December 2003 Archives

"SAULT STE. MARIE, Mich. - Hardly looking 'metrosexual,' a 'shocked and awed' Lake Superior State University Word Banishment selection committee emerged from its spider hole with its annual List of Words Banished from the Queen's English for Mis-Use, Over-Use and General Uselessness.

LSSU has been compiling the list since 1976, choosing from nominations sent from around the world. This year, words and phrases were pulled from more than 5,000 nominations - a record. Most were sent through the school's website: www.lssu.edu/banished.

Word-watchers pull nominations throughout the year from everyday speech, as well as from the news, fields of education, technology, advertising, politics, and more. A committee gathers the entries and chooses the best in December. The list is released on New Year's Day.

The complete 2004 list follows:

METROSEXUAL - An urban male who pays too much attention to his appearance. Bob Forrest of Tempe, Arizona, says it "sounds like someone who only has sex downtown or on the subway." Fred Bernardin of Arlington, Massachusetts, asks, "Aren't there enough words to describe men who spend too much time in front of the mirror?"

X - Last year it was 'extreme.' This year, 'X' follows in its footsteps. "Marketers have latched onto this letter to grab the 'Generation-X demographic. X-files, Xtreme, Windows XP and X-Box are all part of this PR-powered phenomenon," said John Casnig of Kingston, Ontario.

PUNKED - As in bamboozled, duped, flimflammed, hornswoggled. Nominated by the Frank and Johnnie Show, WGN, Chicago. An old noun given new life as a verb because of the television show. Kill it before it grows.

PLACE STAMP HERE - Dennis K. McDermott of Oneida, New York, says, "It appears on 99% of the return envelopes provided by creditors with monthly billings. It's especially annoying when enclosed in a rectangle drawn in the upper right corner. (What if you miss?) And then…they inform you that 'The Post Office will not deliver without postage.' Can we legitimately claim to be a superpower if we need to be reminded to put a stamp on an envelope?"

Eric Hooper of South Lyon, Michigan, agrees: "If I'm too stupid to figure out where to put the stamp, then paying the phone bill is probably the least of my worries."

COMPANION ANIMALS - "They're called PETS." Nick Leach, Bloomington, Indiana.

BLING or BLING-BLING or any of its variations - "Hate, hate. Grate, grate," says Steven Phipps of Pueblo, Colorado. Received many nominations from across the United States. "This once street slang for items of luxury has now become so overused and abused that (everyone) has incorporated it into their vocabularies. Yes, your mom might say it. Nothing could kill the mystique of a word faster." Todd Facklas, Chicago.

LOL and other abbreviated 'e-mail speak,' including the symbol '@' when used in advertising and elsewhere - Alex G. of Warsaw, Poland, says, "It's everywhere on the net! OMG! u r chattin to sum1 then…lol this and lol that….Get it away!" "I wonder if anyone really laughs out loud when they use this short-hand Instant Messenger slang?" Rachel Rose, Pickford, Michigan.

EMBEDDED JOURNALIST - Nominations for this Iraq War II phrase came from throughout the U.S., Canada and overseas. "I'm a journalist and until the war started, I'd never heard this term. In the interest of objectivity, journalists probably shouldn't be embedded with any organization they regularly cover." Ken Marten, Hamtramck, Michigan.

"It seems to be a hip way of saying, 'at the scene,'" said Tim Bednall, Tokyo.

"The next time I hear it used by the media, I'm going to embed my foot in the TV!" Ellen Brown, San Diego.

SMOKING GUN - Another one that came to us from Iraq, but is widely used elsewhere. "Let's give the 21-gun salute to this overused analogy," says Andrew Pagano, Montgomery Village, Maryland.

"Remember the television show 'Gunsmoke'? Now THERE were smoking guns!" Scot Moss, Madison, Wisconsin. "What's wrong with 'hard evidence'?" Kevin O'Sheehan, Bangkok, Thailand.

SHOCK AND AWE - Still another from Iraq. "I'm just waiting on 'Shock and Awe Laundry Soap' or maybe 'Shock and Awe Pool Cleaner,'" says Joe Reynolds of Conroe, Texas.

CAPTURED ALIVE - "The news keeps stating that Saddam Hussein was 'captured alive.' Well, what other way are you going to be captured? Maybe 'found dead' or 'discovered dead' never 'captured dead.'" Bill Lodholz, Davis, California.

SHOTS RANG OUT - "I'm tired of hearing this phrase on the news. Shots don't 'ring' unless you are standing too close to the muzzle, and in that case you don't need the reporter telling you about it." Michael Kinney, Rockville, Maryland.

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES - Gerald Anderson of Winter Haven, Florida, says, "TV shows are often described as being 'ripped from the headlines.' Kicking and screaming, no doubt."

SWEAT LIKE A PIG - Tim Croce of Torrington, Connecticut says "Pigs do not have sweat glands; that is why they roll in mud to cool themselves." Nevertheless, Tim said he was sweating like a pig to get this nomination to us.

IN HARM'S WAY - "Who is Harm, and why would you want to get in his way?" Thomas Watts, Sumter, South Carolina.

HAND-CRAFTED LATTE: We're not sure where Orin Hargraves of Westminster, Maryland discovered this beauty, but we agreed with his assertion that "This compound is an insult to generations of skilled craftspeople who have mustered the effort and discipline to create something beautiful by hand. To apply 'hand-crafted' to the routine tasks of the modern-day equivalents of soda jerks cheapens the whole concept of handicraft."

SANITARY LANDFILL - "Ever been to one?" asks Stan Slade of Long Beach, Mississippi. "Not the cleanest place in the world. What happened to the county or city dump?"

