In Babel No More, Michael Erard goes on a search for hyperpolyglots – people who are said to speak over six languages. But he also wants to know about the legendary hyperpolyglots who are rumored to speak more than 50, 60, or even 70 languages. You can therefore understand why I approached this book with a healthy dose of skepticism. Do I believe one person can speak 70 languages? No. Do I believe that other people believe that someone can speak 70 languages? Yes. After all, that’s where the legends of these hyperpolyglots came from. But I’ve had training in linguistics. Language is a trickier subject for me.
I was skeptical that Erard would not approach the subject of hyperpolyglots with as much skepticism as me. Fortunately, I was wrong. Erard is on point with the nature of language learners, separating the fact from fiction in the legend of the hyperpolyglot:
The hyperpolyglot embodies both of these poles: the linguistic wildness of our primordial past and the multilingualism of the looming technotopia. That’s why stories circulate about this or that person who can speak an astounding number of languages – such people are holy freaks. Touch one, you touch his power. […] Once you say you speak ten languages, you’ll soon hear the gossip that you speak twenty or forty. That’s why people who speak several languages have been mistrusted as spies; people wonder where their loyalties lie.
Jacket design by Zocalo Design
Needless to say, Erard finds many interesting characters in his journey of hyperpolyglots. It’s part of what makes the book so interesting. But he also gets into how language works. And, thankfully, he doesn’t do it from a best-seller pop-science fascinating-but-total-bullshit way. I can’t tell you how refreshing that is, but I can give you a sample quote:
Language, however, encompasses more than the communicating we sometimes do with it. If language had evolved solely for the means of communication, we’d rarely misunderstand each other. Instead, we have a system in which worlds mean more than one thing, in which one can devise many sentences to capture the same idea, in which one moment of silence means more than a thousand pictures. No animal species could survive this intensity of ambiguity. Moreover, people don’t appreciate how little of our meaning is in our words, even as we decipher hand gestures, facial movements, body postures automatically every day. What we mean is implied by us and then inferred by our listeners.
The real beauty of Babel No More, however, is the way in which Erard demystifies the process of language learning without removing the wonderment that people attribute to it. If anything, when you better understand the multifaceted nature of language learning, you will appreciate it more, while at the same time avoid being fooled into thinking someone could speak 70 languages or that someone who speaks more than three must be a spy.
Santorum Samples are passages from Rick Santorum’s It Takes a Family. They are deliberately taken out of context in an attempt to show that Mr. Santorum is a rational human being. Because we all know that when viewed in context, Rick Santorum is a jackass. Find more samples here or just click on the tab above.
From p. 37:
“Irving Kristol once wrote that the most subversive question that can be posed to civilization is: why not? Thanks to the decision of four activist judges in Massachusetts, that is a question we now must face as Americans. In order to answer the question of “Why not?” with respect to same-sex marriage, we have to come to a fuller understanding of what marriage is. Is it simply about publicly honoring a romantic attachment? That’s what the highest court in Ontario, Canada, believes. Just in time for the June wedding season of 2003 that court wrote, as it ruled in favor of same-sex marriages:
Marriage is, without dispute, one of the most significant forms of personal relationship…. Through the institution of marriage, individuals can publicly express their love and commitment to each other. Through this institution, society publicly recognized expressions of love and commitment between individuals, granting them respect and legitimacy as a couple.*
Marriage in this view means nothing more to society, to what we are as a people, and to our future, than making people feel accepted. The state’s interest in promoting and stamping approval upon a marriage starts and stops with tolerance, and therefore it is meaningless.”
Lessons learned:
1. Here’s the game show that is playing in Rick Santorum’s head:
Welcome to Who Defines Marriage?!, the game show where one lucky winner gets to define marriage for the rest of the country! Let’s meet our contestants. Hailing from lovely Everywhere, USA, is Society! Society is reasonably conflicted over this, but no matter – the part of it that opposes same-sex marriage will be dead soon! Next up, we have the Courts! With a flair for the dramatic and a style that is both comfortable and classy, the Courts usually consider their best trait to be the ability to grant equality to all. And last but not least, we have Rick Santorum! Rick believes he deserves to define marriage because, hey, what he thinks is good for (his) God is damn well good for everyone else – whether they like it or not! … And the winner is Rick Santorum!
