Audio
|
Adventures of the World's Most Popular Language _ _ _ This is a podcast of news, views and clues about today\'s global lingua franca. It spotlights the expanding shock waves of the English language in the 21st Century. _ _ Whether your interests in English are professional or personal, you\'ll enjoy the EnglishMojo explorations. See how the worldwide language is changing, and how it is changing us. |
EM 32 - New Word Memory Palace
Download Episode 32 - New Word Memory Palace
Into the narrow news gap between this year's elections, wars, corruption and celebrity gossip, the media has shifted a momentary spotlight toward the latest in words. So, we find a flurry of coverage on new words, on favorite words, on odd words.
These are key words they say without which we can't survive
Vendredi 8 février 2008
EM 31 - Stories for Future Presidents
Download Episode 31 - Stories for Future Presidents
Up against all the hazards already in the world, we now find ourselves blinded by that recurring snowstorm of story-telling known as the US presidential campaign.
An avalanche of these talks is trying to push us to believe that each of the would-be American presidents is a hero - of past, of present and of future scenarios. Urgent politics, though, are steering
Mardi 29 janvier 2008
In case you missed these, here’s a countdown of the most popular Mojo episodes of 2007.
In the seventh most popular episode on the list, Newest Campaign Tricks Part 2, we explored the mysteries of
Lundi 31 décembre 2007
EM 30 - The UK?s Favorite Word
Download Episode 30 - The UK's Favorite Word
If you want to see into the hearts and minds of a people, your chance came recently with the British.
Two thousand Brits each just weighed in with their favorite word in a poll conducted by a game maker. The 20 highest ranking favorites made their way into our hands. And we're eager to share them with you, our loyal readers and listeners.
The number one popular favorite is
Vendredi 14 décembre 2007
“In a world where evil still exists…now is the time, this is the place…for our families, for our future, for America.” From the scary new action film trailer, or the 60-second campaign commercial of Mitt Romney?
“We know what needs to be done… in this room right now…it?s time.” From an inspirational self-help group, or
Dimanche 9 décembre 2007
Celebrities are again taking a beating in the media.
Not long ago How Celebrities Say Sorry looked at the strange world of media apologies. EnglishMojo visitors loved this episode and made it the most popular to date. Now on the heels of Hugh Grant, Paris Hilton and Larry Craig comes
Dimanche 28 octobre 2007
Just Launched: MyMixedMarriage.com
Our sister site is now up and running. It features international communications and relationships. Visit it at MyMixedMarriage.com …
Note to RSS Subscribers: Working to repair problem on EnglishMojo RSS feed. Your patience is appreciated.
Vendredi 28 septembre 2007
EM 29 - Naming Drugs: Superstars
Download Episode 29 - Naming Drugs: Lifestyle Superstars
You can't fight human nature.
Heroes who save us get our thanks, respect and veneration. But the true stars in our lives are more likely to be those who bring us pleasure and enhance our lifestyles. Theirs become the names we look for and remember.
Drug makers haven't overlooked this fact. They now market a new
Samedi 25 août 2007
According to Rudyard Kipling, “Words are, of course, the most powerful drug used by mankind.” To find out about disappearing words & phrases, listen to applied linguist Ruth Wajnryb on Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s Lingua Franca.
Mercredi 22 août 2007
EM 28 - Naming Drugs: New Words
Download Episode 28 - Naming Drugs: New Words
In each of these pairs of drug names one is actual, one is fictional. Can you tell which is which? Fans of Stephen King, MadTV and Star Trek will have an advantage.
The choices: Norvasc & Novril; Qualex & Seroquel; Klonopin & Retinax; and Tretonin & Diazepam. In the third and final part of this series, Lifestyle Superstars, we'll share the answers.
Nothing short of wild success will satisfy today's
Samedi 18 août 2007
EM 27 - Naming Drugs: Superheroes
Download Episode 27 - Naming Drugs: The Superheroes
Recognize characters in the following short scene?
Paxil faced Crestor saying, "Xanax of Lipitor seeks the Neurontin." Hearing this, Zoloft rose from Levitra, dropped his Lyrica and crossed the Cialis to heave an Effexor into Zocor. The Celebrex cheered, "All hail Voltaren".
Names like these suggest superheroes and other larger than life figures. But you may have already guessed that these
Jeudi 9 août 2007
EM 26 - Newest Campaign Tricks 2
Download Episode 26 - Newest Campaign Tricks Part 2
Obama, McCain, Clinton, Giuliani - the leading deep-pocket candidates. Their hyperactive teams are working on new public statements daily. But do mesmerizing messages lie inside these?
So far nothing these three senators and an ex-mayor have released matches the powerful prose of Abe Lincoln or ML King, Jr. Strip off the outer husk of their palaver, though, and
Samedi 30 juin 2007
EM 25 - Newest Campaign Tricks 1
Download Episode 25 - Newest Campaign Tricks Part 1Are we going to be outsmarted by the candidates this election?
Big money is coming to this latest American presidential contest, a billion dollars, making it the most expensive ever. And that means the wordiest.
This bankroll has stimulated great flows of rhetoric from contenders in pursuit of the keys to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. The major party candidates, the funds and the great word mass they support are all attracted to
Samedi 23 juin 2007
EM 24 - President?s Progress Part 2
Download Episode 24 - President's Progress Part 2"No one knows how to define progress in such a mixed-up situation." And so began a U.S. congressman's proposal to use stock market techniques to measure war progress.
As seen in Part 1, from the Constitution to the beginning of television to the latest headlines, Americans need progress. Or something that looks like it.
