about conservation, opt on the side of caution and do the conserving. It can't really hurt you.
7. People in government should probably take the precautionary principle when thinking about environmental policy.
8. We're all going to die.
9. Linguistics is cool.
ACADEMIC
1. Show up to class on time.
2. Second-person pronouns are fascinating. Especially in Middle English.
3. The debate about stuff that is condonable by Christianity has been going on forever. In Old English, the debate was whether it was religiously acceptable to translate the Bible into English from Latin. On the plus side, you could reach a lot more people with scripture. On the down side, THE LATIN TEXT IS SACRED, DAMMIT. (Ignoring, of course, that the text under debate was originally in Hebrew and Greek, not Latin).
4. The environment is messed up.
5. Humans most likely caused the environment to be messed up.
6. There's a thing called the Precautionary Principle. It basically states that the lack of scientific certainty that something is messed up should not be an excuse to do absolutely nothing about a possible issue. Alternatively, this means that if there is a possible issue about conservation, opt on the side of caution and do the conserving. It can't really hurt you.
7. People in government should probably take the precautionary principle when thinking about environmental policy.
8. We're all going to die.
9. Linguistics is cool.
Saturday, July 12, 2014
The Long-Awaited Review
GUESS WHAT I'M FINALLY REVIEWING TODAY? The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, by Douglas Adams.
I wish I could say it doesn't normally take me half the summer to read a book that's barely 200 pages long and fairly enjoyable when I do read it, but it's not exactly a rare occurance. That being said, this review is very much going to be based on what I remember of the bits and pieces of the book.
Hitchhiker's Guide is about Arthur Dent, who gets swept away from Earth by his friend Ford Prefect, just before Earth's destruction by aliens trying to build a highway. From there, the two join up with a bunch of crazy characters - Zaphod Beeblebrox the two-headed ex-hippie, his human girlfriend Trillian, Marvin the brilliant but chronically morose robot, and other crazy characters. They travel across the galaxy on the run from the law, riding on an improbable spaceship obtained by illicit means.
WHAT I LIKED ABOUT THIS BOOK:
1) the humor.
This book is full of wit that's very dry, quite British, and really funny. Often this can point out important things in general. On the first page, the narration notes that most people were unhappy on Earth, and "many solutions were suggested for this problem, but most of these were largely concerned with the movements of small green pieces of paper, which is odd because on the whole it wasn't the small green pieces of paper that were unhappy." There are little asides that add humor to the whole thing - page two sets the date as "one Thursday nearly two thousand years after one man had been nailed to a tree for saying how great it would be for everyone to be nice to each other for a change..." Also, dolphins and mice are smarter than everyone expects, and the answer to the meaning of "life, the universe, and everything" is 42, after 7.5 million years and the realization that there was not actually a question posited in the first place.
2) Marvin the Robot.
Normally I don't laugh at sad people, but Marvin is the exception. Many of his statements begin with "Brain the size of the planet and they make me do [insert menial task]." My favorite Marvin quote comes near the end - he waited for the Participants in Main Action to come back, so "I got very bored and depressed, so I went and plugged into [the police ship's] external computer feed. I talked to the computer at great length and explained my view of the universe to it... And it committed suicide." (214). I know that's very morbid, but that's very much Marvin's personality. (Apparently he's voiced by Alan Rickman in the movie, which I really want to see now.)
THINGS I DIDN'T LIKE ABOUT THE BOOK:
1) I don't know if it was just the fact that it took me several weeks to read this book, but some of the middle bits weren't very memorable. It's hard to remember exactly which bits I can't remember, but it seemed to drag a bit in some points.
2) I would have liked a bit more from the actual Hitchhiker's Guide (it's an actual book in the book), since it does loan the novel its title.
In all, though, pretty good book, even though it took me forever to read. Next time, I'm doing The Professor and the Madman.
Wednesday, July 9, 2014
MORE LANGUAGE GEEKERY
Today, we're discussing PRONOUNS. I'm not going to get into the politics of gender-neutral pronouns; it's late-ish, and I still have to do some reading and wash some underpants. I don't have time to do that topic justice, is what I'm saying.
The pronouns I'm talking about is the pronouns of Second-Person Pronouns in the Renaissance (Shakespeare's time) - specifically, "thee" and "you." Both were used, but in different contexts.
"Thee" was the more derogatory of the two. It was used from superiors to inferiors, as well as when you were insulting someone. That's why Shakespearean insults are so frequently seen as "thou vile wretch" or something like that - the speaker is implying, through pronouns, that the listener is inferior in status to the speaker. Interestingly, "thou" was also used intimately.
