How Many Words Do You Know?

I think that Sacha Baron Cohen is a brilliant comedian. Many people find him disgustingly offensive, especially after the runaway box-office smash Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan, and still others just think his bizarre antics aren't funny. Borat was an equal-opportunity-offender, criticizing Americans from all different walks of life. Personally, I found the satirical film offensive and hilarious. Two thumbs up.

Sacha Baron Cohen first gained fame as alter-ego Ali G, and I think his earlier interviews on Da Ali G Show are among his best work. If you aren't familiar with his stuff (and aren't easily offended), definitely check it out.

Because it is Friday I thought I'd lighten up a bit with some comic relief. Below is Ali G interviewing Dr. Noam Chomsky, distinguished professor of linguistics, on language. I'd personally like to know whether Dr. Chomsky was in on the joke, though it's quite hilarious either way. Enjoy!

You Should Care More

I recently had a telephone conversation with someone who, when asked his viewpoint on some subject, responded, "I could care less." I can't even remember what we were talking about at the time, but as soon as the words left his mouth I immediately began to think about the annoyance that is this commonly misused phrase. "I could care less" literally means that the speaker has the capacity to care less about the subject at hand, thus implying that he or she is not indifferent to the matter and therefore not devoid of emotion regarding the subject. This is not necessarily a negative thing, because there is no absence of care.

Most people, when using the phrase "I could care less" actually mean to say "I couldn't care less," because not being able to care less about something means, more simply put, that they don't care.

William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White list this phrase as one of the expressions commonly misused in The Elements of Style, which is a Bible of sorts to writers and editors alike and should be a required reference tool for anyone who speaks or is learning to speak English. This is what they have to say:

Care less. The dismissive "I couldn't care less" is often used with the shortened "not" mistakenly (and mysteriously) omitted: "I could care less." The error destroys the meaning of the sentence and is careless indeed.

I sincerely hope that this phrase does not become so common that it is adopted as part of the English vernacular. In fact, I'm not sure I could care more.

Shoulda Coulda Woulda

I am proud to be from Texas. Though I don't have a "country" accent, as I was raised in the suburban metropolis that is Houston, I certainly appreciate the slow drawl and sharp twang that is indicative of many a Texan's Lone Star roots. "Y'all" is part of my vocabulary, and I am not opposed to "ain't." I embraced such colloquialisms as "fixin' to" and such abbreviations as "prolly," though in my opinion it is only acceptable to adopt these gems of southern vernacular if and only if you are cognizant of the correct manner of speaking, in a manner of speaking. After all, would Picasso have been as successful in cubism if he had not first gained street cred by showing that he had raw artistic talent?

To that end, I have absolutely no tolerance for "prolly" if you think that is actually how the word is pronounced, and don't even get me started on "supposably." The following are a few common phrases used by native Texans that I consider acceptable in conversation.

"Fixin' to" (about to, as in do something)

"Usedtacould" (used to could, as in used to be able)

"Usedtawould" (used to would, as in used to do)

"Coulda/shoulda/woulda" (for could have, should have, would have, not 'could of,' which is a common mistake)

The list could go on, but what I'd like to address is a glaring grammatical error that I've heard escape the mouths of Texans and New Yorkers alike. This commonly misused phrase is not clearly enough resemblant of a southern dialect to be deemed a colloquialism, and therefore makes the speaker sound just plain dumb. Under no circumstances should it be used.

"Should have went/Could have went"

This phrase hurts my ears and my feelings. I've heard it used by college graduates, working professionals, peers and family members alike, to my dismay. But achieving fluency in language is an ongoing and never-ending learning process, as we are constantly adding new words to our vocabularies and correcting previous mistakes. Now is the time to correct this one. It's most often heard when a person regrets not having gone somewhere. For example:

I heard the concert was really good. I should have went.

or

I left work early, so I could have went.

No. No no no no no. Went should never follow could or should. The correct way to say it is, "I should have gone" or "I could have gone." Similarly, it is correct to say, "You should have come," not, "You should have came."

Y'all come back now, ya hear?

¡La Gringa Habla Español!

