Restaurants and cooks at homes in Japan are serving curry rice in a functional and eye-catching way: by building a wall of rice that acts as a dam holding back curry sauce. Not only does the architectural fare look adorable, but it keeps sauce from getting all over the plate and mixing into other foods.
A pleonasm is a word or phrase with semantically redundant parts. So, for example, at this moment in time is a pleonasm because there are no moments outside time, so we don't really need to say in time. But people do.
Pleonastic expressions are things that language haters like to hate on. (These people often claim to be language lovers, but they don't seem to be very good at the love part.) So, they're the kind of thing that people complain to me about, with the Americans saying "Why do the British say X? It's repetitive and illogical", and the British saying "Why do Americans say Y? It's repetitive and illogical."
At their worst, these complaints come out as "Why do Americans/Britsalways add extra words?"
When I get those complaints, I reply with some phrases from the speaker/writer's own dialect that have 'illogically redundant' words (it's not hard to do) and I say something like "language is not logical and it thrives on redundancy".
I mean, why say Yesterday we baked a cake? Yesterday is in the past, so why bother with the past tense marking on the verb? So redundant. Chinese wouldn't put up with that.
Thinking about these accusations that Brits/American always add extra words, I put a call out on Twitter and Facebook for BrE/AmE-specific pleonasms that others have noticed. We can see from the resulting lists below that there are no innocent parties in the Pleonasm Wars. Many of expressions aren't only said in the 'offending' dialect, but they are more common in one than the other. To indicate the relative "Americanness" or "Britishness" of a phrase, I've given a ratio, which indicates the proportion of instances of the phrase in the British and American portions of the Corpus of Global Web-Based English. (The minority uses in the other dialect may be things like "Can you believe the British call beets beetroot?". That is, the fact that there are some in the other dialect doesn't mean it's necessarily really used in that dialect. The ratios help indicate the chances that it really is AmE- or BrE-specific.) I've bolded the bit of the expression that could arguably be left out without a change in meaning and put links to places I've discussed these before, if available.
American expressions that British folk might find pleonastic irregardless 5:1 (though generally considered non-standard in AmE) in and of itself 3:1 tuna fish 3:1 (0 BrE instances as closed compound tunafish) where I( a)m at 2:1 (again, not exactly standard AmE; and the corpus numbers have a lot of 'noise')
British expressions that American folk might find pleonastic beetroot22:1 hosepipe 13:1 in N days'time 10:1 goatee beard 9:1 go and [verb] e.g. go and see = 6:1 versus go see 1:2; note that go+verb predates go and verb in English--the and has been added in BrE, not deleted in AmE postgraduate 6:1 station stop 4:1 at this moment in time 4:1 chocolatebrownies 3:1 general consensus1.6:1
You might want to argue that some of these are not redundant. It is a matter of perception. Brits might say beetroot isn't redundant because it distinguishes that part of the plant from the greens, but beetroot is redundant to Americans in the same way that carrotroot would be. Chocolate brownies is redundant because in AmE if it's not made of chocolate, it has to be called something else (e.g. blondies). (Americans do have the word brownie for other things too, the context is enough to let us know it's a baked good and not a fairy.) It's been argued to me that station stop is not redundant because trains sometimes have to stop (e.g. for a signal) when they're not at a station, and they sometimes pass stations without stopping. Did you know there's a tuna fruit?
In the end, the Twitter and Facebook and email people gave me more British [alleged] pleonasms than American ones. Possible reasons for this:
Maybe British English does have more of them.
Maybe my social media posts were at better times for the US than the UK. (My waking hours don't quite fit the UK, in spite of 15 years' residence.)
Maybe Americans notice British pleonasms more than Britons notice American pleonasms (I was required to buy a copy of Strunk and White at college. I can't imagine the same happening in UK, where writing isn't a required university subject. So, maybe Americans are trained to cut extra things out of language where British folk are not. We're the country most likely to excise extra letters in the spelling system too.)
Feel free to raise the American pleonasm count (or the British one) in the comments. If I like them, I may retroactively add them to the list here.
