Showing posts with label E Lang. Show all posts
Showing posts with label E Lang. Show all posts

18 October 2012

Uh Oh

I discovered another magical time-wasting tumblr. It's full of definitions!


The Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows


The good (bad?) news is, they are all words that I've been searching for. I feel like this all the time. See Zielschmerz. Also, Nementia.

10 November 2011

Now I should typeset Salman Rushdie

I'm realizing more and more how much type on a page means to me. I love stories, but I love them even more when they're both linguistically and visually beautiful.



All posters from spineless classics. Christmas gift, anyone?

And when it's cool type and Harry Potter, well then, I'm just in heaven.



All posters from The Modern Stylographer. Again, Christmas is coming.

I'm thinking Haroun and the Sea of Stories would make for an excellent typographical challenge. Of course, I should probably wait until I'm not killing myself with school and work.

Still, I love these ideas. And I love that I have the capabilities of creating similar designs. Specific text requests, anyone?

27 October 2011

Designing

I keep talking about being swamped with work, specifically magazine design. So I thought I'd show you what I'm working on.

I'm creating a 24-page linguistics magazine. Going for a Psychology Today-vibe, not a scholarly journal. Language for non-linguists. This is the Q&A department for the back of the book (thanks, once again, to Charlotte for the term hideous editor):




07 October 2011

oy with the poodles already

This has been the longest week of my life.

Okay, maybe not. Third week of December 2009 was long. As was the third week in September of the same year (darn swine flu). And the first week of May this year. But it doesn't matter, I like using superlatives. So let's start again:


This has been the longest week of my life.

Usually when I have eight million things going on (eight million = four articles and an assignment letter to write plus ~100 pages to read for the editing class; revised designs and image research for the magazine class; no fewer than five ads all due on the same day at work; a Sunday School lesson to prepare for the Quakers; and piano accompaniment to learn in a week and a half) time flies and all of a sudden it's Sunday again and where did the weekend go? I had so much to get done! But this week, no such luck. No, this week I had two Thursdays. You think I jest. I do not. It was Thursday TWICE. Which is really disappointing on the second Thursday when you think you've already experienced this and it should be Friday. I swear, yesterday's Thursday was perhaps the worst Thursday I've had in a very long time, if only because it shouldn't have been. (So sorry about the Thursday stacking in the preceding three lines.)

That last sentence (sans parentheses) didn't make much sense. That's what two Thursdays does to you.


Now nothing makes sense in my head anymore. I'm in serious need of a Big Gulp, cherry Dr. Pepper style. (Note on that, I still haven't decided what I think about this cherry Dr. Pepper. I only ever get it at 7-Eleven, but then I saw they sell it at the grocery store—do I buy some to try for longer periods of time instead of just when I want to go to 7-Eleven during work?? Also, let it be known that my Big Gulp purchases are a direct result of my friendship with Charlotte. As is my more frequent use of the word obviously. Obviously.)

And hey, can we talk about that for a minute? Language influences. I've been evaluating my slang terms lately, and I find it a little peculiar whose lexicon I pick up and whose I leave behind. Most of them aren't conscious choices, but I definitely have some sort of internal filter. Only a few people's vocabulary make the cut. I kind of like that my subconscious is just as snobby about language as my conscious mind is. Also, probably about people.

A few other thoughts from the long week, then I'm out (and might go die under my desk):

Still on the fence about New Girl. I love Zooey. But she's a little too dumb. And it's the same story every single episode. I don't know, we'll ride it out and see. (The opener for episode two was hysterical, though.)

It seems like an awful lot of Edgar Allan Poe's characters end up dead inside a wall.

Bacon and chocolate—surprisingly good combo. (See Chocolate Oink.)

Psych season premiere next week. You know that's right.

I've never cared much about Columbus, but thank heaven for him. No work on Monday.

Can we all please be so excited for this? Also, mental note to check out Michael Lewis. (Author of The Blind Side, Moneyball, and Boomerang. Watch Tuesday's Daily Show for an interview.)

23 September 2011

So Proud

Why yes, I did work on an award winning publication.


Way to go, BYU editing department. Way to go.

20 September 2011

Apparently, I Judge People

I spent a lot of time last week with my mouth shut on a variety of topics, then spewing my soapboxes to Melis via gmail (sorry Melis). Topics such as
Also, who thought it was a good idea for BYU to go independent? Embarrassing game on Saturday. 


