How to sound more intelligent - part three

You know, learning good grammar ought to be a responsibility for all native English speakers. My reasoning goes something like this: if four year-olds should know the alphabet, twenty-four year-olds should understand English grammar.

This third and final part is for those who've read and learned, or who already know, what I explained in parts one and two.

Part three: words you should stop misusing

Like someone who buys two pairs of shoes and over time wears only his favourite pair, so a lot of people neglect to say farther because they think that further does a better job. Even writers get this wrong. Writers of books!

Anyway, if you're one of these people, then, half of the time, you're wrong; you're wearing the wrong pair of shoes!

The words farther and further are not interchangeable.

Farther has to do with physical distance.
"Look there, Marie! The sprinter in first place is farther ahead than the chap in second!" - Captain Obvious

Further has to do with mental distance.
"Mrs Obvious rolled her eyes. Her last name notwithstanding, on the subject of education, she had progressed leagues further than her dolt of a husband."

Imply is the opposite of infer. The writer implies; the reader infers.

"Matt loves to write, but occasionally readers will infer something totally other than that which he was intending to imply."

Comprise cannot be used in place of consist or made up.
Comprise can be used in place of consist of or are made up of.

In other words, you can't say, "Clouds are comprised of water," because doing so is the equivalent of saying, "Clouds are are made up of of water."

Instead, say, "Clouds comprise water."

The Game of Thrones writers got it wrong when, on the subject of the Iron Bank, Tywin said, "A temple is comprised of stones." He should have said, "A temple comprises stones." Tsk tsk, Tywin Lannister. Oh, and Cersei made the same mistake in the same scene.

Now, before you get all funny: yes, I spotted the mistakes as I watched the show, but no, I wasn't trying to scrutinise.

In short
You move farther, you think further; your words imply, your ears infer.
Game of Thrones comprises awesomeness, but the script still needs editing.

Read More

How to sound more intelligent - part two

A lot of people - public speakers in particular - attempt to sound fancy by manipulating the English language in strange and obscure ways. They replace words like 'me' with 'I', saying things like:
"So when that Microsoft representative rocked up to our front door and offered Erwin and I the job, my heart, like, jumped out of my chest. I was so excited!"
Read: it's Erwin and me, not Erwin and I. See Part One.

It's like using a sword as a walking stick instead of a weapon. I mean, sure, it does the job, but it makes you look silly. Also, playing with grammar is a lot like playing with a sword. In a word: don't.

These same people also prefer to use 'myself' when they should have used either 'I' or 'me'. They do it like this: "If you have any questions, please talk to Leonard, Janora, or myself [me] at the end of the discussion." Argh! They remind me of those people who insist that the sun revolves around the earth, and not the other way around. Okay, fine, I don't know anyone who believes that, but you get the idea.

Part two: when to use 'myself' in a sentence

The word 'myself' is a reflexive pronoun. The reason that it's a reflexive pronoun is because it reflects onto an earlier noun used in the same sentence. The earlier noun is like its mother, and they're connected by an umbilical cord, which I can't draw.

'Myself' can be used here because it's referring to the 'I' preceding it. If there was no 'I' acting, then there would be no reason to use the word 'myself'.

All reflexive pronouns are the son or daughter or their mother noun.

As you can see, the reflexive pronoun gets its life from the mother noun to which it reflects. It can't breathe without it.

So, when you use a reflexive pronoun without giving it a mother noun, it suffocates. The reflexive umbilical cord has nothing to attach itself to, and the son or daughter dies.

So many people make this mistake, yet they wouldn't say, "Please talk to myself afterwards"; they'd say, "Please talk to me afterwards". The same applies here. When you add Leonard and Janora, nothing changes. 'Me' is still the correct term to use.

In short
reflexive pronouns come with umbilical cords. They must have a mother noun, or they will die. Moreover, you'll sound silly.

Part three: words you should stop misusing

Read More

How to sound more intelligent - part one

Some of the most common discrepancies in the spoken English language can weaken the best of us at the worst of times like a fatal chink on solid steel.

There are those of us who care enough to fix it, those of us who don't realise it's there, and those of us who don't care either way; after all, it's not like anyone else cares.*

*I do.

But it's one thing to have learnt good grammar before discarding it like a Best Buy circular because you opted for sounding cool rather than smart, and quite another thing to claim to appreciate things like brains, words and fountain pens, only to open your mouth and reveal to every passer-by that you are, in fact, the fountain pen. Don't look at me like you don't know what I mean.