The congressman found it in the Iraq Index. This includes rates of monthly car-bombs, foreign nationals' kidnappings, and things like
Dimanche 27 mai 2007
EM 23 - President?s Progress Part 1
Download Episode 23 - President's Progress Part 1"Progress is a message that we send
One step closer to the future
One inch closer to the end"
In this episode and the next we examine how, under immense pressure, the world's most powerful leader chose to rely on a single word to defend himself and a highly unpopular war. Punk music, the world's second largest company, former presidents and homicide detectives provide the answer.
Could the world's most active, most powerful image-makers be taking advice from a punk music group (Bad Religion)? Passing the four year mark in his undeclared war, the U.S. president and his team, all but declared the word "progress" to be his mantra.
Responding to complaints by critics, he has said:
"Since I announced the end of major combat operations in Iraq, we have made progress"
"We're making great progress"
"We've made good progress"
"We are making steadfast progress"
What weird power comes with this word, that makes the world's most powerful leader cite it so often?
Look to the president's audiences of citizens and politicos, and you'll find that "progress" pulses in their very fiber. For example, you only have to go as far as Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution to find a "Progress Clause". In this country the theme of progress emerges continually. Another president, Woodrow Wilson, offered this x-ray of the American psyche, "Progress is the word that charms their ears and stirs their hearts."
When television came to the nation, clever companies quickly used progress to sell their products. Every week for almost a decade the future president, actor Ronald Reagan, made his fame and fortune hosting one of the most popular shows to millions. In it he presented commercials about "Turbosupercharger Progress", "Atomic Safety Devices" and "the Kitchen of the Future".
These earned the greatest audience-recall ratings of their era. The show was the General Electric Theater. Pollsters called it "the leading institutional campaign on television for selling ideas to the public". The company slogan? "Progress is our most important product".
[ Thanks for joining us at EnglishMojo.com ]
Fifty years later amid car bombings and suicide attacks, the U.S. vice-president finds himself visiting the most protected zone in the Iraq war to advance what? Troop morale? Support from allies? No, he's working on the message of progress. Even a window-shaking explosion nearby didn't sway him from delivering this message.
After summoning reporters from their basement shelter, the vice-president emphasized that Iraqi leaders "believe we are making progress".
At home the president started to re-define progress by saying "sectarian murders are down". A neat rhetorical trick that, like the mayor of a crime-ridden city saying "Thursday murders are down".
One can't really avoid the dictionary definition of progress, though. It's simply, movement toward a goal or a higher stage. However by adding a more restricting phrase like "sectarian murders" or "Thursday murders", anyone can narrow the view enough to make progress seem achieved.
To block the sword thrusts of doubters, the president raised the verbal shield of his mantra, over and over.
"There is encouraging progress in Iraq"
"This is real progress"
"Initial signs of progress are encouraging"
"I see progress"
But by calling on this same word again and again, he raised more doubts. Even his supporters began to question the White House's meaning of the word. One capitol politico said and others agreed, "No one knows how to define progress in such a mixed-up situation".
Instead, they wanted to measure it.
In Part 2 of President's Progress, we hear the views of Manhattan murder detectives, a proposal to replace war "progress" with a stock market style average, General Electric's dumping of the word, and Humpty Dumpty's special word power.
Vendredi 18 mai 2007
EM 22: The Lawyer King of Recall
Download Episode 22 - The Lawyer King of RecallHow often do you see history being made? Now an amazing drama of immense importance for the world's strongest nation unfolds around a single word. And since the country in question is the United States of America, what's not amazing is that lawyers fill center stage.
The word at issue is "recall". When it's served up 70 times by the same person in one meeting, the mystery is why.
This battle of the lawyers, by the lawyers and for the lawyers takes place in the Senate Office Building. Gathered on one side, senators who lead the judiciary committee, with degrees from Georgetown University's, Harvard's, and Yale's law schools, ask the questions.
On the other side the US's highest ranking lawyer, the justice department's Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, takes his position backed by a degree from Harvard Law School, and (in words, at least) by his boss, the president who hired him.
The two sides have squared off over Attorney General Gonzales's firing of eight other lawyers, federal prosecutors who served in districts around the country. None of their law degrees comes from Georgetown, Harvard or Yale.
[Thanks for taking this article from EnglishMojo.com.]
As the senators prepared to put some hard questions about these dismissals to the attorney general, one of them said, "I hope and expect we'll be treated to a minimum of 'I don't recall.'" Alas, he got much more than that. At the end of the day the same senator told Attorney General Gonzales, "You've answered 'I don't know' or 'I can't recall' to close to a hundred questions."
Leaving politics and wrongdoing aside, which of course is a hard thing to do in Washington, the root of the problem should be clear to everyone: the attorney general was possibly defrauded by Harvard.
Given that a lawyering JD degree there will cost you about $60,000 a year, over 3 years, you'd expect to come out with a better command of lawyer English. He said "can't recall" or "don't recall" about 60 times the day of his testimony. (You can see and hear it on the video page. But brace yourself: these are all lawyer politicians before the cameras.)
Imagine how cheated he must feel. Just when a law degree is most important in your career- not over some trivial mundane issue like deciding a murder case, or how long to keep someone in jail without a trial - your education lets you down. Imagine if you spent the whole day stammering "I don't recall", like some kid in front of a broken window questioned by his parents, just rolling his eyes and looking at the ceiling saying, "I forget", while nothing clever comes to mind.
