07.05.06
Posted in In The News, Reading at 22:03 by Sarah
ghoti = fish, if you pronounce gh as in enough, o as in women, and ti as in information.
Anybody else think English spelling is weird? I found an article online today about how Mark Twain, Teddy Roosevelt and Andrew Carnegie all tried various methods of reforming the English spelling system.
Twain proposed a plan that, in the first year, would eliminate “x” and “c,” replacing the latter with “k” or “s.” The “c” would remain for the “ch” formation.
In year two, Twain’s plan would reform “w” spellings so that “which” and “one” would start with the same consonant. Year three would replace “y” with “i” and year four would fix what he said was an anomaly with “g” and “j” spellings. Improvement would continue year by year so that, as he put it:
“Bai iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez “c,” “y” and “x” — bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez — tu riplais “ch,” “sh” and “th,” rispektivli. Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iers ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld.”
In August 1906, Roosevelt wrote to the public printer asking that all government publications begin using new spellings for some 300 words as outlined by the Simplified Spelling Board, created by Carnegie. Congress rejected the plan but Roosevelt continued using simpler spellings in his White House memos.
In his letter, he said he merely wanted to extend an “unconscious movement” leading Americans to use “plow” instead of “plough,” “program” instead of “programme” and to turn away from the British “u” in words such as “honour.”
“The purpose simply is for the government, instead of lagging behind popular sentiment, to advance abreast of it,” he wrote.
…
A pioneer of “thru,” “tho” and much more, The Chicago Tribune adopted phonetic spelling for 80 words in 1934 and added to the list in 1949. Setting out to correct “an unspeakable offense to common sense,” the paper introduced readers to words such as “hocky” instead of hockey, “burocrat,” “reherse,” “missil” and “tarif.”
Editors acted in the spirit of Joseph Medill, Tribune editor in the late 1800s, who denounced spelling as “monster cruelty…that fill(s) our schoolhouses with misery.”
http://www.nola.com/
See also this article: http://www.cnn.com/ . I think this one’s a bit misleading though. It tries to be creative by changing a lot of spellings around, but I do not think it is representive of the spelling reforms suggested.
On a side note, Germany did exactly this in 1996. As far as I can tell, German is a much more phonetic language than English, comparable to Spanish. (It didn’t take me too long to catch on to German spellings, and I haven’t been learning very long. If I ask Martin how to say something in German, I have to spell it for him!)
There’s a bit of a confusion in German spelling on the use of “ss” and “ß“, both double “S” sounds. Under the old rules, you would use “ss” between two short vowels, and otherwise use “ß”. Currently, the rule is that you only use “ß” after a long vowel or a diphthong (”ei”, “au”, etc). This is not so bad I guess, except that you still have to remember which goes where. [In Austria and Switzerland, they have gotten rid of "ß" entirely. Much simpler that way.]
They also changed the way you combine words, omnipresent in German. (Mark Twain writes about that in his essay “The Awful German Language,” appendix D of A Tramp Abroad.) In the old system, if you combined “Schiff” and “Fahrt” together, you could drop one of the f’s in the middle, leading to “Schiffahrt” (boat trip). Now, you leave all of them, “Schifffahrt”, and get a very funny looking word.
There was also some attempt to get rid of exceptions to rules, correct capitalization (German capitalizes all nouns), and such. All this makes sense I guess. Except that people don’t really like it much. I certainly wouldn’t want to relearn spellings I’d learned in school. Also, there are many newspapers, including the FAZ and Die Welt, the continue to use the pre-1996 spellings. All this, and German spelling is quite a bit easier and more regular than English spellings! Maybe English just needs it more?
Ils sont fous, ces Américains!
Permalink
06.18.06
Posted in In The News, Reading at 16:36 by Sarah
Check out this week's Newsweek column by Anna Quindlen:
You brush up against a lot of weird stuff in the course of child rearing, but one phenomenon that always had me scratching my head was the parents who hit their kids to teach them that hitting was a bad thing.
In their defense, they had a civic model for that kind of bizarre circular reasoning. Americans still live in one of the few countries that kill people to make clear what a terrible thing killing people is.
Hardly any other civilized place does this anymore. In the past three decades, the number of nations that have abolished the death penalty has risen from 16 to 86. Last year four countries accounted for nearly all executions worldwide: China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United States.
As my Irish grandmother used to say, you're known by the company you keep.
