have u ever heard about the CRAZY ENGLISH?
Moderator: EC
-
ProfessorVerb
- Rising Star
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 8:41 am
- Status: Teacher of English
- Location: U.S.
"Crazy English," is a bit redundant since the language is full of whims and inconsistencies and it seems that everyone agrees that many of its rules are indeed "crazy."
"Crazy" is an interesting word; it can mean adj., "excellent or 'cool,' (this is not heard that much anymore); in common usage it refers to n., a crazy person, or an inmate of a mental institution; or it can simply refer to a destructive or irrational person = LOONY. "Some crazies went skinny-dipping in the swimming pool when it was freezing outside."
Some other usages include: -crazy; as a combining word it means inordinately devoted to, or manic over what is indicated. For example, "Boy (or girl)-crazy," "Speed-crazy."
"Crazy about ..." (or OVER or FOR) adj. phr. Very enthusiastic about, infatuated with = NUTS ABOUT. "I'm crazy about Big Macs."
"Crazy-house." This is where Professor Verb lives ... no really, it is a "mental hospital, insane aslyum."
These references are all from Dr. Robert L. Chapman's New Dictionary of American Slang, 1986 (a valued gift from some former colleagues).
As to Crazy English, here's what one author had to say:
How much do words really matter?
by Frank Grazian
The brochure promoting Rosalie Maggie's new book, Talking About People, contained a section headed, "Do Words Really Matter?" It highlighted the following examples, preceded by the comment that "Words matter terribly":
* "The difference between 'fetal tissue' and 'unborn baby' (referring to the same thing) is arguably the most debated issue in the country."
* "The United States changed 'The War Department' to 'The Department of Defense' because words matter."
* "When President Bush used the word 'hostages' for the first time in August 1990, it made headlines; up to that time he had been using 'detainees.' The change of terms signaled a change in our posture toward Iraq...."
Those of us who teach courses in semantics attempt to get students to examine their unconscious assumptions about language, to understand the symbolism that determines how people act and react to what is said and written.
We try to show that the word is not the thing, that the further a word deviates from its referent, the more likely it is to be misleading or deceiving.
Understanding the difference between the extensional and intensional meaning of a word - the denotation and connotation - is critical to both understanding meaning and being aware of how others may be slanting the language to sway us.
William Lutz in Doublespeak put it this way:
"Basic to doublespeak is incongruity, the incongruity between what is said or left unsaid, and what really is. It is the incongruity between the word and the referent, between seems and be, between the essential function of language - communication - and what doublespeak does: mislead, distort, deceive, inflate, circumvent, obfuscate.
"Doublespeak turns lies told by politicians into 'strategic misrepresentations,"reality augmentations,' or 'terminological inexactitudes,' and ordinary sewage sludge into 'regulated organic nutrients' that do not stink but 'exceed the odor threshold.'"
Most people know how a switch in adjectives can either irritate or flatter people:
Do you refer to a person as "slender" or "skinny"?
Does someone have a lot of "nerve" or plenty of "courage"?
Is he "miserly" or "thrifty"?
Some even realize how a change in verbs can alter the meaning of a sentence.
Will you "emphasize" or "hammer away at" their shortcomings?
Did he "compliment" or "flatter" his assistant?
Do you "gloss over" or "sugar coat" the problem?
Richard Lederer, in Crazy English, offers these examples of how violent words and terms often shape and define our view of reality:
"The world of business is a veritable 'jungle' or 'cut-throat competition,' a 'rough-and-tumble' school of 'hard knocks,' and a 'dog-eat-dog' world of 'backbiting,"back stabbing,' and 'hatchet jobs.' Some companies 'spearhead' a trend of 'price gouging.' Other firms 'beat' the competition to the 'punch' and gain a 'stranglehold' on the market by fighting 'tooth and nail' to 'slash' prices in 'knockdown-drag-out, no-holds-barred' price 'wars.'
"Still other companies gain 'clout' by putting the 'squeeze' on their competition with 'shakeups,"raids,' and 'hostile takeovers.' Then the other side gets 'up in arms' and 'screams ~ murder' about such a 'low blow.'"
Of course, we have to wonder why companies insist on "downsizing" employees instead of "firing" them. Are they "showing compassions" or just "sugar coating" the truth?
That brings us to the euphemism.
As a teacher, I often instruct my students to avoid the euphemism - an inoffensive word or phrase that is less direct and less distasteful than the one that represents reality.
Of course, not all euphemisms are bad. Some are consciously used to protect people from unpleasantness. Others, however, can cause harm.
We often use the term "passed away" for "died" when offering condolences to someone who just lost a loved one. And we refer to the person's "body," not "corpse," lying in the "casket," not "coffin."
But when the Bosnians used the term "ethnic cleansing" to sanitize the murder of hundreds of their enemies, we encountered a euphemism that not only obscured the truth but transcended into evilness.
