Context Counts

Words have importance, but the context of where/how/when those words are said or written will affect how the words are understood. Thanks to a colleague who told me the following.

An immigrant to the US, originally from Europe, ran into his house highly agitated. He told his family that a terrible thing had taken place in Europe: the communists had invaded Italy and were murdering priests. The family gasped and asked how he knew this. He told them that he had seen it as the headline in a newspaper, in words two inches high.

So, what did this man read in the paper? "Reds Murder Cardinals." Yup, context counts.

Reason 43,569,843,507,662,198

Despite the gray hairs and the denigration that sometimes comes our way, English teachers plod on, knowing that somewhere, some time, some how we will break through and influence our students. And why should we need to do so? Because when we get messages such as the one that follows here, we rise to save the world from mis/dis-information.

Received this morning from a company whose technician is scheduled to come to my house:

"Your technician will arrive today at 5:00 pm, between 11:00 and 2:00."

Oh English, I Weep for Thee

A member of one of my professional chat rooms reported an incident that happened to him this week. He wasn't sure whether to laugh or cry. He and his wife and three other couples went out to dinner together. They picked a local diner to eat at. Because it's summer and high schoolers are now on vacation, this particular diner hires a number of those highschoolers for various positions, although not normally as wait staff. However, the diner was busy so one of the busgirls was co-opted into taking their dinner order. She asked what everyone wanted. Two people ordered fried chicken. As she was writing down their orders she repeated them aloud: "Okay, that'll be 2 fried cluck."

One of the people who had ordered the chicken corrected her and said, "I'd like fried chicken." The busgirl replied: "Yeah, I know. You get fried cluck." Finally someone at the table asked her why she was calling it fried cluck. She answered: "Everyone knows that chickens cluck and the word is shorter to say and write then chicken is." Yes, one of those at the table is a professor of English, and I can understand why he couldn't resist saying "You know, chickens only cluck if you are a native speaker of English. In other languages they make different sounds and different words are used to represent those sounds. What if we had been non-native speakers of English? Using cluck would have told us nothing we could understand."

What was the busgirl's answer? Quite seriously she said: "Let 'em learn English!"

Yes indeed.

The Foibles of Spell Checking

At the beginning of the term I give a short lesson on why not to rely on the spellcheck function of your word processing program. I emphasize that using that function is not a replacement for word by word personal editing.

So there I was, reading student essays when I had a sudden burst of laughter, spraying coffee in all directions. My hubby, working from home today, wanted to know what was so funny. This is the line that caused the laughter: "Patrick Henry's call 'Give me puberty or give me death!' caused Virginians to be in favor of revolution." I'm pretty sure there were other reasons; in fact, I'm pretty sure this was not a reason at all. What it was was spellcheck at its worst.

Look at a keyboard; where are the "L" and "P" keys located? Yup, one almost over the other. I was fairly certain I knew what had happened to my student. He must have typed a "p" instead of an "l." Obviously spell check came up and the first word on the list of choices is puberty. It's not just my student; many, many people assume that spellcheck has ordered the words it presents with the most correct word at the top of the list. They click on this word almost without reading it.

My hubby couldn't believe this was the case so he went to his keyboard and typed in "piberty." Yes, spell check highlighted the word. And yes, the first word on the list was "puberty." Spell check goes by the first letter in the word you have typed when the word is incorrect and there is more than one choice. So, poverty and piety were also choices for replacement.

Obviously there's going to be another lesson on careful editing. Oh yes, and just try to imagine what kind of comment I could possibly write next to this error. I could have copped out and simply put "word choice" next to puberty. I compromised by putting "spellcheck error" instead.

Poor Mr. Henry--all grown up and still missing puberty.

Not the Same People

It's that time in the term when my students have to do a research project--a type of academic trivial pursuit game. A comment made on another blog leads me to mention this now. Absolute care must be taken when presenting material as true that that material is actually true--solid research is key.

Let's see how you do with the piece of information I'm referring to. Francis Scott Key and Francis Scott Key Fitzgerald--are these the names of two separate people or two names for the same person? Go ahead, take a moment.....