"You" is the more polite term. It's used from an inferior to a superior, or a child to a parent. Sometimes nobles would use it in derision to their inferiors to mock and embarrass them. If someone doesn't know someone else's status, they would normally address their partner as "you" until they could get a better gauge of it.
How was this used?
Well, firstly, it's really cool to tell character shifts. In Desdemona's final scene of Othello, she and Othello address each other as "you" for the first portion of the interaction. Othello's decision to actually kill Desdemona can be cited to the line where he starts calling her "thee" and not "you" - an interesting point of derision, yes? Even though Desdemona and Othello are supposed to be life partners and all, I think Shakespeare has them address each other as "you" - and has Desdemona continue to address Othello as such - to highlight two things. Firstly, the pronouns point out that there's something definitely wrong in their relationship - if they were truly intimate life partners, they would be calling each other "thee" (the intimate one) all the time. But they're not. That leads me to the second point - that they're calling each other "you" to highlight Othello's decision shift. He could have come into the situation thinking he could maybe not do this, but he decides to go through with it when he changes his address.
In Romeo and Juliet, for example, Romeo uses "thou" to Juliet in their first meeting, because he's fallen INSTANTLY IN LOVE WITH HER, but she doesn't use the same for him until the balcony scene. In that scene, she uses "thou" as both an intimate term and also one instance of "WHAT ARE YOU DOING ON MY PROPERTY?? THIS IS MY SECRET DIARY MONOLOGUE TIME!" Of course, the first term is more frequently used in that monologue, because this is a thirteen-year-old girl doing Secret Diary Monologue Time; speaking as a former thirteen-year-old girl, the Secret Diary Time was frequently filled with things that went along the lines of "OMG, this is the most EPIC/ WORST/ BEST/ MOST GORGEOUS thing EVERRRRRRR." (There were a lot of superlatives, is what I'm trying to say, and Juliet is probably thinking they're going to be together forever and always. She gets married to a dude at 13 after knowing him for fewer than 100 hours, for crying out loud. If that doesn't say "I think we're going to be together forever," then you need to re-evaluate your concept of a healthy relationship.)
Sooooooo yeah. That's what I've been learning.
The pronouns I'm talking about is the pronouns of Second-Person Pronouns in the Renaissance (Shakespeare's time) - specifically, "thee" and "you." Both were used, but in different contexts.
"Thee" was the more derogatory of the two. It was used from superiors to inferiors, as well as when you were insulting someone. That's why Shakespearean insults are so frequently seen as "thou vile wretch" or something like that - the speaker is implying, through pronouns, that the listener is inferior in status to the speaker. Interestingly, "thou" was also used intimately.
"You" is the more polite term. It's used from an inferior to a superior, or a child to a parent. Sometimes nobles would use it in derision to their inferiors to mock and embarrass them. If someone doesn't know someone else's status, they would normally address their partner as "you" until they could get a better gauge of it.
How was this used?
Well, firstly, it's really cool to tell character shifts. In Desdemona's final scene of Othello, she and Othello address each other as "you" for the first portion of the interaction. Othello's decision to actually kill Desdemona can be cited to the line where he starts calling her "thee" and not "you" - an interesting point of derision, yes? Even though Desdemona and Othello are supposed to be life partners and all, I think Shakespeare has them address each other as "you" - and has Desdemona continue to address Othello as such - to highlight two things. Firstly, the pronouns point out that there's something definitely wrong in their relationship - if they were truly intimate life partners, they would be calling each other "thee" (the intimate one) all the time. But they're not. That leads me to the second point - that they're calling each other "you" to highlight Othello's decision shift. He could have come into the situation thinking he could maybe not do this, but he decides to go through with it when he changes his address.
In Romeo and Juliet, for example, Romeo uses "thou" to Juliet in their first meeting, because he's fallen INSTANTLY IN LOVE WITH HER, but she doesn't use the same for him until the balcony scene. In that scene, she uses "thou" as both an intimate term and also one instance of "WHAT ARE YOU DOING ON MY PROPERTY?? THIS IS MY SECRET DIARY MONOLOGUE TIME!" Of course, the first term is more frequently used in that monologue, because this is a thirteen-year-old girl doing Secret Diary Monologue Time; speaking as a former thirteen-year-old girl, the Secret Diary Time was frequently filled with things that went along the lines of "OMG, this is the most EPIC/ WORST/ BEST/ MOST GORGEOUS thing EVERRRRRRR." (There were a lot of superlatives, is what I'm trying to say, and Juliet is probably thinking they're going to be together forever and always. She gets married to a dude at 13 after knowing him for fewer than 100 hours, for crying out loud. If that doesn't say "I think we're going to be together forever," then you need to re-evaluate your concept of a healthy relationship.)