For good or evil, the euphemism is here to stay and seems to be proliferating. As John Leo pointed out in a U.S. News column:
"Prettified language is all around us. A 'graffiti sprayer' is a 'wall artist,' a 'prostitute' is a 'sexual service provider,' and one of the causes of death among young American males is 'legal intervention' (e.g. 'getting shot by cops')."
My favorite illustration of a euphemism is one offered by Everett Dirksen, a former senator from Illinois, on the Senate floor:
"Mr. President, there is such a word as 'euphemism.' I do not think I have looked it up for years, but I suppose 'euphemism' is something that seems like what it ain't. Perhaps that is as good a definition as I can give.
"I am reminded of the man who filled in an application for an insurance policy. One of the questions he had to answer was, 'How old was your father when he died and of what did he die?'
"Well, his father had been hanged, but he did not want to put that in his application. He puzzled it out for a while. He finally wrote, 'My father was 65 when he died. He came to this end while participating in a public function when the platform gave way.'"
Frank Grazian is founding editor of Communication Briefings, a communication-management newsletter with 63,000 paid subscribers in 32 countries. He is also Professor Emeritus of Communications at Rowan College of New Jersey, where he co-founded the journalism major and served as its coordinator for 10 years. He has written five books in communications and has written and served as an anchor for three nationally distributed training videos. He has had bylined articles in scores of national publications, including The New York Times. He currently publishes Alternative Health News Online, a Web site that can be accessed at http://www.altmedicine.com.
51 White Birch Rd., Turnersville, NJ 08012, 609-227-5788, fax 609-228-0113.
-1-
Publication Information: Article Title: How Much Do Words Really Matter?. Contributors: Frank Grazian - author. Journal Title: Public Relations Quarterly. Volume: 43. Issue: 2. Publication Year: 1998. Page Number: 37
On a more analytical note, another author had this to say about "Crazy English":
Universal markers of betrayal and linguistic supremacy: Tsuda Yukio
The next example of culturalist categorization is built around the issue of linguistic supremacy. I discuss two cases, which clearly show that the structures of opposite arguments phrased in terms of binaries may be nearly identical. Li Yang, a (formerly) shy student, acquired wealth and fame by teaching English through the so-called ‘Crazy English’ method of screaming. Li advocates English as a source of emancipation and an indispensable means for strengthening China by conquering foreign markets. By contrast, Nagoya University professor Tsuda Yukio does his utmost to ban English conversation classes from Japan. 15 Whereas Li tries to make foreigners speak English in China, the latter tries to compel foreigners to speak Japanese. Still, both strategies are phrased in East-West dualities, and proceed from the principle of national self-strengthening, although the former focuses on economic growth and psychology and the latter on cultural tradition; both attitudes emphasize the need for self-assertion, overcoming an inferiority complex and fighting imperialism. Running through the parks, Li Yang and his pupils alternately scream in English and Chinese. They shout ‘I never want to let my country down’, and ‘I’m the best’, ‘I enjoy losing face’, ‘I’m the strongest’, ‘I enjoy other people staring at me’, ‘Let the Chinese Voice be heard all over the world’ and ‘Which are the biggest markets in the world?’ ‘America, Japan and Europe!’ ‘What is the Chinese aim?’ ‘To conquer all three!’
Book Title: Academic Nationalism in China and Japan: Framed by Concepts of Nature, Culture and the Universal. Contributors: Margaret Sleeboom - author. Publisher: Routledge Curzon. Place of Publication: New York. Publication Year: 2004. Page Number: 68.
--
Good luck with your endeavors and keep on posting!
"Crazy" is an interesting word; it can mean adj., "excellent or 'cool,' (this is not heard that much anymore); in common usage it refers to n., a crazy person, or an inmate of a mental institution; or it can simply refer to a destructive or irrational person = LOONY. "Some crazies went skinny-dipping in the swimming pool when it was freezing outside."
Some other usages include: -crazy; as a combining word it means inordinately devoted to, or manic over what is indicated. For example, "Boy (or girl)-crazy," "Speed-crazy."
"Crazy about ..." (or OVER or FOR) adj. phr. Very enthusiastic about, infatuated with = NUTS ABOUT. "I'm crazy about Big Macs."
"Crazy-house." This is where Professor Verb lives ... no really, it is a "mental hospital, insane aslyum."
These references are all from Dr. Robert L. Chapman's New Dictionary of American Slang, 1986 (a valued gift from some former colleagues).
As to Crazy English, here's what one author had to say:
How much do words really matter?
by Frank Grazian
The brochure promoting Rosalie Maggie's new book, Talking About People, contained a section headed, "Do Words Really Matter?" It highlighted the following examples, preceded by the comment that "Words matter terribly":
* "The difference between 'fetal tissue' and 'unborn baby' (referring to the same thing) is arguably the most debated issue in the country."