Part one: there's a difference between I and me

At some point in our childhood we were saying things like, "Me and Jimmy are going to the park." But then our parents were all, "Jimmy and EYE," and they'd repeat this phrase a gazillion times like they had grammar tourrettes. Then we hit adolescence and stopped caring about our parents' wellbeings, and about grammar. Okay, fine, we never cared about grammar.

The problem was, thanks to the adults in our lives, the word 'me' was expunged from our vocabulary and replaced with the far more pristine 'I'. So, ironically, for the few brats young adults of us who might have once cared about grammar, there was no room left for 'me'.

Stuff we were taught as kids:

1. Don't say 'me'; say 'I'
2. Put yourself last. Say 'Jimmy and I', not 'I and Jimmy'.

Fun fact #1: rule 2 is table manners, not actual grammar.

Fun fact #2: 'me' still exists.

Stuff I've learnt as an adult:

1. People who say "me and Jimmy" don't care about the rules, whether or not they know them. 
2. People who say "Jimmy and I" do care about the rules, but, more often than not, only know half of them.

Here's the other half:

'Jimmy and I' is correct in this sentence: "Jimmy and I are going to the park."

'Jimmy and I' is incorrect in this sentence: "A man approached Jimmy and I and offered us candy from his van." Such a nice man.

You: Why is the second sentence incorrect?

Me: I'm glad you asked!

Method A - easy answer:

When you take "Jimmy" away from the sentence, you're left with "I".

     "Jimmy and I are am going to the park." :)

     "A man approached Jimmy and I and offered us me candy from his van." :(

The second example sounds silly, right? 'Me' should have been used instead of 'I'. 

     "A man approached me and offered me candy from his van."

Much better, now add Jimmy.

     "A man approached Jimmy and me and offered us candy from his van."

Easy, right? I'm getting goosebumps.

In short 
the phrase "Jimmy and I" is not always correct. To find out which of 'me' or 'I' is correct, simply get rid of Jimmy. He was more a neighbour than a friend, anyway.

Method B - boring/technical answer:

'I' is a subject pronoun; 'me' is an object pronoun. The subject is the thing that acts; the object is the thing that gets acted upon.

"Jimmy and I are going to the park."

In this sentence, Jimmy and I are the subjects. They are going to the park, which is the object.

"A man approached Jimmy and me and offered me candy from his van."

In this sentence, the man is the subject, and he's approaching the objects, which are Jimmy and me.

Other subject pronouns include 'he', 'she' and 'they'. Other object pronouns include 'him', 'her' and 'them'.

In short, stick with Method A.

Part two: how to use 'myself' correctly

Read More

When to use (and not to use) quotation marks

The marks of quotation are perhaps the easiest marks of punctuation to use, yet so often they lead only to destruction. You know what else leads to destruction? Walking on your face.

Compare man walking on his face with man walking on his feet.

Silly, yes? That's because it's easy to walk on your feet, and impossible to walk on your face. For starters, you'd need to have two faces so that your weight can always be on one face while the other takes a step forward. As it happens, we don't possess the required amount of faces, so we'd have to sort of face-hop from place to place. I imagine the process would be rather destructive.

Fortunately it's easy to walk on your feet and not on your face. All you have to remember, when you get up in the morning, is not to walk upside-down.

But there's another reason why we walk on our feet and not on our faces. It makes us look more intelligent. Therefore, walking intelligently is easy. The criteria is as follows:

1. Don’t walk on your face.

You know what else is easy? Using quotation marks! It's like walking, provided that walking had two more rules.

*Only use quotation marks when,

1. quoting someone besides yourself

2. denoting sarcasm

3. writing dialogue

When my brother sent me this image, I was left wondering which of the three rules applied.

1. Forget the backwards quotation marks. Generally, if you're going to quote someone, the done thing is to tag the person whom you're quoting, otherwise you might as well have made it up, which defeats the purpose of having quotation marks. Fortunately no one patented the words, 'Thank you'.

2. If sarcasm was the intention, then the staff member who wrote this sign wasn't wanting to thank me, but to insult me. Yet, as Harvey Norman is a store that tries to sell me things rather than ruin my self esteem, I decided that blurting sarcastic courtesies to potential buyers was counter-productive.

