Oh, grammar!
Here are some grammatical slips of various kinds from the excellent British website worldwidewords.org, which deals with the origins and usage of the English language:
From an article on the Daily Telegraph site from last August that begins, “The top five tips on how to kill flies have been unveiled by a professor who has spent decades studying the pests” and goes on, “In the light of his investigations, he shares his top tips on how to swat them with Telegraph readers.” (Topmost tip: use the newspaper instead.)
A local bakery recently displayed a hand-made sign on a self-serve bin admonishing customers: “Please do not use your fingers to take cookies. Use the tongues.”
A summary of a television show from a cable network: “Hours before giving birth, a woman’s boyfriend leaves her for her best friend.”
The heading for an article in the Sydney Sun-Herald of 22 March: “One in four anorexic kids is a boy, and one in 10 adults is a man.”
At Random
-
jdb1
Re: At Random
Did somebody ask about film festivals in NYC this week? I thought I saw such a request, metioning the Nicholas Ray series at The Film Forum but I can't find it now.
In any event, both MOMA and Lincoln Center are running running some interesting programs over the next week or so. MOMA's got a Brazilian film festival, showing both current and classic films, and Lincoln Center is showing some Russian films, among others. Not likely I'll attend either one; I still haven't seen the Star Trek movie (then there's Harry Potter -- I've never seen one of those in the theater and I'm curious).
In any event, both MOMA and Lincoln Center are running running some interesting programs over the next week or so. MOMA's got a Brazilian film festival, showing both current and classic films, and Lincoln Center is showing some Russian films, among others. Not likely I'll attend either one; I still haven't seen the Star Trek movie (then there's Harry Potter -- I've never seen one of those in the theater and I'm curious).
-
jdb1
Re: At Random
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8163920.stm
Taking their cue, no doubt, from that ground-breaking British researcher who made the recent startling discovery that cats purr to influence the people they own, a team of researchers in Australia and New Zealand universities have likely spent millions in money and years in time to solve the "secret" of why some children fall asleep faster than others. (If you grew up in solitary confinement and were then lost in space all by yourself for the last 10,000 years, you may be the one who is surprised to learn that it's because those who fall asleep faster run around more during the day.)
Tell me -- why is time and money being spent to document the obvious? Can it be that the researchers involved not only never had any dealings with children before but were never children themselves? And do they really want us to believe that it's only children who can sleep better if they are more active, and not adults, or cats, or kangaroos?
With all the imperative and/or worthwhile things that could be researched by those with the time and money to do so, is this really the best they can come up with? It's like those fanciful weather reports we're all subject to; if the forecasters would leave their maps and radar screens and just look out the window every half hour, we'd get much more accuracy.
What is happening to common sense????? [OK I feel better now. Thanks for listening.]
Taking their cue, no doubt, from that ground-breaking British researcher who made the recent startling discovery that cats purr to influence the people they own, a team of researchers in Australia and New Zealand universities have likely spent millions in money and years in time to solve the "secret" of why some children fall asleep faster than others. (If you grew up in solitary confinement and were then lost in space all by yourself for the last 10,000 years, you may be the one who is surprised to learn that it's because those who fall asleep faster run around more during the day.)
Tell me -- why is time and money being spent to document the obvious? Can it be that the researchers involved not only never had any dealings with children before but were never children themselves? And do they really want us to believe that it's only children who can sleep better if they are more active, and not adults, or cats, or kangaroos?
With all the imperative and/or worthwhile things that could be researched by those with the time and money to do so, is this really the best they can come up with? It's like those fanciful weather reports we're all subject to; if the forecasters would leave their maps and radar screens and just look out the window every half hour, we'd get much more accuracy.
What is happening to common sense????? [OK I feel better now. Thanks for listening.]
Re: At Random
if the forecasters would leave their maps and radar screens and just look out the window every half hour, we'd get much more accuracy.
What is happening to common sense????? [OK I feel better now. Thanks for listening.]
YOU GO GIRL!!!!!-
movieman1957
- Administrator
- Posts: 5522
- Joined: April 15th, 2007, 3:50 pm
- Location: MD
Re: At Random
Common sense?
There isn't any when government grant money is involved. (And that works on either end.) It makes one wonder what some people are smoking to come up with the ideas they want to research but then somebody at a higher level thought that was a good idea.
Common sense is a rare commodity. It is usually only alive and well at certain movie discussion forums.
There isn't any when government grant money is involved. (And that works on either end.) It makes one wonder what some people are smoking to come up with the ideas they want to research but then somebody at a higher level thought that was a good idea.
Common sense is a rare commodity. It is usually only alive and well at certain movie discussion forums.
Chris
"Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana."
"Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana."
-
jdb1
Re: At Random
Your point is very well taken, Chris. The researchers have to come up with something to research, no matter how fanciful, but why are they then enabled by management?movieman1957 wrote:Common sense?
