Number crunching language into
God-talk, like any simple truth warped
into fallacy by perverted tongues...
I'd cut mine out if I thought it could make this more clear.
We are but celestial condensation and vibrations.
We are parts of a whole.
We are all that I am; and
We are that "I am;"
and I am a system within a system within a system...
Contemplate meaning...
Wednesday, December 22, 2004
Monday, December 13, 2004
a poem...after a month or more of not writing...
dedicated to the others of you, out there.
Listen, dear brothers, we are
a strange bald ape,
not much more than a
babbling boney lung fish,
living in a mud-brick world of
make believe and cognitive echoes,
the result of an even number
and a spiral
and a vicarious fetish for
binary pairs.
Witness, sisters, that we do not beat the sword
and shape the plow because
community was ransacked like the fall of
Troy,
by trickery,
and forged into harsh societal constructs.
But this age was foretold
and retold.
Muffled prophets cry out and tell of a time,
when we will no longer say to each other, "know..."
I say the time has come when we must know
that the manufactured hydrogen flash
is a sickening sight,
no less so than the burnt shadows of civilized life.
In a previous century, three shouted various
perverted truths from the region
West of the Elbe; but all we heard was the promise
of Dear Brother Adam, crying out from the depths
of the white noise wilderness of insomnia,
"Show me a 'cure' for the evils of modernity
and I'll sell it to you for $19.95
on early morning TV."
Living life in the rear-view, and thus, not seeing
the high beams, ahead...
Charge forth, post-postmodern fighters,
into the 21st Century with eyes looking through that novel glass.
Listen, dear brothers, we are
a strange bald ape,
not much more than a
babbling boney lung fish,
living in a mud-brick world of
make believe and cognitive echoes,
the result of an even number
and a spiral
and a vicarious fetish for
binary pairs.
Witness, sisters, that we do not beat the sword
and shape the plow because
community was ransacked like the fall of
Troy,
by trickery,
and forged into harsh societal constructs.
But this age was foretold
and retold.
Muffled prophets cry out and tell of a time,
when we will no longer say to each other, "know..."
I say the time has come when we must know
that the manufactured hydrogen flash
is a sickening sight,
no less so than the burnt shadows of civilized life.
In a previous century, three shouted various
perverted truths from the region
West of the Elbe; but all we heard was the promise
of Dear Brother Adam, crying out from the depths
of the white noise wilderness of insomnia,
"Show me a 'cure' for the evils of modernity
and I'll sell it to you for $19.95
on early morning TV."
Living life in the rear-view, and thus, not seeing
the high beams, ahead...
Charge forth, post-postmodern fighters,
into the 21st Century with eyes looking through that novel glass.
Friday, December 03, 2004
A Linguistic "Discovery"
Ne ( ni) - third person, singular, asexual human pronoun
Singular..................Plural
it, he, she, ne............they
it, him, her, nir.........them
its, his, hers, nes........their
Today, my friend Amy Roberson and I were discussing the need for an asexual pronoun for the third person singular. We settled on "ne." Our reasoning and discussion, to an extent, are as follows...
Linguistic change occurs within a community when a reality is no longer adequately expressed by the lexicon. Numerous instances of this exist in the English language, from irregulars to borrowed words.
Though langue is, in fact, a property of the total speech community, I suggest that change occurs on the level of parole. Thus, linguistic change occurs as an isolated incident (possibly even by a single individual) and spreads to through larger community. One can see this trend within an isolated speech community with the language variation of slang. It has been my experience that, taking a school to be a small isolated speech community, slang usually begins with a small group then spreads following the trends of fashion, meaning that social elites are act as catalyst for change in the system. For slang, the reality void which is filled is often social differentiation by age, class, or other distinguishing lines.
If one examines our high-speed connected culture, one can see that language variation occurs in an extremely rapid manner. To see an example of this, just chizzle Snoop Dizzle fo' shizzle, nizzle. Though this occurs, much of the linguistic change has been predominated by slang, which follows the life span of fads and other trends associated with fashion. I believe that, for the most part, people, especially those in academia, espouse the old linguists' assertion that one cannot actively change the system. Thus, in dealing with the increased reality that professionals are no longer strictly men, academia has substituted "she" for "he."
As I have just hinted to, there exists a conceptual inadequacy in our modern lexicon. Though this problem is not new, the fact that labeling the world through a male-bias has an impact psychologically and sociologically is receiving more attention as the years progress. As I have just typed, most "progressive" professors substitute the female third person singular for the male. Though this appears to be a good faith effort, it maintains gendered differentiation where there should be none; this, realistically there is no real chance that the male dominance would be reversed in the near future, not without very drastic, outlandish, occurrences. Another solution is the use of the word "one," which does have its place, but makes for rather wordy writing, as well. Thus, if true equality is desired, an asexual pronoun must be used to support this conceptually.