During the height of the war last spring, Tyler King of Toronto, Ontario, told us he'd like to see all words rhyming with Iraq banished, and he sent this lovely poem:

"Lately, every news report has tried to create a rhyme about Iraq. Frankly, I'm sick of hearing about the 'Attack on Iraq'! There is no turning back from an attack on Iraq to (get) that quack who likes to yak with his terrorist pack about having the knack to bring weapon inspectors back."

Finally, the committee admits that it is not infallible. On the 2003 list we included 'frozen tundra' as being redundant and heard back from many people who pointed out that tundra does not mean 'frozen land.' Green Bay Packers fans were especially adamant, even though sportscasters frequently use the phrase to describe their home turf. We hereby reinstate 'frozen tundra.'

And now, for the fine print:

"It is a common mistake," said one person. "Tundra is a state of vegetative and soil conditions that can exist in non-frozen forms. There is flooded tundra (spring), dusty tundra (summer), muddy tundra (fall), and frozen tundra (winter). I know. I walked in all of it during 20 years of working in arctic Alaska."

"Tundra is a treeless, level or rolling ground in polar regions or on high mountains," said another. "It is characterized by bare ground and rock or by such vegetation as mosses and lichens."

We stand corrected. "

At 8:24 PM today, Adams Blog had an positively stupendous celebration (in my mind) of its age of 1 year. 294 entries have been posted in my history. This amounts to an average of 1 post every 1.24 days. Therefore, I see absolutely no reason why you shouldn't check the postings at least once every 2 days. Think of what you could be missing!!! I'll leave that for you to decide. Regardless, I think the inaugural year of Adams Blog has been a general success, if a somewhat shaky one at times. And so I wish you a happy New Year, and I am pleased to say that in 2 days I will be able to change © 2002-2003 to © 2002-2004. It's a great way to get people to think that we're 2 years old when we're really 1 here at Adams Blog (the ability to change a person's perception of reality is viewed by some as the ability of a master debater). In the merry spirit, I call you too to use the genitive incorrectly in sacrilege. Celebrate the essence of...

BLOG!

But I digress...

As a present to myself for this momentous occasion, I finally purchased my Bach Stradivarius Model 37 trumpet. Words cannot describe quite what it is like to play. There are extensive modifications, but the stunning richness of tone is kind of like... like molten 72% cacao chocolate. While my former trumpet from Elkhorn, WI was like a cup of hot chocolate. That's the difference laddies. But here's an interesting fact: Getzen is located in Elkhorn, WI right? So guess where Bach (owned by the Selmer superstructure or some such thing) is located? Elkhart, IN. How's that for funny? Not very. But still yet noteworthy. So anyway, the multitudinous thanks go to Randy Mueller of Wally's Music Shop. I thank thee.

In other news...

We just got 1.5 inches of snow in the last hour, and I think it's still coming down. And that's on top of about 2.4 inches of snow 2 days ago (which is now a solid layer of ice). I can only hope--hope, that is--we're breaking a 130 year trend of declining snowfalls.

2.4 inches of snow at my house (so far, that is. Wheeheeee!!)--2.4 inches of ice now--measured by me. And you thought I'd be blogging...

de: Edgar Allan Poe
enesperantigis de: Adam Anderson

traduko © 2003 Adam Anderson

Hura! kvankam mi marŝas tra la valo de l’ Ombro.
—Psalmo de Davido

Vi legantaj estas ankoraŭ de la vivantoj, sed mi skribanta tre longe antaŭ paŝis mian pasejon en la regiono de ombroj. Ĉar ja strangaj okazoj okazos, kaj sekretaĵoj estos sciitaj, kaj multaj jarcentoj paŝos for, antaŭ ĉi tiujn estos viditajn per viroj. Kaj, kiam viditajn, estos kelkaj por malkredi, kelkaj por dubi, kaj ankoraŭ kelkaj kiuj trovos multan por mediti de la karakteroj kiu estas ĉi tie, ĉizitaj per grifelo de fero.

La jaro estis jaro de teruro, kaj de sentoj pli intensa ol la teruro por kiu estas ne nomo sur la mondo. Ĉar multaj mirindaĵoj kaj signoj okazis, kaj vaste kaj dise, transmare kaj transtere, la flugiloj negraj de la Pesto estis sternitaj. Al ĉi tiuj, tamen, ruzaj en la steloj, ne estis malsciite ke la ĉieloj portas aspekto de malsano; kaj al mi, la Greka Oinos1, kaj aliaj, estis evidente ke nun alvenis la alternado de tiu sepcent-naŭdek-kvara jaro kiam, dum la eniro de Arieso, la planedo Jupitero, estas kunigita kun la ringo ruĝa de la terura Saturno. La spirito kurioza de la ĉieloj, se mi miskompredas ne grande, manifestas sin, ne nur en la globo fizika de la Tero, sed ankaŭ en la animoj, imagadoj, kaj meditadoj de la homaro.