But don't worry, it hasn't been all bitten tongues or diatribes toward Bronco Mendenhall. I have spent a lot of time lovin' on these songs. Give them a listen?






That Wilco song is bee-yew-ti-ful. Seriously, I listen to it on repeat for hours. Better than the JEW cover, I think I've decided. 

And thanks to Danielle for the Mumford & Sons love. Well, Danielle and Spotify.



K, I'm out.

30 August 2011

On Editing

I recently received a comment on this little blog that ended with this request:

Don't edit this post.

This is not the first time I've received such an ending to a blog comment. Or a facebook message. Or an email. Or a text. Or even a face-to-face conversation. Which, naturally, leads to the following question: 

Are people afraid of me because I am an editor?

I am afrightened that the answer might be, Yes. And because of this, I'd like to take the time to clear up some things here for you.

Being an editor does weird things to your brain. You are aware of elements like spelling, grammar, and punctuation in all written media. Newspapers, fliers, signage, websites, magazines, advertisements, T-shirts, TV commercials, basically anything that employs words. Which is basically everything. Because of this, I have a filter system set up in my head (how cool would it be if there was a real filter there?). It goes like this:

Levels of Reading
1. Reading to read (pleasure)
2. Reading to understand (information)
3. Reading to proof (light edit)
4. Reading to edit (decent edit)
5. Reading to revise (major edit)
6. Reading to rewrite (life depends in this)

That having been established, let me categorically state, on the record, that I do not ever edit blog comments/facebook messages/texts/emails/gchats/face-to-face conversations. Do I occasionally notice an incorrect or amusing usage in these forums? Yes, of course. Even normal people do. Will I occasionally comment on said incorrect or amusing usage? Perhaps, if it's particularly funny or I know the user of the irregularity will appreciate it. But I will not correct your language use in casual speech (i.e. any mode of social media and/or personal communication). In fact, I will not correct your language use in formal speech unless you specifically request my editing skills. And even then I will ask that you specify which type of edit you'd prefer. I do this for two reasons: Firstly, I need to know what you have in mind (Light run through for all the right comma placements? Or I desperately need this job and want you to make this as brilliant as possible?) or there can be all kinds of confusion. Secondly, I read differently depending on what is required of me. 

So please, don't be afraid that I'm constantly judging your knowledge of the English language. I'm not. 




Or if I am, I certainly won't let you know. 

12 July 2011

TTT: Authors


This week’s Top Ten at The Broke and Bookish is Top Ten Authors I Would DIE to meet (living or dead). So fun. And tricky. But I bet you can guess the first one.


1. Salman Rushdie. The man is a linguistic genius. And a staunch believer in the power of language and our right to use it. Check out this lovely NYTimes article. Yes, Mr. Rushdie, one day we will meet. Book signing when you write about the fatwa?

2. Thomas Friedman. Major journalistic envy for this guy. I love his writing, I love his idealism, I love his knowledge of the Middle East. I love his new NYTimes photo. Looking good, there, Tom. Are you perhaps friends with the advertising manager for the Times? We had lunch a few weeks ago, you know.

3. Chaim Potok. His books are beautiful and heartbreaking. Quite a bit of my initial Jewish knowledge came from him, and we all know how much I love that.

4. Madeline L’Engle. The older I get, the more I love her young adult fiction. I’ve read all her YA books multiple times. I like the way she blends the religious with the scientific. And there is such a thing as a tesseract. *shiver*

5. David Crystal. I love his analysis of English linguistics. Very accessible to laymen (which I am not, but still), and not so descriptive that I feel like all grammar rules are utterly forgotten. Plus, he blogs! He’s responded to comments I’ve made on the blog—does that count as meeting? I think probably no. 

6. L. M. Montgomery. I feel like I keep saying this, but I love her books. They never get old. They have also inspired me to take the ferry from Maine to Prince Edward Island at some point while I live in Boston. I want to see where the Anne-girl lived.

7. J. K. Rowling. How can I not include the woman who created the magical world of Harry Potter? Talent like that is truly astonishing, and there are so many questions I would ask her about her writing process. Plus maybe she’d invite me to have tea with her and Alan Rickman. Now wouldn’t that be something.