…
Accusers recant, guilty parties confess, the lab makes a match that wasn't possible before. Since 1976, more than a thousand men and women have been executed in the United States. But during that same period more than 123 death-row inmates have been exonerated. That's a terrible statistical average. Put another way, more than 123 individuals truly guilty of savage crimes were walking free while someone else sat waiting on death row. And most, if not all, of those death-row inmates would have been wrongly executed if not for the lengthy appeals process death-penalty advocates like to decry.
…
(http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13390313/site/newsweek/)
Permalink
05.30.06
Posted in Reading at 4:03 by Sarah
I've been reading like crazy lately to get my head to calm down after studying. If I don't do that, I start dreaming about equations (no joke), and then I can't sleep. At the moment though, I'm out of books to read.
Any ideas anyone? I need suggestions…
ps — less than 2 weeks left!
Permalink
03.18.06
Posted in Reading at 2:17 by Sarah
“The Cracked Pot” Chinese Fable (sent to me by Helen)
A water bearer in China had two large pots, each hung on the ends of a pole which he carried across his neck.
One pot had a crack in it, while the other pot was perfect and always delivered a full portion of water. At the end of the long walk from the stream to the house, the cracked pot arrived only half full.
For a full two years this went on daily, with the bearer delivering only one and a half pots full of water to his house.
Of course, the perfect pot was proud of its accomplishments, perfect for which it was made.
But the poor cracked pot was ashamed of its own imperfection, and miserable that it was able to accomplish only half of what it had been made to do.
After 2 years of what it perceived to be a bitter failure, it spoke to the water bearer one day by the stream… “I am ashamed of myself, because this crack in my side causes water to leak out all the way back to your house.”
The bearer said to the pot, “Did you notice that there were flowers only on your side of the path, but not on the other pot’s side?”
That’s because I have always known about your flaw, and I planted flower seeds on your side of the path. Every day while we walk back, you’ve watered them. For two years I have been able to pick these beautiful flowers to decorate the table. “Without you being just the way you are, there would not be this beauty to grace the house.”
Moral: Each of us has our own unique flaws.
We’re all cracked pots.
But it’s the cracks and flaws we each have that make our lives together so very interesting and rewarding. You must take each person for what they are, and look for the good in each one.
For that reason I say…… Blessings to all my crackpot friends and relativ
Permalink
02.13.06
Posted in Reading at 23:47 by Sarah
Love (Khalil Gibran)
Then said Almitra, “Speak to us of Love.”
And he raised his head and looked upon the people, and there fell a stillness upon them.
And with a great voice he said:
When love beckons to you follow him,
Though his ways are hard and steep.
And when his wings enfold you yield to him,
Though the sword hidden among his pinions may wound you.
And when he speaks to you believe in him,
Though his voice may shatter your dreams as the north wind lays waste the garden.
For even as love crowns you so shall he crucify you. Even as he is for your growth so is he for your pruning.
Even as he ascends to your height and caresses your tenderest branches that quiver in the sun,
So shall he descend to your roots and shake them in their clinging to the earth.
Like sheaves of corn he gathers you unto himself.
He threshes you to make you naked.
He sifts you to free you from your husks.
He grinds you to whiteness.
He kneads you until you are pliant;
And then he assigns you to his sacred fire, that you may become sacred bread for God’s sacred feast.
All these things shall love do unto you that you may know the secrets of your heart, and in that knowledge become a fragment of Life’s heart.
But if in your fear you would seek only love’s peace and love’s pleasure,
Then it is better for you that you cover your nakedness and pass out of love’s threshing-floor,
Into the seasonless world where you shall laugh, but not all of your laughter, and weep, but not all of your tears.
Love gives naught but itself and takes naught but from itself.
Love possesses not nor would it be possessed;
For love is sufficient unto love.
When you love you should not say, “God is in my heart,” but rather, I am in the heart of God.”
And think not you can direct the course of love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
Love has no other desire but to fulfil itself.
But if you love and must needs have desires, let these be your desires:
To melt and be like a running brook that sings its melody to the night.
To know the pain of too much tenderness.
To be wounded by your own understanding of love;
And to bleed willingly and joyfully.