Here are some examples from his testimony: "I don't recall the specific mention of this conversation"; "Senator, that I don't recall remembering. I don't recall the reason why I that accept the decision"; "I don't recall the conversation. I don't recall whether or not I was present. I suspect I probably was, but I don't recall."
[Is there a topic you want on EnglishMojo? Contact us: EnglishMojo@gmail.com]
That's not the level we expect from Harvard. We want to gaze at its ivy shrouded halls and imagine with awe a depth of the learning going on inside. We don't want the fantasy broken by hearing "I don't recall" parroted over and over again by one of its alumni. A "Gonzales v. Harvard" lawsuit may be in order. At least a hefty refund should be in the works.
In the meantime, EnglishMojo wants to help. First, this writer confesses that besides overseeing the production of search-and-seizure training, his sole legal experience was being called twice for jury duty, and serving as jury foreman. So there's no legal advice here, but here's our shot at fixing the English.
Let's look squarely at the problem. We can guess that Attorney General Gonzales chose "I don't recall" because it has the virtue of being less clear and more adult-sounding than "I forget" or "I'm not going to tell you". It's also less guilty-
Samedi 28 avril 2007
EM 21: Perils of Japanese English
Download Episode 21 - Perils of Japanese EnglishEnglish-speaking travelers to Japan are now being overwhelmed by a new communications hazard. Rather than a lack of English causing problems, just the opposite is happening. Japan is producing English, and too much of it. Mystifying, home-grown Japanese English.
Like its famous manga and anime, the whole country is awash in Japanese English. It leaps out from fashionable homes and offices, shops, motor cars, package goods and street signs. Yet many of these nods to the West baffle native English speakers.
Written Japanese English is legendary for inscrutability. But, examples can also be heard everywhere as well.
"Orai, Orai", calls the watchful wife as her husband backs the family car into a tight space. "Naisu!" drone uniformed high school girls endlessly as they drill on the tennis court. "Taimu saabisu!" barks the announcer to shoppers at the supermarket. "Don mai" one friend reassures another.
To Japanese these widespread phrases are pure English, mainly because they're foreign-sounding. They and hundreds more like them have been conjured into stylish Japanese sayings out of English proper. But can you recognize their intended meanings? (They are: "All right"; "Nice!"; "Time service"; and "Don't mind".)
The real problem for English-speaking visitors begins when their first intoxication with Japan exoticism starts to overwhelm or exhaust them. That's when a fatigued mind can start responding to the slightest hint of the home language. Apparently English words seem to jump out from printed Japanese texts. Vague snatches of English catch the ear.
Too often, foreigners fixate their attentions on minor points in conversation or text, merely because these suggest English.
Suffering most are the visitors determined to speak the bits of Japanese they've painfully memorized, because many well-intentioned Japanese reward their efforts with mystifying Japanese English. It's hard to blame the Japanese people, though. To them such expressions are as surely English as anything from a Hollywood movie or a Parliamentary debate. The person who looks or sounds Western is presumed to know them.
The Japanese, you see, often do with English what they have done so successfully in other areas: re-engineer it's components into useful Japanese constructs.
Some lay the blame for famous Japanese incomprehensibility on difficulty pronouncing English. It is true that while English has over 40 recognized phonemes, Japanese possesses scarcely more than 20. So, many of the sounds in English simply don't exist in Japanese. This forces people in the Land of the Rising Sun to twist many foreign words into utterances that foreign speakers find hard to comprehend.
[Thanks for taking this article from EnglishMojo.com.]
Understanding spoken Japanese is challenging, to say the least. The scant number of spoken sounds means each has to do multiple duties. For example, say "kami" in Japan and you can mean "hair". Or "god". Or "paper". Japanese however will be quick to point out the significance that each is written differently. But in conversation people only hear what's said.
And that, too, is hard for the Japanese to keep in mind. The complexity of their written language requires them to spend much, if not most, of their school years memorizing the written forms of their language. Eventually it becomes second nature for many Japanese to visualize written forms as they hear the words. In fact, you can often see fingers stroking out a word in the air or on their palm to clarify a point in conversation.
And that brings us to katakana script, the phonetic alphabet where so many English words get kindly beaten to a pulp.
Writing in Japanese requires a working ability not in a single alphabet or script like English, but in four different ones.
Katakana is the one reserved largely for foreign words. Another, the most elaborate, includes complex ideograms borrowed from C
Lundi 12 mars 2007
Download EnglishMojo 20 - White House ChangesTimes change. In recent days White House newcomers have been changing the speech of the US president. They are cleverly modifying his highest profile messages through the words he uses and how often he repeats them.
The latest State of the Union address reveals a shift in text patterns introduced by the new speechwriting staff. They drafted this script to fight the bitter pressure of political realities: a second faltering war, the loss of control of Congress by the president's party, and a public approval rating fallen to 30% from 80%.
Times have indeed changed since the president's first State of the Union address in 2002.
The State of the Union is part requirement, part tradition. The president finds this directive in his job description from Article 2 of the US Consitution: "He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient."
Actual presentation of an in-person speech before Congress has fallen in and out of favor from the time of George Washington. But it's been in vogue for the past quarter century. It amounts to an executive summary by the CEO of the country. As such it's as likely to be filled with visionary fantasy as hard facts, as likely a report of the nation's condition as an Oval Office wish list, as likely to make political posturings as to rally national concensus.
The president's new speechwriter-in-chief is former news executive, chief editorial writer and senior editor William McGurn. He took over teleprompter scripting from departing Michael Gerson last summer [see EM Episode 14].
Beyond the literal statements in the State of the Union addresses of 2002 and 2007 we can see striking differences in the underlying messages of their word patterns. But one thing is clear: For these current White House speechwriters, more is better.