2. Tolerance makes things meaningless. Sooooo…. Fuck you to all the non-white, non-straight, non-Christian non-male people out there. Society’s tolerance of you is ruining Rick Santorum’s meaning.
3. Blame Canada!
*Also, us here at …And Read All Over would like to send a warm Fuck yeah! to the highest court in Ontario.
When I moved this blog over to WordPress, I noticed that under the Users > Personal Settings page there is an option to turn on a computer proofreader. The program is from Automattic (the same people that make WordPress) and it’s called After the Deadline. While an automatic proofreader isn’t anything spectacular in itself, the grammar and style mistakes that this proofreader can supposedly prevent you from making are eye-popping:
bias language, cliches, complex phrases, diacritical marks, double negatives, hidden verbs, jargon, passive voice, phrases to avoid, and redundant phrases.
It’s an impressive looking list, but anyone with even mediocre writing skills and experience with computer proofreaders is likely to be wary. How often has Microsoft Word mistakenly underlined some of your text? How many times has your smartphone autocorrected you into incomprehension?
The thing is, when presented with such a list, even a confident writer couldn’t be blamed for being curious. Are you unwittingly making grammar mistakes in your carefully crafted prose? Have you been straying outside the accepted limits of complex and redundant phrases? Are there verbs hiding in your text? And holy shit, what the hell are diacritical marks?
Let’s put those ridiculous questions aside for a moment. Many people have pointed out what’s wrong with automatic spelling and grammar checkers. What I want to do here is show you why there are problems with these programs by using some highly regarded prose.
Let’s fire up the incinerator.
"To the Lighthouse" by Virginia Woolf*
At the first green line, After the Deadline suggests, “Did you mean… ‘its fine tomorrow?’” Things are not off to a good start. The three other green lines warn me (or Ms. Woolf) about the Dreaded Passive Voice™. The blue line suggests that “Complex Expression” be changed to “plans.”But perhaps the worst suggestion is given by clicking on the red line – “Did you mean… ‘sense,’ ‘cents,’ ‘scents?’” Moving on…
"Sense and Sensibility" by Jane Austen
The blue line is another “Complex Expression,” which After the Deadline suggests be changed to “way.” That’s not so bad. The green line, however, is (according to the proofreader) an example of a “Hidden Verb.” What’s a hidden verb, you ask? As the After the Deadline explains, “A hidden verb (aka nominalization) is a verb made into a noun. They often need extra words to make sense. Strong verbs are easier to read and use less words.” But this doesn’t make any sense. Constant had not been nominalized, while had is one of the most common (and easiest to read) verbs in English. I’m told to “revise ‘had a constant’ to bring out the verb,” but I don’t know what that means. Alert readers will begin to see the problem here. So will everyone else.
"Great Expectations" by Charles Dickens
Here’s the Dreaded Passive Voice™ again. Geoffrey Pullum would have a fit with this program (comments are open, Geoff! Let us know how you really feel!). I guess the proofreader wants me to change the sentence to something like, “So I called myself Pip, and people called me Pip?” It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times… "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair
All I really need to say here is that the second green line says “Hyphen Required” and suggests I change the phrase to “out-of-the-way.” Really? Yes, really.
To be sure, I ran some other styles of writing through After the Deadline, such as Pulitzer Prize winners, and got the same results. You’re welcome to run anything you want through there, but I got $20 bucks saying you’re going to get the same nonsense I did.
Getting back to those ridiculous questions, the answers are all irrelevant. If you have understood this article so far, you already know more about writing than After the Deadline. It will not improve your writing. It will most likely make it worse. Contrary to what is claimed on its homepage, you will not write better and you will spend more time editing.
I can’t believe anyone except the most inexperienced writers would be fooled by After the Deadline’s “corrections.” This isn’t exactly surprising when it comes to grammar checkers because they are at best useless and at worst harmful. But the way in which we rely on technology threatens to undermine our own writing. Insecure writers might be tricked into believing that After the Deadline’s suggestions are legit. And that is the real problem with these programs. Their potential to do more harm than good is a ratio approaching one since it’s almost impossible for them to do good.
