While on my recent vacation, I happened to pass through Groom, Texas. As I did so, I saw the GIGANTIC cross that this town is home to.
Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to get a good picture of it as I passed through (I didn’t stop to get a more stable picture), but fortunately a lady in a comments box provided this link.
It’s a MASSIVE cross.
The kind that any TEXAN could be proud of.
Kudos to Groom!
While on my recent vacation, I happened to pass through Groom, Texas. As I did so, I saw the GIGANTIC cross that this town is home to.
Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to get a good picture of it as I passed through (I didn’t stop to get a more stable picture), but fortunately a lady in a comments box provided this link.
It’s a MASSIVE cross.
The kind that any TEXAN could be proud of.
Kudos to Groom!
Remember 9/11?
Remember how horrible it was?
Remember all the even more horrible terrorist attacks that followed it?
You don’t?
Neither do I.
This raises a hopeful possibility: Maybe al-Qa’eda has spent its force.
Maybe we’ve neutralized so many of its leaders and footsoldiers that it isn’t able to project the force it did on 9/11.
Maybe it played its hand too early and didn’t have the accumulated strength needed to pull off similarly horrible attacks. (Maybe there just aren’t that many fanatical Muslims willing to kill themselves in the pursuit of jihad.)
Maybe it’s a combination of the these factors.
What I know is that, despite all its posturing, al-Qa’eda hasn’t (yet) been able to pull off a similarly horrible attack in the three years that have elapsed since 9/11.
What I’m sure of is that al-Qa’eda would have carried out a similarly horrible attack if it had been able to do so during most of that time.
What I’m worried about is that al-Qa’eda may have been able to accumulate enough resources to attempt such an attack before the U.S. election two months from now.
What I’m confident of is that al-Qa’eda is still a threat that must be taken with grave seriousness and vigorously pursued.
But as more time elapses without a catastrophic attack, the more evidence accumulates that al-Qa’eda is a spent force.
HERE’S SOMEONE WHO WILL PUT THE PIECES TOGETHER FOR YOU ON THAT HOPEFUL POSSIBILITY.
Remember 9/11?
Remember how horrible it was?
Remember all the even more horrible terrorist attacks that followed it?
You don’t?
Neither do I.
This raises a hopeful possibility: Maybe al-Qa’eda has spent its force.
Maybe we’ve neutralized so many of its leaders and footsoldiers that it isn’t able to project the force it did on 9/11.
Maybe it played its hand too early and didn’t have the accumulated strength needed to pull off similarly horrible attacks. (Maybe there just aren’t that many fanatical Muslims willing to kill themselves in the pursuit of jihad.)
Maybe it’s a combination of the these factors.
What I know is that, despite all its posturing, al-Qa’eda hasn’t (yet) been able to pull off a similarly horrible attack in the three years that have elapsed since 9/11.
What I’m sure of is that al-Qa’eda would have carried out a similarly horrible attack if it had been able to do so during most of that time.
What I’m worried about is that al-Qa’eda may have been able to accumulate enough resources to attempt such an attack before the U.S. election two months from now.
What I’m confident of is that al-Qa’eda is still a threat that must be taken with grave seriousness and vigorously pursued.
But as more time elapses without a catastrophic attack, the more evidence accumulates that al-Qa’eda is a spent force.
HERE’S SOMEONE WHO WILL PUT THE PIECES TOGETHER FOR YOU ON THAT HOPEFUL POSSIBILITY.
A toy packaged with candy to be sold to children in central Florida depicts the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center.
Parents, stores, and even the candy company are outraged and have pulled the toy from their shelves. However, the import company that brought the toy into the U.S. and sold it to the candy company (which did not see the toy beforehand) does not deny that the toy depicts 9/11 but also does not believe that the toy is offensive and sees no problem with its distribution.
I want to know who owns this importer and who originally manufactured the toy.
You know those scenes on Star Trek where somebody (the doctor, the captain) orders somebody else (the captain, another officer) to take his vacation?
Well, something like that happened to me not so long ago.
As a (regrettably) single guy, I don’t have a family to motivate me to take vacation, and it’s easy for me at present to throw myself into my work. As a result, I’ve accumulated a whopping huge number of vacation hours, and Karl recently ordered me to get out of the office and start taking my vacation.
So I did.