All my linguistically-correct tolerance for pleonasms aside, I am a ruthless redactor of extra words in academic writing. I train my students in Strunk and White's Rule 13: Omit needless words. If they write
--> Another reason why the categorisation of chocolate* is significant for humans derives from the fact that humans are essentially and uniquely a ‘languaging’ species. ...they get back the following, with an obnoxious note along the lines of "Your way: 24 words; My way: 11 words. Don't make me read twice as many words as I have to!!":
Another reason why the categorisation of cChocolate* is also particularly relevant significant for humans derives from the fact that humans are essentially and uniquely as a ‘languaging’ species. [i.e. Chocolate* is also particularly relevant for humans as a ‘languaging’ species]
* The noun has been changed to chocolate in order to protect the author's identity. But chocolate is particularly relevant to humans as a 'languaging' species. Without it, we couldn't have Cathy cartoons.
In writing academic essays for which (a) you have a word limit, so (b) the more words you use, the less you can say, and (c) you can be assured that your reader is going to be tired and grumpy before they even start reading, pithiness rules the day.
Acknowledgements Thanks to those who contributed pleonasms to the list: Amanda P, Barbara J, Catherine P, David L, Iva, Jennifer, Kim E, Naomi N, Nicole S, Pam T, Rebecca M, Richard H, Sian C, Simon B. I don't give full names unless I'm given permission to, and I am always happy to link your name to your blog/Twitter/webpage. So, if this applies to you, let me know and I'll add surnames and/or links.
The arrest was videotaped. Gray is not seen resisting arrest and police are not physically violent.
Gray’s injuries are more likely to have come from a “Nickel Ride,” a punishment doled out by police during transport: Prisoners are not strapped in. The vehicle then speeds up and stops quickly, causing injury to the prisoner. There are no video cameras inside transport vans.
Six officers involved in the arrest and holding of Gray have been suspended.
Gray allegedly was in possession of a concealed switchblade. Concealed weapons are illegal in Maryland, however, laws prohibiting “gravity knives” are commonly applied by police incorrectly in order to make arrests.
Gray’s death led to protests: protests against police violence, against racist policing, against a white majority oppressing people of color with the power of the law. A crowd gathered in protest outside of the Western District precinct. (Until this week, the Western District was better known as the setting for The Wire.)
When nonviolence is preached as an attempt to evade the repercussions of political brutality, it betrays itself. When nonviolence begins halfway through the war with the aggressor calling time out, it exposes itself as a ruse. When nonviolence is preached by the representatives of the state, while the state doles out heaps of violence to its citizens, it reveals itself to be a con. And none of this can mean that rioting or violence is “correct” or “wise,” any more than a forest fire can be “correct” or “wise.” Wisdom isn’t the point tonight. Disrespect is. In this case, disrespect for the hollow law and failed order that so regularly disrespects the community.
Non-violence is a type of political performance designed to raise awareness and win over sympathy of those with privilege. When those on the outside of struggle—the white, the wealthy, the straight, the able-bodied, the masculine—have demonstrated repeatedly that they do not care, are not invested, are not going to step in the line of fire to defend the oppressed, this is a futile political strategy. It not only fails to meet the needs of the community, but actually puts oppressed people in further danger of violence.
A rendering of the tunnel beneath the Pyramid of the Feathered Serpent in Teotihuacan (image courtesy INAH)
Large quantities of liquid mercury have been discovered at one of Mexico’s most sacred pre-Columbian sites. Archaeologist Sergio Gómez told Reuters that he found the silvery poison beneath the Pyramid of the Feathered Serpent in Teotihuacan — the third largest pyramid in the ancient city. It was located within a chamber at the end of an 1,800-year-old tunnel that has already turned up thousands of artifacts, including jaguar remains and jade statues.
“It’s something that completely surprised us,” Gomez, who has been excavating the site for the past six years, said. Being extremely difficult to mine, mercury was a rarity in Mesoamerica; it has been found at only one Olmec site and two Maya ones, but never before at Teotihuacan.
It’s not the only shiny thing to have been found beneath the Teotihuacan pyramid, though. When excavators first unsealed the tunnel in 2011, they were surprised to discover its walls coated in a glittery metallic powder. While the meaning of this remains unclear, Mesoamericans revered reflective surfaces for their religious meaning. As Annabeth Headreck, a professor at the University of Denver and a scholar of Teotihuacan, told the Guardian, “Mirrors were considered a way to look into the supernatural world, they were a way to divine what might happen in the future.”
Gómez now speculates the mercury may have represented an underworld river — which could be a favorable sign that nearby might lie an even greater discovery: the tomb of a king. The architect has been avidly searching for a royal burial that would shed light on how the pre-Aztec civilization that occupied the area between 100 and 700 CE (and which left no written record) functioned politically. He has previously said that the tunnel could have been used by kings to “acquire divine endowment allowing them to rule on the surface.”