* "The United States changed 'The War Department' to 'The Department of Defense' because words matter."
* "When President Bush used the word 'hostages' for the first time in August 1990, it made headlines; up to that time he had been using 'detainees.' The change of terms signaled a change in our posture toward Iraq...."
Those of us who teach courses in semantics attempt to get students to examine their unconscious assumptions about language, to understand the symbolism that determines how people act and react to what is said and written.
We try to show that the word is not the thing, that the further a word deviates from its referent, the more likely it is to be misleading or deceiving.
Understanding the difference between the extensional and intensional meaning of a word - the denotation and connotation - is critical to both understanding meaning and being aware of how others may be slanting the language to sway us.
William Lutz in Doublespeak put it this way:
"Basic to doublespeak is incongruity, the incongruity between what is said or left unsaid, and what really is. It is the incongruity between the word and the referent, between seems and be, between the essential function of language - communication - and what doublespeak does: mislead, distort, deceive, inflate, circumvent, obfuscate.
"Doublespeak turns lies told by politicians into 'strategic misrepresentations,"reality augmentations,' or 'terminological inexactitudes,' and ordinary sewage sludge into 'regulated organic nutrients' that do not stink but 'exceed the odor threshold.'"
Most people know how a switch in adjectives can either irritate or flatter people:
Do you refer to a person as "slender" or "skinny"?
Does someone have a lot of "nerve" or plenty of "courage"?
Is he "miserly" or "thrifty"?
Some even realize how a change in verbs can alter the meaning of a sentence.
Will you "emphasize" or "hammer away at" their shortcomings?
Did he "compliment" or "flatter" his assistant?
Do you "gloss over" or "sugar coat" the problem?
Richard Lederer, in Crazy English, offers these examples of how violent words and terms often shape and define our view of reality:
"The world of business is a veritable 'jungle' or 'cut-throat competition,' a 'rough-and-tumble' school of 'hard knocks,' and a 'dog-eat-dog' world of 'backbiting,"back stabbing,' and 'hatchet jobs.' Some companies 'spearhead' a trend of 'price gouging.' Other firms 'beat' the competition to the 'punch' and gain a 'stranglehold' on the market by fighting 'tooth and nail' to 'slash' prices in 'knockdown-drag-out, no-holds-barred' price 'wars.'
"Still other companies gain 'clout' by putting the 'squeeze' on their competition with 'shakeups,"raids,' and 'hostile takeovers.' Then the other side gets 'up in arms' and 'screams ~ murder' about such a 'low blow.'"
Of course, we have to wonder why companies insist on "downsizing" employees instead of "firing" them. Are they "showing compassions" or just "sugar coating" the truth?
That brings us to the euphemism.
As a teacher, I often instruct my students to avoid the euphemism - an inoffensive word or phrase that is less direct and less distasteful than the one that represents reality.
Of course, not all euphemisms are bad. Some are consciously used to protect people from unpleasantness. Others, however, can cause harm.
We often use the term "passed away" for "died" when offering condolences to someone who just lost a loved one. And we refer to the person's "body," not "corpse," lying in the "casket," not "coffin."
But when the Bosnians used the term "ethnic cleansing" to sanitize the murder of hundreds of their enemies, we encountered a euphemism that not only obscured the truth but transcended into evilness.
For good or evil, the euphemism is here to stay and seems to be proliferating. As John Leo pointed out in a U.S. News column:
"Prettified language is all around us. A 'graffiti sprayer' is a 'wall artist,' a 'prostitute' is a 'sexual service provider,' and one of the causes of death among young American males is 'legal intervention' (e.g. 'getting shot by cops')."
My favorite illustration of a euphemism is one offered by Everett Dirksen, a former senator from Illinois, on the Senate floor:
"Mr. President, there is such a word as 'euphemism.' I do not think I have looked it up for years, but I suppose 'euphemism' is something that seems like what it ain't. Perhaps that is as good a definition as I can give.
"I am reminded of the man who filled in an application for an insurance policy. One of the questions he had to answer was, 'How old was your father when he died and of what did he die?'
"Well, his father had been hanged, but he did not want to put that in his application. He puzzled it out for a while. He finally wrote, 'My father was 65 when he died. He came to this end while participating in a public function when the platform gave way.'"
Frank Grazian is founding editor of Communication Briefings, a communication-management newsletter with 63,000 paid subscribers in 32 countries. He is also Professor Emeritus of Communications at Rowan College of New Jersey, where he co-founded the journalism major and served as its coordinator for 10 years. He has written five books in communications and has written and served as an anchor for three nationally distributed training videos. He has had bylined articles in scores of national publications, including The New York Times. He currently publishes Alternative Health News Online, a Web site that can be accessed at http://www.altmedicine.com.