Finally, I’d just like to add that when I used After the Deadline on this post, two terms were underlined in the explanation of hidden verbs:
“A hidden verb (aka nominalization) is a verb made into a noun. They often need extra words to make sense. Strong verbs are easier to read and use less words.”
The program says that nominalization isn’t a word and that I should write “fewer words” instead of “less words.” But that is a quote from the program itself! If even the makers of After the Deadline can’t (or won’t) follow their own guidelines, why should you?
And so I have decided to destroy the machine. Feeding this next piece of prose into your grammar checker is equivalent to setting its controls for the heart of the sun.
riverrun, past Eve and Adam’s, from swerve of shore to bend of bay, brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to Howth Castle and Environs.
–Finnegan’s Wake by James Joyce
[Update – Feb. 28, 2011] It’s always nice when someone with first-hand knowledge weighs in on the discussion. In this case, former After the Deadline developer Raphael Mudge was kind enough to stop by and leave his thoughts, to which I responded below.
[Update – Mar. 16, 2012] I heard from the WordPress staff about why they chose to incorporate After the Deadline into their software. Actually, I was directed to the post on the WordPress.com blog about the incorporation. I’m a bit disappointed in this, however. First, although the WordPress staff tells me that “There are many reasons to explain why we chose this service to help WordPress.com users with their writing, but you can read our announcement post for the full details,” their post is not full of “details.” Second, neither the email I got nor the WordPress blog post addresses any of the problems with automatic grammar or spell checkers. Oh well.
But most importantly, I don’t think the author of the post is serious when he says he “was blown away” by After the Deadline. Did he run his own post through there? What the hell did it look like before he did? And why didn’t he accept all of the suggestions? And judging by the comments on the post, when will a psychologist do a study with an automatic grammar checker with incorrect suggestions just to see how blindly people will obey their master?
By the way, running this update through AtD underlines “incorporate,” “was directed,” and “all of the.” Feel free to guess why if you really have nothing better to do.
*So much for only using said to carry dialogue, amIright, Elmore? Way to go, Virginia, you dope.
Mayor Irving’s Facebook account is hacked! Will he become the next Anthony Weiner?
Yesterday, a suspicious message was posted on Mayor Ryan F. Irving’s (I) Facebook wall. The message read:
I regret to inform you that I am stepping down as Mayor of Kemblesville.
Irving believes his account was hacked, possibly by someone from the Rick Santorum camp.
This isn’t the first time Mayor Irving has been involved in controversy. We all remember when he tried to move the Indianapolis Colts to Kemblesville in the middle of the night, his reasons being that that was how they got to Indianapolis in the first place. Then there was the scandal involving his deputy mayor, Ramona C. McVeigh, who tried to unseat him while he was in Indianapolis.
And, of course, there are those on the internet who keep removing his section from Wikipedia, claiming that it is “incomplete, unverified and poorly written.” As if that’s a reason to delete sections of Wikipedia and not the most accurate description of Wikipedia itself.
Well, as campaign manager, I can attest that everything you read on his Wikipedia contains nothing but truthiness. This article is verification of that fact. Check it out before his internet enemies strike at his Wikipedia section again.
I’m plugging it again because the third episode is up and I got a shout out for my submission to their LexiConundrum puzzle. Co-host Mike Vuolo gave two initial letters and the task of the puzzle was to come up with adjectival present participles that matched. For example, firing squad would fit in the given initials F___ S___.
Mr. Vuolo was being nice by not saying my name and broadcasting the extreme nerdiness of my sense of humor. I thank him for that, but anyone who knows me knows that I have no such concern. And so, the joke was:
Adjectival Present Participles = Worst. Band name. Ever.
This week’s episode discusses “the hypercorrected incorrectness of ‘between you and I.'” The LexiConundrum asks listeners to submit a name for a specific type of usage of this term. Check out the feed here. The archives are here.
Confidential to Mr. Vuolo: From one nerdy joker to another, that was a good one. I’m going to pretend such a conversation took place between Mick and Keith because it sounds hilarious.
Since coming over to WordPress from Blogger (a move I should have made a long time ago), I’ve noticed a lot more spam comments. I’m not sure why. Fortunately, Askimet has picked up all of them so far.