The State of the Union address is now jammed with more words and heavier sentences. The count in 2007 shows 50% more words than in 2002. Forty percent more sentences appear. And these are 5% heavier with words.
But the simplest and most powerful emphasis is achieved by repeating. By checking word counts we can look inside what the president intended to stress in each of these two speeches.
[Thanks for taking this article from EnglishMojo.com.]
In the 2002 address - after the invasion of Afghanistan, but before the invasion of Iraq - his longest repeated phrases were: this is a regime that has about iraq, and I hope you will join me, each uttered twice. In the 2007 address, he doubled up on with health insurance will pay no income about taxes, and a future of hope and opportunity requires.
Other phrases he favored in 2002 included:
September the 11th, 5 times
weapons of mass destruction, 4 times
and of course, the American people, 4 times.
The number of phrases repeated in 2007 declined. Still he managed to include:
we need to, 8 mentions
the Middle East, 5 mentions
private health insurance, 4 mentions
war on terror, 4 mentions
and of course, the American people, 4 mentions.
For 2007 his team laid on distinctive word pairs heavily. In 2002 word pairs were mostly general, such as: the best, 6 times, and my budget, 5 times.
By 2007 the leading pairs had become more concrete as health insurance got 11 references, in Iraq got 10, and Al Qaeda, received 10 references.
Among the president's favorite terms, the most distinctive word shifted from security at 19 mentions in 2002, to health with 18 mentions in 2007.
If sticks and stones didn't break bones and words were all that mattered, then great progress had been made because terror and terrorist(s) declined from 38 references to 21.
But, righteousness appears to have suffered as good dropped from 13 to 7 times.
On the other hand, the world might be a safer place considering that weapon(s) mentions slipped
Vendredi 2 février 2007
Download Episode 19 - Surge WarfareOnly a week after the US president announced that many thousands more American military were destined for Iraq, an amazing thing happened. The war ended.
Even as he said, "Victory will not look like the ones our fathers and grandfathers achieved. There will be no surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship," a winner was already rising out of the skirmishes.
The combatants were three words. Welcome to the world of Washington English where the field of combat covers a bloodless maze of power in and around the nation's capitol.
As soldiers gathered their kits and prepared for their trip into the deserts of Mesopotamia, leaders of the world's strongest power were busy fighting inside the beltway - fighting fiercely over three simple terms: surge, escalate and augment. Even someone who doubts the importance of choosing words can see how these American politicos - congresspersons, presidential spokespersons, and the secretary of state - all struggled to gain ground with just the right word.
Maybe they were thinking of Mark Twain's caution, "The difference between the right word and the almost right word is really a large matter - it's the difference between the lightning bug and the lightning."
For even before the president marched out his 3,000-word speech, the three-word battle had been joined. It wasn't over the phrasings his staff had prepared. Not, for instance, because he used the word, "new", a heavy-handed 17 times, nor even because he closed with this odd construction: "trust that the Author of Liberty will guide us".
In fact, he hadn't uttered surge, escalate or augment in the address. But battles are often fought by proxy on behalf of the powerful. It was back in November, after the elections and before the January address that Pentagon officials had been quoted anonymously in the New York Times, talking about plans for 20,000 more troops. Then the term "surge option" appeared in the press, and it soon became, "the surge".
Now, surge is a fine word, a powerful word. My dictionary sees it first of all as "a strong, wavelike, forward movement, rush, or sweep". It's a word with a built-in narrative. A wave grows larger, then smaller. Surge conjures up images of the sea crashing against a rocky coast, or a passing swell on the ocean, or the sudden rush of storm-driven water onto land.
In military use a "surge force" might mean troops that come in quickly to do a job, then leave.
But less dramatic phrases were offered by the president: "increasing American force levels" and "will be deployed". In government and media people likewise used lackluster terms like "increase in military forces" and "a substantial but temporary increase in American troop levels".
These descriptions paled against the short and sexy "surge", which sounds an awful lot like "urge" and was soon on everybody's lips.
The secretary of defense tried to dispel the mojo that surge was exerting when he said, "The increase in military forces will be phased in. It will not unfold overnight; there will be no D-Day; it won't look like the Gulf War." But surge was still embraced in the buzz.
Then signs of consciousness appeared in the American news media, enough to send the president's press secretary after the press conference corps: "And so -- see, Helen's got her favorite term, it's 'escalation'. You've got 'surge'. No, surge is not a term I've ever used. " This was an early sign that new contenders might vie to be the word of choice for the military adventure.
[Thanks for taking this article from EnglishMojo.com.]
In fact, escalation was one of two words that would go toe to toe the day after the president's speech. It was then that one Nebraska senator, who is a veteran of the Vietnam war, questioned the secretary of state, who is a doctor of political science.
THE SENATOR: My question was the escalation of American troops in Iraq.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE: But I think you
Samedi 20 janvier 2007
EM 18: How Celebrities Say Sorry
Download Episode18 - How Celebrities Say SorryA parade of public figures has recently apologized. What did we hear? Not a simple "I'm sorry", was it?
Sorry is perhaps the hardest word for a celebrity - major or minor. Comedian Michael Richards, OJ Simpson publisher Judith Regan, Prime Minister Tony Blair and radio personality Rush Limbaugh all lately found out just how hard.
Welcome to the strange world of the celebrity apology.
The famous, the wealthy and the powerful who happen to be caught in some error come to face the public with a lot at stake. After a career building up an image or an empire, it can be next to impossible to humble yourself, accept the blame, and put your future in someone else's hands.