To wake at dawn with a winged heart and give thanks for another day of loving;
To rest at the noon hour and meditate love’s ecstasy;
To return home at eventide with gratitude;
Permalink
01.23.06
Posted in Reading at 16:08 by Sarah
A Jennifer Knapp song, that I learned about from Helen Hagerty 
There’s a place in the darkness that I used to cling to
It presses harsh hope against time
In the absence of martyrs there’s a presence of thieves
Who only want to rob you blind
They steal away any sense of peace
Though I’m a king I’m a king on my knees
And I know they are wrong when they say I am strong
As the darkness covers me
So turn on the light and reveal all the glory
I am not afraid
To bare all my weakness knowing in meekness
I have a kingdom to gain
Where there is peace and love in the light, in the light
Oh I am not afraid
To let Your light shine bright in my life, in my life
Oh I… am, I…
There are ghosts from my past who’ve owned more of my soul
Than I thought I had given away
They linger in closets and under my bed
And in pictures less proudly displayed
A great fool in my life I have been
Have squandered till pallid and thin
Hung my head in shame and refused to take blame
For darkness I know I’ve let win
Can you hear me?
Well I’ve never been much for the baring of soul
In the presence of any man
I’d rather keep to myself all safe and secure
In the arms of a sinner I am
Could it be that my worth should depend
By the crimson stained grace on a hand
And like a lamp on a hill Lord I pray in Your will
To reveal all of You that I can
There’s a place in the darkness that I used to cling to
It presses harsh hope against time…
Permalink
12.24.05
Posted in In The News, Reading at 19:07 by Sarah
No more “Happy Holidays”, let’s stick to “Merry Christmas!”
Permalink
12.21.05
Posted in In The News, Reading at 22:13 by Sarah
Another good one from Anna Quindlen in Newsweek:
If God is watching us, as some believers suggest, as though we were a television show and God had a lot of free time, the deity would surely be bemused by how dumbed-down devotion has sometimes become in this so-called modern era. How might an omnipotent being with the long view of history respond to those who visit the traveling exhibit of a grilled-cheese sandwich, sold on eBay, that is said to bear the image of the Virgin Mary? It certainly argues against intelligent design, or at least intelligent design in humans.
…Target is not a temple (although I do pray that the Isaac Mizrahi line of cheap chic will be expanded), and the star of Bethlehem was nothing like a blue-light special. As the pope recently noted, “commercial pollution” is contrary to the spirit of the season and the message of Christmas. For those things, see Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, the greatest story never sold. It’s an insult to the power and the glory of faith to seek it in fried foods, statuary or the perfunctory greetings of overworked store clerks. If I ever go to Costco looking for religion, I’ll know my Christmas goose is cooked.
BTW, it’s officially the shortest day of the year! At least the days start getting longer now
Permalink
11.22.05
Posted in Reading at 13:00 by Sarah
Life Lessons From Harry Potter
By Laura Sheahen
Over the years, various religious groups have struggled to pigeonhole the megapopular Harry Potter books. Some conservative Christians will tell you the series is of the devil, its author using a likeable boy hero to promote magick and paganism. Wiccans will laugh off the idea that what happens at Harry’s school, Hogwarts, has even a passing resemblance to their practice. And other Christians will claim there are Christian ideas and even symbols in the series, as new books with titles like “The Gospel According to Harry Potter” show.
None of these characterizations is really accurate; the truth is that the books aren’t Christian, Wiccan, or any identifiable spiritual stripe whatsoever. But they do reflect a consistent moral framework. Like most children’s books, the series teaches lessons many religions would agree on—don’t kill, don’t lie, and so on. But beyond that are more subtle life lessons that can help kids—and adults—navigate relationships, disappointments, and loss. The Harry Potter books teach us to:
1. Beware of pompous people.
No one would deny that the series’ obvious villains–Voldemort, Draco Malfoy, and arguably Snape–are dangerous. But it’s the conceited secondary characters—like Gilderoy Lockhart, Percy Weasley, and Cornelius Fudge—who often do just as much damage as the true bad guys. Their self-satisfied bumbling leaves Harry and his friends exposed to the basilisk, an impostor Mad-Eye Moody, and Voldemort himself. In the latest book, Harry was wise to steer clear of the status-seeking Professor Slughorn, who wants to draw Harry into his clique. In Harry’s world as in real life, serious evildoers are always a threat, but stuck-up people wreak plenty of havoc.
2. Stay true to your nerdy or unpopular friends.
From the moment Harry first met hapless, round-faced Neville Longbottom (who was searching for his lost toad), he’s been kind to the timid Gryffindor. Harry has been loyal to daffy Luna Lovegood and to Dobby, the often irritating and unconventional elf. And Harry defended his best friend Ron Weasley when everyone else was furious with him for his poor Quidditch skills.
All these characters have stuck by Harry in his hour of need, in some cases saving his life. The lesson: No matter how tiresomely they rave about Crumpled-Horned Snorkacks or make you examine plants that squirt Stinksap, don’t disown your true friends.
