Sadness and Joy in the News

[lizzytysh]

Despicable is it to be sure you get things right? Try it sometime, Laurie.

I knew the basics of what you did. I knew you had it posted in your Profile. I had been there before, long ago. I wanted to be sure I got the terminology correct. I knew it wasn't Psychology. Just one of those things ~ wanted to get the reference right. I didn't need to go looking for "information" to be "vindictive" with. I already knew the jist and knew exactly where to go for clarification [that memory of mine really does serve me well, sometimes ~ better than yours did you, in fact]. Going on a fishing expedition for things 'against' you doesn't interest me in the least. I have better uses for my time. I love your poetry, but I'm not that 'in' to you ~ but, at least I provided you a way to promote yourself . You're welcome. No charge.

To insult you? Interesting that you draw the line for that occurrence [the act of insulting] as immediately-post my reading your Profile. While you're wailing about being insulted, I guess you don't think attacks on what a person feels and expresses isn't personal. Well, just so you know, actually that's moreso than how one earns a dollar ~ but then, that is the realm of the almighty dollar, so perhaps you feel it's even more egregious to reference your occupation vs. you slandering my feelings and expression of them.

Shame on me? Well ~ as I said before, if this is the most traumatic event you encounter in cyberspace, count your blessings. Meanwhile, I guess about the best I can say to you at this point is get a band-aid. You're far better off than many elsewhere.

~ Lizzy

[tom.d.stiller]

We're all "far better off than many elsewhere". Lizzy is, Laurie is, bee is, I am. So I believe I might be better off running for my band-aid now, and at this point.

There is racism in this world, I agree, beyond the obvious forms ("N-wording", making strange fruit for southern trees). The more subtle forms include referring to one's opponent's neighbourhood as "your immigrant community". However wrong bee may be in her assessment of this President's merits (if there are any), remarks like that are below the belt.

Dragging personal information out of the public profile doesn't seem to be that cruel. After all it doesn't reveal anything that hasn't been said before. The simple fact, however, that it doesn't belong to the discussion, makes it dubious. We all have published facts about our personal lives, but that doesn't entitle anybody to drag this information into threads that don't deal with the circumstances of one's money-earning.

Lizzy, in many ways I agree with you. The way you handled this discussion is not among them.

Cheers
tom

[~greg]

And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye,
but perceivest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

With due libation to Matthew and Luke
I still want to point out a mote in lizzytysh's printed e-matter.

She wrote:

a Black woman, an incrediby decent woman, by any standard;

which is racist.

It's the comma (the mote) that makes it so,
as it wouldn't be so without the comma,
like so:

a black woman, an incredibly decent woman by any standard;

My respect for lizzytysh can only increase, if she will see that,
and just accept it, as a moment's slip the rood.

[Snow (retired)]

Gregory wrote:
>My respect for lizzytysh can only increase, if she will see that, and just accept it, as a moment's slip the rood.


Well, lizzytysh probably made a mistake just like lots of people do. Millions, in fact. To give you an example I draw your attention to the very front page of Jarkko's 'Leonard Cohen Files' website - of which this forum is a part.

Look at the upper section, quite near to the top, and you will see that Rauli Arjatsalo is named as 'Technical advisor'. Every time I see this it jars me, because Leonard is a person one associates with literature as well as song, and a spelling mistake of this magnitude, in such a prominent position on the opening page, perused by one and a half million visitors, makes the error extra obscene.

If you write the word 'advisor' in Google's search engine you will get an incredible 53 million hits. I doubt that these can all be so-called 'typos'. But if you spell it correctly, (i.e. 'adviser') you will get a paltry 17 million hits - hence the reason I wrote that millions get things wrong. Allow me to insist that if the majority spell a word incorrectly it remains wrong.