3. Pretty lame dialogue.

The inevitable conclusion was, of course, that the writer either had no idea how to use quotation marks properly, or he/she had no idea how to underline text.

Do not use quotation marks when:

1. You aren't doing anything in the above list. Or, in other words, whenever you're trying to place emphasis on a given word or phrase.

Surrounding a phrase in quote marks in order to denote emphasis is just as helpful as surrounding it in commas, or @ symbols, or these things: ~ , which is to say that they do nothing. Except they don't do nothing. For people who know better, the phrase becomes sarcastic.

If you want to add emphasis to a phrase, underline it, use italics, or write it in bold. You could even try using CAPS, though that generally denotes yelling. The only punctuation mark that adds any form of emphasis is the exclamation point!

The writer of the sign didn't know that, and he/she is one of millions. Sad, isn't it? Who would put ~ thingies around the words 'thank you' to denote emphasis? I sure wouldn't. It's sort of a rule of life for me. Rule #1: Don't walk on my face. Rule #2: Don’t emphasise words with ~ thingies.

------------

Here they are again.

Only use quotation marks when,

1. quoting someone besides yourself

2. denoting sarcasm

3. writing dialogue

*There are some other, rare instances in which quotation marks can be used, but even then they aren't necessary.

Read More

Five words that aren't words but should be. Start saying them.

This list was harder to think up than I anticipated, and not because the non-words are used so scarcely that I'd almost forgotten about them. Anna, a friend who can vouch for me that these non-words should be words, put it nicely when she said,

"The problem is we use them so normal-like, that they aren't stored in our heads as weirdly words."

Just so; I hope they become stored in your heads as nothing less than funtastic.

Trouché

Trou∙ché

Exclamation

Used to acknowledge taking a 'hit' (as in the word touché), only that the hit was also true. A combination of touché and true.

1.         "Aah! My house is on fire!"

            "That's probably because you left the oven on."

            "Trouché."

Goog/Googs

Verb or Noun

An abbreviation for Google.

Examples:

1.         "I'm bored. How long does it take for the fire truck to get here?"

            "I dunno, why don't you Goog it?"

2.         After using Google to find the answer to your question: "Thanks Googs!"

Possibtentially

Poss∙ib∙ten∙tial∙ly

Adverb

Both able to be done and possible. A combination of possibly and potentially.

Synonyms

Proboplausibly

Examples:

1.         "Do you think Mister Muggles is still alive?"

            "Possibtentially."

Zactlo

Zact∙lo

Adverb

The alien term for exactly. It's also more fun to use.

Examples:

1.         "Mister Muggles has an acute sense for danger."

            "Yeah. Plus it wasn't like I put him in the oven."

            "Zactlo!"

Hugify

Hug∙i∙fy

Expression or verb

Used upon magically making something bigger than its ordinary size, that is, after hugifying an object or person. The exact duration of hugification is irrelevant.

Examples:

1.         "Oh look, here comes the fire truck."

            "Hugify!"

            "Huh? Whoa! You just supersized that truck! How did you do that?"

            You smile knowingly. "I'm a wizard."

            "Couldn't you use your magic to extinguish the flames?"

            A lengthy pause. "Trouché."

Read More

Introverts 201

Introvertedness is a complicated term. It's also not a word. Needless to say, a few paragraphs about social energy are hardly sufficient to clearly explain the complicated relationship introverts have with their given state of 'limited social capacity'. So, here are some things to consider.

There are those who think they're extroverts (and everyone else also thinks they're extroverts), but, really, they aren't - at least, not entirely. Cynthia, a friend of mine who socialises nonstop and has far too many friends, recently told me that her energy for them is limited like mine, except, until now, she's never admitted it. She's like a fish with too much food, except she hasn't died… yet. You see, next to her social energy tank is an inability to say 'no'. One too many yeses later and she's wondering why she's feeling so drained. Tsk tsk, young Cynthia. "True courage is about knowing not when to [be social], but when to [not be social]." Then I proceeded to give her a sword.

via Memecenter

There are those whose introvertedness clashes with their fear of missing out. I'm one of these. I'll be playing a game, or watching a film when some intrusive friend decides to message me, "U shld come ova 4 a bbq @ Zed's plce! We gt salad, but nd meat." Up until this point, I would be content doing next to nothing. But now that there's a social event going on, I'm torn between accepting and declining, never mind the dwindling energy bank! Something about, "I can watch this film or play that game at any time, but I can't summon barbecues quite so easily. Also, people die."