How do celebrities manage their public apologies? And are these truly apologies at all?
When high-profile people find themselves in a public crisis their thoughts naturally turn toward reputation, career or financial liability.
Maybe that's why radio personality Rush Limbaugh said recently, "I will bigly, hugely admit that I was wrong, and I will apologize to Michael J. Fox, if I am wrong in characterizing his behavior on this commercial as an act."
The key word here is "if", which neatly twists an apology into a statement of doubt and suspicion.
Maybe the same reason motivated publisher Judith Regan to give a 2,200-word justification rather than apologize. Her multi-million dollar book deal on how O.J. Simpson would have murdered his ex-wife and her friend disgusted much of the public.
Regan's statement wandered deep into her own marital difficulties and included at its core this: "I made the decision to publish this book, and to sit face to face with the killer, because I wanted him, and the men who broke my heart and your hearts, to tell the truth, to confess their sins, to do penance and to amend their lives. Amen."
The key phrase here is "I wanted", and the twist casts a high-stakes executive publisher as a courageous detective-confessor heroine motivated by her own grievances to righteous combat.
Then there's Michael Richards, the on-stage comedian whose shouting match at a group of hecklers suddenly turned into a racial tongue-lashing. Afterwards he too didn't stop at a simple apology.
Rather he went on to hire a firm specializing in "rapid response" "work 'round-the-clock" against anything that "can inflict long-term damage in a very short time on" "an individual's character". Apparently his own televised contrition wasn't enough, so he turned to these apology advisors, the kind who can cost over $400 an hour.
[Thanks for taking this article from EnglishMojo.com.]
The full scope of what Richards' hired PR guns will have him do has yet to be seen.
Judith Regan's boss is media titan Rupert Murdoch. He at least has added an actual apology to her vignette by saying in his own peculiar grammar: "I and senior management agree with the American public that this was an ill-considered project. We are very sorry for any pain that this has caused the families ".
As for Rush Limbaugh, his reverse-spin comments were still generating a media buzz three weeks later.
Still, celebrities can occasionally surprise us with a simple apology done right. Hugh Grant was arrested in a car with prostitute. In his first television interview after the incident he said, "I think you know in life, pretty much, what the good thing to do is and what a bad thing is. And I did a bad thing. And there you have it."
But this is rare style among celebrities. Most can, and do, stretch the meaning of apology to their own ends. Yet no one has stretched the timing of apology more than British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who must be the King of Late Apologies.
He is expected to deliver a statement for the upcoming commemoration of outlawing of slavery in Britain 200 years ago. As drafted this reads in part: "we condemn its existence utterly and praise those who fought for its abolition - but also
Mardi 28 novembre 2006
EM 17: The Latest to Apologize
Download Episode 17 - The Latest to ApologizeBefore you give your next apology, consider some recent results of saying sorry.
After apologizing for his prime minister, an Australian was suddenly forced off-line. In Las Vegas a man who apologized was arrested and extradited. And Ohio teenagers - scheduled to court-ordered public apologies - were stopped by death threats.
Even Japanese, perhaps the most apologetic people on earth, now often refuse to do so at all when in the US. In short, the climate of the apology has been changing across much of the developed world.
The pressures against apologies are growing perhaps most in the lawyer-overrun environment of North America.
How strong are these pressures? What is the state of the common apology today? And what are the consequences of apologizing in this environment?
Apology is generally defined as an expression of regret, remorse, or sorrow for having insulted, failed, injured, or wronged another, and at other times as a defense, excuse or justification for some action.
Most people in Western cultures expect a true apology to contain several key elements, namely: a confession of error, a sincere statement of sorrow over hurt caused, a request for forgiveness, reparations for the error, and a sincere promise to not repeat the error.
But the risks of saying sorry are rising.
Chief among these: civil and criminal liability. In response to these risks, a Canadian province and 20 American states now enforce new apology laws to protect people whose apologies might otherwise lead to them to court.
In recent months high profile and celebrity apologies - crafted by behind-the-scenes publicity professionals - have been mutating the most. Some have changed so much that all key elements of expressing regret are totally missing. But even among people who must craft their own apologies, the common folk, new styles of apology are emerging.
For example, young people who run afoul of the law are expected to make direct apologies. Those Ohio teenagers pleaded guilty to delinquency charges in damaging two US flags last summer. They had been sentenced to deliver apologies at Veterans Day services. But when a murder plot against them was discovered in an Internet chat room, their appearance was canceled. In its place the apology was simply printed in the local newspaper.
Apologies mixed with satire tend to unsettle those in power. The Australian mentioned set up a spoof apology web site for Prime Minister John Howard. It received 10,000 visits its first day, and also attracted a rapid response from the Australian Federal Police. Then - though no charges were filed - suddenly and without announcement the parody site was disconnected by its private domain registrar.
[Thanks for taking this article from EnglishMojo.com.]
No one says sorry more often, more quickly and in more different ways than the Japanese. If you live in Japan, you realize that hundreds of automatic apologies are needed to keep daily life going smoothly. But when they visit the US these days many Japanese fear they may be trapped when they trip up and apologize out of habit. The reason? Like many Americans, they have become terrified of potential lawsuits in a country where expressing regret or concern over a fender-bender can be interpreted as admitting legal culpability.
On the other hand, apologies have recently popped up where you would least expect. Last month a Colorado resident reported to police that he had been clubbed by a nighttime intruder with a baseball bat. The assailant apparently realized too late that he had come to the wrong house. He proceeded to apologize to the resident and explain his mistake. But just as suddenly it was back to business, and a battle ensued before the intruder finally fled with an accomplice.