Okay, the answer is that the names refer to two different people. Francis Scott Key was the composer of the lyrics of "The Star Spangled Banner." Francis Scott Key Fitzgerald was otherwise known as F. Scott Fitzgerald and is perhaps best remembered as the author of The Great Gatsby. Francis Scott Key Fitzgerald was born in St. Paul, Minnesota, on September 24, 1896, the namesake and second cousin three times removed of the author of the National Anthem.

So what's the problem? F. Scott Fitzgerald was known as a drunkard--the first Francis Scott Key was quite the opposite: a man of solid character, highly religious and not an inbiber of alcohol.

A highly respected Rav apparently made a comment a few decades ago that is remembered by some today. Unclear from the comment on the blog was whether or not the Rav was referring to The Star Spangled Banner or to Hatikvah when he said that it is kefira because its author was a drunkard. If this was said in reference to The Star Spangled Banner I'd like to believe that that Rav, were he living today and were it pointed out to him that he was mixing up two different people, would have retracted his statement. Unfortunately the Rav is not living, but it seems that his words live on after him. If the statement was made referring to The Star Spangled Banner it's time for a correction.

So, lesson of the day: check your sources, and then double check them, or triple check them if need be.

Beware of Whom?

The night before election day I took a moment to encourage my students to vote the next day. I was not shilling for a particular party or a particular candidate. My intent was strictly to make my students see that they, too, were part of the process.

A student asked if I had any particular candidate that I was recommending for office. Another asked who I was going to vote for. No, I do not "recommend" candidates to my students--I'd consider that an abuse of my role as teacher. No, I don't share who I am going to vote for--that's between me and my ballot. One student did, however, ask a question I would answer. He asked, "Do you have any advice to give us in making our own decisions?" My advice was simple: Beware Greeks bearing gifts. And what was a brief reminder to vote carefully turned into a brief lesson in the origin of that phrase, as blank faces stared up at me, no comprehension visible.

The phrase references the mythological wooden horse brought by the Greeks to the city of Troy. It is recorded in Virgil's Aeneid, Book 2, 19 BC:
"Do not trust the horse, Trojans. Whatever it is, I fear the Greeks even when they bring gifts."

The same thought was also recorded by Sophocles (496 - 406 BC), in Ajax:
"Nought from the Greeks towards me hath sped well.So now I find that ancient proverb true,Foes' gifts are no gifts: profit bring they none."

So many of the references to the characters of classical works aren't understood today. The Classics are no longer widely taught or read, so this phrase is now little used, but it does remain with those of us educated in earlier times. [Note:when I was in high school a year of Latin was a requirement.] I guess for most/all of my students Ajax is a household cleanser and Achilles is the name of a tendon in the foot, if they know that much. Mention Dumbledore, however, and faces light up. "That champion of commoners, of Mudbloods and Muggles" I am told. And the certainly respond to Grindelwald, the most dangerous Dark Wizard of all times. I wonder how they would feel if I told them that I knew all about Grindelwald decades before they were born, and certainly decades before the Harry Potter series was written. Grindelwald, a village in Switzerland, and which was considered back when I was young as one of "the" places the wealthy went to for incredible winter skiing, something it is still known for now.

It's not just age that separates the generations. It's what we know and who we know and what we say.

Not Convinced that Reading Skills are Necessary?

In case you think I'm being alarmist about the poor reading/writing/comprehension/vocabulary skills of our students today, let me give you a few examples taken from last years GED exams. Yes, I checked with Snopes--no one is challenging that these did not come from the exam.

Q. Name the four seasons.
A. Salt, pepper, mustard and vinegar

Q. What does the word 'benign' mean?
A. Benign is what you will be after you be eight.

Q. What is a terminal illness?
A. When you are sick at the airport

Q. What is a turbine?
A. Something an Arab or Shreik wears on his head

Q. What guarantees may a mortgage company insist upon?
A. If you are buying a house they will insist that you are well endowed.

Reading? Rest in Peace

This past decade has given us many new devices to make communication between people faster and easier. Walk into any electronics store or browse online and there are dozens, perhaps hundreds, of these time savers for sale. Where once computerized communication devices were the purview of adults, mostly those in the work world, these devices are now seen in use everywhere by everyone. Yes, even three-year-olds know how to turn on a computer or fool around with a cell phone or PDA. And virtually everywhere you will hear people applauding the success of these devices, you will hear them lauding all the benefits of the devices.

