Home » Discussion Forum—A Way with Words, a fun radio show and podcast about language

Discussion Forum—A Way with Words, a fun radio show and podcast about language

A Way with Words, a radio show and podcast about language and linguistics.

Discussion Forum (Archived)

Please consider registering
Guest
Forum Scope


Match



Forum Options



Min search length: 3 characters / Max search length: 84 characters
The forums are currently locked and only available for read only access
sp_TopicIcon
Season Premiere: Howdy, It's a Wit's War!
Guest
21
2007/11/29 - 5:22pm

greyaenigma said:

Leo, I've tried to defend my grammar usage with logic too. Unfortunately, common usage often seems to be invincibly illogical.

(And yes, I prefer putting the punctuation in a logical place — otherwise your meaning can be lost.)

And I could take a guess on what the pun in your name would be, but right now I sem to be stuck in a Spanish gutter, and I'm kind of hoping that's not the right track.


I don't know if logic has anything to do with it. It is just that it is easier to get a satisfactory result some ways rather than others. For example, putting your socks on before you put on your shoes. But here in Hawaii, lots of people don't wear shoes, so it doesn't matter!

ckc
22
2007/11/30 - 4:45am

Welcome back!

I was listening to your podcast this morning on my way in from work, and as soon as I heard the beginning of the question on a g-job, I immediately thought "grunt." Grunt work is something no one wants to do -- the clean up, the set up, the errand-running, etc. In an office, a grunt job would be filing or data entry -- the work not done by the higher-ups.

I can't give you any sources, or explain how I know this -- so you'll have to take it or leave it as you will.

By the way, I love your show. I'm an English teacher, and I learn so much (and feel vindicated quite often). Unfortunately, when I mention your show to my college students (I also teach high school), their eyes glaze over. How do we get them interested and excited about words?

Grant Barrett
San Diego, California
1532 Posts
(Offline)
23
2007/11/30 - 5:03am

ckc said:

Unfortunately, when I mention your show to my college students (I also teach high school), their eyes glaze over. How do we get them interested and excited about words?


CKC, don't try much! Seriously. It's like trying to convince someone that your favorite band should be their favorite band, too. It almost never works and all you've managed to do is to set the bar much higher. After the hype, they'll be expecting fireworks, sacks of gold, and hotties lined up at the door.

The tactic I usually recommend I call by the innocuous name of "availability." It involves making sure that you include non-study, not-for-credit freebie reading material in your syllabus. In packets, throw in a word origin story that's related to the subject-matter, but don't make it testable must-know material. If you have an online area for your class, include regular links to interesting news articles or blog entries. Make your favorite books available for borrowing.

Then remember that you're not going to convince most students that language is really interesting and worth making into a hobby. Most of your books will be unborrowed. Many of the online posts will be unremarked upon. Much of the freebie reading material will not come up in conversation. I don't think you can get *everybody* interested in any one topic. But there will be a few students you'll connect with over language and words, and that'll be a pretty good result. When you find the few interested students, nurture their interest further by directing them to brilliant writing, reliable reference works, and the least-traveled corners of language trades.

Good luck!

Garage
24
2007/11/30 - 6:39am

Your 'podsnicker' sounds like a candy bar that plays mp3s. The first alternative I came up with was "ilaugh." But that made sense. So, if we must use 'pod' I would prefer "podchortle" or "podsnort."

Another question about punctuation placement: if you single quote a word at the end of a quote it would look like this: "She said she was 'busy.'" Right?

Grant Barrett
San Diego, California
1532 Posts
(Offline)
25
2007/11/30 - 8:00am

Garage said:

Another question about punctuation placement: if you single quote a word at the end of a quote it would look like this: “She said she was ‘busy.'” Right?


Yes.

Guest
26
2007/11/30 - 2:24pm

Grant Barrett said:

Garage said:

Another question about punctuation placement: if you single quote a word at the end of a quote it would look like this: “She said she was ‘busy.'” Right?


Yes.


That is what Martha seems to propose.
I say it would be:
“She said she was ‘busy'.”
This implies she was re-defining what busy means.
This helps smoke out prevaricators like our 'beloved' President and his minions.
The situation is most valuable in short text where it might not be clear that I am using the word beloved in a sarcastic sense.
English syntax tends to force such words to occur in positions other than the last word in a sentence so it is not very common. I guess your example is a good one. I can't think of any excuse for putting the period inside the single quote other than it will "keep the tiny period warm".
Here, I claim that the period belongs to my words and that what is between the quotes is incomplete but exactly as originally stated. I am trying to help the nit picker by signaling that the partial quote might be out of context. But, of course, 'We' know better.

Allan Salkin
27
2007/12/01 - 1:39pm

I'd like to echo the earlier comment about "G-job" being derived from the world of vendors with government contracts. The term implies, as observed earlier, having to comply with a set of standards in government work that might be lower than would be required in a more competitive commercial environment.

Guest
28
2007/12/02 - 5:48pm

About the subject of:

“Why is an undesirable task called a g-job?”

There seems to be a variety of meanings for "G-Job" but I think that the expansion is meant to be "Government Job" in most cases.