Sooooooo yeah. That's what I've been learning.
Monday, July 7, 2014
My Theories on Phrases
Ever heard the phrase "A picture's worth 1,000 words?" I have a theory regarding the phrase's origin.
My theory is that "a picture is worth 1,000 words" comes from Middle English manuscripts. These are the ones with fancy calligraphy, a fancy-looking letter to start a section of a work, and, frequently, a little drawing to the side of the text (this is called an "illumination"). Each of these things - the calligraphy, the letter, and the illumination - were done separately. Each person commanded a different fee - the calligrapher was paid the least, the letter-drawer was paid a bit more, and the illuminator was paid still more. Because of this, the calligrapher did his work first (and it was almost always a man who did this); the theory went that if the calligrapher knocked over the inkpot, then the mess would only affect the cheap work and not the really nice work, too.
My theory is that the illuminator was paid the same amount for the one illustration as the calligrapher was paid per thousand words. This is, in fact, a theory, and could be completely wrong.
TO RESEARCH!
According to dictionary.com, unfortunately, I am completely wrong. According to the definition given on the website,
Ah, well. I hope this post was, at least, a bit informative.
My theory is that "a picture is worth 1,000 words" comes from Middle English manuscripts. These are the ones with fancy calligraphy, a fancy-looking letter to start a section of a work, and, frequently, a little drawing to the side of the text (this is called an "illumination"). Each of these things - the calligraphy, the letter, and the illumination - were done separately. Each person commanded a different fee - the calligrapher was paid the least, the letter-drawer was paid a bit more, and the illuminator was paid still more. Because of this, the calligrapher did his work first (and it was almost always a man who did this); the theory went that if the calligrapher knocked over the inkpot, then the mess would only affect the cheap work and not the really nice work, too.
My theory is that the illuminator was paid the same amount for the one illustration as the calligrapher was paid per thousand words. This is, in fact, a theory, and could be completely wrong.
TO RESEARCH!
According to dictionary.com, unfortunately, I am completely wrong. According to the definition given on the website,
"This saying was invented by an advertising executive, Fred R. Barnard. To promote his agency's ads he too out an ad in Printer's Ink in 1921 with the headline "One Look Is Worth a Thousand Words" and attributed it to an ancient Japanese philosopher."
Ah, well. I hope this post was, at least, a bit informative.
Thursday, July 3, 2014
On Rolled Ankles
I've noticed something. I have rolled my ankle three times since I was fourteen. Two of those times, it has been just before some event that would majorly test my endurance and athletic capability.
The first time, when I was fourteen, I over-corrected after a jump kick in Tae Kwon Do. A week and a half later, I took my first black belt test, where I had to break boards... with jump kicks. That was the worst time.
The second time, I was trying to train for a trip to Switzerland. I went for a run and... yeah. Anyway, that time we went on a sunrise hike up a mountain. I'd had time to heal and walk on it by that point, but it was still frustrating.
The third time was this morning. The conclusion I have come to in this instance is that the action of "talking to a classmate while wearing flats and walking down steps" is not a wise one. Given my track record, I'm also expecting that I'll have to do some major athletic accomplishment this weekend - something on the order of mountain climbing or black belts. Maybe I should try and survive in DC during the 4th! (Actually, I don't want to do that. Touring the US Capital on the 4th isn't so much a life accomplishment as it is a test of one's patience for lines and tolerance for humidity).
Well, I will definitely be posting about the long-awaited review of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy tomorrow. Post then!
The first time, when I was fourteen, I over-corrected after a jump kick in Tae Kwon Do. A week and a half later, I took my first black belt test, where I had to break boards... with jump kicks. That was the worst time.
The second time, I was trying to train for a trip to Switzerland. I went for a run and... yeah. Anyway, that time we went on a sunrise hike up a mountain. I'd had time to heal and walk on it by that point, but it was still frustrating.
The third time was this morning. The conclusion I have come to in this instance is that the action of "talking to a classmate while wearing flats and walking down steps" is not a wise one. Given my track record, I'm also expecting that I'll have to do some major athletic accomplishment this weekend - something on the order of mountain climbing or black belts. Maybe I should try and survive in DC during the 4th! (Actually, I don't want to do that. Touring the US Capital on the 4th isn't so much a life accomplishment as it is a test of one's patience for lines and tolerance for humidity).
Well, I will definitely be posting about the long-awaited review of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy tomorrow. Post then!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)