I have just returned to life from a much-needed vacation in Playa Grande, Costa Rica. The hot weather was a welcome change from the bitter cold of the Big Apple, as was the absence of cell phone, computer, and even television. That's right, folks, you can survive! Being immersed in a culture whose motto is "Pura Vida," or pure life, had the effect on me of a detoxifying system overhaul. What's more, I had the chance to brush up on my Español.

I began studying Spanish in eighth grade, went on to study it extensively in high school, placed out of a minor's worth of college credit thanks to Advanced Placement Exams, and opted to further my bilingual education by double majoring in Spanish in college. I'm somewhat of an anomaly in that I became fluent in Spanish in the classroom, having never studied abroad or even visited a Spanish-speaking country, for that matter. My trip to Costa Rica reminded me how valuable a tool bilingualism can be, not only in order to communicate but also to strengthen one's grasp of the English language.

It has long been my hypothesis that English must surely be one of the most difficult languages to learn. It is rife with exceptions to the rule and words that aren't pronounced like they are spelled. Luckily I didn't have to learn it as a second language. Learning Spanish was actually extremely helpful in my knowledge of English grammar, tenses, and vocabulary, and for this reason I encourage bilingual education, especially at a young age. Spanish, along with French, Portuguese and Italian, are formulaic in structure and therefore can be learned systematically. Spanish taught me several things about English, for instance, what a gerund was (an -ing verb in English, or a verb in noun form), the difference between imperfect and preterite tenses (two forms of the past tense -- imperfect means something was happening while the preterite tense describes a finite event that happened), reflexive verbs (involve myself, yourself, etc.), and the subjunctive, to name but a few. My vocabulary benefited greatly from Spanish, as did my general understanding of both languages.


In Costa Rica I quickly became known as “La gringa que habla Español,” which I did not mind. Despite my unfortunate hiatus from regular practice of the language, I was able to get by. In fact, some of the Tikos (native Costa Ricans, their term) even complemented me and asked where I had learned to speak. For some reason I am usually afraid to use my Spanish in the states because I do not want to make mistakes. I realized that this is ridiculous. How can I ever claim fluency in a language that I do not allow myself to use? The people in Costa Rica were thrilled that I tried, and it certainly paid off.

¡Buenas Noches!

Me, Myself and I

I know first-hand that nobody likes to be corrected. That said, the ever-increasing obsession with such websites as Myspace and facebook (both of which employ picture-posting mechanisms of some sort), along with the relatively new digital photo-sharing sites as Shutterfly or Snapfish, has made it necessary to explain to the internet-loving public something about posting photos. Whether these sites are genuine networking and keep-in-touch tools or simple technological outgrowths of this generation’s burgeoning narcissism and stalkerism is another issue altogether, and one that would require far more in-depth analysis (though I presume the latter). In the spirit of contributing to the greater good, I'd like to address a grammatical mistake that is commonly made among Myspacers, facebookers, and fellow bloggers alike: captioning pictures incorrectly. I’m not sure which is more disheartening: the posting public’s absolute ignorance of elementary grammar rules or the ensuing overcompensation aimed at avoiding mistakes which, consequently, results in utter failure.

Rudimentary English courses teach some version of the “I vs. me” lesson, though quite often for many students this valuable bit of subject vs. object pronouns goes in one ear and out the other. The basic rule is to use the subject pronoun "I" when "I" is the subject of the sentence, and to use the object pronoun "me" when "me" is the object of the sentence. Oxford Dictionary explains it this way: "I am the subject of the sentence, but the object of the sentence is me." What follows is the easiest way, in my opinion, to master the art of choosing between “I” and “me,” with specific regard to photo captioning.

Lisa and I went to the store.

To determine whether this sentence is grammatically correct with regard to the use of “I,” remove the extra person from the sentence.

I went to the store.

This sentence, like the cheese, stands alone. It is idiomatically legitimate. Therefore, “Lisa and I went to the store” is correct. Alternatively, “Lisa and me went to the store” would be incorrect, and cacophonous, I might add. That was easy. Now what if we recast the sentence to make it sound like a caption?

This is a picture of Lisa and I in Times Square.

Hmm. That sounds pretty good, right? Wrong! This sentence, apart from making my ears bleed, is grammatically incorrect. The easiest way to tell is to remove Lisa from the sentence.

This is a picture of I in Times Square.