What’s really interesting is that the spam comments I receive aren’t anything like the spam emails I receive. None of them want me to grow my manhood and none of them are from Nigerian royalty. Maybe everyone on WordPress already knows about this, but I wanted to highlight a few things. I also thought a good mocking of the spammers would be fun.
First, almost all of the spam comments have been on my book review of The Loved One by Evelyn Waugh. Why this is, I don’t know. It’s not my first post, nor is it my best. I guess the spammers only go for the high brow stuff.
Second, the language is confusing since it’s no better or worse than the legitimate comments I see around the net. It’s the links and/or the user names, however, that gives the spammers away – “Beats By Dre” and “DoMeDolls(dot)com” are two of the most recent ones. Whatever happened to a good ol’ user name like LordDragonSlayer47? Or, more interestingly, how is it that we know a user name like that clearly represents a real commenter?
Finally, here are a few examples of spam comments left on my site, with their links removed and my comments added.
From Beats by Dre on The Loved One by Evelyn Waugh:
Thank you for the auspicious writeup. It in fact was a amusement account it. Look advanced to more added agreeable from you! By the way, how could we communicate?
I don’t know how we could communicate. More added agreeable maybe?
From Orville Ras on The Loved One by Evelyn Waugh:
You can use the process of elimination. For example my next post mentions Breitbart and Stranahan so you know it isn’t them.
Well, that’s two suspects down. By the way, who are we looking for again?
From Jenise Landers on The Loved One by Evelyn Waugh:
I can just say that of a relief to discover somebody that actually knows what theyre talking about on the net. You definitely know how to bring a worry to light making it important. Lots more people must read this and see why side in the story. I cant believe you aren’t widely used since you definitely hold the gift.
I cant believe it either, Jenise, but remember: Flattery will get you nowhere. Apostrophes might though.
From Garret Ply on The Loved One by Evelyn Waugh, which is a review of a book published in 1948:
that is one of the best articles i’ve seen about TV’s lately, really tells me alot about what goin on in TV market this days
That, ladies and gentleman, is called definitely holding the gift.
[Update 22 March 2012] I couldn’t resist adding this one I got recently on my post about grammar checkers. There’s just something about it that has me cracking up.
Word Press DOES give my life meaning! It’s TRUE!Before WordPress there was only Darkness, the Void, and the urlmbcy bits at the bottom of the bag of chips. That’s not to say that the urlmbcy bits are bad or anything, it’s just that they’re REALLY laden with sodium benzoate and all manner of artificial colorings and flavorings. Speaking of which, have you ever LOOKED at the ingredients on a bag of chips? And what exactly is a snack ring ? Corn Chips I understand, but Snack Rings ? That’s a mystery. Some sort of corn product paste, I think .ANYWAY, WordPress is gonna’ send me a free tee-shirt. At least I think so. Think they might offer me a JOB?A JOB. Y’all READING this? I WANT A JOB with you guys!I can’t code to save my life, but I can sure write copy, and not just your run-of-the-mill boilerplate crap, but really engaging patter, and spell-checked to boot!Listen, I live on the Big Island of Hawai’i, in a converted school bus with my wife Anna and a very cool cat named Henry. Anna’s a brilliant recording artist and Henry rules our lives. We sell baked potatoes at our local farmers’ market one day a week and I could REALLY use the cash.Thanks so much for your CAREFUL ATTENTION TO MY PLEA.DaveLike this? 0
“Corn Chips I understand, but Snack Rings […] WordPress is gonna’ send me a free tee-shirt. At least I think so […] Y’all READING this? […] baked potatoes (?) […] DaveLike this?”
These aren’t the words of a spammer, they are the ravings of a lunatic. And spell-checked to boot!
Besides being a great song on a great album (Leave Home), “Suzy is a Headbanger” by the Ramones also has a very interesting line:
Suzy is a headbanger,
Her mother is a geek.
