Words, Words, Words

Words, words, words!
I’m so sick of words
I get words all day through
First from him, now from you
Is that all you blighters can do?
(“Show Me” from My Fair Lady, M/L: Lerner and Loewe)

Words, words, words (and their underlying concepts): we use them everyday, but as they say in The Princess Bride: “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.” Here are some articles that have passed through my various RSS feeds and sources of late that relate to words/concepts, and their use/misuse:

  1. Words You May Be Using Wrong. This is an interesting summary of a scientific paper that explores 50 terms that people regularly confuse and use wrong. For example, there is a significant difference between asocial and antisocial, and most people use the latter when they mean the former. Envy and jealousy are similarly confused. Race and ethnicity. Serial killers vs mass murderers. Quite an interesting read.
  2. Lost Words That Deserve a Comeback. Here’s another interesting word list: 30 Lost English Words that Deserve a Comeback. We had a good example of such a word in the last few days: dotard (meaning “an old person, especially one who has become weak or senile”). I’m not sure that’s the word I would have used.  Sillytonian seems better to me (A silly or gullible person, esp. one considered as belonging to a notional sect of such people). In any case, it is worth reading the list.
  3. Open and Closed Minded. Speaking of Sillytonian people, one of the major complaints about that group is that they are so closed minded (but they would say the same about us). But what does it mean to be open or closed mined. Here’s an exploration of 7 significant ways you can tell open from closed minded. For example, closed-minded people don’t want their ideas challenged. They are typically frustrated that they can’t get the other person to agree with them instead of curious as to why the other person disagrees. Where are you on that spectrum?
  4. Infinities of Infinities. Infinity is a concept that has fascinated me since high school. The math surrounding the concept is so weird: ∞ + ∞, for example, equals ∞. The infinity of all even numbers is the same as the infinity of all numbers. However, for the longest time, we have believed that the infinity of all rational numbers (that is, those that can be represented by a fraction of two integers) was actually smaller than the infinity of all numbers including transcendental numbers (i.e., the real numbers like π that can’t be represented by a fraction). It now appears that we were wrong, and all infinities are equal. I expect this is something we’ll keep seeing come back, because it is in someways counter-intuitive, like the ever-present Monty Hall Problem.

Words, words, words!
I’m so sick of words
I get words all day through
First from him, now from you
Is that all you blighters can do?

P.S.: If you like words, here’s a newly discovered Kurt Vonnegut short story.

Share

Reading, Writing, and Language

userpic=fountain-penIntense focus on a current project at work, combined with a migraine-heavy week (possibly the subject of a future post), has led to fewer posts than usual. But fret not. Today’s lunchtime post brings together a number of articles on reading, writing, and language that caught my eye:

 

Share

Recurrent Themes

userpic=mood-swingsIf you’ve been reading my journal for a while, you know there are a number of recurrent themes that catch my interest. Theatre, of course, is just one of them (just booked the rest of June, for example). Words is another. Food. Los Angeles. Politics. … and of course, History. The last one is the unifying theme for this collection of links:

 

Share

Words Words Words

userpic=meeting-of-mindsI’ve loved words ever since I was at UCLA and took Linguistics 10, which looked at the origins of words. So today’s news chum concerns words, in various forms… and shapes…

Music: Welcome to the Club (1989 Original Broadway Cast): “The Trouble with You”

Share

Catching Up: Friday Link Stew

I know, I know. I’ve been quiet all week. That’s because I’ve been busy taking care of my wife (who had shoulder surgery on Tuesday) and dealing with various work stuff… plus there haven’t been a lot of articles that caught my eye. So, while I’m back and work and eating lunch, here are a few that did:

Music:The Music of Smash (Megan Hilty): Let’s Be Bad

 

Share

The Debate of the Day: Oxford Comma, Shatner Comma, or Something Else

OK, folks. Where do you stand on “The Oxford Comma vs. The Shatner Comma

Quoting from the article:

“The Oxford comma, thought by some to be an annoying punctuation foible, appears in a list of multiple items before the “and.” Here’s how the Oxford comma looks in a sentence: “Scotty transported Spock, Kirk, McCoy, Sulu, and a redshirt down to the planet’s surface.”

[…]

“See, the problem people have with the Oxford comma is that it puts a pause where some think one doesn’t belong. The idea is that “I went to the market to get triple sec, limes and tequila” is better, or more modern, than “I went to the market to get triple sec, limes, and tequila.” And the Shatner comma? It, does, nothing, but, put, pauses, where, they, do, not, belong.”

After all: Who cares about politics? The real debates are about grammar!

Share

Curiouser and Curiouser

When I was in my last year of undergrad at UCLA, I took Linguistics 10, which looked at the etymology of words. I mention this because earlier today I asked about the word for “three times a year”. The answer was triannual, whereas triennial was every three years. So (I wonder): was there an etymological difference?

Triannual: tri ‘three’ + annual (from the Websters New Millenium dictionary); origin: 1630–40; tri- + annual (per Random House)

Triennial: 1640, “lasting three years;” 1642 in the sense of “occurring every three years,” from L. triennium “three-year period,” from tri- “three” + annus “year”

So, they both seem to be “tri” + “annual” (or annus). So where and how did “-annual” get the sense of part of a year, whereas “-ennial” get multiple years? Further, if that is indeed the case, wouldn’t semiannual therefore be equal to biennial, given that 1/½ = 2? Should it be semiennial?

I’m confused.

[My wife’s response: She knows, but good doctors are expensive.]

Share