There isn't any when government grant money is involved. (And that works on either end.) It makes one wonder what some people are smoking to come up with the ideas they want to research but then somebody at a higher level thought that was a good idea.
Common sense is a rare commodity. It is usually only alive and well at certain movie discussion forums.
I suppose it's part of that "publish or perish" mentality that informs all technical and scholarly endeavors. Anything for professional journal recognition. I went to high school with a woman who is now at at Duke University. I never thought much of her academic depth. I read a very long (and rather boring) treatise she wrote, on "The Godfather," of all things, the conclusion of which was that the Mafia is male-dominated. Huh??? Whaddaya, kiddin' me? Male-dominated. Imagine that. (And yes, she is Italian-American.) Kind of brings to mind Yoko Ono writing things on the ceiling, calling it art, and charging $150,000 for it. The outrageous part isn't that things like that are done, but that anyone is willing to pay attention to it.
-
movieman1957
- Administrator
- Posts: 5522
- Joined: April 15th, 2007, 3:50 pm
- Location: MD
Re: At Random
I'm married to an Italian and I could have told her nearly everything is male dominated. Would have saved her some time.
Everything is worth only as much as someone is willing to give for it. Art is a perfect example.
Everything is worth only as much as someone is willing to give for it. Art is a perfect example.
Chris
"Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana."
"Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana."
-
jdb1
Re: At Random
Show of hands, please:
How many of you who came of age in the 60s are sick to death of this Woodstock anniversary nonsense (not to mention the endless docus about Chas. Manson last week), and the pervasive thesis from the current media that we were all delusional but quaint freaks, far inferior to the movers and shakers of today.
I propose a film montage which juxtaposes Woodstock's dancing hippies with the drugged out and half-dead dancers at Studio 54, moshers at a heavy metal concert, teenies screeching at Brittany and the Jonas Bros, Cher and Madonna competing to see who can wear the least onstage, and thugs pumping their fists while some rapper curses, postures, and forces words to rhyme. The narrator should point out that in time, every one of these images will be a source of embarrassment to its participants. Then we should all vote on which one looks the stupidest.
How many of you who came of age in the 60s are sick to death of this Woodstock anniversary nonsense (not to mention the endless docus about Chas. Manson last week), and the pervasive thesis from the current media that we were all delusional but quaint freaks, far inferior to the movers and shakers of today.
I propose a film montage which juxtaposes Woodstock's dancing hippies with the drugged out and half-dead dancers at Studio 54, moshers at a heavy metal concert, teenies screeching at Brittany and the Jonas Bros, Cher and Madonna competing to see who can wear the least onstage, and thugs pumping their fists while some rapper curses, postures, and forces words to rhyme. The narrator should point out that in time, every one of these images will be a source of embarrassment to its participants. Then we should all vote on which one looks the stupidest.
Re: At Random
jdb1 wrote:Show of hands, please:
How many of you who came of age in the 60s are sick to death of this Woodstock anniversary nonsense (not to mention the endless docus about Chas. Manson last week), and the pervasive thesis from the current media that we were all delusional but quaint freaks, far inferior to the movers and shakers of today.
I propose a film montage which juxtaposes Woodstock's dancing hippies with the drugged out and half-dead dancers at Studio 54, moshers at a heavy metal concert, teenies screeching at Brittany and the Jonas Bros, Cher and Madonna competing to see who can wear the least onstage, and thugs pumping their fists while some rapper curses, postures, and forces words to rhyme. The narrator should point out that in time, every one of these images will be a source of embarrassment to its participants. Then we should all vote on which one looks the stupidest.
My hand is raised.
Re: At Random
MY hand is also raised high as it can go. Unfortunately I watch so much cable TV that I miss these little bits and pieces you get on commercial TV. In addition, I rarely watch any of the nightly news, because as I've said, I'm more interested in how the health care is going than if some silly actress is pregnant or whatever.
I was going to ask in some thread about that movie that is coming out that seems to be about the leasing, and preparation for the Woodstock mess, but now I guess my answer is that this is it's anniversary. Are we going to plan to party-hearty for the discovery and turnover of Watergate also? Or perhaps a gala celebration for the days that Oswald and Jack Ruby were killed. Both things are equally embarrassing to us as a people, even though it was my generation that attended. The whole time I was covering my eyes in mortification.
Anne
I was going to ask in some thread about that movie that is coming out that seems to be about the leasing, and preparation for the Woodstock mess, but now I guess my answer is that this is it's anniversary. Are we going to plan to party-hearty for the discovery and turnover of Watergate also? Or perhaps a gala celebration for the days that Oswald and Jack Ruby were killed. Both things are equally embarrassing to us as a people, even though it was my generation that attended. The whole time I was covering my eyes in mortification.
