One time I was flipping through the radio channels in Atlanta and I heard a brief snippet of some radio host:
"Honk if you love Star 94!" or some other radio station, I don't recall which. And then I heard a bunch of screaming girls, apparently on speaker phone, who had called into the show:
"AAAAAA - honk - AAAAA WOO honk HOO honk honk!!!!"
Ever since that night I have wondered what the people around the girls' car were thinking. Had I been around them, I probably would have had one of the following thoughts:
"I am going fast enough, idiot!"
"Are my lights on? Are they honking at me?"
"Same to you!!"
And I imagine that the drivers near the girls had similar reactions. But perhaps they were at a stoplight, then reactions would have been slightly different:
"I can't go - the light's red." Honk Honk!
"Do I know them or something?"
Pedestrians would have instinctively ducked and looked for the source. Stray dogs would have started barking and feral cats meowing, the inhabitants of the neighboring car would have looked over and, upon seeing a group of giggling girls, rolled their eyes and continued to wait for the light.
Communication between drivers can be very confusing. The most well-intentioned gesture can be misread and returned with anger, a simple goading honk can be misinterpreted as the honk of utter contempt and unleash a torrent of curses. I have a friend who was once flicked off by a nearby driver who had misunderstood my friend's passionate singing (with arm motions) as passionate screaming and finger-giving. It's dangerous to enjoy your music too much.
Other gestures can be misread too, especially when drivers are wearing sunglasses. Most people love to wave their arms around in meaningful ways while talking to other passengers. That's all well and good until the guy in the car next to you thinks you are waving and gesticulating at him. Then he thinks you are giving him the right of way, he zips in front of you, cutting you off, and you proceed to really wave and gesticulate at him. He does the same back, but he thinks you are happy. It is particularly confusing if you are talking to someone on speaker-phone, so any gestures are made to invisible people. I am normally inclined to think you are gesturing at me before I think you are gesturing to your brother who cannot see you and lives in Alaska.
Often these gesture mishaps result in honking mayhem. The neighborly driver has cut you off, and you are now angry. So you let off a string of honks - long, pregnant ones. Then he knows you are mad. Honking is easily interpreted. The quick two-honk duo is a sign that you need to go, having missed the change of the light. The long, full two-honk means, "You are an idiot," and is often responded to in kind. Longer strings of short honks are light-hearted hellos or demonstrative thoughts of the driver which have nothing to do with anyone else. A single, lengthy honk (for more than 3 seconds) means "Get out of my way fool!"
The only problem is that many cars have vastly inferior horns. Many sound like a mouse squeaking in the corner, trying to be heard in a room full of elephants. Good car horns are juicy, gargling, full, and deep. Large sedans often have the best of all. I used to drive a Buick LeSabre which had an exceptional horn, and I was sure to make use of it often.
All the gesturing and honking has made America's roadways an emotion-laden festering ground of anger. Sometimes even simple mistakes without any malice can result in unbelievable anger. One time I was riding with a friend in rush hour on a local highway. We needed to merge, so seeing a chance, we merged to our right. It just so happened that one lane further to the right contained a gentleman who wanted to merge left into the space we had just occupied. He basically merged at the same time we did and we ended up in front of him. He apparently read this merge as us cutting him off. So he managed to fly past us in the next lane over and remerged into our lane, right ahead of us. Then, in the middle of rush hour on an exceedingly busy highway, he stopped his car and got out (five lanes, mind you). With ire in his face, he walked back to our car, which was effectively blocked by his car ahead of us and traffic all around us, and began to pound on the driver-side window, screaming expletives and nonsensical blabber about us cutting him off. Luckily, we caught a gap in the lane to our right and sped away before anything worse happened. But really, neither of us was in the wrong; I think the no-longer-gentle man was probably affected by indigestion.
I once went to Charleston with a group of friends and our wonderful hosts took us out into the river and harbor in a boat. There were not many other boaters out, at least, we only passed by 10-15 other small boats in the course of 2-3 hours. But every time we came upon another boat, all the passengers waved to each other. We didn't know them, but we were united by boating-culture.