The first possible solution would be to use the one already in existence: "it." The problem is rather obvious, "it" relates to objects, not humans (though this could be considered pretensious on our part...). In looking at the use of "one," the problems are easily observed. The first problem is the lack of intimacy between the speaker and the subject, one tends to feel, as a reader, as though one is being lectured to. Another problem is found in the lack of efficiency that "one" allows. However, if a writer were to use a different pronoun, ne would find that nes writing can avoid these problems.
I could go into how Amy and I came up with it, but that doesn't really matter. We got a laugh and gave ourselves pats on the back (very tongue-in-cheek like). The point is to use it (I'm referring to "ne," of course), since a word has no value outside of the lexical system. Thus, if some one agrees with us, ne should start using "ne" and impress nes friends. You can use it, too! And maybe then you go up to your favorite progressive pal and tell nir about "ne." Then all of us can start using it!
Singular..................Plural
it, he, she, ne............they
it, him, her, nir.........them
its, his, hers, nes........their
Today, my friend Amy Roberson and I were discussing the need for an asexual pronoun for the third person singular. We settled on "ne." Our reasoning and discussion, to an extent, are as follows...
Linguistic change occurs within a community when a reality is no longer adequately expressed by the lexicon. Numerous instances of this exist in the English language, from irregulars to borrowed words.
Though langue is, in fact, a property of the total speech community, I suggest that change occurs on the level of parole. Thus, linguistic change occurs as an isolated incident (possibly even by a single individual) and spreads to through larger community. One can see this trend within an isolated speech community with the language variation of slang. It has been my experience that, taking a school to be a small isolated speech community, slang usually begins with a small group then spreads following the trends of fashion, meaning that social elites are act as catalyst for change in the system. For slang, the reality void which is filled is often social differentiation by age, class, or other distinguishing lines.
If one examines our high-speed connected culture, one can see that language variation occurs in an extremely rapid manner. To see an example of this, just chizzle Snoop Dizzle fo' shizzle, nizzle. Though this occurs, much of the linguistic change has been predominated by slang, which follows the life span of fads and other trends associated with fashion. I believe that, for the most part, people, especially those in academia, espouse the old linguists' assertion that one cannot actively change the system. Thus, in dealing with the increased reality that professionals are no longer strictly men, academia has substituted "she" for "he."
As I have just hinted to, there exists a conceptual inadequacy in our modern lexicon. Though this problem is not new, the fact that labeling the world through a male-bias has an impact psychologically and sociologically is receiving more attention as the years progress. As I have just typed, most "progressive" professors substitute the female third person singular for the male. Though this appears to be a good faith effort, it maintains gendered differentiation where there should be none; this, realistically there is no real chance that the male dominance would be reversed in the near future, not without very drastic, outlandish, occurrences. Another solution is the use of the word "one," which does have its place, but makes for rather wordy writing, as well. Thus, if true equality is desired, an asexual pronoun must be used to support this conceptually.
The first possible solution would be to use the one already in existence: "it." The problem is rather obvious, "it" relates to objects, not humans (though this could be considered pretensious on our part...). In looking at the use of "one," the problems are easily observed. The first problem is the lack of intimacy between the speaker and the subject, one tends to feel, as a reader, as though one is being lectured to. Another problem is found in the lack of efficiency that "one" allows. However, if a writer were to use a different pronoun, ne would find that nes writing can avoid these problems.
I could go into how Amy and I came up with it, but that doesn't really matter. We got a laugh and gave ourselves pats on the back (very tongue-in-cheek like). The point is to use it (I'm referring to "ne," of course), since a word has no value outside of the lexical system. Thus, if some one agrees with us, ne should start using "ne" and impress nes friends. You can use it, too! And maybe then you go up to your favorite progressive pal and tell nir about "ne." Then all of us can start using it!
Thursday, December 02, 2004
In this first week of Advent...
As Bush stands waiting to light the national Christmas tree, I say to those who are not Christian, "remember." For those that are Christian, I say, "remember." Luther was the first to incorporate the tradition of the Yule log into the Christmas tradition, which itself rose from Christians in Rome seeking a day to celebrate the birth of Christ. The symbols relate to the old tradition of celebrations during winter's cold. This nation was founded by Deists.
Trace the history of all symbols, so that their meaning is not forgotten. As McLuhan suggests, the medium (both context and content) is the meaning.
Trace the history of all symbols, so that their meaning is not forgotten. As McLuhan suggests, the medium (both context and content) is the meaning.