Of course some apologies just lack credibility. This is especially true in those arising from criminal activity. In the state of Delaware a person
Dimanche 19 novembre 2006
EM 16: This Election Explained
Download Episode 16: This Election ExplainedConfused by an election? You may well have reason to be. But it's easy to feel you understand. Lately, legions of candidates and commentators have been releasing thousands of sound bites to explain all.
You can now see elections as simply as they wish you to, because recently their views flooded the news. You've likely heard some. What might surprise you is how many fit any election, anywhere.
Do such explanations really define an election? Do they agree with each other? And what do they tell us about the state of democracy?
To give you a better feeling for the latest experiment in democracy, we've assembled the following "Ode to This Election". We condensed recent explanations from the news into a lyrical presentation reflecting this year's campaigns.
If you had to walk a gauntlet of politicos and pundits, each pushing a different view on you, this is what you might hear:
This election is a two-horse race
What's important to me in this election is a vision
This election is not about who's best, who's prudent, or who has the slickest TV ads
This election is more intense
This election is between you and me
This election is about the future of this country
This election is about my state
This election is very significant for us, as a community
This election is about our candidate and the good work she has done
This election is about fixing health-care, providing education, protecting borders, balancing civil liberties with national security, and how best to prosecute the war
This election, it is imperative to elect people with high moral values
In this election, God is in control
This election is a no-brainer
This election is about honor, dignity and comity in this country
This election is going to be all war, all the time
This election is about a referendum on the war
This election is about amnesty as much as about war or taxes
This election is about power
[Thanks for joining us at EnglishMojo.com.]
This election is a decision between receding or advancing
This election is about dealing with terrorism on the offense, or going back to being on the defense
This election is bringing out of the closet the crowd who will say anything to get votes
This election is a national intelligence test
This election is all about which party has the most aggrieved victims
This election is about creating a new majority in the Senate
This election is about leadership, not party affiliation
This election is worth $500 million, if it will get the Party back to controlling Congress
This election is not worth $500 million to the voters; it is worth that to interest groups buying support for their causes
This election is about the issues that we're confronting right now
This election is about a finishing of business, an older sort of politics
This election is critical to the future of our country
This election is about change; a big part of that change is energy security
This election is about an electorate that is frustrated, dissatisfied, and just plain ready for change nationally
This election is important because of an accumulation of power in the executive
This election is being fought on the streets
This election is about decency maybe more than anything else.
This election is meaner, dirtier, and more divisive
This election is not about race
This election is a fight for the hearts and souls of black folks
This election is not just about winning; it's about working to change the country
This election is all about winning
This election is in jeopardy
This election is going to be very, very close
I can't wait until this election is over
Lundi 6 novembre 2006
Download Episode 15: Election StabsWant to see a brawl among hundreds of expensively dressed men and women? You only need look at the politicians currently trading verbal punches in elections for 468 seats in the United States Congress.
Political slugfests also happen in Britain, Australia, Canada, and elsewhere. But the stunning thing about this particular free-for-all is how the disappearance of one small phrase has suddenly sent incumbents scrambling to rewrite their battle plans.
Only a few weeks before elections began unrolling, the president did the unthinkable to his fellow party politicians. He jettisoned the two-year old catchphrase that had united them in promoting an increasingly unpopular overseas war.
Instantly and completely the sound bite, "Stay the Course", disappeared from his speeches and statements.
What's happening to today's political slogans? How have they been used for attack? And what are they evolving into?
The president's companion attack mantra "Cut and Run" seems to have disappeared as well. "Stay the Course" conjured the image of an unswerving ship's captain. "Cut and Run" suggested the battlefield coward.
"Stay the Course" first appeared in print in the mid 1880's, and applied to a race horse's ability to cross the finish line as a winner. By the end of World War 1, politicians had reined it to their own purposes.
"Cut and Run" was actually the nautical term and long an established military tactic used by sailing ships under sudden attack. It goes back over 200 years. To free a vessel for quick escape the anchor cable would be slashed, allowing it to fall into the sea as sails were raised.
There is nothing like a war to generate political slogans. Recent hostilities inspired the president's "We'll Stand Down When They Stand Up", and "Mission Accomplished", which appeared as signage behind the president on the deck of an aircraft carrier. And "Protecting America" was posted at the signing table of the much-distrusted Military Commissions Act of 2006.
But for raw power and simplicity, no one beats the ancient Roman, Cato. The senator became famous for closing all his speeches with the imperative, "Carthage Must Be Destroyed!" Rome eventually attacked.
Election watchwords range from sweet to sarcastic, from personal praise to attacks and counter attacks. Sometimes they even take sides on an issue. Often developed by a campaign team of three to four people, they can be stabs in the dark, seeking to hit an emotion, evoke an impression, or trigger a voter's mood such as optimism, anxiety , anger or apprehension.
Many times - because they have the impossible task of being distinct and memorable while remaining vague to hundreds, thousands, maybe millions of people - they fail. The beauty of a political slogan lies in its ability to imply much and say little.
Consider this from the Scottish National Party: "The Power for Change" and "It's Scotland's Oil". Or this from different parties in Canada: "Moving Forward" and "Someday is now". From Australia: "When It Matters" and "We're for the Country".
In the UK the war of watchwords brought forth from the Labour Party "New Labour, New Life for Britain", which was countered by the Conservatives with "New Labour, New Danger". The mysterious appeared in "Britain Forward Not Back" and "Are You Thinking What We're Thinking?". And there was the especially irrelevant, "Proud of Britain".