While some archaeologists think early Teotihuacan was governed by more than one ruler, US archaeologist George Cowgill said Gómez might be on to something. “But it’s still very uncertain and that is what keeps everybody in suspense,” he told Reuters.
An anonymous reader writes: Pepsi believes sales of diet soda are falling because of aspartame and how the general public think it is a dangerous substance to consume. Even though the FDA describe aspartame as “one of the most thoroughly tested and studied food additives the agency has ever approved,” Pepsi has decided to stop using it. Aspartame removal is being turned into a marketing campaign of sorts with "Now Aspartame Free" printed on cans.
yoo its almost as if nonviolent protests dont work
Soo basically Ghandi, Woman’s March of 1913, MLK’s Washington March, and all the other examples of peaceful protest accomplished nothing?
fuck ghandi and they literally shot mlk in the head eat a dick
also let’s note that civil rights marches were ONLY PEACEFUL ON THE SIDE OF THOSE PROTESTING FOR EQUALITY. PEACEFUL PROTESTERS WERE MET WITH FUCKING DOGS AND FIRE HOSES FOR FUCKS SAKE. BLACK PEOPLE SPEAKING UP ABOUT INEQUALITY HAS ALWAYS BEEN MET WITH VIOLENCE
^^^^I wonder why they keep leaving that out? And they keep talking about MLK being nonviolent as if his nonviolent ass didn’t get fucking murdered for NONVIOLENTLY STANDING UP FOR THE HUMAN RIGHTS OF BLACK PEOPLE. You people are fucking pathological.
Picture time for
flywithmesomeday. For real, how are you on the Internet, but apparently too willfully ignorant to use Google?????????????
Nonviolent Civil Rights Protests met with violence from white police officers, regular citizens, and firemen…
Oh look…. Peaceful suffragettes assaulted by police officers and regular citizens….
The number of people using these services is growing fast. Find out what happens when a writer rents out his Mini Cooper and an Airbnb tenant learns something terrible has happened to his host.
Dear npr - Can we please stop pretending that the “Sharing Economy” is about anything else but working class poverty?
Stein lost money when it came to running his own restaurant but found driving others and charging $35 a day to rent out his car profitable.
But he no longer owns a business, he provides a service that creates wealth for startups like AirBnB and RelayRides.
People aren’t using the sharing economy to create good vibes and build communities, though there may be beneficial side effect. People can’t afford their homes or their cars, and consumers can’t afford hotels or car rentals. They are doing this out of necessity. It’s “burdensome” to own property because we can no longer afford it.
“The sharing economy’s success is inextricably tied to the economic recession, making new American poverty palatable,” Cagle writes. Sure, she says, it’s “largely heralded as a ‘return to the village,’ an ahistoric utopia where we were friends with all of our trusted neighbors, lived in harmony with nature, and wanted not to consume, but to share.” But, she reminds us, “sharing and homesteading are things poor people have been doing forever out of necessity.”
The sharing economy looks like a classically neoliberal response to neoliberalism: individualized and market-driven, it sees us all as micro-entrepreneurs fending for ourselves in a hostile world. Its publicists seek to transform the instability of the post–Great Recession economy into opportunity. Waiting for your script to sell? Drive an Uber on the weekend. Can’t afford a place to live while attending grad school? Take a two-bedroom apartment and rent one room out. You may lack health insurance, sick days and a pension plan, but you’re in control.
In a Pew survey in August 2012, 85 percent of middle-class adults reported it is more difficult for them to maintain their standard of living now than it was a decade ago.13 That is not surprising given that incomes among middle and low-income households have declined over the last decade. In that time frame, median middle-class wealth (assets minus debt) also shrunk by 28 percent, and the median wealth held by low-income families declined by 45 percent.14
Financial planners recommend that families have about 6 months of emergency savings. Three-quarters of Americans do not meet that low bar. These asset-starved families are the same ones who have lost $6.5 trillion in home equity since 2006. More than 50 percent of Americans do not have sufficient income to maintain their current living standards in retirement.
“I’ve never heard the term ‘strong male character.’ That doesn’t mean anything. So what does ‘strong female character’ mean? We’re so ready to put a label on something instead of leaving room for every different kind of expression, every vulnerable, weak, funny, vulgar, stupid thing. It’s just people, right? There are layers and levels, and you can’t put somebody in a box, you know?”