Well, let me be one to take the opposite stand: these devices have caused us, as a nation and as a world, to lose something very precious. We are no longer readers. But wait you say, you have to read to use these devices. Well, you have to scan letters, I'll grant you that, but reading? Nope.

Educators from nursery to post-college are all bemoaning the fact that students' reading skills have dropped, and with that drop in reading skills, their writing skills have also deteriorated. Many an employer has pointed a finger at the poor job that schools are doing in educating their students, evidenced by the poor reading, writing and speaking skills of those who apply for jobs and/or who are in the work place. Employers are pointing a finger at the wrong place in attempting to place all the blame on the schools. The blame can be squarely placed on the general society that is involved in a hot and heavy love affair with technology, with communication devices.

How do people develop solid or stellar communication skills? One way is by observing others, listening to how they speak and copying their inflections, vocabulary and speaking style. Yet another way is to be taught the basics of English grammar and syntax, to be taught vocabulary, to be given practice in writing across many different subject areas. But perhaps the best way to become an excellent writer is to be a reader.

Why is reading books an excellent developmental tool for the skill of writing? In reading well-written material from a variety of print sources a person is exposed to the patterns, cadences and usages of standard English. They are exposed to a diverse vocabulary and how that vocabulary is used. There is a patterning that takes place when someone reads, a patterning that can be used when that person writes.

The English that appears in the writings on most of the electronic devices we use for communication is a truncated form of English, more patois or jargon than standard English. The purpose of this jargon is a simple one: give information using the fewest number of words (or letters) possible, reducing the amount of time spent in communicating. Everything connected with these devices is about short and quick.

But not everything that people might have to write in the academic and business worlds is going to be about shortness or quickness. There are still a multitude of situations where in- depth analysis and critical thinking skills are necessary. There are still a multitude of situations where being able to write flowing English, with all its complexities, is required. And to write that more complex English, reading is a key tool.

There is no reason to be a Luddite and decry that all those electronic devices be banished so we can return to a "better" way of doing things. What we do need to do, however, is recognize that those devices are only a few of the ways that we need to communicate with each other, and that the approaches that are useful when using those devices are not correct or useful in other writing situations. And yes, we need to once again stress the reading of books as a necessary tool for an educated person.

Let's be honest here--when an occasion arises to give a gift to a young person (and yes, to an adult as well) is your first thought to head to a bookstore, or is it to head to an electronics store or toy store? As a society we have come to value those electronics more than the printed word as found in books, and therein lies a ticking time bomb. Those who still read, and who reap the benefit of that reading as seen in their writing, are going to be the cream that rises to the top. The rest are going to be literal skim milk.

Like the ubiquitous fast-food meals so many rely on, those "fast-reading" devices aren't going to deliver any "nutritional" benefits to the readers who use them. Keep them in their place, as one type of tool that is available today. But bring back the reading of books for the much more "nutritious" benefits that they can give us, as readers, as writers and as educated communicators.

English? What's That?

A friend, retired from the public school system, has been teaching a while in a chasidishe elementary school. He reported back on a conversation he had with his fifth grade and my husband shared that conversation with me.

Our friend was giving the boys a mussar shmooze on the importance for them of learning at least English, if they gave no importance to history or science. Basically he told them, "You need to be able to read a contract for business reasons, you need to be able to understand what you are signing and what that obligates you to. You need to be able to communicate with various business authorities and you need to be able to not only understand what they say to you but you need to make yourself understood to them."

One of his fifth graders responded: "Far dos vell ich hobben ah veib"--for this I will have a wife. Chasidishe secular education philosophy in a nutshell.

I'm old enough to remember when a large part of my parents' generation was referred to as "greenuh." The newly arrived immigrants from Europe were particularly characterized by their poor skills in English. But here's the thing--that generation struggled and worked hard to attain English language skills, to be able to function as a "regular" member of American society. To be complimented on their English usage was a compliment of the highest degree. A scant 3-4 generations later we've got a new generation of greenuh, born and raised here and less fluent in English than their grandparents and great grandparents were, and it bothers them not at all.

Just what is the frum veldt coming to?

Seeing is Seeing

I have posted before that many of the older members of Klal have vision problems. For them reading a siddur or chumash or bencher is difficult to impossible. There are many large print seforim available. In addition, the Jewish Heritage for the Blind has such material available at no charge for those who are legally blind--an opthalmologist's written certification is necessary. All contact information is at the link as well as listings of what material is available. If someone in your family or a friend or neighbor requires this large print material, please tell them about the sources to get it. Or be a really good friend and buy them the gift of comfortable reading.

http://www.jhbinternational.org/index.html

In addition, for those who may not qualify for the free large type seforim, Art Scroll publishes a variety of siddurim and machzorim in large print editions. http://www.artscroll.com/Categories/plt.html

Note: in order to facilitate the larger print size, the size of the seforim is far larger than the regular-sized equivalents, resulting in many more pages and a heavier sefer. You may also need to keep the weight/size of the sefer in mind when choosing for an older person with vision problems.

Cite It Correctly!

As a professor of English, one of the things that I teach is accurate/correct citation methodology. Yes, my department is very makpid that ANY material that is not 100% solely the ideas and writing of a student be cited as to source. It is not only directly quoted material that must be cited: paraphrases are also required to be cited as to original source.

What I teach is 100% congruent with Jewish philosophy. We are taught that we must give credit to the source of any ideas or information about which we are writing/speaking. We don't hide behind a nebulous "they" but name names. Just peruse our writings and see the multiple examples that begin "In the name of ______ it is said" or "_______said," or _____ and ____ said."

Why this posting now? There is apparently a bit of a brouhaha about a letter printed in one of the Anglo-Jewish papers. The writer states that he conferred with daas Torah, that he conferred with gedolei Yisroel, and that the people he conferred with are 100% in agreement with him. He states that the rabbanim of the area in question are also all in agreement with his position. What he doesn't do is name names. This leaves the reader of the letter with some problems. If a gadol, if a rabbi is in 100% agreement then why aren't the names of these gedolim and rabbanim stated? Surely an argument would get stronger when respected names are listed as being of the same opinion as the letter writer? You can't offer as support for your position that others also hold that position without naming who these people are. There is no way to verify what the truth is without some black and white facts.

Were a scientist employed by a known research laboratory to offer up a statement that X is absolutely not the correct approach/view about phenomenon Y, and were that scientist to offer up as corroboration the statement "I have conferred with known greats in this field and with others who are also researchers and they support my opinion," he/she would be the laughingstock of the scientific world if no names were mentioned. What scientists and what are their credentials? Un-named scientists just don't make it as expert opinion.

So, why do we accept less in areas that affect us as observant Jews? Daas Torah says? Do we have only one learned person in all of Klal? Is there only one posek whose word is taken above all others? According to whom? It is poorly crafted writing/argument to leave out the names of those who supposedly have given their imprimature to an idea. Who is that masked man behind the mask of "Daas Torah"?

A Post for the Oldies Among Us

Last night I had occasion to speak with one of my oot cousin. He was calling to give the bris information for his new grandson, a bris that will be in NY. We spent a few moments just catching up on what was going on in our lives. Somehow the subject of the younger generations among us came up and yes, we bemoaned about some of what we are seeing.

I mentioned that there was a cultural literacy gap that was widening every day. In class I happened to use the phrase "You're not in Kansas anymore" about a phenomenon a student was describing. There were blank looks on all but one face in the class. Someone even volunteered that that particular student was from Queens, not Kansas. My cousin said that he, too, had used that phrase in a business meeting and only those above a certain age had caught the referent. It got us to wondering about just how many of the cultural referents we grew up with are now unknown to the younger generations. It seems like the different generations are speaking different languages, and meaning sometimes gets muddled. Laughingly my cousin said that there was a good reason for this sometimes disconnect--"It's because we aren't in Kansas anymore!" Yup, and I feel like I've definitely fallen down that rabbit hole.

Yup, They Said It

Once upon a time the type of vocabulary a person used could clearly indicate the level of education that had been achieved. The college graduate was clearly recognizable because he/she spoke "better" than the less well educated in society. Somehow that is no longer the case, or certainly not the case across the board. A wide and varied vocabulary doesn't seem to be valued as much by society in general. And, unfortunately, that also includes many college students/graduate school students.

Some people will hear a word--sort of--and can pull up that word to use later, again sort of. Some people will write a word and assume they have the correct word needed with no checking necessary--hey, spell check will catch any of their errors, right?