I worked as a contractor on many military and government projects and when government projects had “deep pockets,” there were always more workers than needed on a job. Many workers had lots of time on their hands and so would pursue their own personal projects or fabricate things related to their particular area of expertise (electronics for example). When anyone referred to these projects it was called a “G Job” which was short for “Government Job”, a sort of cross between a cynical remark and a code word (for those who didn't know any better (such as a new “green” boss or a family member or friend). I suspect that this phrase was more common in the 50's to 70's when a lot of government money was available and so has fallen into disuse or forgotten by the younger generation.

I have never heard "G Job" used in a manner such as "Good enough for government work" although it may have evolved this way in some environments.
Paul Holliday 071202-5

Mike
29
2007/12/03 - 1:18pm

The mens' names puzzle came from NPR's Weekend Edition Sunday Puzzle for November 25.

I am enjoying the new season. Martha and Grant seem to be a bit more playful.

Monika
30
2007/12/08 - 6:17pm

Re: The government of children

When I heard your listener talking about a word for the situation when children are in charge, I thought immediately about "paedocracy", or "pedocracy", take your pick. I was surprised, being a non-native speaker of English, when I checked and found that it does not really function in English apart from such sites as "The Phrontistery" http://phrontistery.info/p.html . It does function in Polish, mostly in a derogative sense, for instance when the former (thank God) Minister of Education announced "Democracy in schools is paedocracy" (which was basically his version of the saying "Children should be seen and not heard").

Martha Barnette
San Diego, CA
820 Posts
(Offline)
31
2007/12/08 - 7:10pm

Thanks, Mike! I think you're right that we're more playful this season. We were a brand-new radio team last season, but we've gotten to know each other better over the last few months. And as you might suspect, to know Grant is to love him. (That is, when you're not giving him noogies for the way he misspells the word "website.")

Martha Barnette
San Diego, CA
820 Posts
(Offline)
32
2007/12/08 - 7:11pm

Thanks for that insight, Monika. What is the Polish sentence, exactly?

Monika
33
2007/12/17 - 1:37pm

You mean how it looks in Polish? "Demokracja w szkole to pajdokracja" (yes, we do polonize our Greek and "j" is our way of spelling long i, as in "York").

Sorry about the late answer and Merry Christmas!

Guest
34
2008/01/08 - 9:04pm

Monika said:

When I heard your listener talking about a word for the situation when children are in charge, I thought immediately about “paedocracy”, or “pedocracy”, take your pick.

I (almost) second this. "pediarchy" was my first thought. This is what I would call the rule of Tutankamon.

Edit: I often get confused differentiating "pedo" and "pedi". Would a pediarchy be a society ruled by children, or feet?

Oh, regarding where I put the period with respect to the quote: I placed it outside as I am comparing the prefixes "pedo and pedi", not "pedo and pedi." which would not have a period next to them in use. That is the same logic applied to the placement of the comma in the previous sentence.

Guest
35
2008/01/09 - 9:13am

strehlow said:

I often get confused differentiating “pedo” and “pedi”. Would a pediarchy be a society ruled by children, or feet?


Another reason why a foot doctor is a "podiatrist"!

Guest
36
2008/01/09 - 11:10am

dilettante said:

Another reason why a foot doctor is a “podiatrist”!


True, but then why are "centipedes" not "centipodes" or "centipods"? It is an ambiguous prefix, to me anyway.

Guest
37
2008/01/18 - 1:50pm

strehlow said:

I (almost) second this. “pediarchy” was my first thought. This is what I would call the rule of Tutankamon.

Edit: I often get confused differentiating “pedo” and “pedi”. Would a pediarchy be a society ruled by children, or feet?


Ah, but then there is PEDIAtrician.

I find that "pediarchy" rolls off of the tongue better than pedarchy or pedoarchy (*ouch*). I also like the -archy choice better than the -ocracy choice as it keeps the form of Patriarchy and Matriarchy.

Guest
38
2008/01/18 - 4:30pm

Paradox said:

Ah, but then there is PEDIAtrician.

Yes, but there are also pedodontists.

I find that “pediarchy” rolls off of the tongue better than pedarchy or pedoarchy (*ouch*). I also like the -archy choice better than the -ocracy choice as it keeps the form of Patriarchy and Matriarchy.

I agree.

Guest
39
2008/01/18 - 5:01pm

strehlow said:

Yes, but there are also pedodontists.


Well, in that case it is really ped-odontist.

odonto- (? dän?t?, t?) --> tooth or teeth
Etymology: < Gr od?n, odous (gen. odontos)

Emmett Redd
40
2008/01/22 - 1:54pm

luke said:

Grant Barrett said:



Penny said:


A 12-year old had given a puzzle–what 4-letter common male name can change the first letter to the next letter of the alphabet and create another 4-letter common male name.


My husband and I thought it was Mick and Nick.


Did anyone else come up with something else?


They're not *that* common, but what about Raul and Saul?



Not to mention Paul.


Cale (Yarborourgh) and Dale (Earnhardt) are not only sequential. They were even in the same profession.

Emmett

Forum Timezone: UTC -7
Show Stats
Administrators:
Martha Barnette
Grant Barrett
Moderators:
Grant Barrett
Top Posters:
Newest Members:
A Conversation with Dr Astein Osei
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 1
Topics: 3647
Posts: 18912

 

Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 618
Members: 1268
Moderators: 1
Admins: 2
Most Users Ever Online: 1147
Currently Online:
Guest(s) 82
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)