Who created Caitlin Snow, the alter ego of Firestorm super-villain Killer Frost, who appears regularly on The Flash?
According to DC Entertainment, nobody.
That’s right. Caitlin Snow, the brilliant scientist working for Harrison Wells, fiancée of Ronnie Raymond and friend of Barry Allen, aka The Flash, sprang fully formed into existence without a creator or creators.
But that’s okay, because, by the logic employed by DC Entertainment, nobody created Barry Allen either.
Let me explain. See if you can follow me here.
As I’ve described elsewhere (http://comicsequity.blogspot.com), many years ago DC Comics established the first program to provide comic book creators with a share in the revenues generated by their creations in other media. This concept became known as “creator equity participation” and it was a small but significant step toward compensating creators for their work beyond a simple page rate. For me, personally, it’s been moderately lucrative (thank you, Bruce Timm, for putting Killer Croc in the animated Batman) but in recent years it’s also become an increasingly frustrating and, lately, infuriating process.
The reason, I believe, is the shift of corporate culture at DC Comics that occurred around the time Paul Levitz left his position as publisher.
As a comic book creator himself, Paul displayed a protective empathy for creators. Once the creator equity concept became policy, Paul applied it liberally and proactively– often notifying writers and artists their creations were due to receive equity participation when creators would otherwise have no idea. For thirty plus years, under Paul, creators were valued and supported as equity partners. (We can argue about the level of support, whether the percentage creators received was commensurate with their contributions, but we can’t deny that the support was there, and it was consistent.)
All of that changed when Paul left, and DC Comics became, officially, DC Entertainment, a fully subsumed cog in the Warners Entertainment wheel.
I first learned how this change would effect DC’s approach to creators equity when I received a letter from DC Entertainment’s new president, Diane Nelson, informing me I would no longer receive equity payments for Power Girl because she was now considered a “derivative” character. To soften the blow and show “appreciation” for my “contribution” she enclosed a check for $1000.
Thank you, Diane.
The next thing I learned about DC Entertainment’s new approach to their comic creators equity program was just as distressing, given how many characters I created for DC over the decade-plus I wrote for the company: if I wanted to receive an equity participation contract for a character I created, I had to request one, in writing, for each character, before that character appeared in another media, because DC would refuse to make equity payments retroactively.
By a rough guesstimate, I probably created over five hundred characters for DC between 1969 and 1985. Most of them were minor one-shot creations, and some of them, like Felicity Smoak (now a regular on Arrow) were minor supporting characters who’ve taken on a new life in other media. Unless I’m willing to commit a large chunk of my life to tracking down each character and filing a separate equity request in anticipation that somehow, some day, one of these characters might end up on a TV show, I risk being cut off from any share in the fruits DC enjoys from the product of my labor. A share which DC acknowledges I’m due– but which DC refuses to assist me in receiving.
Thank you, DC.
But now we come to the catch-22 of DC’s new approach to creator equity agreements. Assuming I perform my due diligence (which should really be DC’s due diligence) and dig up references to characters I’ve created that might soon be appearing in other media (maybe as a chess piece, or a Heroclix figure, or a recurring character on The Flash), and assuming I file the necessary request form in a timely fashion– DC can still decide, unilaterally, that my creation is “derivative” and they don’t owe me a dime.
What, exactly, is DC’s definition of a “derivative” character?
It’s a character that DC decides was “derived” from some other previously existing character.
For example, Power Girl– “derived” from Superman, because, like Supergirl, she’s a relative of Superman. Which means I can’t claim to be her co-creator because Superman is a pre-existing character. Fair enough, I suppose. The logic here is that Superman is the original creation, so Power Girl is derived from that original creation, so in effect, Power Girl is an extension of Superman, which means, by this tortured logic, that Power Girl was more or less created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster.
Uh, no.
This was the tortured logic National Periodical Publications tried to use back in the 1940s when Siegel and Shuster sued National for the rights to Superboy. National (the company that preceded DC) argued that Superman was the original creation, which Siegel and Shuster sold to National, and that Superboy was just a “derivative” creation. A court-appointed legal referee found that Superboy was in fact a unique creation and that National was guilty of copyright infringement. Sadly for Siegel and Shuster (and for creators everywhere), legal expenses forced the creators to sell National the rights to Superboy in a consent decree that obscured this fundamental finding. But the finding is pretty clear:
Characters “derived” from other characters are legally unique, and DC’s claim that “derivation” deprives creators of any equity participation rights in those characters is nothing more than an immoral, unethical, deceitful and despicable money grab.