I've noted before that one of my students wrote that he was taking Advanced Suppository Writing--that's Advanced Expository Writing for those not familiar with the actual course. This past week my students gave me two examples yet again for why English teachers not only go grey but tear their hair out at the roots.

One student, in writing a letter of apology to a customer who encountered problems with a product, wrote the following: "Thank you for writing to us about your problems in using our wet/dry vacuum, model #69A. First, we would like to apologize for any incontinence our product caused you."

Then there was the student who was writing about popular tourist attractions in New York State. This gem appeared in his writing: "One of the most beautiful scenic wonders in New York is the upstate Viagra Falls."

I've got a whole stack of papers waiting to be marked--I can't wait to see what "gems" will be there--not.

Definitely not the Stork

A major snow storm, no school and a bit of free time to to sit and shmooz on the phone with friends. A friend who still lives in the area was reminiscing with me about the old Far Rockaway, the one that existed before I got married. In going through some of our favorite shared memories she reminded me of one story that had us rolling back then and that still gives us a chuckle now.

NYC was hit by a major snow storm (sound familiar?). Somehow the area from Beach 9th to Reads Lane never got plowed until at least a day after any storm, and this time was no different. Everyone was outside trying to dig out their cars. Suddenly a man was seen running up to one of the garbage truck/plows that was on Beach 9th, waving his hands frantically. In a second the truck had turned around and was following the man down the street, plowing as it went.

The story? A woman went into labor and could not drive to the hospital because of the snow, so she and her husband started walking towards a main street. She managed to get as far as the house of the Rav of the White Shule and could go no further. She delivered in the Rav's house. But she and the baby needed to get to the hospital. The garbage truck managed to get down the Rav's street and the driver bundled up the new mother and baby and put them into the cab of the garbage truck and took them to the hospital. Okay, an unusual enough development in the giving birth story. But the best was yet to be.

Apparently babies who were not born within the sterile confines of a hospital delivery room were isolated from those born in the hospital. The records had to indicate the circumstances of their birth. The local newspaper printed an entry from the new baby's hospital record (twas the days before HIPAA). The hospital record clearly stated: "Delivered by garbage truck." Gee, most people had to settle for being delivered by an obstetrician.

It's items like this that remind me that it's not just my students who occasionally twist the English language into strange shapes and amazing statements.

On Icons and Squeaky Wheels

Once upon a time it was the practice in our country that news consisted of information that was of importance to us as a nation or as a region. Importance was defined fairly narrowly--something that could change our lives or affect them, either positively or negatively. Sometimes that news would affect only one segment of our society; other times the affect would be across the board. What it costs to live in our country was considered news. What Congress was debating was considered news. How much water is in our reservoirs was considered news. Agricultural methodology changes in the Midwest was considered news.

Pretty much we knew that "news" appeared on the front pages of newspapers or in the front sections, or were the opening headlines of television news reports. Reading a daily paper and/or catching the evening news reports on television/radio was a communal custom across the land.

No, those newspapers were not devoted only to "hard" news, but basically they were. Any "soft" news was buried in interior sections. Yes, mankind being mankind, there were social columns that told us who was marrying whom and what the latest styles were going to be in clothing. And yes, some papers have always had a resident gossip columnist. But no one back in those dark ages considered this type of information to be news of the type necessary to be blazoned on the front page.

There were some publications that came in a physical newspaper form that purported to be giving us news, but we all knew that they didn't. You know, those tabloids that were sold in supermarket checkout lines with headlines that yelled, "Aliens hold Midwestern man hostage as his wife gives birth to her own mother." These types of publications were truly the "low man on the totem pole" in the newspaper hierarchy, and no one, but no one regarded them as a serious news source.

Fast forward to today and the situation is wholly different. More and more today the "major" newspapers are becoming repositories for stories that would have been buried in yesteryear's newspapers, if they were printed at all. Today's news, if we can call it that, is about our "icons," the highly visible people whom our society has elevated to "superstar" status. Generally, these people come from the entertainment/sports arenas. Some come from the fashion industry. The rare few who make it to "icon" status who come from government and industry usually do so because they have one of two things that has propelled them forward: a sex scandal or mega, mega bucks. The saying goes, "The squeaky wheel gets the grease." Today that translates to mean that those who have icon status, who are "personalities," get put on the front page: real news is now relegated to the interior sections somewhere, if it makes it into a paper at all.