Added to all this is the issue of who to hang out with. Think of each relationship you have with someone like its own slope. Some friends are easy to get along with. You can be yourself, say whatever, embrace awkwardness rather than shy from it, and there are no lengthy good byes, which are also awkward. These are the downhill-sloped people. They don’t drain social energy. They give it. By contrast, there are those with whom you don't really relate, those who'll stop listening if you talk about anything other than panel beating, or those who will probably judge you for having an interest in biodegradable objects. It quickly becomes a chore to talk to these folk. Some of them will drive you insane! These are the uphill ones. And in between the two are those who don't really give or take energy. Perhaps they don't talk much; perhaps they're mute. In any case, they're flat, like Hamilton. Basically, some people require more social energy than others. A barbecue has more than just food. It has people, too, and those people will impact on whether or not I'll bother. Of course, this is on a bad day.

If anything, be grateful when your introvert friend shows up. More often than not, they decided that spending time with you would be more worthwhile than not spending time with you, and they went to the effort to do so. Believe you me, there's always effort involved. You know, you have to go uphill before you can go down again.

------------------------------------

Introverts 101

Read More

Does Grammar really Matter?

Grammar and Punctuation¹: a volatile blend of simplicity and complexity. Simple in purpose, yet horrendously difficult to master. Each one of us knows what the term means - it isn't rocket science - but when it comes to hearing its application, I oftentimes close my eyes, picturing a cave occupied by men and women. They wear the skins of primitive beasts, and their tools are a collection of stones and bones. Fittingly, like the mammoth they slew and from whose bones they procured, grammar and punctuation is too great a beast to simply tame. It must be laid to rest.

Forsooth, some say that grammar doesn't matter; that it is an old-fashioned mix of arbitrary rules belonging to a minority who refuses to adapt; that those who claim to be well-versed are all compensating for things of actual significance that they lack; or that it is only relevant in some situations, like during a job interview or an exam.²

Such claims are bold, but they are no bolder than the ones proclaimed from those who hold a different view. Indeed, some would go so far as to say that grammar and punctuation might be the Achilles heel of today's Western society.

To those who uphold the former-most view, that language is changing, and that we ought to change with it: I agree. Language is always changing, much like fashion. Yet, no matter the fashion, there are standards; and in every instance, there is a scale ranging from inappropriate to over-dressed, with just right sitting in the middle. It is the same with grammar. There are standards, even today - standards that many people would rather do away with. I might want to wear shorts and a tee shirt instead of a suit to my wedding, but you would all gawk at me (or not attend) if I actually did. Likewise, I gawk at the eight out of ten native English-speaking people who can't differentiate 'have' from 'of'.

Granted, this comparison fails to shed any light as to why grammar and punctuation matters in the strictest sense of the word, and it even appears to support the claim that grammar is only important in some situations, like during a job interview or an exam. Perhaps that is because this claim is spot on. Just like most things, finely-tuned grammar only truly matters when its counterpart, poor grammar, bears unwanted consequences. Applying sun block at the beach matters because, if I don't, I'll get burnt. Correctly-punctuated writing matters in an exam because the alternative is to lose marks. Following is a spam email I recently received.

------------------

T-Mobile Nederland BV
Waldorpstraat 60,
2521 CC Den Haag,
The Netherlands.
online-client service.

CONGRATULATION!

From T-mobile NL we are proud to inform you that your email address have
won you 850,000.00euros from our online anual coordination.

Chose an option which you will like to receive your winnings presenting
along side your winning reff number: NL/VV5-421/0031012.

(1). Come to the Redemption centre here in the Netherlands.
(2). On-line Bank Transfer
(3). Courier Delivery service

Congratulations once again.
Regards,
Robijn van-kloose.
Award Coordinator for T-mobile NL

------------------

A sore thumb is a grave understatement in illustrating just how jarring this email is to anyone with half a brain. Indeed, it is completely submerged in discrepancy. You might have noticed that the word in capitals is missing a letter. Just one letter of a fifteen-letter word, yet we all notice it, and I'm sure we would all agree that it is unacceptable. Even with the 'S', the word itself, capitalised to grab the reader's attention, is a tell-tale sign of spam, yet the typo (I'll give them that much) is icing on the cake. Then there are 99 others. You see, even if I would have been so easily fooled, this one slip up is the ultimate sacrifice of credibility.