These lyrics puzzled me because they didn’t really make any sense. It wasn’t until I read the term “feed the geek” in Babel No More by Michael Erard (review forthcoming) that I decided to look into it. It turns out, the reason the lyrics didn’t make sense to me was because I was thinking of geek in its contemporary sense, the one Macmillan defines as “n. Someone who is boring, especially because they seem to be interested only in computers.” Even more recently, as we all know, the term has become to mean something like enthusiast or to describe a particular way of practicing some activity (as in geek sex). But since “Suzy” was written around 1976, those are obviously not the intended meanings.
The problem is, I’m having a hard time believing that Joey Ramone meant the other, older sense of the word. I looked at multiple dictionaries, but all of them basically defined this sense as “n. A carnival performer whose show consists of bizarre acts, such as biting the head off a live chicken.” Mmm! Mothers bring your daughters, fathers brings your sons!
So what’s going on? Did he really mean to sing geek? If he didn’t mean that Suzy’s mom is a circus freak and he couldn’t have meant that she’s a computer nerd, what did he mean? The song obviously portrays Suzy in a positive light, so was he doing something like Bob Dylan did in his song “Ballad of a Thin Man” and questioning what we think of as normalcy?
You hand in your ticket
And you go watch the geek
Who immediately walks up to you
When he hears you speak
And says, “How does it feel
To be such a freak ?”
And you say, “Impossible”
As he hands you a bone.
– Bob Dylan, Ballad of the Thin Man
Or did geek have a meaning specific to punks in New York (or punks anywhere) in the 1970s?
There was a 70s Australian punk band in Perth called the Geeks, but knowing what I know about punk rockers, they tend to relish in classifying themselves as the outcasts. It’s a way to welcome someone in and strengthen group identity (The Ramones chant, “Gabba! Gabba! We accept you, we accept you! One of us!” perfectly encapsulates this notion). So were they saying that Suzy’s mom was one of them?
Besides the Perth band, I couldn’t find any connection of geek to the 1970s punk rock scene, so I decided to look at the Corpus of Contemporary American English. If geek was being used by the punks in the 70s, I assumed it was also being used by at least the music journalists as well. I just hoped it was being used in the same way. There were two hits for “geek.[nn1]” in the 1970s, both being the carnival kind of geek. The 1980s is where things start to change since there are five hits – two carnival geeks, two nerd geeks, and one I’m not really sure of (it’s hard to tell from the bit context). After that, the usage really takes off with thirty-three hits in the 1990s and 104 hits in the 2000s.
This still hasn’t answered my question, however. Certainly another word besides geek would fit there just as easily, especially if you’re rhyming it with “ooh ooh wee.” But there’s the catch. I want to conclude that Joey was speaking positively of Suzy’s mother, but that’s not realistic. Joey was most likely using geek to describe a disapproving mother.
Wordnik, which is a great site, lists one definition of geek as “n. An unfashionable or socially undesirable person.” Today there might be wide agreement on which type of person is a geek (because we’re all so cool, you know, man?), but what’s interesting is that in “Suzy is a Headbanger” we have a counter-culture band, who by no means owned the majority stake of Cool, using geek to insult a member of another group. But the reason he’s doing so is that he sees Suzy’s mother as being judgmental, which is not a trait often attributed to geeks. So there’s a disconnect between the connotations of the two meanings of geek, which suggests the term was in flux. Notice also that insulting someone else by calling them a geek is simultaneously an attempt to prove one’s cool, but that’s beside the point.
I think geek is a great case of how quickly words can change their meanings, something linguistics call “semantic shift.” It’s also a simple example of what linguistics mean when they say, “We’re not sure.” Words are tricky things to pin down, especially when they are ones that are used infrequently. Add to that someone using the word in a novel way (or at least with a slightly different meaning) and things get even trickier. Had Joey’s meaning taken off, we might today be using geek to describe older people who disapprove of the younger generation’s activities. Geek then would have a decidedly uncool meaning. Instead, being a geek is an aspiration since it means not only enthusiasm, but knowledge and mastership of a certain area. The success of this meaning of geek, of course, is obviously due to the success of computers and the success of geek as an adjective to be applied to any and all activities. In this way, later in Babel No More, Michael Erard can write, “Indeed, boasting about the languages one has studied or can speak is a display of geek machismo,” and everyone understands the meaning.