Kun kelkaj flakonoj de la vino ruĝa Chian2, internen la muroj de halo nobla, en urbo malluma nomas Ptolemais3, ni sidis, dum la nokto, en kompanio de sep. Kaj en nia ĉambro ne estis enirejo krom per pordo alta de latuno; kaj la pordo estis formita far la artisto Corinnos, kaj, estante de bonkvalito malofta, si estis fiksita interne. Drapiraĵoj nigraj, simile, en la ĉambro krepuska, blokis nian vidaĵon de la luno, la steloj ardaj, kaj la stratoj senpopulaj—sed la aŭguro kaj la memoro de Malbonegeco: ili tiel neekskludigus. Estis aĵoj ĉirkaŭ ni, kaj de kiu mi povas diri ne konton klaran—aĵoj materiaj kaj spiritaj—pezeco en la atmosfero—senso de sufoko—anksieco—kaj, pli ol ĉio, tiu stato terura de ekzisto kiu la nervuloj spertas kiam la sensoj estas akre vivantaj kaj maldormaj, kaj dume la potencoj de pensado estas dormanta. Morta pezo pendis super ni. Ĝi pendis super nia membroj—super la hejmmeblaro—super la pokaloj per kiuj ni trinkis; kaj ĉioj estis deprimitaj, kaj elportitaj malsupre per tio—ĉioj krom la flamoj de la sep lampoj de fero kiuj ilumigis nian ĝojfeston. Suprenirante per linoj altaj maldikaj de lumo, ili tiel restis brulante tute pale kaj senmove; kaj en la spegulon sia glaceo formis, sur la ronda tablo de ebono ĉe kiu ni sidis, ĉiu de ni kunigitaj rigardis la palecon de lia propra mieno, kaj la agititan kolergrimacon en la vizaĝalteraj okuloj de liaj akompantoj. Tamen ni ridis kaj estis feliĉaj en nia konvena maniero—kiu estis histeria; kaj ni kantis la kantojn de Anacreon4—kiu estas frenezaĵo; kaj ni trinkis multe—kvankam la vino purpura rememorigis nin de sango. Ĉar estis ankoraŭ alia okupanto de nia ĉambro en la persono de Zoilus5 juna. Morta, kaj li kuŝis maksimumlonge, vuale;—la genio kaj la demono de la sceno. Ve! li montris nenion por nia ĝojo, krom ke lia mieno, distordita peste, kaj liaj okuloj, en kiuj Morto estingis nur duone la fajrojn de la pesto, ŝajnis interesiĝi de nia gajeco tiel la mortuloj eble hazarde partoprenas en la gajeco de tiuj mortotaj. Sed kvankam mi, Oinos, sentis ke la okuloj de la mortuloj rigardis min, mi ankoraŭ perforcis min nepercepti la amaron de ilia esprimo, kaj, rigardante malsupre stabile en la profundoj de la ebonspegulo, kantis laŭtvoĉe kaj sonorvoĉe la kantojn de la filo de Teios6. Sed grade miaj kantoj malkomencis, kaj siaj eĥoj, rulante malapude inter la zibeldrapiraĵoj de la ĉambro, iĝis malfortaj, kaj maldistingeblaj, kaj tiel forfadis. Kaj jen! de la intero de tiuj zibeldrapiraĵoj de kie la sonoj de la kanto foriris, tie elvenis ombro malluma kaj malklara—ombro tiel la luno, kiam malalta en ĉielo, eble kreas de la figuro de homo; sed ĝi estis la ombro nek de homo nek de Dio, nek de io ajn konata. Kaj tremetante dum iom da tempo inter la drapiraĵoj de la ĉambro, ĝi post iom da tempo restis tutvideble sur la surfaco de la pordo de latuno. Sed la ombro estis malklara, kaj senforma, kaj maldifinita, kaj estis la ombro nek de la homo nek de Dio—nek Dio de Grekio, nek Dio de Chaldæa7, nek iu ajn Dio Egipta. Kaj la ombro restis sur la pordmalfermo latuna, kaj sub la arko de la entablemento de la pordo, kaj nemovis, kaj neparolis iu ajn vorto, sed tien senmoviĝis kaj restis. Kaj la pordo sur kio restis la ombro estis, se mi memoris ĝuste, kontraŭ la piedoj de la Zoilus juna vualita. Sed ni, la sep ĉi tien kunigita, vidinte la ombron dum ĝi venis el la interno de la drapiraĵoj, kuraĝis ne stabile rigardi ĝin, sed malsuprenigis niajn okulojn, kaj fiksrigardadis daŭre en la spegulo de ebono. Kaj post iom da tempo mi, Oinos, parolante per mallaŭtaj vortoj, demandegis de la ombro ĝian loĝejon kaj ĝian nomon. Kaj la ombro respondis, “Mi estas OMBRO, kaj mia loĝejo estas ĉirkaŭ la Katakomboj de Ptolemais, kaj apud tiuj mallumaj ebanaĵoj de Helusian kiuj limigas la kanalo abomena Charonian8.” Kaj tiam ni ja, la sep, foriris niajn sidejojn pro hororo, kaj staris tremante, tremantege, kaj konsternegite, ĉar la tonoj en la voĉo de la ombro ne estis la tonoj de iu ajn unuopa estanto, sed de multegaro de estantoj, kaj variigante siajn kadencojn de silabo al silabo, falis krepuske sur niaj oreloj per la akcentoj bonmemoritaj kaj konataj de multaj mil forpasintaj amikoj.

by Edgar Allan Poe
(1850)

Yea, though I walk through the valley of the Shadow:
Psalm of David.

Ye who read are still among the living; but I who write shall have long since gone my way into the region of shadows. For indeed strange things shall happen, and secret things be known, and many centuries shall pass away, ere these memorials be seen of men. And, when seen, there will be some to disbelieve, and some to doubt, and yet a few who will find much to ponder upon in the characters here graven with a stylus of iron.

