Words mean things, Julius Caesar edition

From Mary Beard's SPQR:

Sometime around 10 January 49 BCE, Julius Caesar, with just one of his legions from Gaul, crossed the Rubicon, the river that marked the northern boundary of Italy. The exact date is not known, nor even the location of this most historically significant of rivers. It was more likely a small brook than the raging torrent of popular imagination, and – despite the efforts of ancient writers to embellish them with dramatic appearances of the gods, uncanny omens and prophetic dreams – the reality of the surroundings was probably mundane. For us, ‘to cross the Rubicon’ has come to mean ‘to pass the point of no return’. It did not mean that to Caesar.

According to one of his companions on the journey – Gaius Asinius Pollio, historian, senator and founder of Rome’s first public library – when he finally approached the Rubicon after some hesitation, Caesar quoted in Greek two words* from the Athenian comic playwright Menander: literally, in a phrase borrowed from gambling, ‘Let the dice be thrown.’ Despite the usual English translation – ‘The die is cast’, which again appears to hint at the irrevocable step being taken – Caesar’s Greek was much more an expression of uncertainty, a sense that everything now was in the lap of the gods. Let’s throw the dice in the air and see where they will fall! Who knows what will happen next?

 *Ἀνερρίφθω κύβος (anerriphtho kybos)

Words mean things, classified ads edition

In previous posts, I have talked about the idea that words have certain meanings, and the words you choose carry those meanings with it. With that in mind consider a recent classified advertisement that reads as follows:

Free firewood

Freshly cut oak trees need to be cut and split...

Firewood is defined variously as "wood suitable for fuel," or "wood used to make a fire : wood used as fuel." In a sentence: "They collected and cut their own firewood." "They chopped enough firewood to last the winter."

Generally, and it has been my experience, that when people are advertising firewood for sale (or for free), it means that the wood has already been cut and split, and often separated into cords or other bundles. An image search for "firewood" on Google bears this out.

To be fair, the ad does say the trees "need to be cut and split." But they're also "freshly cut," meaning they're not really going to be ready for firewood until they dry out.

Ok, I was bored...

Words mean things, work edition

A colleague of mine ("Bob") had a form he needed me to sign. Except we don't work in the same building. He works in Building A. I used to work in Building B, but I recently moved to Building C (which isn't owned by our company).

Bob emailed me on a Wednesday and asked me if I was in Building B. I said no, I moved to Building C. However, I told him, if you "send it through the [intra-company] mail, I would stop by Building B and sign it for him. He said that he would do that.

On the next Monday afternoon (after I had already left work), I received an email from the mail room in Building B that I had mail. On Tuesday morning, Bob asked me why I hadn't signed his form yet. I told him that I had only just been notified that the mail arrived, and that I intended to sign it later that day. Bob thought this was unacceptable. Why did I wait to be notified about the mail delivery when he personally dropped it off last Wednesday? This was a time sensitive form (something else he neglected to mention).

Of course, Bob had agreed to "send it through the mail." To me, this meant he dropped off the form via intra-company mail at Building A and it would take a day or two to get to Building B. Under those circumstances, I wouldn't expect the form to be there on Wednesday. But to Bob, dropping it off in person at Building B mail room was just the same as sending it through the mail. And when he dropped it off, he told the mail room attendant that I would be expecting the form, so the mail room attendant didn't email me until Monday (when I hadn't picked up the form in several days).

Words mean things. A simple phrase like "send it through the mail" can mean two different things to different people. In this case, it resulted in a delay of several days. Fortunately, everything was cleared up on Tuesday after several back-and-forth emails. But don't take it for granted that a simple phrase means the same thing to everyone else that it does to you.

Words mean things, law school edition

Here are the requirements to join the UDC Law Review:

Membership

Students may receive offers to join the UDC Law Review staff by grading on and/or writing on.

Grading On

Students who have completed at least thirty hours of coursework and are in good standing, as defined by the UDC David A. Clarke School of Law Student Handbook, are eligible to grade on to the law review by exceeding a 3.2 GPA and receiving a “B” final grade in Lawyering Process I and II. Offers of membership to students who grade on are sent before the start of the Fall semester. Students who are eligible to grade on may also participate in the write-on competition, regardless of their expected or actual grades. No distinction is made within the Law Review staff between students who grade on and those who write on.

Writing On 

Students who are not eligible to grade on to the law review may attempt to write on. Materials for the write-on competition are posted on this page at the end of the Spring semester. Students typically have two weeks to complete the submission, which consists of a Bluebook exercise, an editing exercise, and a legal essay based on a closed-universe of cases and articles provided by the Law Review staff. The essays are graded anonymously and offers of membership to students who write on are sent before the start of the Fall semester.

To summarize, you can grade on (with a GPA requirement, a Lawyering Process grade requirement, and a 30 credit hour requirement); or you can write on ("Students who are not eligible to grade on").

Just to be clear, I emailed the Law Review back in April:

Will part-time 1L's be eligible to grade on to law review?

The answer:

If you have completed LP I and II then you will be eligible to grade on law review as a part-time 1L, rising 2L.  Thanks for your question.

Except this isn't the case--the 30 credit hour limit applies to both grading on and writing on. I only know this because a fellow student told me he was confused about whether or not we could participate. Fortunately, I had completed only a smart part of the write on before I realized this. Yes, I did Bluebook exercises that I didn't have to do.