Credibility. It matters.

Things that uphold credibility: research, enthusiasm, confidence, good grammar.

If you can't back up a claim, prepare to be criticised. If your tone is dry and stale, prepare to be ignored. If you sound as confused as the people you're trying to instruct, prepare to be questioned. If your grammar is atrocious, then you can forget about everything else; you're going in the spam folder! Essentially, in all cases where you want to be taken seriously, strong grammar and punctuation strictly does matter.

via cheezburger.com

But what about in all other cases? Does grammar matter on Facebook, on Skype, or in casual emails? Your first response might be: no, it doesn't. You have nothing to prove on these mediums; you type like you talk; and there is no reason to put any effort into it. Fair enough, I say. And once again, I completely agree. In fact, I see no need to comment on the structure of someone's imperfect Facebook status when there isn't any pressing reason for them to write it correctly. If everyone understands it, and it makes sense, then that's all that matters. My hope is that, in cases where grammar does matter, they know what to do, and they'll get it right.

There is a difference, however, between a man who knows better but simply doesn't care, and a man who strives to get his grammar and punctuation correct, yet falters at the last word. My view is that everyone is innocent until proven guilty. In other words, it's only when there's a genuine mistake that I consider addressing the author. In such a case, my train of thought plays something like this: "If John has made a grammatical mistake despite making an effort not to, then he is likely to make the same mistake at a later time when it may prove detrimental." What is the next step upon this realisation? Do I point out the food caught between his teeth, or do I leave it unnoticed, hoping that he won't be too embarrassed when he eventually gets given a mirror?

In essence, grammar and punctuation on mediums like Facebook doesn't matter, or at least it wouldn't matter if these social mediums were the be all and end all of communication. But they aren't. Eventually, you will write something - a report, an essay, a personal statement - in which your understanding of grammar and punctuation will be your backbone. A good performance requires practice. Whether or not your grasp of English needs a polish is entirely up to you. Perhaps you know it well enough; but when it comes down to it, will you know where to place the apostrophe, if any? Should there be a comma before the quotation, or not? And can you properly distinguish its and it's, or there, their and they're? Your lecturer can. Your employer can. If you can't, then teach yourself. Google it, learn it, then practise it. 

Facebook, text, email - they might not matter right now, but they will matter when it's too late. For the sake of a job interview or exam, it's not unheard of to, you know, prepare.

For those times where grammar and punctuation strictly matters, every other instance may or may not matter in retrospect. It is your call to make. But it's all part of a constitution, and governing that constitution is a language that probably stems from your childhood. Do you remember? You learned a 26-letter alphabet, and you came to appreciate 26, not 25, distinct characters as the building blocks for communication. Today, not once do you forget one and replace it with more of the others. You accepted the whole package. It was either that, or nothing at all. Creating your own language, choosing your own rules, it doesn't work. You speak English, a constitution complete with standards and guidelines. Typing "your" when you mean "you're" is like spelling CONGRATULATIONS without the S. It's incomplete and, quite frankly, irresponsible. This, my friends, is why grammar and punctuation matters. It's the same reason the letter 'S' matters in the English alphabet. Forget everything else. You can punctuate and spell how you like on Facebook; you can rebel against your employers with a typo-ridden resume; but you can't then call it English. English has 26 letters; it has spelling and grammar rules; and it has punctuation marks.

If you say "should of" or "yous" or "Some-think", then by all means, keep saying these things. I trust you of all people are the smartest of us all, for your grasp of language is so firm that you feel confident to play with it, as if the tendon above the heel bears no limit to its stretch.

----------------

1. As both nouns are part of the same constitution, I'm treating them as a single term. For instance, "Parks and Recreation" IS a TV program.

2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7E-aoXLZGY I love this!

Read More

Grammar Matters, Otherwise You'd Still Say 'Brang'

Important: This post was originally a column written for Nexus - the University of Waikato's weekly magazine. However, it went unpublished because, I think, there wasn't enough room in this week's issue what with it being the last issue for the year. It's all wrap-everything-up themed, so they replaced my column with something way less cool (I read it, and decided it was way less cool). Since it didn't get published there, I decided to publish it here! Naturally, this column is aimed at a university audience, but it's just as relevant for them as it is for everyone else. Read on, if you will.