The year had been a year of terror, and of feelings more intense than terror for which there is no name upon the earth. For many prodigies and signs had taken place, and far and wide, over sea and land, the black wings of the Pestilence were spread abroad. To those, nevertheless, cunning in the stars, it was not unknown that the heavens wore an aspect of ill; and to me, the Greek Oinos, among others, it was evident that now had arrived the alternation of that seven hundred and ninety-fourth year when, at the entrance of Aries, the planet Jupiter is conjoined with the red ring of the terrible Saturnus. The peculiar spirit of the skies, if I mistake not greatly, made itself manifest, not only in the physical orb of the earth, but in the souls, imaginations, and meditations of mankind.

Over some flasks of the red Chian wine, within the walls of a noble hall, in a dim city called Ptolemais, we sat, at night, a company of seven. And to our chamber there was no entrance save by a lofty door of brass: and the door was fashioned by the artisan Corinnos, and, being of rare workmanship, was fastened from within. Black draperies, likewise, in the gloomy room, shut out from our view the moon, the lurid stars, and the peopleless streets- but the boding and the memory of Evil they would not be so excluded. There were things around us and about of which I can render no distinct account- things material and spiritual- heaviness in the atmosphere- a sense of suffocation- anxiety- and, above all, that terrible state of existence which the nervous experience when the senses are keenly living and awake, and meanwhile the powers of thought lie dormant. A dead weight hung upon us. It hung upon our limbs- upon the household furniture- upon the goblets from which we drank; and all things were depressed, and borne down thereby- all things save only the flames of the seven lamps which illumined our revel. Uprearing themselves in tall slender lines of light, they thus remained burning all pallid and motionless; and in the mirror which their lustre formed upon the round table of ebony at which we sat, each of us there assembled beheld the pallor of his own countenance, and the unquiet glare in the downcast eyes of his companions. Yet we laughed and were merry in our proper way- which was hysterical; and sang the songs of Anacreon- which are madness; and drank deeply- although the purple wine reminded us of blood. For there was yet another tenant of our chamber in the person of young Zoilus. Dead, and at full length he lay, enshrouded; the genius and the demon of the scene. Alas! he bore no portion in our mirth, save that his countenance, distorted with the plague, and his eyes, in which Death had but half extinguished the fire of the pestilence, seemed to take such interest in our merriment as the dead may haply take in the merriment of those who are to die. But although I, Oinos, felt that the eyes of the departed were upon me, still I forced myself not to perceive the bitterness of their expression, and gazing down steadily into the depths of the ebony mirror, sang with a loud and sonorous voice the songs of the son of Teios. But gradually my songs they ceased, and their echoes, rolling afar off among the sable draperies of the chamber, became weak, and undistinguishable, and so faded away. And lo! from among those sable draperies where the sounds of the song departed, there came forth a dark and undefined shadow- a shadow such as the moon, when low in heaven, might fashion from the figure of a man: but it was the shadow neither of man nor of God, nor of any familiar thing. And quivering awhile among the draperies of the room, it at length rested in full view upon the surface of the door of brass. But the shadow was vague, and formless, and indefinite, and was the shadow neither of man nor of God- neither God of Greece, nor God of Chaldaea, nor any Egyptian God. And the shadow rested upon the brazen doorway, and under the arch of the entablature of the door, and moved not, nor spoke any word, but there became stationary and remained. And the door whereupon the shadow rested was, if I remember aright, over against the feet of the young Zoilus enshrouded. But we, the seven there assembled, having seen the shadow as it came out from among the draperies, dared not steadily behold it, but cast down our eyes, and gazed continually into the depths of the mirror of ebony. And at length I, Oinos, speaking some low words, demanded of the shadow its dwelling and its appellation. And the shadow answered, "I am SHADOW, and my dwelling is near to the Catacombs of Ptolemais, and hard by those dim plains of Helusion which border upon the foul Charonian canal." And then did we, the seven, start from our seats in horror, and stand trembling, and shuddering, and aghast, for the tones in the voice of the shadow were not the tones of any one being, but of a multitude of beings, and, varying in their cadences from syllable to syllable fell duskly upon our ears in the well-remembered and familiar accents of many thousand departed friends.

"The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King" is the greatest of the greatest. The trilogy is the best movie I have ever seen, and this last installment tops all the rest. In honor of this great work of art, I duly note that all of the major critics in the nation have hailed this movie as great. I shall also reprint here a brief review of the film by the Oregonian's infamous Shawn Levy (reputed by readers of the northwest's largest newspaper to be excessively critical of all movies) from the film's #1 status on his "high five" list.

"The final installment of Peter Jackson's epic adaptation of the J.R.R. Tolkien classics legitimately raises the question of whether the massive whole is the greatest film ever made. A stunning display of film artistry, committed acting, deft storytelling and exquisite care in every detail add up to an overwhelmingly satisfying film. The battle for Middle-earth and the fate of humanity comes to a thrillingly dynamic and emotionally rich conclusion. It's tough to follow if you haven't seen the first parts, but why haven't you seen the first parts? Your grandchildren will."

--Shawn Levy, Oregonian film critic, 12/26/03

This movie is the only movie other than "The Exorcist" to which I have known Levy to give an "A+". And it's probably way better than "The Exorcist" (which I haven't seen) too. So go see it! And don't feel a twinge of pain for giving those big bucks to the megaplex because it's sure worth it.