Now can you see the problem? Unfortunately, many people make this mistake in captioning pictures in shared photo albums for the world to see, to my obvious irritation. This, therefore, is my way of straddling the proverbial fence between a not-so-subtle and not-quite-offensive way of telling my friends and foes to (pretty please) take a look at their own captions.

In fact, I would even venture to encourage caption-crafters to err on the side of “me.” At least that way, if you get it wrong, it more likely resembles the vernacular than a (failed) valiant effort in sophisticated syntax.

Lisa and me in Times Square is correct.

Time for I to sign off, er, me have to go.

May I Have the Definition Please?

An article in the New York Times Tuesday talked about a contest that took place at the New York Public Library on Monday. No, not a spelling bee. It was the National Vocabulary Championship, and the winner walked away with $40,000 toward his college tuition. I personally liked the headline: "A Contest Where the Competitors Flex Their Lexicons."

The Princeton Review came up with the questions, which is the company that all but guarantees elevated standardized test scores. I am an avid reader, a grammar aficionado and I love to learn new words. Having taken both the SAT and GRE, whose verbal constituents I consider to be nothing more than glorified vocabulary tests (or, perhaps, a test of whether a student has studied Latin), I was excited to read the coverage in the Times because there were many words I did not know. So I have taken the liberty to define them, more for my own satisfaction than anything else. I'm not ashamed to admit that I'm usually armed with the Merriam-Webster Dictionary.

perspicuous - adj: plain to the understanding - perspicuity, n. I guess I should have known.

poecilonym - this one's not in my dictionary, but it is a synonym for synonym, and one of my personal favorites.

pusillanimous - adj: contemptibly timid: cowardly - pusillanimity, n.

pulchritudinous - adj: beautiful - pulchritude, n. This one I actually knew; I think it's an SAT word. Or maybe it's because I embody it's significance. (Ha)

pulverulent - this one's not in my dictionary either. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language defines it this way: "1. Made of, covered with, or crumbling to fine powder or dust. 2. Dusty; crumbly." It makes sense, because it is derived from Latin, and the Spanish word for 'dust' is polvo.

nidicolous - also not in the dictionary. The New York Times says it means "remaining in the nest for some time after hatching, as some birds; or living in the nest of another species."

nidifugous - starting to lose faith in my dictionary. It's an adjective, and seems to be the opposite of nidicolous. It means "Leaving the nest a short time after hatching. Used of a bird."

Brobdingnagian - adj: immense, enormous. "Etymology: After Brobdingnag, a country in Gulliver's Travels by Jonathan Swift, where everything was enormous," says The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. Definitely adding this one to my repertoire.

While on the subject of Brobdingnag, I'd like to add something here. A dose of correct word usage, if you will. The word "enormity" is commonly misused. Enormity, as defined by Webster's dictionary, means "1. an outrageous, vicious, or immoral act, or 2. great wickedness." These are its primary definitions. And, did you know that the first definition of "enormous" is not "huge," but "great wickedness" instead? The secondary definition is most common (great in size, number, or degree), and we most commonly associate "enormous" with its synonyms: immense, vast, gigantic, colossal, mammoth, elephantine. Who knew?!

Clearly, I need a new dictionary. Scrabble, anyone?

Spelling Counts

While perusing the Internet for possible summer internships, as I often do with looming deadlines, I came across a posting for an unpaid internship with Social Life Magazine in New York. Being that I am a young, female, socially-savvy city girl, I clicked on the posting. It read:

Social Life Magazine is a luxury and lifestyle magazine about the Hamptons and New York City. We cover events, benefits, parties, and night clubs. We make sure that are readers are up to date with the latest fashion trends as well as any new options that promote a luxurious lifestyle.

At the moment we are looking for amazing people to help grow the magazine.

Position: Associate Editor with potential to become one of the Assistant Editors

So far, sounds good. I suppose I can live with the obvious typo (look closely... you'll catch an "are" instead of an "our" in there), though it makes me cringe. Moving on... after all, to err is human.

Now, as for this internship... I have experience with special event marketing, and I am a student of journalism. Sounds right up my alley. I continued reading:

First and foremost, you need to have a strong sense of grammer. I am looking for someone who is an avid reader and who knows how an article should flow both structurally as well as musically and rhythmically. Your responsibility will be to help edit anywhere from two to ten articles. Being in the New York area is not a necessity since you will not be coming into the office but will be working from home. Therefore, a student at Princeton or Yale can definitely work on articles from their campus dorm. You can come into the office the week before we go to press and help with proofing the magazine but that is not required.

