Finally, here is some AP English I can relate to. I don't know about you all, but I'm extremely sarcastic and I love satire because it stops everyone from taking life too seriously.
So, we read Mark Twain's "Advice to Youth" in class, and when trying to find the full text for this blog, this article came up:
http://ape43.edublogs.org/2010/03/22/advice-to-youth-by-mark-twain/
Now, it's not that interesting of an article honestly, so you don't have to read it, but I'm going to dicuss a few things in the article because I thought it had some decent points.
Article: "Most people giving advice focus on positive things such as being honest and respectful. Twain, however, begins his article with positive things like obeying your parents and being respectful to superiors - but later brings up how to master lying – this questions whether the advice people often give is actually true advice or what people want to hear, for people never want to admit however ‘wise’ they are that lying can be successful".
What Twain actually said was, "Always obey your parents, when they are present. This is the best policy in the long run, because if you don’t, they will make you." This is obviously sarcastic and making fun of the way children sneak behind their parents' backs.
Later, Twain actually encourages the practice of lying, so that a person may become better at it and not have to tell weak lies.
"An awkward, feeble, leaky lie is a thing which you ought to make it your unceasing study to avoid; such a lie as that has no more real permanence than an average truth. Why, you might as well tell the truth at once and be done with it."
Now, here, he's pointing out the basic truth in the world: people lie. People lie all the time, and there's no stopping it. So he jokes that you might as well be good at it if you're going to.
Anyway, I love Twain's speech. If he had given it at my college graduation I most likely would have laughed until I cried. And I thought people weren't funny in the nineteenth century. :)
Oh, also, if you like political satire, check out this link:
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/bldailyfeed5.htm
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Thursday, November 15, 2012
Third Grade Flashback
"To be, or not to be, that is the question. Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to set arms against a sea of troubles, and by opposing, end them..."
In third grade, me and several other people in my English class (Becca, Mike) were all in Hamlet. Granted, we did not understand a thing that was going on, but I do still have that speech memorized. But anyway, I've learned a lot about Hamlet that I didn't learn by being in it in 2003.
Freshman year, I learned about Shakespeare's life and the Globe Theater and such, just like the rest of you probably did. I also learned about iambic pentameter, which I think is a good excuse for Shakespeare using so many random words. I mean, if you have to fit what you want to say in ten syllables with specific ones stressed, you're going to have to make some stuff up. Like, I know I couldn't do it.
This year, I learned about all the symbolism and puns and crazy stuff Shakespeare slips into his plays. I know for sure I didn't notice it then, and I missed out on some of it this time when I read, but there's definitely a ton of wordplay. Also a lot of humor that eight-year-old me missed out on. For example, Hamlet makes fun of Polonius after he kills him. Here's a website with a modern-day translation for you non-Shakespeare-loving English students out there.
King: Now, Hamlet, where's Polonius?
(Where's the corpse, you brat?)
Hamlet: At supper.
(Wouldn't you like to know?)
King: At supper! Where?
(Watch it, kid!)
Hamlet: Not where he eats, but where he is eaten...
(Guess how many worms he's feeding!)
King: Alas, alas!
(The guy was an idiot, but what can you do?)
Hamlet: A man may fish with the worm that hath eat of a king, and eat of the fish that hath fed of that worm.
(King becomes worm food, worm becomes fish food, fish becomes fisherman food. Ergo, fisherman chows down on royalty. Circle of life, sucker.)
Hamlet is just a twisted little genius, isn't he? Who comes up with stuff like that on the spot? I don't know, but taking a closer look at Hamlet has definitely made me appreciate Shakespeare's writing a lot more.
Oh, and if you were wondering, I was Horatio in the play. :)
Full article:
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/3433776
In third grade, me and several other people in my English class (Becca, Mike) were all in Hamlet. Granted, we did not understand a thing that was going on, but I do still have that speech memorized. But anyway, I've learned a lot about Hamlet that I didn't learn by being in it in 2003.
Freshman year, I learned about Shakespeare's life and the Globe Theater and such, just like the rest of you probably did. I also learned about iambic pentameter, which I think is a good excuse for Shakespeare using so many random words. I mean, if you have to fit what you want to say in ten syllables with specific ones stressed, you're going to have to make some stuff up. Like, I know I couldn't do it.
This year, I learned about all the symbolism and puns and crazy stuff Shakespeare slips into his plays. I know for sure I didn't notice it then, and I missed out on some of it this time when I read, but there's definitely a ton of wordplay. Also a lot of humor that eight-year-old me missed out on. For example, Hamlet makes fun of Polonius after he kills him. Here's a website with a modern-day translation for you non-Shakespeare-loving English students out there.
King: Now, Hamlet, where's Polonius?
(Where's the corpse, you brat?)
Hamlet: At supper.
(Wouldn't you like to know?)
King: At supper! Where?
(Watch it, kid!)
Hamlet: Not where he eats, but where he is eaten...
(Guess how many worms he's feeding!)
King: Alas, alas!
(The guy was an idiot, but what can you do?)
Hamlet: A man may fish with the worm that hath eat of a king, and eat of the fish that hath fed of that worm.
(King becomes worm food, worm becomes fish food, fish becomes fisherman food. Ergo, fisherman chows down on royalty. Circle of life, sucker.)
Hamlet is just a twisted little genius, isn't he? Who comes up with stuff like that on the spot? I don't know, but taking a closer look at Hamlet has definitely made me appreciate Shakespeare's writing a lot more.