I would like to retract a statement that I made in an earlier post about Christianity's worship of a crucified dead person being somehow "unusual". Worship of dead people or people who have been martyred is actually incredibly common among the world's religions. In fact, I can't think of a single religion that doesn't somehow deal with the dead in the manner of their presence in a type of afterlife. So I was dead wrong. I think my rather annoyed language at the time may have been misinterperated as intolerant slander of the faith. Truth to be told, I actually have an ironically good knowledge of Christian (specifically Catholic) beliefs. Their belief in afterlife and death is only one reason why I don't adhere to this or any other spiritual doctrine. I believe that when you die, you're dead, and there isn't anything more. Yourself and everything about you then proceeds to decay into a simpler arrangement according to fundamental physical laws which we may or may not have yet discovered. Christianity generally believes in two distinct regions which the spirit may proceed into after death. The lower, hell, is where the spirit experiences "eternal damnation". The upper, heaven, is an unimaginable paradise. The entrance to either of these regions is subject to the deity's just judgement which is based on the quality of the person's actions through the duration of their life. There are other lesser regions of the afterlife such as purgatory which serve other purposes. There are also a great number of intricacies relating to these afterlives which I shall not delve into here. I do not believe in any of this, therefore I am not a Christian. In fact, my total lack of spiritual beliefs easily classifies me as an atheist. Although I believe that all people with religious beliefs are incorrect in their views, the fact remains that it is impossible for me to prove my beliefs on the universe any better than they can prove theirs and therefore there is no point in trying to argue. Therefore my respect in people has no bearing on which philosophical doctrine they subscribe to. I believe that in my previous post I was mixing my own personal reasons for nonspiritualism with fact, and the result was false fact.

An article on why innovation, in the case of Apple, makes for failure:

http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/78/jobs.html

In Esperanto each major part of speech takes a different grammatical ending in order to indicate just that: the part of speech. There are special endings for nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs. These form an imperative function of the language and are merely a subset of a rich system of agglutination. Of these four endings--or perhaps, root-modifiers--it seems that the adverb was perceived as the least important and commonly used in Esperanto's early days, and is still perceived as the least useful by most beginners (including myself, until very recently). Indeed, the adverbial "-e" termination certainly is the simplest by the bare definition of the language's hailed "16 rules". Unlike nouns or adjectives which use agglutination of additional suffixes to indicate number and the accusative case, and unlike verbs which use a more inflectional system to indicate tense, mood, etc., the adverbial termination takes no additional modifications. So, from a literal point of view, yes, the adverbs are the simplest part of speech in Esperanto. And, up until the 1950s, this was probably true in practice. Now, however, it is safe to say that the adverb is the least understood and probably second or third most complex piece of the international language.

Since the 1950s, the adverb in Esperanto has taken on a role similar to (I believe) the ablative case. If I am correct, the ablative case is a case used in certain very conservative languages (Latin, Slavic languages) which indicates an "agent, instrument, or location" (dictionary definition). So words and phrases like "by means of", "to", and "for" are represented with the ablative declension of nouns. In Esperanto the adverbial "-e" termination is filling a somewhat similar role in conversational speech. The word with the "-e" ending still is, of course, an adverb, but the substitution of the "-e" ending for the -o ending (the ending for nouns. Grammatical endings can be freely replaced in Esperanto to form different forms of the same root for different purposes: e.g. varmo - warmth, varma - warm, varme - warmly, etc.) replaces whatever ablative-like preposition would be used before the noun. I'm pretty bad at explaining this, so an example will probably do way better than me. This is an excellent example I got from some french guy. Take the sentence, "I will take a train to the Esperanto congress." In formal Esperanto this translates to: "Mi iros per trajno al la kongreso de Esperanto." (literally: "I will go by means of a train to the congress of Esperanto.") Since Esperanto has always had free word compounding, it would be very common to see "kongreso de Esperanto" shortened to "Esperantkongreso" (literally: Esperanto congress). Regardless, this is pretty much how this sentence would have been formed at the turn of the last century by the experienced Esperantist. Now, at the turn of this century, it would be fair to expect the experienced Esperantist to say something like "Mi alesperantkongresos trajne." (very, very literally: "I will to-the-Esperanto-congress trainly"). Aside from the obvious increase in the tendency to compound words, two things are evident. First, there is the tendency to shorten the standard "iri al destination" (to go to wherever) to using the destination with a verbal ending and the preposition "al" as a prefix. And second, there is the replacement of "per trajno" (by means of the train) with "trajne" ("trainly"). The first change is kind of cool, but the second one is what I've been talking about. The change from "per trajno" to "trajne" replaces the -o (noun) ending with an -e (adverb) ending, and it drops the preposition "per" (by means of). In effect, the adverb ending is kind of assuming the role of the preposition, and acting like an ablative case (but not entirely, since the word is technically no longer a noun. But "trajne" can still be validly replaced by "per trajno"). The most common instance of this dropping of a preposition in favor of the adverb ending is in relation to time. Let take the example of "Mi aĉetas florojn en la somero" (literally: I buy flowers in the summer.) During the infancy of Esperanto (if one no longer considers it an infant) this would be common usage, and indeed, to the English speaker this makes sense because we literally say the same thing in English. Current experienced speakers of Esperanto would not often use this form however. They would probably say or write "Mi aĉetas florojn somere." (very literally: I buy flowers summerly.) Again, the more compact form with the adverb ending is favored, with "somere" and its adverb ending replacing the preposition "en" in "en la somero" (the article "la" is also dropped because "somere" is not a noun). "En" is a preposition of location (temporal and physical), and its role is assumed by the adverb ending again. In the preceeding example, it would probably be more appropriate to use the preposition "dum" (during) instead of "en". But regardless, the adverb ending could and would most often still replace "dum". The replacement of prepositions of time, location, "agent", "instrument", etc. by some kind of modification to the noun is characteristic of the ablative case, and in a liberal sense, is what I believe is happening in Esperanto with the "-e" ending.