Yet, it gets worse.
Let’s say DC agrees you created a character, like, for example, Killer Frost. In your original creation, Killer Frost had a secret identity named Crystal Frost. Later, a “new” Killer Frost is created for the New 52, and this new Killer Frost has a secret identity named Caitlin Snow.
You’ll be pleased to hear (I hope) that DC agrees I and Al Milgrom are the co-creators of all manifestations of “Killer Frost.” We are also considered the co-creators of Crystal Frost. And, of course, by the twisted logic that credits Power Girl as a derivation of Superman, Al and I must also be the creators of Killer Frost’s New 52 secret identity, Caitlin Snow.
Right?
No. We’re not. And DC insists we are not. And I agree with DC.
Caitlin Snow was created by Sterling Gates and Derlis Santacruz.
Except, according to DC Entertainment, she wasn’t. Because she was “derived” from the original creation of Killer Frost.
Which means Al Milgrom and I created her.
Except, according to DC Entertainment, we didn’t.
Nobody created her.
Or, rather, nobody gets credit and creator equity participation for creating her.
And that, my friends, is truly obnoxious and despicable.
DC Entertainment has created a marvelous catch-22 that allows them to cheat creators by using both sides of an argument to serve DC’s interests.
According to DC, Sterling Gates and Derlis Santacruz didn’t create Caitlin Snow. Don Newton and I didn’t create Jason Todd. Ric Estrada and I didn’t create Power Girl. Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster didn’t create Superboy. Bob Kanigher and Carmine Infantino didn’t create Barry Allen.
These characters just appeared out of nowhere.
But the money for their exploitation goes directly into DC’s bank account.
Two years ago we stumbled onto the story of a girl in Japan who was going through her father’s old belongings when she discovered a hand-drawn maze rolled up in a tube. Kazuo Nomura spent 7 years drawing the sprawling labyrinth while working as a janitor and it hadn’t seen the light of day since 1983. After posting photos of it to her Twitter account, Nomura’s work went viral around the web, and it was quickly turned into a print so others could have a try at solving it.
Responding to pressure from his daughter to draw a second maze, Nomura initially said he had “had enough of mazes.” But, after a 32 year hiatus, he finally sat down to try again earlier this year with the hope of drawing a puzzle that was a bit clearer and easier to solve. After two months of drawing he’s finally done, and if you posess the patience of a saint you can try your hand at solving it: Papa’s Maze 2.0. Nomura assures the maze has a solution, but according to reports from people insane enough to try, it’s actually more difficult than the last, and takes about two days to work through. Read more on Spoon & Tamago.
Those cases detail a frightful human toll. Officers have battered dozens of residents who suffered broken bones — jaws, noses, arms, legs, ankles — head trauma, organ failure, and even death, coming during questionable arrests. Some residents were beaten while handcuffed; others were thrown to the pavement.
And in almost every case, prosecutors or judges dismissed the charges against the victims — if charges were filed at all. In an incident that drew headlines recently, charges against a South Baltimore man were dropped after a video showed an officer repeatedly punching him — a beating that led the police commissioner to say he was “shocked.”
Such beatings, in which the victims are most often African-Americans, carry a hefty cost. They can poison relationships between police and the community, limiting cooperation in the fight against crime, the mayor and police officials say. They also divert money in the city budget — the $5.7 million in taxpayer funds paid out since January 2011 would cover the price of a state-of-the-art rec center or renovations at more than 30 playgrounds. And that doesn’t count the $5.8 million spent by the city on legal fees to defend these claims brought against police.
This is an explanation, not a defense, of violence and looting. But it needs to be kept in mind.
Can mansplaining ever be productive? Flavorwire’s Sarah Seltzer suggests that while Jon Krakauer’s ignorance may be infuriating, his “show don’t tell” approach to writing about rape in Missoula might help readers see firsthand how structures of oppression operate:
Krakauer isn’t speaking to “us.” He’s speaking to his mainstream audience, and many of them are probably as ignorant as he admits he was. By some standards, that’s called being an ally. But by any standards, it’s being a good writer.
I love a good rare book theft mystery.