Recently I decided to take up this habit when I drove around the area in which I live. If I was anywhere near my apartment, I would wave to other drivers as they passed by (on two-lane roads, that is). I really enjoyed it; it brought cheer to my day. But people are crazy. I more often received the middle finger than a wave in return for my jollity.
I don't know why people are so disgruntled by friendliness. But one thing is sure, America's roads certainly need more friendliness and less disgruntlement.
Luxury vs. Necessity
In my March 31 post, "Do you want three shots or four?", I discussed the sense of entitlement assumed by many Americans. Basically, I said that the convenience of access to goods and services in America should not become an excuse for greediness.
I was listening to NPR the other day (you should all listen to NPR, it is amazing) and I heard a story that was very encouraging. They were interviewing a man from the Pew Research Center about a recent poll the Pew Center conducted. Apparently, the Pew Center has been asking Americans since 1973 what they consider to be luxuries and necessities. The poll focuses on things like cars, TVs, dishwashers, microwaves, and the like. From 1996-2006, Americans' perceptions of most of these items as a necessity steadily increased. By 2006, 91% of Americans thought a car was a necessity, 83% said the same of a clothes dryer, 70% for home air conditioning, 64% for a TV, 68% for a microwave, and 33% for cable or satellite TV service.
A few years ago, I probably would have said most of those things, with the exception of cable and a TV set, were necessities, particularly AC, a car, and a microwave. Living in Georgia, AC is a must have. It's either AC or death in the middle of the summer here, and I still believe that. But after living in England without a single one of the things listed above (and no dishwasher either!), I have revised my views a little. Whereas I felt that I needed my own car, I have realized that sharing a single car with my wife is really quite feasible, at least for now. We also do not have a microwave in our new apartment. It didn't come with one, and we hardly ever miss it. When I was in college, I used the microwave almost every day. I really didn't need to. We have decided that it's not worth it to spend the $30 it would cost us to buy a microwave - that is how little we need one. We only get the basic channels of TV, and it's great; we read more instead.
In short, I realized that many of the things I considered necessities were really luxuries, and some of them were luxuries that I really wouldn't miss if I didn't have them. Apparently, the recent economic troubles have caused many Americans to rethink this issue as well. Now, according to the poll, the percentages listed above have dramatically reduced. That is great! While the recession is not a good thing, I'm glad it has caused people to realize what is luxury and what is necessity. Some of the new percentages of people considering items as necessity are as follows:
Car - 88%
Clothes Dryer - 66%
Air Conditioning - 54%
TV set - 52%
Microwave - 47%
Cable or Satellite TV Service - 23%
I'm especially pleased that less than half of Americans think microwaves are necessities. Compared to the old 68%, the microwave percentage dropped 21% in three years! That is marvelous. Unfortunately, I know all the numbers will go right back up when the economy rebounds. Meanwhile, it is a good time to reflect on how good we have it in America, because in many places, all the items in the poll are luxuries. And while I'm not saying it is bad to own the things in the list, just because we can afford something doesn't mean it is necessary.
For a summary of the research mentioned, click here.
For the complete report, click here.
I was listening to NPR the other day (you should all listen to NPR, it is amazing) and I heard a story that was very encouraging. They were interviewing a man from the Pew Research Center about a recent poll the Pew Center conducted. Apparently, the Pew Center has been asking Americans since 1973 what they consider to be luxuries and necessities. The poll focuses on things like cars, TVs, dishwashers, microwaves, and the like. From 1996-2006, Americans' perceptions of most of these items as a necessity steadily increased. By 2006, 91% of Americans thought a car was a necessity, 83% said the same of a clothes dryer, 70% for home air conditioning, 64% for a TV, 68% for a microwave, and 33% for cable or satellite TV service.