I have provided only 2 examples to prove a reletively radical point to the reader, and I am certain that he/she is not satified with my evidence unless she/he is an experienced Esperantist. Nevertheless, I ask the reader to take what I say without additional evidence (assuming they have droned their way through all of this boring junk far enough to actually read this) in a leap of faith, and trust that if I had the time or desire, I could devise at least 10 times as many examples to illustrate my point as the number presented here.

"et caetera" is a spelling of "et cetera" which uses a an a-e ligature instead of "e": quite common in fact. True, I failed to go to the character map and find the a-e ligature. "Monette" is the last name of man in Portland who manufactures the greatest mouthpieces on earth. These are not spelled incorrectly.

"Tio estas por mi Volapukaĵo."

--Meaning, "that's all Greek to me". Volapukists are archaic to Esperantists, which, is itself very humorous.

Well, I sold my trumpet. Yes I did. My sister and my mother find it to be symbolic of some kind of rejection of them because my upgrading trumpets implies that it is not the greatest trumpet to ever be welded, et caetera... I could go on for a long time on that track, but I shall not. My trumpet is gone. I have no trumpet. I will soon though. One that, I might add, evades all other description besides "pretty dang sweet". It's a used Bach 37 with some modifications, that is going to be largely refurbished by its owner on this Friday. I haven't played it (I will within the week though), but I have played a Bach 72 and it is bliss. Free blowing; a warm, dark, smooth tone; high register with ease; it's the best I've ever played, especially with my mouthpiece (once the god, now the demigod of mouthpieces). It's about 8 or 10 years old and has been used by one of the best jazz players in the area. He's the head mechanic at Wally's Music (is that not the most classic name or what?).

But I need to pause a moment to describe what life is like now that I have officially left the world of the Getzens of Elkhorn, Wisconsin. It's actually pretty strange. That is the horn that I have either played or wanted for virtually all of my trumpet playing existance. It was beautiful. Shiny; silver; smashing pistons; responsive; kind of like the souped-up of BMW Z3s of the trumpet world. Now I'm moving on to the '96 Porshe 911 of trumpets. We're not at the Ferrari F50 level (those would be the custom Monettes at approximately $10,000), but you can't complain. It's maybe not as new and chic as the Z3, but it smashes it on the roads. Now that I actually think about that analogy, it's a terrible one. But you get the idea. It's not as new or shiny but has this brilliant warmness. I don't have any of the chronic sharpness, brightness, or occasional abrasive edginess. Life is good. And at about only $300 net expense, life is really good.

Last night I had an interesting fleeting thought on the topic of constructed languages, or conlangs. Esperanto--the reigning king of kings of the conlangs--is certainly not without its flaws, but it is probably the best conlang. So then I got thinking of all the changes I would make to Esperanto if I were to make a new dialect of it, and the I came up with a realllly interesting idea. What if I were to make a radically agglutinative version of Esperanto (an already highly agglutinative language), or what if I were to make a radically analytic version of Esperanto? Well, I think agglutinativeness is way cooler than analyticness in languages, so here's what I came up with in about of idle thought 15 minutes this morning.

Alphabet
c ---> ts
ĉ ---> tc (t∫)
ĝ ---> dj (d3)
j ---> y (j)
ĵ ---> j (3)
ĥ --->h/k
ŝ ---> c (∫)
ŭ ---> w

Pronouns
Sing.
1 - mo
2 - vo
3 - lo (m), co (f), djo (n)
indef. - uno
reflex. - so
Plur.
add 'y' to each for plural

Noun/Adjective
(this is where it gets really funky)
word formation: prefixes-root-suffixes-preposition-grammatical ending-number-[accusative]
ex: "of the old large female pigs" ---> praporkinegdeoj
adjectives take same declension as nouns

Verbs
verb formation: prefixes-root-suffixes-[participle time]-[voice]-[tense]-mood
I am walking - Mo piedirantas
It had been known - Djo stsiitis

verbs aren't changed for person, because that's just cruel.

I finally admitted something to myself today. I strongly dislike Christmas. It has taken me some time to get past the venomous accusation of being "a scrooge!!" or "horrible person!!" and admit it. The reader is at this point (unless they think I'm from Afghanistan) is undoubtedly aghast. But it is true. I really don't like Christmas at all. Now this certainly doesn't mean that I hate everything associated with Christmas, quite the contrary in fact. I think all of the gift-giving, food-sharing, and family/friend-fraternization is excellent. All of those are very good indeed. But to be perfectly honest, although those things are associated to the Christmas tradition, they are in no way unique to the Christmas tradition. They happen all throughout the year and are in no way restricted to the holiday season. And I think they are essential to living a happy life. So obviously that's not what I dislike. What I dislike are those "joyous" things that you will only find around Christmas (not everything, mind you, just those things that I shall relate to you). Take Christmas decorations for instance. I vehemently hate most Christmas decorations. Not only are they generally ugly plastic impressions of things like little deranged automaton-dwarves running around in the snow, but they're useless and they abound in innumerable quantities! You can only use them for about 3 weeks out of the year, and they you have to find a place to store the rotten things. Plus a lot of them are probably made by slave/sweatshop labor in 3rd-world countries. Now that I find simply hypocritical. I also don't like this excessive preparation that Christmas entails. My sister has spent the past two days solid working feverishly on Christmas cookie decorating parties, Christmas dinner parties, Christmas tree decorating, Christmas-garland-on-the-railing-of-the-stairs-decorating that renders the railing entirely unusable for a significant duration of time. And then she has to force me to help with her Christmas mania, yelling at me when I refuse. But that's just the tip of the iceberg...