We do subscribe to our local newspaper. I don't think the paper would be happy to know that we do so mainly for the coupons and store circulars that come with it during the week. We don't so much read the paper as we skim it to see if anything of real importance is buried in it. Yes, on occasion, the paper does carry a front page story of interest to those in our borough or city. Sometimes they actually carry news on the front page. Sadly, mostly they don't. Open the front page of the front section and you have arts and entertainment staring at you--yup, all the latest tidbits of (no) interest on entertainers and sports figures. Sports gets a complete section of its own. International and national news? Buried here and there when given at all.

An editorial in our paper last week was a rant about how they were disappointed that more Islanders did not show up at a public meeting with the MTA to discuss Island concerns about the new MTA policies. They stated that they had advertised that forum in the paper. Uh huh. That article announcing the forum was buried somewhere in the interior. What made the front page? The death of some 32 year old actress under what may be suspicious circumstances. Like I care.

There are all kinds of outlets today from which we can get news. Newspapers, with only a few exceptions, are not the favored outlet for most people. When newspapers complain about declining numbers of subscribers, they just might look to themselves for the source of the problem. As long as the "news" part continues to be less important than the antics of the Hollywood and sports crowd, readership is going to continue to decline.

While out shopping Sunday I noticed the headline story on the front page of the Daily News--it was about the terrorist on an airplane who was caught before he could ignite the bomb he was carrying. Real news, right? Sure it was. With a headline that screamed out underpants where terrorist hid bomb, emphasis underpants. Want to bet just how many people were drawn to the paper, not by the "real" news that might have been buried in there but by the underwear reference? Add to the icons and the squeaky wheels that sex sells and you've got the philosophy of a whole bunch of newspapers.

And just a final word on those newspapers that are Jewish ones. They aren't any better than their secular counterparts. They, too, are "icon/squeaky wheel" driven. Real news is rare and certainly not reported in anything resembling an objective manner. Advertisements outnumber news stories. Personal opinion columns certainly outnumber news stories. There's a lot of reporting on personalities within the frum communities. Sometimes the letters to the editors outnumber the number of news items. Honestly? When I glance at some of these Jewish papers what comes to mind is not newspaper but tabloid.

One major newspaper uses as a banner "All the news that's fit to print." Yeah, right. That really should read "All the quasi-news that fits into our print allotment."

Dag Nab It! Spelling Counts!

So, I'm doing maintenance on all my email accounts today, getting rid of all the account-clogging ads and appeals. One such ad had me laughing and crying at the same time--laughing at the absurdity and crying about the sad state of those who attempt to write in English.

The subject line clearly stated: "Lowlife insurance rates like you've never seen before." Say what?! It had never occurred to me before that lowlifes would have trouble getting regular insurance and would be required to purchase insurance specially tailored for their needs. In a strange way it even makes sense: lowlifes are liable to involve themselves in risky undertakings, so they should be paying extra.

For anyone who still doesn't get it, what the ad should have said was "Low life insurance rates." At least I can be thankful that it wasn't one of my students who penned this gem.

Playing With Words

No secret that language fascinates me. It's cold and dreary out and a perfect time to do some language sleuthing. I really love the BrownieLocks site for a number of reasons, but the offering I link to below offers a look at the sometimes quirky side of our language. You'll find the history of anagrams there (auction=caution), some really great cognative anagrams ( alien forms=life on Mars) and some very funny malapropisms (Generally speaking, can you be more specific please?)

http://www.brownielocks.com/Pizazz.html

Permanent Employment

The following was sent to me via email. I'm aware that the intended "lesson" was supposed to be political. Well, you know what they say about intentions. Unlike the writer of the piece, I see this as illustrative of a language problem, or maybe the state of education today. One thing for sure--if this is the state of our spoken language today, English teachers are never going to be unemployed.


CLUELESS in Seattle

In a Seattle , Washington college classroom, they were discussing the qualifications to be President of the United States . It was pretty simple. The candidate must be a natural born citizen of at least 35 years of age.