No! It can't be! Another mistake? In an industry that is admittedly (and rightfully) obsessed with stellar written communication skills and acute attention to detail, I was flabbergasted. Let me run it by you once more, in case you didn't catch the glaringly obvious, "First and foremost, you need to have a strong sense of grammer." (Italics mine). I'm not sure that it gets any better than this, and it is in precisely these types of situations that I begin to appreciate the adage that searching for jobs is just as much about finding a place you want to work as it is about finding a company that will hire you. Perhaps I am too harsh, knowing that mistakes happen, especially when it comes to the Internet.

No, strike that. I am appalled, and I find it deliciously funny that this posting attempts to lure Princeton or Yale graduates to participate in the internship program with imperfect prose. I am no Ivy League alumna, but I do have an eye for detail. To make matters worse, if I had been willing to forgive what might very well have been a mere typographical error, I would have reneged upon viewing the magazine's website. The mission statement reads as follows:

Our mission is to dominate the Hamptons and Manhattan market by capturing the reader's attention with engaging profiles, a lavish wedding section, fascinating short stories, and an sophisticated fashion section.

While a typo on an internet posting for internship applicants may be harmless, an error on the official website is inexcusable. Funnier still is that the culprit (the indefinite article an, which in this case refers to the "fashion section") is followed by the adjective "sophisticated." I think the rest is sufficiently self-explanatory.

Pornography and Stupidity

Walking East on 23rd Street on the way home from the gym the other night, I passed by a place that I had up to this point never noticed. This happens quite often in New York, because it is impossible to notice absolutely everything when there is always so much going on and so much to look at. What I saw, however, stopped me dead in my tracks.

I stood outside of the adult video store, peering through the glass at what I thought must be a joke. A brightly-lit neon sign hung in the window, beckoning people to come inside to preview their vast selection of pornography. That a place like this exists didn't surprise me, as does little these days now that I live in New York. What struck me, however, was that a neon sign like this actually got manufactured in the first place. Take a look.


Now, I'm not traditionally a huge fan of assuming a causal relationship between things that could be completely unrelated, however, this time I can't resist. Are there not people who make sure that words are spelled correctly before signs are made? This is precisely the kind of thing that confirms my cynicism and chips away at any positive inkling I might have had about the general intelligence of the masses. I understand that typos occur, but this is not a typo. I would be remiss, in this case, not to state the obvious. I think this might be an example of how pornography is directly contributing to the dumbing-down of the American public.

Making Apologies

A recent cartoon in The New Yorker cleverly articulated the blogosphere as a place where, quite often, opinionated individuals attempt to wax poetic (often unpoetically) about everything from politics to pop culture to poodles. The cartoon is a spot-on representation of blogging, commenting on the proliferation of the phenomenon and equating bloggers with a person who uses the sidewalk and a blowhorn as a platform to voice his opinions. Be that as it may, and also being fully aware that blogging has been criticized for the glaring absence of the editor, I have still opted to climb atop my own wobbly soapbox of sorts.

That said, I have no druthers to project my political beliefs -- or any beliefs for that matter -- on unsuspecting passersby that happen upon my blog. I aim solely to comment on the world as I see it, with an occasional bit of satire, sassiness and an honest appreciation for the correct usage of the language.

I do think that bloggers have a place at the table. In the ever-shifting media landscape, it is becoming increasingly important that traditional news organizations remain on their toes in reporting stories and maintaining utmost integrity in delivering news content. The word “medium” may soon become obsolete, as the constant convergence of media vehicles continues to change the way we consume, respond to, and participate in the news. In We the Media, David Gillmor addresses such technological advancements as blogs and internet news content as evidence of the increasingly democratic, grassroots nature that journalism may be approaching. I think, in this information age, that it is paramount that journalists do everything they can to prevent such journalistic fiascos from occurring as that of Stephen Glass and Jayson Blair. This is where the bloggers come in. While some journalists are terrified of the idea of citizen journalists and regular Joe Pundits entering the arena, blogging in general will help media organizations stay abreast of the latest news while maintaining a heightened level of integrity and achievement in news dissemination.