The worst part about Christmas is the rampant consumerocomericialism. My sunday newspaper weighs at least twice as much on the sunday before Christmas as it does at the beginning of march. It's horrible! I hate the ads, and Christmas just makes them bigger, better, and more obnoxious, plus it uses up a lot of paper (as if buying a paper instead of just using the internet wasn't bad enough... my conscience weighs heavy on me). Everywhere you look it's about how much and how many, how large and how wide. Instead of thinking about the less fortunate 5 billion people, the media and corporate advertisements turn us into tyranically monsters of material.

And then there's the whole religion thing. That doesn't really bother me too much, but I happen to have exactly zero religious beliefs, and although I have an unchanged respect for anyone regardless of their beliefs, the worship of a dead person nailed to a post is slightly... well... it isn't exactly the most likely thing that I would imagine would serve as the icon of a religion.

Maybe I don't hate Christmas at all, maybe it's just the modern Christmas I don't like. So before I am nailed to a post, and serve as the next religious icon when my sister and mother find out what I have been writing here (blasphemeous disgrace to the cult of Christmas, first rate), I'd better go. Oh and by the way, just think about the idea of Santa Clause: he knows where you live, he knows if you've been good or bad, he comes into your house at night through the chimney, and he has an army of elf-helpers at the north pole. It's a little scary.

Record: 5-2
Pct: .714

Clackamas, Rnd. 1: Win
Anderson/Corbett (Wilson)
--bye--
quote: "Dammit!"

Clackamas Rnd. 2: Loss
Anderson/Corbett (Wilson)
??C2/C3?? (Grant)
quote: "I think we won... but that judge did not know what he was doing."

Clackamas Rnd. 3: Win
Anderson/Corbett (Wilson)
Lashley/Boyce (West Albany)
quote: "Wow. I'm not sure that could even be called a debate"

Westview, Rnd. 1: Win
Anderson/Schweitzer (Wilson)
Peter/Preston (Tigard)
quote: "They came up with so much B.S..."

Westview Rnd. 2: Win
Anderson/Schweitzer (Wilson)
--bye--
quote: "I want to stab the people in the tab room."

Westview Rnd. 3: Cancelled
quote: "[insert various obscenities here]!"

Westview Rnd. 4: Loss
Anderson/Schweitzer (Wilson)
HH119/HH119 (name unknown) (Tigard)
quote: "We blew it."

Westview Rnd. 5: Win
Anderson/Schweitzer (Wilson)
Schurman/Plotkin (Corvallis)
quote: "I hate Christmas... We're two Jewish people and two atheist people!"

The first day of the Westview debate tournament is now over (it was only for debate). Since it is late, and we won't get the ballots until tomorrow, here's the best breakdown I can give you. More on the morrow.

Westview, Rnd. 1: (Unknown)
Anderson/Schweitzer (Wilson)
??????????? (Tigard)
quote: "They came up with so much B.S..."

Westview Rnd. 2: Win
Anderson/Schweitzer (Wilson)
--bye--
quote: "I want to stab the people in the tab room."

Westview Rnd. 3: Cancelled
quote: "[insert various obscenities here]!"

So far, the worst our record can be is 1-1, but it's probably more likily than not that it is 2-0. This was a horrible tournament where the organization was so bad that they had to cancel a round. Bad, bad, BAD!! But Leeor did give the quote of the month when he said: "A good debater is one who can change someone's opinion. A master debater is one who can change people's perception of reality."

Await the results of the Anderson/Schweitzer juggernaut, for they shall bear the tidings of good fortune!

Also, the Herr Mach (German teacher) is starting a club on Wednesdays at lunch where he is teaching Norwegian. I can't wait to join. Those industrious Germans!

For the record, here's a recap of my debate record, now that Clackamas is over and Westview is right around the corner (massive! massive! there's 5 or 6 rounds of debate!!):

W/L: 2-1
Pct: .666

Clackamas, Rnd. 1: Win
Anderson/Corbett (Wilson)
--bye--
quote: "Dammit!"

Clackamas Rnd. 2: Loss
Anderson/Corbett (Wilson)
??C2/C3?? (Grant)
quote: "I think we won... but that judge did not know what he was doing."

Clackamas Rnd. 3: Win
Anderson/Corbett (Wilson)
Lashley/Boyce (West Albany)
quote: "Wow. I'm not sure that could even be called a debate"

"Have a happy winter pagan festival."

--Ron Zaraza, wishing his students a happy holiday break.

"You have to understand the Arab mind. The only thing they understand is force--force, pride, and saving face."

--Capt. Todd Brown

"This fence is for your protection. Do not approach or you will be shot."

--Sign on barbed-wire fence surrounding the town of Abu Hishma

"With a heavy dose of fear and violence and a lot of money for projects, I think we can convince these people that we are here to help them."

--Lt. Col. Nathan Sassaman

Today was the Clackamas Speech/Debate Tournament, and the first tournament which I have ever been to. Colin and I debated in the Junior division of Public Debate, and although there were many points that I was rather displeased with, we came out 1-1-(1) (win-loss-bye). We are now officially "speechies" that have tasted the joys of getting to school at 6:00 AM on a Saturday and the delays of tournament schedules.

It took about 30 minutes to drive to Clackamas High School--the newest nicest school I have ever been to. The school was apparently built just this year, and they have so much money to spend that they can afford abundant wood paneling and large expanses of totally useless empty open space in their building. It's disgusting, absolutely disgusting... It's those people out in the burbs... Anyway, for our event there were an odd number of debate teams, so a team during each round received a "bye" meaning that they wouldn't debate. Although the bye counts as an automatic win, the team doesn't get any speaker points. We had the unlucky displeasure of getting a bye on our first round, thus completely screwing up any chance that we ever had of placing. So we sat in on some rounds of dual and ADS, and we listened to the most vulgar and repulsive piece that I have ever listened to. I shall not elaborate, but it involved killing people and a chaotic assortment of character changes that confused me. We watched Beth's ADS, Beth and Jaime's dual, and Clara and Joe's dual, all (Σ∞ "very") good (my statements are lauded by their awards). Finally, after long delays, our first round of debate ever in a tournament began.