The last couple of weeks I’ve been gadding about the country in my pickup:
1) First I went to Roswell, New Mexico, where I did the outer-space tourist thing.
2) Then I went to Oklahoma City, where I visited a friend (who I recently gave away in marriage) and her new husband.
3) Next I went to Fayetteville, Arkansas, where I visited my dad and my brother and his family (including my brand new nephew).
4) Afterwards, I went to my family’s cattle ranch in Deep East Texas (though my 85-year old grandmother recently sold the cattle, she still gets out with the brush hog and mows down the tough stuff that grows wild on the ranch).
5) Subsequently, I went to Houston (South East Texas) to visit the multiple aunts and uncles who live there.
6) Then I shot back to San Diego, crossing Texas (more than half the journey!), New Mexico, Arizona, and California in a two-day period.
It was a great trip.
Six states. Twelve days. Four thousand miles in a pickup.
I got a lot of family business and fun stuff accomplished, including taking some great photos and getting some great stories.
More on those soon.
BACK IN THE DAY:
THEN:
NOW:
|
|
|
|
MORE TO COME IN A FEW MONTHS!
Or even the accent of a junior linguist, such as myself.
You may find out more than you want to know.
A reader writes:
Dear Jimmy,
You are driving me crazy!! I know that you are a very literate person and pronounce other languages correctly, so why do you refuse to pronounce your “ing’s” at the end of your words instead of you just saying “in”!?
You’re drivin me crazy!!
The phenomenon you’re referring to is commonly referred to as “g-dropping” or “dropping your g’s”, though this is actually a misnomer. There is no /g/ sound in the suffix “-ing.” What we actually do when making the distinct “-ing” sound is say /in/ except we touch the back of our tongue to our velum (the soft flap of skin at the backs of our mouths) instead of touching the tip of the tongue to the ridge behind our teeth.
The thing is, “g-dropping” is an extremely common feature of the speech of English-speakers. Everybody does it to some degree, and it’s more common in some accents (pronunciation schemes) than others. One of these is the English country aristocracy’s accent. It’s also common the American Southern group of accents, which can be quite distinct: Someone from the Tidewater area of Virginia will sound very different from a Cajun, who will in turn sound different than an Appalachian.
My own accent tends to be Texan (more East Texan than West Texan), with admixtures of Ozark hill accent elements, and I do drop my g’s.
Sorry, that’s just the way I talk.
I take pride in it.
When I’m speaking someone else’s language, I make every effort to adopt their phonology, even if it means I have to practice really hard to learn to make sounds that English doesn’t use (like the Hebrew /r/, which is made at the back of the mouth, or the Arabic /gh/, which is a kind of throaty noise that sounds like a trilled /r/.)
But when I speak my own language, I use my own accent.
People make fun of my accent at their peril. (Remember that when using the comments box, below.)
Here’s a page that has a really interesting section on “g-dropping.”
You may also notice something else I tend to drop other word-final sounds when I talk. For example–like my relatives and co-regionalists–I tend to say kep’ instead of kept and an’ instead of and.
There’s actually a rule for what sounds get dropped, and I recently found out what it is: In simplified terms, a word-final stop tends to get dropped if it is preceded by a consonant with the same voicing.
Lemme ‘splain:
Certain consonants are called “stops,” because they stop the flow of air coming through your mouth. /t/ and /d/ are two examples of stops, and you’ll notice I tend to drop those a lot when they are word-final (i.e., at the end of a word).
They get dropped when immediately before them there is a consonant that has the same voicing they do.
“Voicing” refers to whether you have your vocal cords turned on or off. Some consonants we make with our vocal cords turned off (like /p/ and /t/) and other consonants we make with our vocal cords turned on (like /n/ and /d/). To see what I mean, put your hand on your throat and say those four sounds. You’ll feel vibration with /n/ and /d/ that you won’t feel with /p/ and /t/. That vibration is produced by you turning your vocal cords on as you say the sound.
Thing is, people with my accent will tend to drop a stop consonant at the end of a word if it is preceded by a consonant with the same vocal cord status.
For example, since /p/ and /t/ are both “unvoiced” (i.e., vocal cords off), I will tend to drop /t/ at the end of a word when it is preceded by /p/. That’s why I say kep’ instead of kept.