8. C. S. Lewis. The man is brilliant. What interesting conversations you could have.

9. F. Scott Fitzgerald. I am fascinated by his life. Could I meet Zelda too? They are so horribly tragic, but his writing is lovely. And I’d love to hear him talk about working with Maxwell Perkins. And Hemingway.

10. Margaret Mitchell. The woman who wrote my favorite book of all time, but then nothing ever again. She had a pretty interesting life herself.


I’d like to mention that I have met two authors who would normally have made it on this list, but since I’ve talked to them already they no longer qualify:

Simon Winchester. I told him his discussion of the Oxford English Dictionary was brilliant; he told me to apply for a scholarship he was starting in honor of Larry Ashmead and he’d pull some strings for me because I like his books.

Leif Enger. I heard him read from So Brave, Young, and Handsome at Powell's and fell mildly in love. His brother Lin read from his book Undiscovered Country at the same time. Both great (people and books).

11 July 2011

Typographical Love


Sometimes I wish I lived in a world that still uses letterpress, or even linotype. Is it ridiculous that I get giddy discussing serifs, x-height, weight, stroke, and kearning; that I love organizing typefaces into their different categories: Oldstyle, Modern, Slab Serif, Sans Serif, Script, and Decorative; that I am training myself to recognize not just typefaces, but fonts, by sight, and that I would love to learn how to set type even though it is a useless skill nowadays?

Seriously though, how can you not love designs like these?

Source found here.


Source found here.
Source found here.

03 June 2011

Words, words, words

(Just a few.)


Yesterday, I think I used the word wicked six different times.

As in, That storm last night was wicked awesome.


I also find myself using shut up more and more as an exclamation (not a command).

As in, shut up, seriously? can I marry you and move to London?


To top it all off, I am continuously (continually?) referring to people in my head as chickadee. I haven’t vocalized it in oral or written communication yet, but I’m certain I will soon. Almost did yesterday:

Calvin: lol, ok
have a good evening
me: thanks. Sleep well [chickadee]


I refrained, but it was there in my mind. I just didn’t transmit it through my fingers to the interwebs. So today I thought before I add it to the list of endearments I use with certain people who are my friends (usually dear and every so often hun), I’d better test it.

me: if I called you chickadee would it make you uncomfortable in any way?
Michael: If it was in person I'd think it was weird
 me: haha, that's fair
 since I haven't seen you since January and we only communicate via gchat, what about that?
Michael: I would just think it was silly


me: if I called you chickadee would it make you uncomfortable in any way?
Matt: umm
 i'd be curious for the reasoning behind the name
 but not uncomfortable, per se


So I think I’m safe with that one. We’ll see what happens. (And just so you know, I don’t only want to use it with boys. They just happened to be the only people gchat-available to take the poll.)

Not sure where chickadee came from, fairly certain shut up is because I’m friends with Miss Melis (though we lived together for a year and a half, you’d think I’d have picked it up then), and wicked is totally Boston.


I like knowing where my words originate.

28 April 2011

Happy Birthday, KJV

I live in a weird language dichotomy, unique to those who were (or still are) ELang and editing students. On the one hand, I am a grammar snob: a prescriptive believer in the purity of language, its origins, and its power. On the other hand, I am a linguist: a descriptive understander that language evolves, that varieties are not better or worse than each other, and that our dialectal differences are what make our language fascinating. Like most dichotomies, it is a confusing one, and I find myself continuously (or is it continually?) vacillating between the two ideas. I have labeled myself as a descriptive prescriptivist, but even that classification is not always entirely accurate. I never know exactly where I stand.

Except with one thing:


I love the KJV.


I’ve never been able to totally define my strong feelings toward this particular text; I think the Geneva is quite nice as well, and I will acknowledge that the NIV does a good job with its more contemporary translation. But I will always, always refer back to KJV, no matter how much anyone attempts to convince me that another translation is better, more accurate, or easier to understand.

This year, as I hope many of you know, marks the 400th anniversary of the publication of the King James Version. I know it sounds a (lot) bit ridiculous that I am getting sentimental about this, but I am. I love this translation. I love it for its message, yes, but right now I love it for its language and how much it has affected ours. There have been several tributes to it in recent weeks, to which I would like to draw your attention:




The end of Charles McGrath's article is a better explanation of my feelings than I have articulated thus far.