Oh, and if you were wondering, I was Horatio in the play. :)
Full article:
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/3433776
Thursday, November 8, 2012
What makes a word beautiful?
Aesthetics
Carouse - To party hearty; celebrate and jubilate
Coffee
Flaneur - A soulful urban wanderer.
Ramble
Smirk
Sub Rosa - Under the rose, confidential, secret.
Voluptuous
Zenith
In this article by the huffington post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/phil-cousineau/beautiful-words_b_2077755.html?utm_hp_ref=books#slide=more261269, some random writer picked out what he believed to be the nine most beautiful words in the English language. Now, while I like these words, not all of them strike me as the most beautiful words ever. What makes a word beautiful? If I had to come up with criteria, it would be:
1. It has to flow well (this one is kind of hard to define, but each person will have their own definition of flow and each person will have their own 9 words)
2. It has to be easy to pronounce
3. Lots of vowels and not too many consonants (this might be because I sing, and vowel-y words are prettier)
4. It doesn't necessarily have to mean something beautiful or great, but if by definition it is gross or dark, it should be crossed off the list on principle.
5. It shouldn't be extremely short (an) or obnoxiously long (perfidiousness), but just right (like Goldilocks? I guess?). Extremely long words are fun, but most of the time they have too many syllables to be really beautiful.
So, here's my list:
Lovely
Illusion
Rose
Iridescent
Cascade
Beheld
Complete
Lullabye
These aren't perfect, but what do you all think? Any criteria I missed out on? Any words you'd like to add to the list?
Carouse - To party hearty; celebrate and jubilate
Coffee
Flaneur - A soulful urban wanderer.
Ramble
Smirk
Sub Rosa - Under the rose, confidential, secret.
Voluptuous
Zenith
In this article by the huffington post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/phil-cousineau/beautiful-words_b_2077755.html?utm_hp_ref=books#slide=more261269, some random writer picked out what he believed to be the nine most beautiful words in the English language. Now, while I like these words, not all of them strike me as the most beautiful words ever. What makes a word beautiful? If I had to come up with criteria, it would be:
1. It has to flow well (this one is kind of hard to define, but each person will have their own definition of flow and each person will have their own 9 words)
2. It has to be easy to pronounce
3. Lots of vowels and not too many consonants (this might be because I sing, and vowel-y words are prettier)
4. It doesn't necessarily have to mean something beautiful or great, but if by definition it is gross or dark, it should be crossed off the list on principle.
5. It shouldn't be extremely short (an) or obnoxiously long (perfidiousness), but just right (like Goldilocks? I guess?). Extremely long words are fun, but most of the time they have too many syllables to be really beautiful.
So, here's my list:
Lovely
Illusion
Rose
Iridescent
Cascade
Beheld
Complete
Lullabye
These aren't perfect, but what do you all think? Any criteria I missed out on? Any words you'd like to add to the list?
Thursday, November 1, 2012
Fiction is good for the soul
In the educational debate presented here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/fiction-vs-nonfiction-smackdown/2012/10/17/cbb333d0-16f0-11e2-a55c-39408fbe6a4b_story.html
experts argue on whether English classes should have more fiction or nonfiction reading in them. One person suggests that by 12th grade, students be reading 70% nonfiction! Now, I don't know about you all, but I think that is ridiculous.
Non-Fiction reading is for learning facts. You don't really learn enough about creativity, culture, or style unless you're reading fiction books. Most of the literature we've gotten this year has been fiction, and it has been way more interesting than reading your history textbook. I think that cutting out fiction is like cutting out labs from science. You just can't learn all there is to know without it.
Also, fiction reading keeps kids more interested in what they're learning. Granted, not all of our English short stories or books are going to be everybody's favorite, but I guarantee they're better than reading nonfiction.
"Pondiscio says he admires Bauerlein and Stotsky and doesn’t see why English classes have to carry the nonfiction weight. Social studies and science courses can do that."
I agree a lot more with this guy ^^ than the guy who was on the side of non-fiction. Kids will enjoy fiction more, learn more creative writing skills from fiction, and the non-fiction skills can be covered by other classes. I feel like I learned most of the non-fiction reading skills I needed from reading the entire AP World and AP US textbooks. Personally, that was enough for me.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/fiction-vs-nonfiction-smackdown/2012/10/17/cbb333d0-16f0-11e2-a55c-39408fbe6a4b_story.html
experts argue on whether English classes should have more fiction or nonfiction reading in them. One person suggests that by 12th grade, students be reading 70% nonfiction! Now, I don't know about you all, but I think that is ridiculous.
Non-Fiction reading is for learning facts. You don't really learn enough about creativity, culture, or style unless you're reading fiction books. Most of the literature we've gotten this year has been fiction, and it has been way more interesting than reading your history textbook. I think that cutting out fiction is like cutting out labs from science. You just can't learn all there is to know without it.
Also, fiction reading keeps kids more interested in what they're learning. Granted, not all of our English short stories or books are going to be everybody's favorite, but I guarantee they're better than reading nonfiction.
"Pondiscio says he admires Bauerlein and Stotsky and doesn’t see why English classes have to carry the nonfiction weight. Social studies and science courses can do that."
I agree a lot more with this guy ^^ than the guy who was on the side of non-fiction. Kids will enjoy fiction more, learn more creative writing skills from fiction, and the non-fiction skills can be covered by other classes. I feel like I learned most of the non-fiction reading skills I needed from reading the entire AP World and AP US textbooks. Personally, that was enough for me.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)