51 White Birch Rd., Turnersville, NJ 08012, 609-227-5788, fax 609-228-0113.
-1-
Publication Information: Article Title: How Much Do Words Really Matter?. Contributors: Frank Grazian - author. Journal Title: Public Relations Quarterly. Volume: 43. Issue: 2. Publication Year: 1998. Page Number: 37
On a more analytical note, another author had this to say about "Crazy English":
Universal markers of betrayal and linguistic supremacy: Tsuda Yukio
The next example of culturalist categorization is built around the issue of linguistic supremacy. I discuss two cases, which clearly show that the structures of opposite arguments phrased in terms of binaries may be nearly identical. Li Yang, a (formerly) shy student, acquired wealth and fame by teaching English through the so-called ‘Crazy English’ method of screaming. Li advocates English as a source of emancipation and an indispensable means for strengthening China by conquering foreign markets. By contrast, Nagoya University professor Tsuda Yukio does his utmost to ban English conversation classes from Japan. 15 Whereas Li tries to make foreigners speak English in China, the latter tries to compel foreigners to speak Japanese. Still, both strategies are phrased in East-West dualities, and proceed from the principle of national self-strengthening, although the former focuses on economic growth and psychology and the latter on cultural tradition; both attitudes emphasize the need for self-assertion, overcoming an inferiority complex and fighting imperialism. Running through the parks, Li Yang and his pupils alternately scream in English and Chinese. They shout ‘I never want to let my country down’, and ‘I’m the best’, ‘I enjoy losing face’, ‘I’m the strongest’, ‘I enjoy other people staring at me’, ‘Let the Chinese Voice be heard all over the world’ and ‘Which are the biggest markets in the world?’ ‘America, Japan and Europe!’ ‘What is the Chinese aim?’ ‘To conquer all three!’
Book Title: Academic Nationalism in China and Japan: Framed by Concepts of Nature, Culture and the Universal. Contributors: Margaret Sleeboom - author. Publisher: Routledge Curzon. Place of Publication: New York. Publication Year: 2004. Page Number: 68.
--
Good luck with your endeavors and keep on posting!
Last edited by ProfessorVerb on Wed Jun 08, 2005 3:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
ProfessorVerb
- Rising Star
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 8:41 am
- Status: Teacher of English
- Location: U.S.
Why, thank you very much, Rose. It's great to be back home! Texas was an interesting place for sure, and we had a blast at Six Flags (an amusement park) and Hurricane Harbor (a large water park). We rode the fastest roller coaster in the world (ohmygodohmygod) http://www.sixflags.com/parks/overtexas ... titan.html and the Superman Tower of Power and are now sunburnt, exhausted and broke. In other words, a successful vacation by any measure.
Yep, it's good to be home. Nice to hear from you too.
Yep, it's good to be home. Nice to hear from you too.
Last edited by ProfessorVerb on Sun Jun 12, 2005 4:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
MissLT
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 2530
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:05 pm
- Status: Other
I loved your whole post. Really well-detailed. But I'm only quoting this part because I like it more than the rest. English sure is crazy and that's why people are crazy about it 8) .ProfessorVerb wrote: That brings us to the euphemism.
As a teacher, I often instruct my students to avoid the euphemism - an inoffensive word or phrase that is less direct and less distasteful than the one that represents reality.
Of course, not all euphemisms are bad. Some are consciously used to protect people from unpleasantness. Others, however, can cause harm.
We often use the term "passed away" for "died" when offering condolences to someone who just lost a loved one. And we refer to the person's "body," not "corpse," lying in the "casket," not "coffin."
But when the Bosnians used the term "ethnic cleansing" to sanitize the murder of hundreds of their enemies, we encountered a euphemism that not only obscured the truth but transcended into evilness.
For good or evil, the euphemism is here to stay and seems to be proliferating. As John Leo pointed out in a U.S. News column:
"Prettified language is all around us. A 'graffiti sprayer' is a 'wall artist,' a 'prostitute' is a 'sexual service provider,' and one of the causes of death among young American males is 'legal intervention' (e.g. 'getting shot by cops')."
My favorite illustration of a euphemism is one offered by Everett Dirksen, a former senator from Illinois, on the Senate floor:
"Mr. President, there is such a word as 'euphemism.' I do not think I have looked it up for years, but I suppose 'euphemism' is something that seems like what it ain't. Perhaps that is as good a definition as I can give.
"I am reminded of the man who filled in an application for an insurance policy. One of the questions he had to answer was, 'How old was your father when he died and of what did he die?'
"Well, his father had been hanged, but he did not want to put that in his application. He puzzled it out for a while. He finally wrote, 'My father was 65 when he died. He came to this end while participating in a public function when the platform gave way.'"