A few years ago, I probably would have said most of those things, with the exception of cable and a TV set, were necessities, particularly AC, a car, and a microwave. Living in Georgia, AC is a must have. It's either AC or death in the middle of the summer here, and I still believe that. But after living in England without a single one of the things listed above (and no dishwasher either!), I have revised my views a little. Whereas I felt that I needed my own car, I have realized that sharing a single car with my wife is really quite feasible, at least for now. We also do not have a microwave in our new apartment. It didn't come with one, and we hardly ever miss it. When I was in college, I used the microwave almost every day. I really didn't need to. We have decided that it's not worth it to spend the $30 it would cost us to buy a microwave - that is how little we need one. We only get the basic channels of TV, and it's great; we read more instead.
In short, I realized that many of the things I considered necessities were really luxuries, and some of them were luxuries that I really wouldn't miss if I didn't have them. Apparently, the recent economic troubles have caused many Americans to rethink this issue as well. Now, according to the poll, the percentages listed above have dramatically reduced. That is great! While the recession is not a good thing, I'm glad it has caused people to realize what is luxury and what is necessity. Some of the new percentages of people considering items as necessity are as follows:
Car - 88%
Clothes Dryer - 66%
Air Conditioning - 54%
TV set - 52%
Microwave - 47%
Cable or Satellite TV Service - 23%
I'm especially pleased that less than half of Americans think microwaves are necessities. Compared to the old 68%, the microwave percentage dropped 21% in three years! That is marvelous. Unfortunately, I know all the numbers will go right back up when the economy rebounds. Meanwhile, it is a good time to reflect on how good we have it in America, because in many places, all the items in the poll are luxuries. And while I'm not saying it is bad to own the things in the list, just because we can afford something doesn't mean it is necessary.
For a summary of the research mentioned, click here.
For the complete report, click here.
Dragons
Commercials are an interesting part of our culture. Those of us who care nothing for the NFL (college rocks) still watch the Super Bowl just to see what Budweiser will come up with. In my opinion, the commercials are often better than the game. But sometimes you find a gem of an ad watching something other than the Super Bowl.
This happened for me not too long ago. I was innocently watching some nerdy program no doubt, when I was suddenly rapt by drama and excitement of the highest order. The Mac Daddy of all commercials had finally been produced.
Since the commercial is inexplicably absent from Youtube and the rest of the internet as far as I can tell, I will describe the commercial for you. It should not surprise you that the commercial is for Gerber Graduates, food for toddlers. They have always had splendid ads. (And they make food that looks cool, tastes awesome, and is nutritious to boot!)
Basically, a 2-3 year old fellow, who I shall refer to as Henry, has captured a dragon (his mom) and imprisoned her in a cage of couch cushions with little more than brute strength and a tin foil sword. But, alas, it is lunch time! How ever will Henry eat if he must guard a dangerous dragon?!?! Whatever will become of the fair peasants whom Henry guards?? The suspense is so intense!!! !! !
Henry has the perfect solution: "You're freeeee dragon! Fly! Fly! Fly! Fly!"
I never would have thought of it myself. But Henry knew his adversary, and he knew that the perfect way to eat lunch, was to free the dragon. It worked like a charm. Three year olds always know what to do.
The first time I saw the commercial, I had many reactions to it, all of them good. My gut reaction was laughter, of course, as it is quite comical. But then I realized that the little boy had done what I always wanted to do - he had purposefully released a dangerous creature, knowing its heart was good all along. He realized that dragons have feelings too and set it free to revel in its power and mystique. He was the quintessential knight, upright and just.
Now I'm sure the line was scripted, and I'm sure the shot that made it to TV was the 319th take (I can just imagine the producers: "Alright Henry, just hold that 'freeee' a little longer - and why don't you wave the sword around too? No, Henry, you cannot have another popsicle until you finish the commercial!"), but the line was right in sync with the ways of the young. It is just like them to have a keen insight into life at the perfect moment, or to ask the question you have always intended to ask but never did.