Colin and I represented the proposition in a debate with the topic "Resolved: The US should promote democracy abroad" which we defined as "The United States government should (taken at face value) encourage the adoption of democratic forms of government (republicanism included) in countries that do not have this form of government." We defined the value as "human liberties". Therefore if we proved that the US promoting democratic forms of representation in undemocratic nations was pursuant to the goal of having "human liberties", then we would win the debate. By all standards it was an excellent debate. I was delivered the opening and rebuttal speeches and I really felt that my structure (especially of my rebuttal) could have been much better, but considering that it was our first debate, I was not displeased. Colin gave one of his best speeches as te second propositional speaker that I've ever heard from him. And we were well matched with the opposition too. I thought that this was a hard topic for them to argue, and they did a worthy and highly respectable job. Now let me digress... into the judge. The judge was, in a word, "awful". He had absolutely no idea about the format of Public Debate and little experience in speech or debate tournaments. It is my opinion that he failed to understand the imperative relevance of the value to the debate. At the end of the tournament when we received the scoring sheets that informed us that we lost the debate, this became even more clear. His sole reason for favoring the opposition was because of a reletively moot point that the brought up about why specifically it should be the US promoting democracy abroad. That wasn't really the point of the debate at all (in my understanding of it) in the context of our definition of the topic and the value. My personal feeling on the debate before I actually knew the judges vote was that it could have very easily gone either way. Quite frankly, losing bothers me very little compared to the judge's seemingly nonexistant experience and knowledge of public debate. I would have been quite content to lose with a decent judge. My one consolation is that the team we debated was the team that won 1st for junior debate in tournament, and we at least cam close to beating them (Colin thinks we should have, but I'm not as convinced as him).

After that debate I ate some food, talked some more, drank some water, and then watched Jaime's Interp piece, which was very, very good (awards laud my claims). Then, after a lot of time talking to Leeor Schweitzer (the greatest person of today's events, for which I shall describe later) the information for round 3 (the final round; this tournament did not have finals because it was phenomenally lame) was posted. I hesitate to call what followed a "debate" because it really didn't even come close to what the word embodies, and our slaughtering of our opponents was particularly unsatisfying.

We debated in this school's drama room. There was a play that evening. This was the last round of the tournament. It was getting late: almost the evening. Plays occur in the evening. Need I say more? There were phones ringing and people poking their heads through multiple doors all throughout the "debate". It was an inhumane atmosphere in which to debate. But then the topics came, and they were the most inhumane of all. The topics were: 1) The US needs an enemy, 2) The women's rights movement has gone too far, and 3) Sports are the opiate of men. We were the opposition, thus the proposition struck first, eliminating topic 2. Then we struck topic 3 because it afforded them more flexibility of definition. Topic 1 is a good topic... an interesting topic if considered literally. They skewed it to a degree that was about 10 times worse than anything Colin and I had expected. They defined "Resolved: the US needs an enemy" as "The Bush administration requires a military opponent to distract the public from the fact that George W. Bush is incompetant". Despite the fact that this definition is far to liberal in its bending of the actual topic, they did a worse than imaginable job fulfilling the "burden of proof" of the proposition. They had two (2) points. Contention 1: the Bush administration is using war as a means to raise Bush's popular opinion, thus distracting the public from his incompetance; Contention 2: Bush is incompetant because he is a poor public speaker: subpoint A: (merely consisting of this phrase, which I quote) "'strategery' need I say any more". This warrents the phrase "crap beyond the pale". Aside from the fact that their arguments had ZERO (0) facts and were essentially 100% unsupported opinion (they did bring up the point that wartime presidents do have high approval ratings, but they failed to identify why this is), their speeches were beyond bad. The first propositional speech (all speeches have 30 second grace periods) is supposed to be 7 minutes, the second 8, and the rebuttal 5. Their 1st speech was 1:20, their second was certainly no more than 3 or 4, and their rebuttal was probably under 2. One of the propositional speakers kept firing off questions that had little relevance to the debate. My two favorites were "Which apology would you personally be more inclined to accept: one from FDR or Andrew Jackson?" and "What do you personally, you yourself personally think of George W. Bush's speaking?" In the first, I'm guessing that he was trying to create some kind of connection between public trust and presidents during wartime. This is incredibly stupid because anyone with a fraction of sanity would trust FDR over Jackson because Jackson was obsessed with power, executed more vetoes than any other American president, and killed a man in a duel. Gee, I wonder who I'd trust more? The second question is completely and utterly irrelevant because in a debate, you're not arguing your opinion, you're arguing for or against the topic. I personally don't like George W. Bush's speaking and I don't think it's that great, but I will commend him for making enormous strides in his speaking abilities since he entered the presidency. Their arguments were so full of contradictions and irrelevancies that I could go on for a long time. But I won't. I'll just say: we won. I'm also a little annoyed that they squandered a perfectly good round on this worthless tripe. I would have rather lost another good debate than been given this one.

And that was it. The awards were given, and as a school we did okay. I think people were expecting better because of last year's fifth in state performance. We didn't place as a team, but we had a good number of people win awards. I'm tired so I'm going to stop now, but all I can say is: "I'm psyched for next Saturday!" And I shall tell the saga of Leeor at a better time.