Jarkko's front page, fanfaring publicity for a figure of literature, has a glaring spelling mistake right at the top - there's no getting away from it. There is simply no 'o' in 'adviser' - never has been and never will be. If you want to argue about it then I suggest you thumb through a dictionary of your choice. Or better still, why not take a gander at Beautiful Losers (ch1: v50) where the author writes about Queen Elizabeth's 'advisers'. You can slap me and tell me I'm wrong as much as you wish, but you swipe Leonard as well.

Now, my respect for you, Gregory, will only increase if you can see and accept that this spelling blunder has stuck out like a beam in Jarkko's eye for ten whole years, and that even though you've walked past dozens upon dozens of times - not once have you noticed it. You never saw it. Nobody ever did, except one person.

Geoffrey

[tom.d.stiller]

It's the comma (the mote) that makes it so,
as it wouldn't be so without the comma,
like so:

a black woman, an incredibly decent woman by any standard;

My respect for lizzytysh can only increase, if she will see that,
and just accept it, as a moment's slip the rood.

~greg, I'm inclined to assume that lizzy made just one very common mistake, though, of course, you're right about the comma...

We should never believe that we ourselves could never fall into traps like that, this belief being exactly the self-righteousness the passage about the mote and the beam is about.

Cheers
tom

[linda_lakeside]

Hello Snow,

My dictionary (Webster's) says that both are correct. Those in Britain and North America using different spellings of the same word. We, in Canada, use either the British or American, depending on ... I don't know what. But then, I've never claimed to be a Mistress of Spelling. My Canadian spell-checker accepts both.

I bet this was fascinating for you.

Cheers,
Linda.

[lizzytysh]

Gregory ~

I meant "an incredibly decent woman by any standard" ~ the scenario I described from long ago was, apparently ~ given some's disbelief of my accounting ~ a case of 'truth is stranger than fiction.' As I described it, I remembered back to my disbelief at the time and the appeals to whatever it would take inside the employer to see the situation differently. It was an intense exchange, at the time. I can remember exactly where we were standing.

If you'll notice the way I construct sentences, I tend to sometimes be heavy-handed on commas, and sometimes I have to go back and delete or move them elsewhere.

Please take me a little further as to how the comma placement in this makes it racist or not racist. The way I'm reading the snippet you've provided is that with the comma being where I put it, the "incredibly decent woman" being set off by commas would be allowing the rest of the sentence be connected, which would put "Black woman" and "by any standard" be connected in their meanings. Is there a standard for being Black? Is there a standard for being "woman"? If there were, it would have nothing to do with the meaning of my statement. The phrase I used, "by any standard" is a common one used for making the point that whatever is being described rises high above the norm ~ this had nothing to do with what a standard may or may not be for "Black wom[e]n" (if that's how you're arriving at "racist"). However, in making that comment, it's also common to put a comma [to take a breath, to make the point that it is by any standard]. This employer, however, seemed to want to paint the picture of the woman being unworthy to step foot in her house simply because of the color of her skin. If decency as a person isn't enough to accomplish that, but the color of her skin is enough to prevent that, there's something wrong. If she'd said, "This person is a thief and I don't want her in my home," the rest of the conversation would never have taken place.

If I need to go further to answer your question, let me know.

~ Lizzy

[Snow (retired)]

linda_lakeside wrote:
>My dictionary (Webster's) says that both are correct. Those in Britain and North America using different spellings of the same word. We, in Canada, use either the British or American, depending on ... I don't know what. But then, I've never claimed to be a Mistress of Spelling. My Canadian spell-checker accepts both. I bet this was fascinating for you.


Noah Webster was the son of an American settler, and those people were ignorant riff-raff deckhands who had run off to sea because they had not the education to be employed in England as architects or lawyers. This is why the 'u' is missing in 'colour' - it explains why the 'u' is missing in 'honour', why the 'u' is missing in 'favourite', etc. etc. They didn't have spell-checkers in those days, you see. The English language in America is now corrupt because Webster's used a 'the-majority-is-the-norm' stance. It used a 'tell-a-lie-often-enough-and-it-will-be-believed' stance. If an illiterate Neil Armstrong had settled on the Moon and started a family he might have corrupted 'adviser' yet again - this time to 'advisur'. And eventually the Moonian dictionary of the English language would state that 'advisur' was the right way to spell it. Leonard would never write 'advisor', not ever. He likes the proper British way of spelling things best. It's good enough for him, anyway. He abhors corruption, I bet.