With the end of the year approaching, it's time to look back, to reflect, and to let go. Remember when you let go of that word 'brang'? It's a non-word kids substitute for 'brought', and it's often interchanged with 'brung'. You've probably forgotten, because it's been over a decade since you grew out of it; but I'll try to jog your memory.

One day in your fleeting childhood, you were given a divine revelation. You realised that 'brang' and 'brung' sound like both of two things, and nothing at all like 'brought'.

via Your Daily Portion of lol's page on Facebook

For one, they sound like creative uses for 'bleep' when someone curses on a candid video clip. For instance a man might say, "I'll BRANG you up good." If this was on TV, you'd hear the sound of clanging cymbals instead.

Secondly, these words 'brang' and 'brung' suitably fit onomatopoeias for the violent strumming of a guitar. Onomatopoeia, by the way, means a word formed from the sound with which it is associated. Examples include flap, meow, clap, patter and brang. 'Brung', of course, is simply the past tense. Clap, clapped; brang, brung.

"Tama brung his guitar as he walked to school. The guitar strings snapped from all the branging."

I bet you remember now, right? In hindsight, it wasn't too difficult to grow out of. After all, 'brought' sounds so much better and more sophisticated than 'brang'. So you quickly detached yourself from 'brang' and 'brung', and dumped them in the sewers to float amongst all the others. By 'others', I mean: 'should of', 'ragland', 'alot', 'some-think',misplaced apostrophes. The list goes on. 

You got rid of them, yes? 

What? You say you still use some of them? 

You say you still cling to these foul and pungent mutations? 

You, who stand here at the crossroads of your life; you, who hope to make it to the top someday. My friend, you're still deep, deep underground, where the waste of yesterday churns, where vermin gnaw through decaying flesh, and where unrealised dreams become lost in the darkness.

To this I have but one question. As the season changes from spring to summer; as the cool fog clears for the rising sun, will you forfeit the burdens of the past that hold you down, and rise up out of the ground like a flower through soil? If so, then stay your tongue and sever those foul words; for a flower can be full of potential, but as long as there are weeds, it cannot hope to grow.

Read More

Introverts 101

*Interlaced with helpful analogies and metaphors!

Introverts are often misunderstood. I would know, because I'm one of them. But we're humans too, and like all human beings - regardless of gender, race or hair colour - we just want to be acknowledged. But how can we be acknowledged unless we're understood? Thus, I shall endeavour to explain, in a logical fashion, how introverts work based on my own experience and the general nods of affirmation I've received in previous discussions on the subject with like-minded people. The key term to keep in mind is social energy. Having said that, it must be noted that a man should not, upon reading this, put introverts, or anyone else for that matter, into a box labelled 'explained'. After all, "you're unique, just like everyone else." Rather, I hope only to demystify, even if just a little bit, the clouded notion people tend to equip pertaining to introverts.

Social energy is exactly what it implies: it's the energy one has to be social. Like sleep, we all need it, and like regular energy, it's expendable. Some people have large social energy 'tanks', if you will, while others have smaller ones. Of these people, some expend their energy quickly, while others are able to trickle it out over a long period of time. I for one use it up pretty fast. It sort of gushes out (I often appear quite extroverted), but I'm able to adapt to the situation. For instance, I can go to a four-day non-stop social conference, and use it up over those four days, or I can go on a two-week long non-stop social trip to Nelson, and have enough social energy to last the entire time there. Regardless, at some point or another, the social energy depletes, and from there it needs time to restore itself. For the introvert, this means being alone, or around few people, just so he or she is recuperating social energy faster than he or she is spending it. I'm sure everyone needs time alone sometimes; but introverts undoubtedly need more. Lots more.

During this period, social events are hideous beasts, while time by oneself is heaven on earth. Therefore, if a friend text messages me, "Hey, come over! I want to catch up with you and ten other people all at once!" I'm likely to say no. However, it's not because I don't like them, or any of the other ten people for that matter. It's simply because I can't be social right now. I'll talk sparsely, get irritated easily, and wish I wasn't there. Simply put, my company wouldn't be enjoyed, and I'd think myself inconsiderate. As a general rule, I don't take well to spontaneity. However, you might notice that even your introverted friends take quite kindly to spontaneous events, at times. This would likely be because you caught them at a time when their social energy is high, and they're rearing to use it like a dying man in a desert is rearing to drink of the fresh waters and eat the magical pineapples in the sparkling oasis he's just discovered. However, like this sparkling oasis, such occasions are rare and should not be depended on.

via blog.lib.umn.edu

You see, introverts generally like to plan ahead. This is because social energy cannot simply be 'summoned' when there is none. So, if my social energy is low, and you invite me to an event today, I will likely decline, even if I'm not doing anything. However, if you invite me to something a few days in advance, I'll likely accept, because I can plan for my social energy meter to be full and usable. If it's planned, it'll work out.