But no place produces more sloganeering variety than America. How important is it there?
[Thanks for joining us at EnglishMojo.com.]
If cost is any indication, one group estimates that spending this season for those 468 positions in Congress will reach 2.6 billion dollars. That works out to nearly six million dollars per seat, and is said to average about $60 per vote in the Senate, and $35 per vote in the House.
That's a long way from the quaint 1840's "Tippecanoe and Tyler Too" and the beginnings of presidential campaigning. Amer
Samedi 28 octobre 2006
The man who gave the world ?axis of evil? recently left the White House, presumably never to return.
Though his words captured people?s attention around the world, chief speech writer, Michael Gerson?s identity was relatively unknown. Since he departed have you noticed a difference in what comes out of the President?s mouth?
That famous three-word power phrase emerged from word games inside the White House four-person speech writing team - people with weighty compound titles such as ?Assistant to the President and Director of Presidential Speech Writing?, and ?Special Assistant to the President and Deputy Director of Presidential Speech writing?. By contrast, 80 years ago the very first of their kind had to endure a less impressive designation as ?literary clerk?.
These days why don?t these influential wordsmiths come up with more inspired titles for themselves? And is their speechifying any different from the past?
Whatever the bureaucracy weighing on their creativity, the presidential speech team did manage to produce the ?axis term? to link certain countries to terrorists in the public mind. The phrase developed when one of the team coined ?axis of hatred?. Then evangelical Christian heavyweight Gerson stepped in and spun it into a more theological ?axis of evil?.
Evil, of course, is not new to the White House. Ronald Reagan referred to the Soviet Union an ?evil empire?. And more obliquely, Franklin Roosevelt called the war against Germany a battle between the Cross and the swastika.
So what?s the real difference between presidential speeches of the past and now?
History has conveniently, if somewhat cruelly, provided snapshots in two different speeches created in remarkably similar tragedies. Look at the Pearl Harbor and the September 11 attacks, and at the responses of Presidents Franklin Delano Roosevelt and George Walker Bush .
In both cases, a nation was suddenly shocked by large numbers of deaths ( 2,403 at Pearl Harbor; at least 2,973 on September 11), and serious material destruction ( 18 ships, including five battleships at Pearl Harbor; seven buildings on September 11). And in both cases, the President responded within a day with an address to the American people.
[Thanks for joining us at EnglishMojo.com.]
FDR?s speech - it?s said - was composed in his head. He then reportedly dictated calmly to his secretary what appeared to be a request to Congress for a declaration of war, but which was more a rallying cry to the American people.
The development of GWB?s speech is less clear, but it?s reasonable to suppose the core writing team was involved. In any case the texts of the speeches speak for themselves.
Some people would compare the speeches subjectively. Such comparisons will always be debatable. But interesting differences can be found by more scientific analysis. For instance consider the frequency of repeated words and phrases. The longest phrase repeated by FDR is ?last night Japanese forces attacked?, which he says three times. GWB?s is ?will be open for business?, which he repeats twice.
Among non-trivial or uncommon single words FDR repeats ?Japanese? the most, ten times. For GWB the leading word is ?I?, repeated eight times, followed by ?America? (six times), ?world? (five times), and ?evil? (four times).
FDR?s next most repeated words or phrases are ?United States?, ?American?, ?forces?, and ?I?, all six times each.
As to the raw mileage for each speech, FDR covers his distance in 518 words, while GWB takes 596. How big are the words? GWB uses an average of 16 syllables every ten words and 16 words per sentence, while FDR weighs in at 17 average syllables and close to 19 words per sentence.
We hear smaller words, shorter sentences, and a longer speech from GWB in 2001 than from FDR in 1941. And remember, FDR?s was heard through radio; GWB?s was seen o
Mardi 17 octobre 2006
Nearly a million people went online last month to vote for one. A global computer maker, a brewery in Wales, an Oklahoma mega-church, and an Australian soccer club each recently launched one.
They are slogans, and now they are reaching everywhere like a crashing tsunami. The advertisers just mentioned launched these: ?Believe or burn?; ?Remember, there was a time when you thought you wouldn?t like sex either?; ?A Newport blonde goes down better?; and ?Go far, keep your secrets close?. But can you guess who launched which slogan?
Current trends in slogan-making mean that compact messages such as these are actively breaking down our usual word associations, as they compete with other slogans. What effects are these messages having on us? And how are they targeting us?
Every day slogans, the battle shouts of modern commerce, affect consumers more powerfully. The word, slogan, in fact originally meant a Scottish war cry.
Also known as tags, tag lines, end lines and straplines, today?s slogans - composed by backroom copywriters - are the indispensable short swords of politicians, corporations and anyone else aiming at the public?s attention.
Oddly though, these messages are becoming increasingly cryptic to catch us off guard and overpower our normal sense of English.
Could you match those four slogans to their owners? ?Believe or burn? belongs to the soccer team, while the remark about sex comes from the church. The Newport blonde - though represented in an ad by a model in fishnet stockings and hotpants - refers to a beer. And it?s the computer maker that encourages us to be secretive.
Recently the American Association of Advertising Agencies? entered Year 3 of honoring slogans on its Madison Avenue Walk of Fame. Tallying those near-million votes earlier this month, it selected two you might know.
Popular contenders included the edgy ?Just do it? for athletic shoes and ?Friends don?t let friends drive drunk? for safe roads. But the slogans that consumers seemed to like most were: ?Don?t mess with Texas?, for anti-littering; and ?When it absolutely, positively has to be there overnight?, for delivery service.