However, one girl in the class immediately started in on how unfair was the requirement to be a natural born citizen. In short, her opinion was that this requirement prevented many
capable individuals from becoming president. The class was taking it in and letting her rant, but everyone's jaw hit the floor when she wrapped up her argument by stating, “What makes a natural born citizen any more qualified to lead this country than one born by C-section?”

Yep, these are the 18 year olds that just voted for the President of the United States . These are our future leaders. Are we in trouble or what?

DHMO

Thanks to Dave for bringing up a subject that happens to be one I use in my Advanced Expository Writing class--DHMO--dihydrogen monoxide.

We like to think that we are sophisticated thinkers, people who can read, observe and synthesize the massive amounts of information we are presented with on a daily basis, particularly in the scientific arena. We place faith in science and scientists and the facts and figures they give us. We tend to believe that a lie would not be published and be believed because of all the access we have to media information. We tend to believe in our own infallability and our ability to tell the real from the fake, the truth from a hoax. Oh that that were 100% true.

Well, Professor Tom Way, building on the prior work of others, decided to put our abilities to the test. He began an organization and put up a website for that organization, a website that meets the highest standards for what a website should be and do. It's masterfully created and organized.

Please go to the website at http://www.dhmo.org/ And after you've gone there, please do come back and tell me all about how infallible we are as information gatherers and synthesizers.

That's English for You

Thanks to my sister for calling this to my attention. I decided to save it for after yom tov was over. Most of these are just too good to miss. A few are just that bit over the line, but I'll let you be your own censors.

Once again, The Washington Post has published the winning submissions to its yearly neologism contest, in which readers
are asked to supply alternative meanings for common words. The winners are:

1. Coffee (n.), the person upon whom one coughs.

2. Flabbergasted (adj.), appalled over how much weight
you have gained.

3. Abdicate (v.), to give up all hope of ever
having a flat stomach

4. Esplanade (v.), to attempt an explanation while drunk.

5. Willy-nilly (adj.), impotent.

6. Negligent (adj.), describes a condition in which
you absentmindedly answer the door in your nightgown.

7. Lymph (v.), to walk with a lisp.

8. Gargoyle (n), olive-flavored mouthwash.

9. Flatulence (n.) emergency vehicle that picks you
up after you are run over by a steamroller.

10. Balderdash (n.), a rapidly receding hairline.

11. Testicle (n.), a humorous question on an exam.

12. Rectitude (n.), the formal, dignified bearing
adopted by proctologists.

13. Pokemon (n), a Rastafarian proctologist.

14. Oyster (n.), a person who sprinkles his conversation
with Yiddishisms.

15. Frisbeetarianism (n.), (back by popular demand):
The belief that, when you die, your soul flies up onto
the roof and gets stuck there.

16. Circumvent (n.), an opening in the front of boxer
shorts worn by Jewish men.

The Washington Post's Style Invitational also asked
readers to take any word from the dictionary,
alter it by adding, subtracting, or changing one letter,
and supply a new definition. Here are this year's winners:

1. Bozone (n.): The substance surrounding stupid people
that stops bright ideas from penetrating. The bozone layer,
unfortunately, shows little sign of breaking down in the near
future.

2. Foreploy (v): Any misrepresentation about yourself for
the purpose of getting laid.

3. Cashtration (n.): The act of buying a house, which
renders the subject financially impotent for an
indefinite period.

4. Giraffiti (n): Vandalism spray-painted very, very high.

5. Sarchasm (n): The gulf between the author of
sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.

6. Inoculatte (v): To take coffee intravenously
when you are running late.

7. Osteopornosis (n): A degenerate disease.
(This one got extra credit.)

8. Karmageddon (n): its like, when everybody is sending
off all these really bad vibes, right? And then, like, the
Earth explodes and it's like, a serious bummer.

9. Decafalon (n.): The grueling event of getting
through the day consuming only things that
are good for you.

10. Glibido (v): All talk and no action.

11. Dopeler effect (n): The tendency of stupid
ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.

12. Arachnoleptic fit (n.): The frantic dance
performed just after you've accidentally walked
through a spider web.

13. Beelzebug (n.): Satan in the form of a mosquito that
gets into your bedroom at three in the morning and cannot
be cast out.

14. Caterpallor (n.): The color you turn after finding
half a grub in the fruit you're eating.

And the pick of the literature:

15. Ignoranus (n): A person who's both stupid and an asshole.