I identify with the little guy; I've always wanted to free the dragon but I'm afraid it will eat me. Now I know dragons just want to be free and fly. So next time I'll free the dragon.
I'll be eagerly awaiting the next development in food for toddlers.
For my favorite dragon, click here.
For some funny kid quotes, click here.
This happened for me not too long ago. I was innocently watching some nerdy program no doubt, when I was suddenly rapt by drama and excitement of the highest order. The Mac Daddy of all commercials had finally been produced.
Since the commercial is inexplicably absent from Youtube and the rest of the internet as far as I can tell, I will describe the commercial for you. It should not surprise you that the commercial is for Gerber Graduates, food for toddlers. They have always had splendid ads. (And they make food that looks cool, tastes awesome, and is nutritious to boot!)
Basically, a 2-3 year old fellow, who I shall refer to as Henry, has captured a dragon (his mom) and imprisoned her in a cage of couch cushions with little more than brute strength and a tin foil sword. But, alas, it is lunch time! How ever will Henry eat if he must guard a dangerous dragon?!?! Whatever will become of the fair peasants whom Henry guards?? The suspense is so intense!!! !! !
Henry has the perfect solution: "You're freeeee dragon! Fly! Fly! Fly! Fly!"
I never would have thought of it myself. But Henry knew his adversary, and he knew that the perfect way to eat lunch, was to free the dragon. It worked like a charm. Three year olds always know what to do.
The first time I saw the commercial, I had many reactions to it, all of them good. My gut reaction was laughter, of course, as it is quite comical. But then I realized that the little boy had done what I always wanted to do - he had purposefully released a dangerous creature, knowing its heart was good all along. He realized that dragons have feelings too and set it free to revel in its power and mystique. He was the quintessential knight, upright and just.
Now I'm sure the line was scripted, and I'm sure the shot that made it to TV was the 319th take (I can just imagine the producers: "Alright Henry, just hold that 'freeee' a little longer - and why don't you wave the sword around too? No, Henry, you cannot have another popsicle until you finish the commercial!"), but the line was right in sync with the ways of the young. It is just like them to have a keen insight into life at the perfect moment, or to ask the question you have always intended to ask but never did.
I identify with the little guy; I've always wanted to free the dragon but I'm afraid it will eat me. Now I know dragons just want to be free and fly. So next time I'll free the dragon.
I'll be eagerly awaiting the next development in food for toddlers.
For my favorite dragon, click here.
For some funny kid quotes, click here.
Merlyn knows best
On my bedside table sit a lamp, a clock, a coaster, and thirteen books. They cover a range of topics about which I often pontificate to my wife and other unwary listeners: medieval literature, evolution, language, theology, physics, writing, myth, the geological formation of fjords, and ocean floor cartography. The mound continuously grows as I visit bookstores or libraries, which, of course, I do regularly. Every night is a battle to decide which book I shall read, and it is truly stressing. Most of the time I cannot make up my mind, so I pick three or four books out of the heap and set them next to me on the bed. I hope to read each of them, but I invariably get hooked into whichever I choose first and neglect the others until the following night. But there is the special case of the short story which allows for greater flexibility. At the suggestion of my friend Paul (cheers Paul), I recently checked out a selection of mysteries by Isaac Asimov (Paul actually suggested some of his other works, but the library was fresh out). Not only are the mysteries entertaining, but their brevity also allows me multiple genres of entertainment in one night. Capital, I say.
The only problem is that in this edition, Asimov himself makes a few brief comments at the beginning of each mystery. As a prescript to the first story I read, he mentions how obvious the solution is - apparently I'm an idiot.
But the point is that bibliophiles like myself (and many of you, I dare say) can hop, skip, and jump from genre to genre with the gracious help of our local bookmongers and lenders. I haven't been around too long, but from what I can tell, the availability of books today is absolutely staggering compared to that of even thirty or forty years ago. The collections at the library are about what they have always been (except those of university libraries, which have greatly expanded due to the internet), but chain bookstores like Barnes & Noble and Borders have put thousands of additional options at the fingertips of the consumer. And if these still do not have the required volume, Amazon is sure to provide.
