University Campuses & Our Ever-Evolving English Language: Two Exhibits

I had occasion to be on a University Campus this afternoon to attend a celebratory event. More on this event in the next post. While my camera & I were wandering around, I snapped a couple of pictures.

EXHIBIT 1:

From dictionary.com:
de-lamp - no dictionary results

Furthermore:

cut  [kuht]  verb, cut, cut·ting, adjective, noun
verb (used with object)
1. to penetrate with or as if with a sharp-edged instrument or object: He cut his finger.
2. to divide with or as if with a sharp-edged instrument; sever; carve: to cut a rope.
3. to detach with or as if with a sharp-edged instrument; separate from the main body; lop off: to cut a slice from a loaf of bread.
4. to hew or saw down; fell: to cut timber.
5. to trim by clipping, shearing, paring, or pruning: to cut hair.

I do not see "reduce" anywhere in this list of five, do you?

Plus, it's pretty funny that the machine only dispenses 20 ounce Cokes. If The Coca Cola Company really wanted to help to "cut" energy consumption, maybe they should stock their machines with 12 ounce Cokes. But hey. It's a Free Country! If you want to shell out $1.25 for 240 calories (20 oz.), consume only 140 calories (12 oz.), and contribute the remainder to your local landfill, what do I care if the machine is lit up or not?

I'm just objecting to the display of nonsensical words on Campus.

[GMOYA: Think about the cost-- in any way you want to think about cost-- $, energy, man-hours-- of what you throw away.]

By the way, we have lettuce for the taking!

EXHIBIT 2:

Well, which is it? "Ladies or Men's"?

I don't claim to know them, but there are rules regarding the proper use of "and," "or," and/or my favorite, "and/or." Since I don't claim to know these rules, I got nothin' to say about the "OR" here. That said... .

As Trisha commented, no doubt an embarrassing moment motivated this sign. But surely that moment couldn't have been more embarrassing than the sign it motivated.

1. Parallelism. Ladies and Gentleman. Men and Women. This is not an and/or choice. Pick one. If Females are to be "Ladies," then Males are to be "Gentlemen." If Males are "Men," Females are "Women." Every freaking restaurant in town gets this right.

2. Plural Possessives. According to the eight English grammar books in my library that I've catalog so far, we've known how to properly construct plural possessives since at least 1936.

3. Underlines & Squiggles: You cannot tell me that ORMen's doesn't have a red squiggly line under it because I'm looking at a red squiggly line under it right now. Proof Read. Insert Space.

My point.  Students will grab a soda from a machine that uses nonsensical words to make them feel good about conserving something in a closed system (how much sense does that make?) and then they will go to the Ladies ORMen's restroom to piss it away. And then they will take a test or write a paper. And their profs will wonder why they cannot think or write.

Go figure.

A Terrible Squabble

Daughter C. and Miss M. got into it today. Fur was flying! There was cussin'! They were throwing books at each other left & right. They pleaded with me to referee.

At issue were the definitions of the words, "farther" and "further."

It was ugly and it got uglier when-- after I'd gotten out my crappy old 1892 Noah Webster Dictionary-- I pulled out my brand spankin' new version of Elements of Style.

Page 153: The Copyright Page; Click to see the actual history of this volume.

Daughter C. and Miss M. were fooled by the 2005 version of this crappy old book into thinking it was a brand spankin' new book. But I digress.

And then, as arguments among and between The Girls often do, the argument took a turn and they were off arguing about the Vices and Virtues of Old English versus Middle English. (It's all about etiology, don't you know?)

When the dust had settled, I gave them their assignment for the day. No one looked happy-- I think they thought it was a holiday or something. But when I told them what it was, they perked up. Read Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "Letter from a Birmingham Jail." 

Food for Young Children, especially 4-year olds

Citation information below

By now you've heard about the little kid who walked to work carried her lunch to pre-school only to be forced to eat a school lunch because her mom did not pack a vegetable in her lunch (banana & fruit juice but no veggie). If you don't know what I'm talking about, google "4-year old's lunch confiscated" or something like that.

Not having had any 4-year olds around for some time, I consulted a crappy old cookbook to discover just what Young Children should be eating. From the Introduction to Chapter VI in the Universal Cookbook, I see that

A little child who is carefully fed in accordance with his bodily needs (as these are now understood) receives every day at least one food from each of the following groups:

1. Milk and dishes made chiefly of milk (most important of the group as regards children's diet); meat fish, poultry, eggs, and meat substitutes
2. Bread and other cereal foods.
3. Butter and other wholesome fats.
4. Vegetables and fruits.
5. Simple sweets.

Caroline L. Hunt, Scientific Assistant, Office of Home Economics-- who wrote this chapter-- goes on to provide a "good rule" as to amounts and servings from the groups. Each group is then taken up in turn, with milk being dominant throughout.For example, Milk Toast is discussed at length in the Milk, etc. section and mentioned again in the Breads section. (My paternal grandmother used to make my dad milk toast and he tried to get my brother and I to like it. Didn't happen.)

What I'd like to know is how to properly understand the parenthetical, "as these are now understood." It is modifying "bodily needs," but can be taken one of two ways. On one reading, it says "as bodily needs are currently understood." This reading leaves room for changed understanding of children's nutritional requirements. For example, if the expert child nutritionist Nanny Bloomberg decrees it so, simple sweets get taken off the list-- at least until some future mayor of New York City who's also a child nutritionist puts them back on the list. 

Crappy old stuff: The Meal Planner's Creed

A dear old friend once commented that we "have a lot of crappy old stuff." True. Our Big Life is filled with crappy old stuff-- especially books. From one old cookbook:

The Meal Planner's Creed from The Modern Family Cookbook by Meta Given 

(J. G. Ferguson Publishing Company, Chicago. 1958. p2)

Question. Why do authors continue to include the word "modern" in book titles-- especially cookbooks, books on decorating, fashion, and so forth? I know here "modern" modifies "family" but what family isn't modern? Oh. Those that have a lot of crappy old stuff.

So there's no need to click to enlarge:

The Meal Planner's Creed

The health of my family is in my care, therefore--
I will spare no effort in planning the right kinds of food in the right amounts.


Spending the food dollar for maximum value is my job, therefore--
I will choose from variously priced foods to save money without sacrificing health.


My family's enjoyment of food is my responsibility, therefore--
I will increase their pleasure by planning for variety, for flavorful dishes, for attractive color, for appetizing combinations.


My family's health, security, and pleasure depend on my skill in planning meals, therefore--
I will treat my job with the respect that is due it.

The first thing I wonder is, why a creed? The Modern Family Cookbook also has creeds for Shoppers and Cooks. What is a creed? According to Webster's New School and Office Dictionary (1962), a creed is a "brief statement of belief."

ASIDE: I have several old dictionaries-- I think if you're going to wonder what I'm wondering, you should make some effort to be in the same time frame. I should have referred to a dictionary older than 1958, but unfortunately, my dictionary collection has gaps. I'll look for a crappy old dictionary from the '40s and '50s next time I'm out. Note that this is not the #1 definition given at dictionary.com. It is decidedly different.

A meal planner believes four things about herself. (I'll not go PC here. It was 1958. Women did the meal planning. End of story.) She believes she is responsible for her family's health, her portion of the family budget, her family's food experiences, and their security and pleasure! That is a lot of responsibility. But it's her job and she's going to respect it. And what's more, when she finishes planning and shopping and gets down to the business of cooking, she's going to

... take pride in doing an outstanding job of cooking.

(My emphasis.)

IMHO, the our county and culture would be a lot better off if we had more "modern" families.*