[tom.d.stiller]

Leonard would never write 'advisor', not ever. He likes the proper British way of spelling things best. It's good enough for him, anyway. He abhors corruption, I bet.

Let me be your advisor / adviser as to this, Snow...

Look at Beautiful Losers I, 50 (the italics are added by me)

--London has announced the Queen's intention to visit French Canada in October 1964. It is not enough that she and Prince Philip will be greeted by police cordons, riot tanks, and the proud backs of hostile crowds. We must not make the mistake the Indians made. Her advisers in London must be made to understand that our dignity is fed with the same food as anyone's: the happy exercise of the arbitrary.

Cheers
tom

[linda_lakeside]

Snow,

Those damn deck hands! Well, I'm happy to call Rauli, one who advises in technical matters. Kind of wordy, but we can't please all of the people all of the time. Frankly, it's becoming more and more difficult to please some of the people some of the time. That was wordy also. C'est la vie.

Cheers,
Linda.

[linda_lakeside]

It seems everyone types faster than I do.

[Snow (retired)]

lizzytysh wrote:
>Please take me a little further as to how the comma placement in this makes it racist or not racist.


I believe that Gregory is provoking you, Lizzytysh - he's an intelligent geezer and under the impression, perhaps, that 'racist' doesn't necessarily need to be a negative term. It might be that he cannot see anything wrong about a person wanting to preserve the various races and cultures on our vast planet. It might be that he dislikes the idea of everyone eventually being under the same umbrella, having the same complexion, speaking the same tongue. Me? I have no opinion on the matter. I don't mind the neighbour's Alsation being crossed with a Collie, but nobody's bringing their half-breed mongrel street cat into this house to impregnate my lovely Siamese cat. Suki is beautiful, and elegant - and I can assure you that no filthy Tom cat is going to play 'hide-the-salami' with her.

[tom.d.stiller]

It seems everyone types faster than I do.

Oh Linda,

for once in my life I typed faster than you, or maybe I just started typing a bit earlier. Usually no one beats you at that, well, almost no one. At least I don't.

Maybe this time I did. Maybe I didn't. But even if I did: you know that one lousy flake can never pretend to be a real blizzard.

Cheers
tom

[linda_lakeside]

Thank you, tom. I knew there was a reasonable explanation.

Regards,
Linda.

[Paula]

Euro-English
The European Union's plan for a single European language
European Commission has just announced an agreement whereby English will be
the official language of the European Union rather than German, which was
the other possibility.

As part of the negotiations, the British Government conceded that English
spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a 5- year phase-in
plan that would become known as “Euro-English”.

In the first year, “s” will replace the soft “c”. Sertainly, this will make
the sivil servants jump with joy.

The hard “c” will be dropped in favour of “k”. This should klear up
konfusion, and keyboards kan have one less letter.

There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year when the
troublesome “ph” will be replaced with “f”. This will make words like
fotograf 20% shorter.

In the 3rd year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted to
reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible.

Governments will enkourage the removal of double letters which have always
ben a deterent to akurate speling.

Also, al wil agre that the horibl mes of the silent “e” in the languag is
disgrasful and it should go away.

By the 4th yer people wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing “th” with
“z” and “w” with “v”. During ze fifz yer, ze unesesary “o” kan be dropd from
vords kontaining “ou” and after ziz fifz yer, ve vil hav a reil sensibl
riten styl.

Zer vil be no mor trubl or difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi tu
understand ech oza. Ze drem of a united urop vil finali kum tru.

Und efter ze fifz yer, ve vil al be speking German like zey vunted in ze
forst plas.