Unfortunately, along with the many wonderful books that this expansion makes accessible, mountains of worthless books are also strewn around us. Many books simply restate the ideas or plots of previous books, and I am actually fine with that to some extent. Each generation needs its own authors to recast the most important ideas in life, and that has always been the case. But aside from these, the refuse that populates bookshelves is almost comical. From the lexical pornography of the harlequin novel to the ten billionth Lord of the Rings copycat to the endless stream of self-help and fast-money pyramid scheme books to the infernal mindlessness of many modern works, good books are slowly being overtaken by commercialism. As a Christian, one of the other problems that irks me is the incessant flow of poorly written Christian metaphoric novels. This is one category that we could probably ignore for several generations before needing to recast it. But even worse is the conspicuous money grubbing of the authors of series like Left Behind, first intended as three books, then seven, and finally filling out at a whopping sixteen.
One cause for the multiplication of poorly written books is that publishers are afraid to reject the voice of the minority, even if the work is utterly terrible, for fear of being called racist. This problem is especially evident at the university level, where introductory literature classes are often full of books by minority authors regardless of the books' merits. Harold Bloom, noted Shakespeare critic, says it best in his book Genius:
"I was a sweeter person before our universities yielded to supposed social benignity and chose texts for teaching largely on the basis of the racial origin, gender, sexual orientation, and ethnic affiliations of the New Authors, past and present, whether or not they could write their way out of a paper bag."
So true.
The more subtle problem is that these days anyone can publish, even in nonfiction, whether or not the information contained in their books is true. So when Thomas Cahill, a supposedly reputable historian, publishes a book entitled How the Irish Saved Civilization, we are led to believe that the Irish really did save civilization. The book is right there in the history section along with Herodotus, Tacitus, the Beards, the Durants, and all the rest. But Cahill's facts are all mixed up, and in reality there is little evidence for his thesis that "without the mission of the Irish monks, who single-handedly refounded European civilization...the world that came after them would have been an entirely different one - a world without books." The Irish monks were not the only ones copying books, as he proposes. I'm quite certain we would still have books without the Irish monks. But to the unsuspecting reader, Cahill's premise may be believable.
Thus, the availability of books is both a blessing and a curse. It allows us to construct massive towers of diverse genre on our bedside tables, but it also clutters our bookstores, libraries, and educational establishments with rubbish. I have to conclude, though, that the benefits outweigh the detriments. I would rather have access to all the books I desire while having to winnow out the garbage than to be unable to learn as much as I please. And I suppose the task of separating the worthwhile from the worthless also educates. While tricky books like Cahill's still bother me, the pleasure of learning is too great to ignore.
T.H. White sums it up nicely via Merlyn, sage of Arthurian legend:
"The best thing for being sad is to learn something. That is the only thing that never fails....Learn why the world wags and what wags it. That is the only thing which the mind can never exhaust, never alienate, never be tortured by, never fear or distrust, and never dream of regretting. Learning is the thing for you."
The only problem is that in this edition, Asimov himself makes a few brief comments at the beginning of each mystery. As a prescript to the first story I read, he mentions how obvious the solution is - apparently I'm an idiot.
But the point is that bibliophiles like myself (and many of you, I dare say) can hop, skip, and jump from genre to genre with the gracious help of our local bookmongers and lenders. I haven't been around too long, but from what I can tell, the availability of books today is absolutely staggering compared to that of even thirty or forty years ago. The collections at the library are about what they have always been (except those of university libraries, which have greatly expanded due to the internet), but chain bookstores like Barnes & Noble and Borders have put thousands of additional options at the fingertips of the consumer. And if these still do not have the required volume, Amazon is sure to provide.