On that note, there is another factor to consider when trying to understand the concept of social energy. You see, I like socialising, but I also like not socialising (often, choosing between the two is like choosing which flavour Subway to get: not easy!) I also get accustomed to things that are yet to happen. I might have a super busy few weeks, but know that Saturday is going to be a nothing-at-all day, which I'll look forward to, and which will thus motivate me to get through the week in high spirits. However, if, on Friday, some friends invite me to lunch on Saturday, I might say no, because it violates my plans to do nothing. However, if they invited me before I made those plans, then I would've said yes! I also said yes to a two-week long beach mission in Nelson, because I had time to think, and I was given six months' notice.¹ In short, social energy not only restores over time, but even when full, it often needs time to prepare itself. Your food might be in the fridge, but it needs time to heat up.

I hope the concept of social energy is easy to grasp. If so, then it should have helped to explain and justify why introverts like me need time alone: primarily to recuperate and to prepare. When my social energy is high, I talk a lot, and appear very extroverted; but I could just as easily be at home doing nothing, and that's equally fun. However, everyone's different, and when an introvert declines your invitation to the game, or when he or she is quieter than normal, it might not have anything to do with social energy. It might just be that they don't like rugby, or that they have nothing to say. It might even be because they're busy. Introverts make plans, too, you know. In the end, don't adopt the idea of social energy to every instance where an introvert says 'no' to you. And don't bother asking why, either; it'd take all my social energy to explain it again.

----------------------

1. You don't need to give me six months' notice, or any notice. Just don't take it to heart if I say 'no'.

Read More

Common selfishness

Small talk. An essential tool for general human-to-human communication, yet constituting a type of mutual selfishness.

In the twenty seconds of downtime between when you first see your doctor and he decides to get on with his job, he might ask, "How are you?" to which you respond with one of the following.

"Good/fine/all right."

"Good/fine/all right, thanks."

"Good/fine/all right, thanks. Yourself?" (Warning: grammatically incorrect)

"Sick, obviously."

"Murderous."

It's likely that, with any positive reply, he'll smile and say, "That's good!" and with a negative, "Aw, that's too bad." And regardless, "How may I help you today?"

You see, from his perspective, he doesn't care that much. On the surface, he genuinely hopes you're well, that you get better; and he's genuinely pleased when your day's been a blast. Beyond that, however, he doesn't give a rat's ass. This isn't a bad thing, mind you. He simply doesn't have time for a lecture of, say, why your day's been so awesome. Heck, he doesn't even know you. From his perspective, he's filling in the silence with verbal acknowledgement of your presence.

Likewise, from your point of view, you know he doesn't care that much. You acknowledge that he hasn't got the time of day for details beyond "good" and "fine". And it's likely you don't want to waste your allocated fifteen minutes revealing personal information to someone you barely know. Furthermore, you know that he understands this. From your perspective, 'fine' is all but sufficient. For both of you.

In short, he doesn't care about you. You don't care that he doesn't care about you. Nothing needs to be said. Hand over the money and go. Common selfishness.

Fundamentally, it's always the same. But we're humans. We're relational. We have to bury the "I don't care-ness" as far down as possible. So far that even we, the very culprits with spades still brandished, are as unaware as any.

It happens naturally, and we change it up with our tone of voice. Perhaps my day's been rather depressing. Got a speeding ticket, cat threw up, internet stopped working, had to wake up before 8 - you know, genuine rich world problems. If someone asked, "How are you?" I might say, "Mm. Good?" with a rather high tone to indicate uncertainty. And with that, I've told them all they want to know; and I've been completely honest, too: "I haven't really got anything to complain about, but my day could have been better." All in two words. Common selfishness. Respect.

We do it all the time - adopting a tone to accommodate our given level of 'good'. And while some people are better at it than others, we're aware that our small talk is often teeming with all kinds of apathy. High or low, short or tall, no matter the tones of people you meet; if you've heard it once, you've heard it a thousand times. Mutual selfishness. You can go now.

Read More

Totes, I say

“Totes!”