Advertising slogans began at least as long ago as the 1880?s, when an obscure bottled beverage was relesed under the simple two-word slogan, ?Drink Coca-Cola?.
[Thanks for joining us at EnglishMojo.com.]
Coke?s slogan has since morphed through over 150 different variations.
Early on it was ?For headache and exhaustion?. Then in the early 20th Century, it became ?The favorite drink for ladies when thirsty, weary, and despondent?. A United States under prohibition of alcohol saw it become ?The Great National Temperance?, then ?It will satisfy you?, and later ?Thirst can?t be denied?. Dust-bowl depression provoked the term, ?Ice-cold sunshine?. Then as the economy shifted upward, America heard, ?Carry a smile back to work?. The Second World War saw ?It?s the real thing?. The Vietnam Era brought an expansive ?I?d like to buy the world a Coke?. Soon afterward post-war blues were offered ?Look up America?, and ?Coke adds life?.
A succession of forgettable phrases followed in the 1980?s and 90?s until the vague ?Life is Good? appeared in 2001.
Whatever the slogan, one trend is strengthening: its writers are aiming increasingly at emotions, and impulsive reactions.
For copywriters, slogans fall into categories. Canadian Alan Sharpe produced one list of these categories. They include: Ask a Question, as in Clairol?s ?Does she or doesn?t she??; Link a Product Feature with an Abstract Need, as in DeBeers? famous ?A diamond is forever?; and Make a Compelling Promise, as in Federal Express?s ?When it absolutely, positively has to be there overnight?.
You might think the slogans we hear provide miniature fantasy scripts, triggering our brains to produce
Mardi 10 octobre 2006
A billion people, three languages, and a battle to dominate. So far English has the lead.
English has made India a world player. The country is an outsourcing king, especially among publishers. Read a book or visit a web site, and there?s a chance that some part of it was produced or serviced in India.
How strong is English in India today? What forces oppose it? And which way is the struggle for language dominance going?
Every day on their subcontinent nearly 150 million Indians read 8,000 domestically-published English language newspapers. The circulations of some are undeniably world-class. The most striking example is Number Six on the global Top Ten list of daily newspapers in English. Number Six outranks both the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. Number Six is the Times of India.
English language books, too, are big. Only the US and the UK publish more than India, which releases 20,000 titles a year, more than a fourth of the country?s total production.
Sure, China can produce goods cheaper, but India?s unrivaled second language experience gives it an edge in the global business of information industry outsourcing. Worldwide, publishers outsource to the tune of a couple billion dollars. So, Delhi caters to book giants like Macmillan and Thomson Press.
Geography, which for generations hindered development on the subcontinent, now conspires with English. Together in the digital age, they produce a situation of high value timing. Now call centers and web sites are milking the difference in time zones. News portal CNET, for example, uses Indians to keep its news site fresh when HQ staff are sleeping.
Consider the huge effect the language has on India in the 21st Century. You might think it gets protected status there. But far from securing its place, English is being challenged in the world?s next most populous country.
[Thanks for joining us at EnglishMojo.com.]
The premier challenger to Indian English is - as you might guess - Hindi. These two languages cooperated for two and a half centuries to dominate the vast subcontinent.
But early signs of a change can already be seen. Hindi appears to be emerging as the lingua franca of the literate in India. Penguin Books India, which always only published in English recently launched its first publishing program in Hindi.
Hindi is already spoken by four to five times as many Indians as any other native language including Bengali, Tamil or Telugu.
On the global scale -if you count only native speakers - Hindi appears even larger than English.
But big as it is, this potential English-killer has failed to win over the large non-Hindi regions of the country. In the south English remains the lingua franca.
No one can say for certain how the language struggles will turn out. It is possible that these two leviathans may have to yield to a third force, their own offspring.
?Hinglish? is the name given to English spiced with Hindi vocabulary, or to Hindi syntax supplemented with English. It?s currently popular among the Indian middle class. So advertisers - who might otherwise choose either Hindi or English - are using Hinglish.
Their reasoning: though they might be understood well enough in either of the two languages, the hybrid offspring gives them maximum connection with their audiences. As a result Indian advertising from most multinational corporations is filled with Hinglish.
In previous generations many Indians grew up thinking that if you can?t speak perfect English, you shouldn?t speak it at all. But now market power has shifted to the young. To them, being understood outclasses being correct. And this new attitude opens the door wide for that mix that is Hinglish.
So will it be English, Hindi or Hinglish for India? Who knows? But one thing is sure.
The winner in this billion-population country will affect the whole English-speaking world for years to come.
Samedi 30 septembre 2006
Contact Podflux.net Blog : PodFlux.net évolution et actualité
PodFlux.net : annuaire podcast vidéos, podcast audios et podcast radio :: Podflux.fr - Podflux.net - Podflux.com - PodCast-france.net - PodCast-france.fr Annuaire-podcast.eu - Annuaire-podcast.fr - Podcast-directory.net vidéos à la demande - VOD - téléchargement
édité par Exilius.net vidéos à la demande - VOD - téléchargement vidéos à la demande - VOD - téléchargement Science vidéos à la demande - VOD Histoire vidéos à la demande - VOD Nature vidéos à la demande - VOD Arts vidéos à la demande - VOD Sports vidéos à la demande - VOD Sexualité (Sexe) vidéos à la demande - VOD bon-achat.net annuaire marchand, Guide d'achat, bon de réduction, bons plans Tous-Gays.net : portail gay annuaire blog podcast boutique avis test petites annonces