Unfortunately, along with the many wonderful books that this expansion makes accessible, mountains of worthless books are also strewn around us. Many books simply restate the ideas or plots of previous books, and I am actually fine with that to some extent. Each generation needs its own authors to recast the most important ideas in life, and that has always been the case. But aside from these, the refuse that populates bookshelves is almost comical. From the lexical pornography of the harlequin novel to the ten billionth Lord of the Rings copycat to the endless stream of self-help and fast-money pyramid scheme books to the infernal mindlessness of many modern works, good books are slowly being overtaken by commercialism. As a Christian, one of the other problems that irks me is the incessant flow of poorly written Christian metaphoric novels. This is one category that we could probably ignore for several generations before needing to recast it. But even worse is the conspicuous money grubbing of the authors of series like Left Behind, first intended as three books, then seven, and finally filling out at a whopping sixteen.
One cause for the multiplication of poorly written books is that publishers are afraid to reject the voice of the minority, even if the work is utterly terrible, for fear of being called racist. This problem is especially evident at the university level, where introductory literature classes are often full of books by minority authors regardless of the books' merits. Harold Bloom, noted Shakespeare critic, says it best in his book Genius:
"I was a sweeter person before our universities yielded to supposed social benignity and chose texts for teaching largely on the basis of the racial origin, gender, sexual orientation, and ethnic affiliations of the New Authors, past and present, whether or not they could write their way out of a paper bag."
So true.
The more subtle problem is that these days anyone can publish, even in nonfiction, whether or not the information contained in their books is true. So when Thomas Cahill, a supposedly reputable historian, publishes a book entitled How the Irish Saved Civilization, we are led to believe that the Irish really did save civilization. The book is right there in the history section along with Herodotus, Tacitus, the Beards, the Durants, and all the rest. But Cahill's facts are all mixed up, and in reality there is little evidence for his thesis that "without the mission of the Irish monks, who single-handedly refounded European civilization...the world that came after them would have been an entirely different one - a world without books." The Irish monks were not the only ones copying books, as he proposes. I'm quite certain we would still have books without the Irish monks. But to the unsuspecting reader, Cahill's premise may be believable.
Thus, the availability of books is both a blessing and a curse. It allows us to construct massive towers of diverse genre on our bedside tables, but it also clutters our bookstores, libraries, and educational establishments with rubbish. I have to conclude, though, that the benefits outweigh the detriments. I would rather have access to all the books I desire while having to winnow out the garbage than to be unable to learn as much as I please. And I suppose the task of separating the worthwhile from the worthless also educates. While tricky books like Cahill's still bother me, the pleasure of learning is too great to ignore.
T.H. White sums it up nicely via Merlyn, sage of Arthurian legend:
"The best thing for being sad is to learn something. That is the only thing that never fails....Learn why the world wags and what wags it. That is the only thing which the mind can never exhaust, never alienate, never be tortured by, never fear or distrust, and never dream of regretting. Learning is the thing for you."
Eight months in review
If you are new to the Survey, or even if you are a veteran, you may not have checked out some of the posts from the last eight months. So I thought I'd provide links to a few of the posts I find most enjoyable, new and old:
The Battle of Lechèque
Paranoia
He's a Regular
Books
Do you want three shots or four?
Cast your vote for your favorite in the box to the right!
The Battle of Lechèque
Paranoia
He's a Regular
Books
Do you want three shots or four?
Cast your vote for your favorite in the box to the right!
An Etymological Excursion
I find it comical how often preachers refer to dead languages. Don’t get me wrong, dead languages or great, and I plan to learn as many of them as I can before I die, but preachers like to use them unnecessarily. Once, for instance, I heard a sermon about abundant life, and the preacher decided to whip out the Greek:
“Abundant – in Greek the word literally means ‘abundant’”
Fascinating. This sort of thing happens all the time, unfortunately. While I love old languages, I think it would really be better of preachers avoided them, except on especially useful occasions.