“Totes? Did you just say totes!?”

“Yeah, did I offend you? Haha.”

“‘Totes’ is a terrible abbreviation and should be reserved strictly for sarcasm. In my books, ‘totally’ and ‘totes’ are not synonymous.”

“What’s ‘synonymous’?”

“Oh dear.”

Recently added to the standard list of abbrevs, ‘totes’ is defs not very presh!

I first heard it used a couple of years ago. In a conversation with a friend of a friend, I casually asked, “Are you glad to be back?”

With a flick of the hair and a stumble of the high heel, she replied, “TOTES!” 
I stood petrified, and not because of her lisp. It took me a moment to work out what this monstrous abbreviation stood for. And when I did, the connotation was violently ingrained in my mind.

If you’re anything like me, you can understand how gross the word, like almost all other abbreviations of its kind, sounds. It succeeds in doing the unnecessary job in chopping one syllable off a three-syllable word, but it makes the speaker sound horribly uneducated. It’s like blurting out “Bah!” not with the intention of impersonating a sheep, but simply to add your two cents.

I know I’m not alone in this world. Anna, an angel sent from heaven to help me smite the world of its poor grammar, agrees with me. She recently revealed that the word we seek to destroy is, in fact, its very own weakness. In order for it to destroy itself, we (Anna, those of you who care, and I) must become wielders of the word and master it. But unlike the heathens who use it with as much fervour as they would ‘loathe’, our job is to be perpetually conscious for when the word ought to be used. Sarcasm. 

Sarcasm is the key.

Pretend you’re a guy who hasn’t shaved in a while and you’re meeting up with a friend.

“When was the last time you shaved?” he asks.

“This morning,” you reply through the coarse tendrils of your beard.

“Re-really?”

“Totes!”

See what you’ve done? You’ve appealed to his folly. Not all people are as gullible; most would probably reply, “No, seriously, take my hedge trimmers.” But for those who don’t, sarcasm is called. If you strictly use ‘totes’ in such contexts, they’ll learn that you only say it when you’re being sarcastic. And if you’re fortunate, it’ll rub off on them.

Conversely, the recipient of your sarcasm may in fact share your hatred for the word. Thus, using ‘totes’ in this way will spark a warm conversation about how stupid it sounds, after which you will have discovered another member in the legion of Totes (God-willing, poor grammar) Haters. It’s a win-win situation.

It is imperative to note, however, that ‘totes’ cannot be used at just any time where sarcasm is called. In the case above, the fool asking you when you last shaved is asking a serious question. The blatant sarcasm begins, and must always begin, from you with the word ‘totes’. Naturally, ‘totes’ is transformed from the absurd abbreviation for ‘totally’ into a light-hearted insult while justly undermining the integrity of the word itself, as well as its heathen hosts, all in the hope that they will see the error of their ways and repent. 

Let us all unite to repair the sundered veil which separates light from darkness!

Read More

Greetings, travellers

My name's Matt, and this is my blog. It's about language and other things, progressively more other things and less language [07/07/14].

Language sounds boring, doesn't it? Well, it's not. It's art, and there's so much to say about it. Like why 'totes' doesn't belong in anyone's colloquial English vocabulary (please see post number two), and why verbing nouns is super fun (work in progress). I don't care much about the correct use of apostrophes, commas, ellipses and so on.... What? Okay, fine. I do. I mean, how can I not cringe at the sight of a 'who's' that should be a 'whose', or not stab my eyes with blades at a misused apostrophe? You understand. Anyway, I'm more concerned with the aspects of language less commonly discussed, and the aforementioned 'other things'.

Stuff about me you might care to know:

• I'm a born again Christian, but I do not perpetually judge non-Christians for their beliefs. That would be like judging a dead person for being dead.
• I have a First Class Honours degree in English Literature, a degree in Philosophy, and an Advanced Diploma in Applied Writing.
• I've owned a second hand iPhone and a first hand Android. iPhones are better.
• One of my pet peeves is the deployment of pedestrian crossings right next to roundabouts. I still don't understand it.
• I cried at the ending of How To Train Your Dragon because it was non-cryptically poetic.
• Twelve Angry Men is the worst film ever. It sure made me angry! Heh heh heh...
• My super power is the ability to clap quite loudly with one hand.
• Bad jokes and puns make my day
• I'm an introvert
• I'm writing a fantasy novel!

That's all for now.

Read More