There are countless new Bibles available now, many of them specialized: a Bible for couples, for gays and lesbians, for recovering addicts, for surfers, for skaters and skateboarders, not to mention a superheroes Bible for children. They are all “accessible,” but most are a little tone-deaf, lacking in grandeur and majesty, replacing “through a glasse, darkly,” for instance, with something along the lines of “like a dim image in a mirror.” But what this modernizing ignores is that the most powerful religious language is often a little elevated and incantatory, even ambiguous or just plain hard to understand. The new Catholic missal, for instance, does not seem to fear the forbidding phrase, replacing the statement that Jesus is “one in being with the Father” with the more complicated idea that he is “consubstantial with the Father.”

Not everyone prefers a God who talks like a pal or a guidance counselor. Even some of us who are nonbelievers want a God who speaketh like — well, God. The great achievement of the King James translators is to have arrived at a language that is both ordinary and heightened, that rings in the ear and lingers in the mind. And that all 54 of them were able to agree on every phrase, every comma, without sounding as gassy and evasive as the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, is little short of amazing, in itself proof of something like divine inspiration.


Maybe that’s why I love it so much.


To celebrate its birthday next month, I would like two presents. First, this amazing book by one of my favorite linguistic authors, David Crystal. You should go check out NPR’s review. It will make you want it too.

The other is this amazing poster. Tell me you aren’t in love with the idea. I want that on my wall.

05 April 2011

Why Spelling Matters


First, a little segment from our favorite psychic detectives…


While I would fail in a spelling bee (I am a visual speller, I have to write a word to spell it properly, so if they ever invent a writing bee I’m set), I absolutely prescribe to proper spelling. Never will you catch me using, cuz, gonna, or b4, in text messages or any other forum. I tried I’ma go last night and about gave myself a heart attack (although that is a pragmatic issue, not one of spelling). I just can’t work against spelling prescriptions until they have been fully adopted into the lexicon.

But that has nothing to do with this post.


K, lie. It is tangentially related (don’t you love that word?). What I actually want to talk about is my name. I just got sidetracked by the type of yellow fruit scene.

To a certain extent, names reflect personality. We discussed this in my semantics course with Dr. Oaks (great linguistic professor): think about the names Betty and Reginald. You come up with a type of person in your head, don’t you? Names have a sense even before they are attached to a person. Because of this idea (and other ideas), naming is such a powerful privilege. You help shape someone’s identity for their entire life.

Okay. I like my name. It’s common enough that people know it and get it right, but not so common that everyone else has it. Although I don’t like it when other people have it (see this post), which is probably partly due to the fact that your name says something about you, and perhaps somehow I don’t want to be defined by another Allison. (Semi-related anecdote: I was once introduced to a guy as Allie and he told me later that it took him a long time to be comfortable with that because I didn’t fit the Allie stereotype he held in his head based on a girl he’d known in high school.)

But while everyone would know that an Allison is different than a Miranda who is different than a Hailey who is very different than a Brittany (I once knew a Brittany who told us in no uncertain terms that the proper pronunciation of her name was Britt-a-ny, not Britt-ny), I don’t think that everyone thinks about the differences in spelling as well. But there are. Observe:

Kaitlyn, Katelyn, Katelin, Caitlin, Caitlyn, Catelyn. I’m sure there are more. But just because they are pronounced the same does not mean they are the same name. They feel very different, and they are.

Likewise, Allison and Alison and Alyson are all very different. My preference is for the first, naturally, because it is mine. People tend to get that right though; it seems Allison is the standard. What they rarely do get right is Allie. And that is the point of this post:

When calling me Allie, it is spelled as I have just typed it (which is what I always thought was the standard spelling of the name). All you do is take the –son off my original name and add an –e. No dropping Ls or adding Ys. Why take out a letter that is already there? You might counter with, why add a letter that doesn’t need to be there? This is why:

Alli

Allie

Which looks more complete?


I don’t think I ever encountered this problem before I moved to Utah, but since I did that nearly five years ago I’ve had people misspell my name more times than I can count. Stupid Mormon culture with its weird spellings of normal names. But my name is important to me, as I’m sure yours is to you, and I want it handled the way I want it handled.

Also, don’t try to pick up a new nickname if I’ve known you over a year. It’s too late; you’re stuck with whatever you currently use.