Simialrly, since /n/ and /d/ are both “voiced” (i.e., vocal cords on), I will tend to drop /d/ at the end of a word when it is preceded by /n/. That’s why I say an’ instead of and.
Similar rules (and even much more complex ones) govern every accent, and people internalize them without even realizing it. It takes the professional activity of linguists to tally up the data and figure out the unconscious rules that govern the pronunciation schemes we call accents.
Ain’t phonology a hoot?
Or even the accent of a junior linguist, such as myself.
You may find out more than you want to know.
A reader writes:
Dear Jimmy,
You are driving me crazy!! I know that you are a very literate person and pronounce other languages correctly, so why do you refuse to pronounce your “ing’s” at the end of your words instead of you just saying “in”!?
You’re drivin me crazy!!
The phenomenon you’re referring to is commonly referred to as “g-dropping” or “dropping your g’s”, though this is actually a misnomer. There is no /g/ sound in the suffix “-ing.” What we actually do when making the distinct “-ing” sound is say /in/ except we touch the back of our tongue to our velum (the soft flap of skin at the backs of our mouths) instead of touching the tip of the tongue to the ridge behind our teeth.
The thing is, “g-dropping” is an extremely common feature of the speech of English-speakers. Everybody does it to some degree, and it’s more common in some accents (pronunciation schemes) than others. One of these is the English country aristocracy’s accent. It’s also common the American Southern group of accents, which can be quite distinct: Someone from the Tidewater area of Virginia will sound very different from a Cajun, who will in turn sound different than an Appalachian.
My own accent tends to be Texan (more East Texan than West Texan), with admixtures of Ozark hill accent elements, and I do drop my g’s.
Sorry, that’s just the way I talk.
I take pride in it.
When I’m speaking someone else’s language, I make every effort to adopt their phonology, even if it means I have to practice really hard to learn to make sounds that English doesn’t use (like the Hebrew /r/, which is made at the back of the mouth, or the Arabic /gh/, which is a kind of throaty noise that sounds like a trilled /r/.)
But when I speak my own language, I use my own accent.
People make fun of my accent at their peril. (Remember that when using the comments box, below.)
Here’s a page that has a really interesting section on “g-dropping.”
You may also notice something else I tend to drop other word-final sounds when I talk. For example–like my relatives and co-regionalists–I tend to say kep’ instead of kept and an’ instead of and.
There’s actually a rule for what sounds get dropped, and I recently found out what it is: In simplified terms, a word-final stop tends to get dropped if it is preceded by a consonant with the same voicing.
Lemme ‘splain:
Certain consonants are called “stops,” because they stop the flow of air coming through your mouth. /t/ and /d/ are two examples of stops, and you’ll notice I tend to drop those a lot when they are word-final (i.e., at the end of a word).
They get dropped when immediately before them there is a consonant that has the same voicing they do.
“Voicing” refers to whether you have your vocal cords turned on or off. Some consonants we make with our vocal cords turned off (like /p/ and /t/) and other consonants we make with our vocal cords turned on (like /n/ and /d/). To see what I mean, put your hand on your throat and say those four sounds. You’ll feel vibration with /n/ and /d/ that you won’t feel with /p/ and /t/. That vibration is produced by you turning your vocal cords on as you say the sound.
Thing is, people with my accent will tend to drop a stop consonant at the end of a word if it is preceded by a consonant with the same vocal cord status.
For example, since /p/ and /t/ are both “unvoiced” (i.e., vocal cords off), I will tend to drop /t/ at the end of a word when it is preceded by /p/. That’s why I say kep’ instead of kept.
Simialrly, since /n/ and /d/ are both “voiced” (i.e., vocal cords on), I will tend to drop /d/ at the end of a word when it is preceded by /n/. That’s why I say an’ instead of and.
Similar rules (and even much more complex ones) govern every accent, and people internalize them without even realizing it. It takes the professional activity of linguists to tally up the data and figure out the unconscious rules that govern the pronunciation schemes we call accents.
Ain’t phonology a hoot?
Precision-guided weapons are not the only weapons that represent the future of warfare. Non-lethal ones will play an increasingly important role as well, which will cause moral theologians to have to do a lot of rethinking if future warfare is able to capitalize on achieving war goals with fewer and fewer casualties.
One new weapon that has been announced is a stink bomb the Israelis are planning to use against Palestinian demonstrators.