As a side note, for those interested in linguistics, semantic shift, or the etymology of contemptuous words, I recommend checking out Slate.com’s new podcast Lexicon Valley. They have two episodes and both are excellent. What’s even better, and even more pertinent to this article, is that in the second episode, entitled “The Other F-Word,” you get to hear linguist Arnold Zwicky reference Pansy Division. What a headbanger.
[Update – July 24, 2012] The Oxford Dictionaries blog has written twice about geek. The most recent post compares the collocates of geek to nerd in their corpus, while the older post explains the transformation in the meaning of geek. Sadly, there is no mention of the Ramones. Maybe it’s time for them to update their corpus?
In The Drunkard’s Walk Leonard Mlodinow provides readers with a wonderfully readable guide to how the mathematical laws of randomness affect our lives. With insight he shows how the hallmarks of chance are apparent in the course of events all around us. The understanding of randomness has brought about profound changes in the way we view our surroundings, and our universe. I am pleased that Leonard has skillfully explained this important branch of mathematics.
– Stephen Hawking
I’m not about to contradict Mr. Hawking (although some people on Amazon are – canyoubelieveit?). I think he is right that Leonard Mlodinow “skillfully explained this important branch of mathematics.” But I think it should be noted that Drunkard’s Walk is probably more of a book for the general public, than it is for the math enthusiast.
Cover design: Keenan
That’s because a person trained in mathematics will know most of the math explained in the book, so all they’ll really get out of it are the anecdotes. Someone less inclined in math, however, will get both. For those people (i.e., me), Drunkard’s Walk is an even more enjoyable read.
Do note, however, although Drunkard’s is a relatively quick read and although I said that this is a math book for the general public, don’t assume that it’s something akin to the current rash of pop science books that have been all over the best seller lists. Mlodinow knows his stuff. He got a guest review from Stephen Fucking Hawking* because he co-wrote A Briefer History of Time with the man.
Finally, if dabbling in statistics and history is something that you like, Mlodinow’s book comes with so many references that you’re bound to wind up with more interesting things to read. I’m already looking into a couple. Expect to see my thoughts on them here.
*For those of you on Twitter, you should follow him. Here’s a sample tweet, “I can’t believe I missed the Horizon programme on black holes. I was hoping to pick up a few tips.” Dude’s a riot.
The American Heritage Dictionary has a very cool site which “invites you to create a self-portrait using your words.” It’s called You Are Your Words and what you do is upload a picture, then a document (or link to Twitter or Facebook), and the site will turn your picture in something like this:
Pretty cool, huh? I am totes setting this as my new gravatar (I was getting tired of that stuffed horse anyways.*)
Before you get started, a few words to the wise. First, the final step allows you to choose a color, font, and contrast. These things matter in making your picture look right, so take your time playing around with them. I could only get the black text on white background to work, but maybe that was because of the photo. Also, for me, the texts that worked best were Marker and One Days.
Second, this site is kind of addictive, so have fun not getting any work done today.
I read recently that the malaria vaccine is progressing well and will be coming out soon. If we act now, we’ll be able to protest it the moment it hits the shelves. Obviously, the first order of business is to come up with a few “side effects” that it causes. I’m thinking diarrhea, gout, dyslexia, boredom, Parkinson’s and possibly homosexuality. I’m open to your suggestions, but I think beating the dead autistic horse would be counterproductive.
The next thing we need to do is figure out other ways that our kids can be protected from and cured of malaria without taking the evil vaccine. I’m offering Japanese Eyeball Poking™ because I’m sure that by the time the vaccine comes out, someone will have visited my office with malaria (although I kind of hope not). Oh well, doctors don’t need to know and we don’t need evidence for our claims. And I’m not going to Africa to treat people for malaria with Eyeball Poking. Have you seen that place? Talk about disease central.
Can you think of anything else we need? A celebrity endorsement would be nice. Jenny McCarthy is taken, obviously, but maybe there is someone with similar skills. What’s Yasmine Bleeth up to these days? Does she have kids? Can we give them malaria?
Until we figure these things out, I’ll be the face of the protest. You get everything working behind the scenes. I’ll germinate the forums, you plan the march on Washington. Together we can stop this terrible “life saving” vaccine from ever reaching Africa.
Also, someone needs to figure out if we can send live mosquitoes through the mail.