Last night I was in Borders and decided it would be a good time to peruse the good ole etymological dictionary, just for fun. There were a few words I had been meaning to look up anyway. While I am not attempting to explain abundant life, I hope you enjoy some of the nuggets I found:
Wold – open country
This word, while rare in America, is common in England and has an interesting history. It ultimately comes from German wald, forest. England used to be covered in forests, so many places have the word wold in them to denote a forest. But the forests didn’t last forever. As England was deforested, the names for places did not always change, so many places that are labeled wold were previously forests but are now open country. This process occurred so many times that the meaning of wold now only retains the meaning of ‘open country.’
Naughty – disobedient, mischievous; older – evil, wicked
The word originates in Middle English from naught, that is, nothingness, void. Naughti originally meant needy or having nothing. The current meaning of disobedient or of ill repute probably came from the view that the poor were improper and mischievous.
As an interesting side note, medieval Christian thought was influenced strongly by theologians like St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, and Boethius, all of whom espoused the view that evil was essentially the absence of good. Then perhaps naught had a connotation of evil in the medieval mind since nothingness contains nothing, including anything good. So obviously nothingness would have a conspicuous absence of goodness and would therefore be evil. But I have no evidence for this meaning, just speculation of a potential influence.
Villain – a scoundrel
Villain is ultimately from Latin villanus, farmhand, someone who worked on a villa. Villein denoted someone belonging to a half-free group of peasants in the Middle Ages. Both meanings did connote roguery, probably because of class differences again.
Flavor – taste
From Latin flator, odor, aroma. I just found that interesting.
Ambrosia – food of the gods
Originally from ambrotos, immortal [a – not + brotos (from mrotos – mortal)]. This is a good example of semantic narrowing. Instead of just meaning immortal, ambrosia came to mean something more specific that was associated with the immortals. Another good example is meat, which used to mean simply ‘food’ but now means, well, ‘meat.’
Flamingo – pink bird that stands on one leg all the time
Stems from flamenco which comes from Dutch Vlaming, a native of Flanders. The bird is so called because its coloring was associated with the pinkish complexion of the Flemish or Dutch.
Fornicate – have sex outside of marriage
This one shows just how disparate original meanings can be. It comes from Latin fornix, arch, vault. It gained its current meaning because prostitutes in Rome often solicited under the arches of certain buildings.
Fiasco - complete failure
Again, strange things on this one. It comes from the Latin flasco, flask, and derives its meaning from an obscure allusion in Italian drama.
Fascist (apparently I like 'f' words) - an extremist right-wing psycho
Comes from Latin fascis, a bundle (of twigs or straw). In Roman days, a bundle of rods attached to an axe head was carried before magistrates as a symbol of authority and power. How that came to mean authority or power, I have no idea. Strange thing, culture.
I think that’s enough for now. I hope you have enjoyed our etymological excursion!
“Abundant – in Greek the word literally means ‘abundant’”
Fascinating. This sort of thing happens all the time, unfortunately. While I love old languages, I think it would really be better of preachers avoided them, except on especially useful occasions.
Last night I was in Borders and decided it would be a good time to peruse the good ole etymological dictionary, just for fun. There were a few words I had been meaning to look up anyway. While I am not attempting to explain abundant life, I hope you enjoy some of the nuggets I found:
Wold – open country
This word, while rare in America, is common in England and has an interesting history. It ultimately comes from German wald, forest. England used to be covered in forests, so many places have the word wold in them to denote a forest. But the forests didn’t last forever. As England was deforested, the names for places did not always change, so many places that are labeled wold were previously forests but are now open country. This process occurred so many times that the meaning of wold now only retains the meaning of ‘open country.’
Naughty – disobedient, mischievous; older – evil, wicked
The word originates in Middle English from naught, that is, nothingness, void. Naughti originally meant needy or having nothing. The current meaning of disobedient or of ill repute probably came from the view that the poor were improper and mischievous.