On top of that, members of the Law Review made several announcements in our part-time, 1L classes (in which almost no one has yet met the 30 credit hour requirement).

Lesson learned, especially for those studying to be lawyers: Words mean things!

Language Lessons: News room roundup

This is one in a series of posts about the peculiarities of writing and speaking the English language. For similar posts, click here.

A few tidbits from the news:

"North Webster man and his dog invades [read 'invade'] an Albion home, held at gunpoint."

Elderly, Disabled Struggling on Carnival Cruise Ship, Passenger Says: "Carnival has [read 'has been' or simply 'blamed'] blaming the cause of fire on an alternator."

Security Council and UN officials condemn DPR Korea's nuclear test: "Underlining that he personally had repeatedly called on the new leadership in Pyongyang to give up its nuclear weapons, and try to diffuse [read 'defuse'] the situation through political dialogue and confidence-building measures with neighbours and the international community, Mr. Ban said that “regrettably, my appeals have fallen on deaf ears." [Also, a bit of a run-on sentence, don't you think?]

"Irregardless of its convenience, the Internet promotes the Worst. Writing. Ever." ["Irregardless" is a word, but it's nonstandard. Especially interesting because this links to an article about bad writing. A Google news search for "irregardless" finds fairly common use, too.]

Language Lessons: None was or None were?

This is one in a series of posts about the peculiarities of writing and speaking the English language. For similar posts, click here.

In the Supreme Court case of Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318 (2001), Justice Souter wrote:

"None of them was wearing a seatbelt."

There is conflicting opinion about "none was" and "none were." Some say none should always be used with a singular verb (reading none as not one). Others say to look at the object of the preposition to determine whether to use a singular or plural verb. Here, them is plural, so were would have been appropriate. Yet others say singular objects should get singular verbs, and plural objects can get either singular or plural verbs.

Confused yet?

I have an inquiry into Bryan Garner to see what he thinks. If and when he responds, I'll update this post.

Update: Here's what Bryan Garner said:

“@theprez98: @bryanagarner Justice Souter wrote: "None of them was wearing a seatbelt." Should it be Was or Were?”Either.
— Bryan A. Garner (@BryanAGarner) February 12, 2013

For what it's worth, "None of them was wearing a seatbelt" sounds awkward to me. I would rewrite it: "None of them were wearing seatbelts."

What do you think?

Language Lessons: More on Defuse vs. Diffuse

This is one in a series of posts about the peculiarities of writing and speaking the English language. For similar posts, click here.

As a follow-up to yesterday's post, here are some more examples of journalists confusing defuse and diffuse, all stories from within the last week or so:

Jets lose 8-3 to Tampa Bay:" Good teams find a way to minimize damage when asked to diffuse [read 'defuse'] the bomb in front of them and in the inconsistent world of NHL officiating, fuses are lit all the time."

Unexploded WWII bomb discovered at Hamamatsu railway: "The Self Defense Forces were called to diffuse [read 'defuse'] the bomb and then transport the 250 kilogram (55 pound) rusted explosive."

N.Korea Threatens War With S.Korea Over UN Sanctions: "Meanwhile, China, the North Korea’s major ally called for restraint and continuation of the dialogues to diffuse [read: 'defuse'] tension in the peninsula."

Cruz's Grass-Roots Role at NRSC Still Evolving: "Sen. Ted Cruz was appointed vice chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee to diffuse [read 'defuse'] a destructive tension with the conservative grass roots..."

As a reminder, you can see the difference between defuse and diffuse here.

Language Lessons: Defuse vs. Diffuse

This is one in a series of posts about the peculiarities of writing and speaking the English language. For similar posts, click here.

Notice the error yet? The title of this blog post gives it away.

See here for the difference between defuse and diffuse.

It's a common enough error that the first example I found was a newspaper headline from today: Thompson to diffuse [read 'defuse'] IEDs in Afghanistan. In this article, "All four of the officers received awards for their actions to diffuse [read 'defuse'] a bomb threat on the ferry."

Language Lessons: How do you pronounce that word?

This is one in a series of posts about the peculiarities of writing and speaking the English language. For similar posts, click here.

How do you pronounce the following words?

comptroller
coupon
err
flaccid
heinous
schism

In Justice Scalia and Bryan Garner's Making Your Case: The Art of Persuading Judges, they argue (quite sensibly) that if you want to be taken seriously during oral arguments of a case, you need to pronounce words correctly. What's the correct pronunciation? Generally, it's the preferred pronunciation, meaning "preferred by well-educated people" (p. 145).

For example, they argue that the six words listed above are among those that are commonly mispronounced. Chances are that you, like me (despite us being reasonably well educated people), have also been pronouncing at least a few of them incorrectly (or, at least, by their non-preferred means).

Here are the original six words, linked to their Dictionary.com definition (follow the link, then click the speaker icon for the spoken pronunciation):

comptroller [kuh n-troh-ler; not komp-troh-ler]
coupon [koo-pon; kyoo-pon is acceptable but not preferred]
err [ur, er; not air]
flaccid [flak-sid; although flas-id is also acceptable]
heinous [hey-nuh s; if there is a common mispronunciation, I don't know of it]
schism [siz-uh m or skiz-uh m]