3. Realize that your parents (and the rest of your family) are more important than you think.
Ron Weasley’s brothers overshadow him, and his parents often embarrass him. Neville Longbottom’s grandmother is starchy and dictatorial, and his parents have been driven insane by Voldemort’s followers. Harry’s aunt, uncle, and cousin actively oppress him—and his parents are dead. Yet for all three boys, family holds the key to mysteries. Ron’s parents and brothers are in the Order of the Phoenix, protecting Ron and Harry in ways they learn only late in book five. Neville’s parents were also in the Order, and his strange connection to Harry—he was born in the same month—may be developed in book seven. Harry’s parents died to save him, yet live on in important ways (see Lesson 6). And his horsey, nasty Aunt Petunia is grudgingly part of a secret blood spell protecting him from Voldemort. In other words, even when we feel distant from our families, they may be helping us in ways we don’t know.
4. Speak your pain.
Harry’s refusal to share his fears and feelings, or ask for help, once seemed like a frustrating tic. In the past few books, however, it’s become clear that it’s his tragic flaw—one of Shakespearean proportions. In the early books, it’s worrisome when he doesn’t alert Dumbledore that his scar is hurting; if he did, the powerful Hogwarts headmaster might know when Voldemort is plotting something. In “Goblet of Fire,” it’s maddening when Harry doesn’t tell Neville that he needs a way to survive under water, since Neville knows about a plant that makes humans grow gills. And in “Order of the Phoenix,” it’s heartbreaking to contemplate the alternate future lost when Harry doesn’t use Sirius’ mirror to talk to his godfather—or warn him of danger.
In every case, Harry would have saved time, trouble, and maybe even a life if he had opened up to those who care about him. In each book, despite the rising stakes, he thinks that he’ll just worry people or that they won’t be able to help him anyway.
Assuming he knows how people will react—and hiding the truth in a misguided attempt to protect them—is Harry’s great failing. When Harry does talk to his friends, they often are able to help him (as when Professor Lupin teaches him to repel dementors) or allay his fears (as when Ginny reassures Harry that he couldn’t have been possessed by Voldemort). But when he keeps secrets, Harry makes himself and others miserable and more vulnerable.
5. Don’t fear death…
“There is nothing worse than death,” says Voldemort in book five. “You are quite wrong,” Dumbledore replies. “Indeed, your failure to understand that there are things much worse than death has always been your greatest weakness.” Death is what Harry’s nemesis most fears; his thirst for immortality drives all his actions, from seeking the sorcerer’s stone to stealing Harry’s blood for a revivification potion. Calling themselves Death Eaters, Voldemort’s followers use the Dark Arts to feed off other people’s pain and death and grow stronger.
The Dark Lord’s followers may think they have power over death. But in reality, all of them are trying to prolong their own lives by gruesome and selfish means. In the books, characters who try to escape death turn into moral monsters (or, in less extreme cases, into laughable ghosts—like Nearly Headless Nick and Professor Binns). Characters who are willing to die for others—like Harry, his parents, Ron, and Dumbledore—often save themselves or their friends. As Dumbledore says, death is not something to be feared and dodged at all costs, but “the next great adventure.”
6. …because love is stronger than death.
The deaths in the Harry Potter books are heart-wrenching and ever present; Cedric, Harry’s parents, Sirius, and now Dumbledore are not forgotten. And death changes those left behind: Harry hears his parents in visions and sees them in the Mirror of Erised; Luna and other bereaved students can see thestrals, beasts invisible to their luckier friends; Dumbledore’s phoenix sings a strange new song of lament.
But the dead are never really gone. As Harry grieves Sirius, Luna reminds him of the mysterious murmurs behind the veil in the Department of Mysteries, reassuring him that they’ll see their loved ones again. And Harry’s dead parents actively protect him—his mother through the lasting power of her self-sacrificing spell, his father as the patronus Prongs. Dumbledore’s spirit, too, may live on as a portrait in the headmaster’s office, watching over Harry and the school. Though no longer with Harry in the flesh, their love continues to guide and guard him as he prepares for his final showdown with Voldemort.
(Laura Sheahen is Beliefnet’s senior religions editor.)
Permalink
10.31.05
Posted in In The News, Reading, Updates at 20:16 by Sarah
My grandpa was always convinced that eventually, we’d all be the same color, coffee-colored, and I tend to agree with him. Maybe that’s closer than we think? (That link requires an account on the NYTimes website, but I have the fulltext if anyone is interested.)
Permalink
« Previous entries