As an interesting side note, medieval Christian thought was influenced strongly by theologians like St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, and Boethius, all of whom espoused the view that evil was essentially the absence of good. Then perhaps naught had a connotation of evil in the medieval mind since nothingness contains nothing, including anything good. So obviously nothingness would have a conspicuous absence of goodness and would therefore be evil. But I have no evidence for this meaning, just speculation of a potential influence.
Villain – a scoundrel
Villain is ultimately from Latin villanus, farmhand, someone who worked on a villa. Villein denoted someone belonging to a half-free group of peasants in the Middle Ages. Both meanings did connote roguery, probably because of class differences again.
Flavor – taste
From Latin flator, odor, aroma. I just found that interesting.
Ambrosia – food of the gods
Originally from ambrotos, immortal [a – not + brotos (from mrotos – mortal)]. This is a good example of semantic narrowing. Instead of just meaning immortal, ambrosia came to mean something more specific that was associated with the immortals. Another good example is meat, which used to mean simply ‘food’ but now means, well, ‘meat.’
Flamingo – pink bird that stands on one leg all the time
Stems from flamenco which comes from Dutch Vlaming, a native of Flanders. The bird is so called because its coloring was associated with the pinkish complexion of the Flemish or Dutch.
Fornicate – have sex outside of marriage
This one shows just how disparate original meanings can be. It comes from Latin fornix, arch, vault. It gained its current meaning because prostitutes in Rome often solicited under the arches of certain buildings.
Fiasco - complete failure
Again, strange things on this one. It comes from the Latin flasco, flask, and derives its meaning from an obscure allusion in Italian drama.
Fascist (apparently I like 'f' words) - an extremist right-wing psycho
Comes from Latin fascis, a bundle (of twigs or straw). In Roman days, a bundle of rods attached to an axe head was carried before magistrates as a symbol of authority and power. How that came to mean authority or power, I have no idea. Strange thing, culture.
I think that’s enough for now. I hope you have enjoyed our etymological excursion!
Changes at the Survey
Hello all! As you may have noticed recently, the blog is changing. Unfortunately, I don't really know HTML, so the changes are slow. I have been wanting to update the format for some time now, so I have finally begun. It will probably take awhile to complete, but eventually I hope to make the blog more attractive and easier to read. I went ahead and switched to this current format because of the wider reading area (I was sick of that thin column on the old blog). But you will probably see more changes, perhaps complete format changes, in the weeks to come.
For now, please notice that the comments are now just under the heading of the article rather than at the end. So you can click on it and comment as usual. Also, notice the great new search bar in the upper right corner of the page. It actually works!! I'm really excited about that. So, for instance, if you type "defenestration," you will notice that I have mentioned the topic twice!
If you follow the blog but have not become one of my "followers," please take the time to become one by clicking the follow button in the right hand column a few boxes down. You will need a google email address to do this, I believe.
I am trying to focus my blog a little more from here on out. It has been extremely random, and while I do not plan to eliminate that, I plan to focus more on language, the arts, and culture. Most of my articles have perhaps vaguely fallen into these categories, but I will be more conscious about it henceforth. But trust me, there will still be plenty of ridiculous stories.
I hope you enjoy the blog, and I hope the changes will make it even more enjoyable.
Thanks to all you readers!
For now, please notice that the comments are now just under the heading of the article rather than at the end. So you can click on it and comment as usual. Also, notice the great new search bar in the upper right corner of the page. It actually works!! I'm really excited about that. So, for instance, if you type "defenestration," you will notice that I have mentioned the topic twice!
If you follow the blog but have not become one of my "followers," please take the time to become one by clicking the follow button in the right hand column a few boxes down. You will need a google email address to do this, I believe.
I am trying to focus my blog a little more from here on out. It has been extremely random, and while I do not plan to eliminate that, I plan to focus more on language, the arts, and culture. Most of my articles have perhaps vaguely fallen into these categories, but I will be more conscious about it henceforth. But trust me, there will still be plenty of ridiculous stories.
I hope you enjoy the blog, and I hope the changes will make it even more enjoyable.
Thanks to all you readers!
Posts