Anne
Anne
***********************************************************************
* * * * * * * * What is past is prologue. * * * * * * * *
]***********************************************************************
***********************************************************************
* * * * * * * * What is past is prologue. * * * * * * * *
]***********************************************************************
-
jdb1
Re: At Random
It's Hell in a Handbasket time once again.
I couldn't resist -- I had to watch some of the two hours Fox devoted to the Octomom last night. And so my worst suspicions were confirmed: the woman is a loony. And not only a loony, but a boring one at that.
She looks so grotesque with that not very good plastic surgery. Her children are completely out of control, and most of them appear not to like her very much. In addition, at least the way this program was presented, she doesn't seem to have much of a maternal bond with any of them. The woman seemed more concerned with convincing us that there's a ghost in her house than with telling us about her relationship with her children.
And of course, just like most other "celebrities" who crave our attention and want to live out their pathetic lives in public, she resents the paparazzi and the curiosity seekers.
I know I shouldn't have been watching this travesty at all, but the schadenfreude got the better of me. How long before all 14 children are taken away from this crazy person? I recall what Judge Judy, a former NYC Family Court judge, said in an interview when asked about Nutty Nadya. She said she feared that this woman, who professes to be very religious, would use the excuse of God commanding her to do away with her children and thus relieve herself of the burden she foolishly imposed upon herself. It's not a fanciful as it sounds, folks. It happens all the time.
Those poor children.
I couldn't resist -- I had to watch some of the two hours Fox devoted to the Octomom last night. And so my worst suspicions were confirmed: the woman is a loony. And not only a loony, but a boring one at that.
She looks so grotesque with that not very good plastic surgery. Her children are completely out of control, and most of them appear not to like her very much. In addition, at least the way this program was presented, she doesn't seem to have much of a maternal bond with any of them. The woman seemed more concerned with convincing us that there's a ghost in her house than with telling us about her relationship with her children.
And of course, just like most other "celebrities" who crave our attention and want to live out their pathetic lives in public, she resents the paparazzi and the curiosity seekers.
I know I shouldn't have been watching this travesty at all, but the schadenfreude got the better of me. How long before all 14 children are taken away from this crazy person? I recall what Judge Judy, a former NYC Family Court judge, said in an interview when asked about Nutty Nadya. She said she feared that this woman, who professes to be very religious, would use the excuse of God commanding her to do away with her children and thus relieve herself of the burden she foolishly imposed upon herself. It's not a fanciful as it sounds, folks. It happens all the time.
Those poor children.
-
charliechaplinfan
- Posts: 9040
- Joined: January 15th, 2008, 9:49 am
Re: At Random
I've read an interview with her and got the impression she was nuts. The same interview said that she wanted a job as an advocate for baby rearing and childcare. Oh please, as most Mums know, one child is an absolute joy, two are mostly sweet but can raise hell together, three and four is the limit of most people's patience and 14 especially 8 at once is unbelieveable. How was she allowed to carry so many? Surely her life was in danger and 6 children would have been left without a mother. Who pays for her children?
I think we all have those moments when we've watched something we really don't approve of just because we find it mind boggling.
I think we all have those moments when we've watched something we really don't approve of just because we find it mind boggling.
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin
-
moira finnie
- Administrator
- Posts: 8024
- Joined: April 9th, 2007, 6:34 pm
- Location: Earth
- Contact:
Re: At Random
A doctor with dollar signs where his ethics should have been.charliechaplinfan wrote:How was she allowed to carry so many?
It probably seemed like a good trade-off to get the attention this unbalanced creature obviously craves.charliechaplinfan wrote:Surely her life was in danger and 6 children would have been left without a mother.
I believe it is the nearly bankrupt state of California and probably the Federal Government who pays for much of the care as well, though she can justify her exhibitionism of herself and these poor tykes in the media by claiming that it is the "only" way she can make a living with so many little ones, several of whom have physical problems as a result of their multiple births. Duh.charliechaplinfan wrote:Who pays for her children?
-
charliechaplinfan
- Posts: 9040
- Joined: January 15th, 2008, 9:49 am
Re: At Random
Stories like that just drive me nuts, it's the world gone mad!!!
My guilty pleasure isn't so much the television programmes because I have my sensible husband tutting at me if I put anything like that on but the magazines that get left at the kids play centres, the celebrity culture magazines and I devour them ravaneously whilst having a drink and supervising Joe. I think it's the guilty pleasure of not having to buy them myself.
My guilty pleasure isn't so much the television programmes because I have my sensible husband tutting at me if I put anything like that on but the magazines that get left at the kids play centres, the celebrity culture magazines and I devour them ravaneously whilst having a drink and supervising Joe. I think it's the guilty pleasure of not having to buy them myself.
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin