Vloggin'

I accidentally clicked the stop button in the middle of my video... so it's in two halves. I didn't know how else to do it, I was already 12 minutes in and didn't want to start over.

Here's the first half:  http://youtu.be/cDK0_HPUxqU

And here's the second:  http://youtu.be/L0AlrN_a_lo

I'm really sorry

So I realize I've been lacking in the blog area lately, and my video blog is late, BUT I promise I'll be better after the AP Calc exam tomorrow morning. It's just been quite a heavy beginning-of-week. I promise to have the most marvelously in-depth video blog that you have ever seen posted by tomorrow night. Cross my heart, hope to die, stick a needle in my eye. I even wrote a poem to express the integrity with which I am making this promise. Okay bye see you tomorrow at this time with my vlog!

In Response to Jae

In Jae's blogpost, here, he discusses the two main characters in the book he's reading. He begins by talking about the narrator, which made me think about the narrator in the book I'm reading. The narrator of Sula appears to be omniscient and unnamed. He or she knows all of the character's thoughts and actions, as well as stories that some characters are not aware of. This is helpful to the reader because it is possible to know many background stories and not be confused why one character is this way or another. We are able to know the characters thoughts and therefore motives for their actions. In this way, it is nice. It is also slightly boring. I like wondering what other characters are thinking, and the comfort that a reader tends to build with a character-narrator.
Although the omniscient narrator supposedly gives the reader more insight to everything and everyone, being all-knowing and all-seeing as he or she supposedly is, I feel more disconnected from the story this way. Jae was able to easily classify and describe the two main characters in the book he was reading, yet I would have a hard time doing that with mine. The two main characters in Sula are also two young girls, yet neither of them ever narrates and thus their interactions are merely commentated upon by the narrator. I am quite far along in the novel, yet I find it hard to clearly separate the two girls. Everything they do, they are together. Even after they effectively kill Chicken Little, they remain close as ever. Either I'm totally missing it, or this is a technique used by Morrison to show how they two girls really become one person. They are so compatible that they synchronize. They think and act as one.

In Response to God

So I read Kaylynn's blog here and found it very interesting. We are not reading the same book, so I found it a little hard to relate directly. Yet in her post she discusses God and God's relationship with the character in the book that she is reading, The Bluest Eye. The book I am reading, Sula, does not make any explicit mention of God at all. In fact, it is full of mothers having casual sex with strangers, creepy men leering at young girls, young girls killing even younger children, and mothers burning their children to death. Pretty un-Godlike if you ask me. Maybe God comes into play later and I haven't gotten to that part yet. But if not, this just goes to show Morrison's diversity and the differences in themes throughout her novels. I may have to correct myself later though, so stay tuned.

Nel and Sula

In relation to my previous post, the introduction of Sula to the story is another event that sets Nel apart from her mother. Nel had never played with Sula because Helene "said that Sula's mother was sooty," yet after their trip to New Orleans, Nel gathers the courage to strike up a friendship with the other girl (29). Sooty means blackened or covered in soot, which I doubt is the literal meaning of the word in Helene's context, but it is possible that she is referring to the color of Sula's mothers skin. She may be calling her sooty as in very black, which in Helene's opinion may mean less like white people or uncivilized. Either way, Helene see's Sula's house as inferior. Yet Nel greatly prefers the "wooly house" where many people came by and Sula's mother was never oppressive or scolding like Nel's mother. Sula and her family represent a freedom for Nel, a break from her own home and family. Once Nel and Sula become friends, little mention is made of Nel's home. The story is then focused on Sula's home and her friendship with Nel. Nel and Sula remain closest friends even after the accidental murder of Chicken Little. Sula was the one who let him go, but anyways Nel feels guilty. They become like one person. Nel becomes a part of this person and leaves her oppressive mother behind.

Train Race

In the scene where Nel is on her way to New Orleans with her mother, there is an incident in the train where the conductor is very racist towards Helene. Helene is very polite in her response, almost apologetic, "we made a mistake, sir. You see, there wasn't no sign. We just got in the wrong car, that's all. Sir" (21). Then, as the rude conductor passes by, "she smiled. Like a street pup that wags its tail at the very doorjamb of the butcher shop he has been kicked away from only moments before, Helene smiled. Smiled dazzlingly and coquettishly at the salmon-colored face of the conductor" (21).
Nel watched the scene and the bystanders' reactions with interest. She notes that "the two black soldiers, who had previously been watching the scene with what appeared to be indifference, now looked stricken" and they physically react with disgust (21). Nel does not understand why her mother had smiled and feels "both pleased and ashamed to sense that these men... were bubbling with a hatred for her mother that had not been there in the beginning but had been born with the dazzling smile" (21).
This shows that Nel does not agree with her mother's meek acceptance of racist behavior. It sets Nel apart from her mother for the first time in the story, as always before Nel has been a footnote in her mother's actions. Here, Nel is in agreement with the other black people on the train. The two black soldiers represent the rest of the black community in that they are angered by acceptance of racism and by a black person accepting inferiority to a white person. This will grow to be a theme in the novel as I believe Morrison's purpose is to show her disagreement with such racism on the part of white people, and such meek acceptance on the part of blacks.  

Danglers

As I read through the comments on and correction of various articles, I could only feel pity for the people that actually comb through those articles so finely to find such minuscule errors. I mean I guess if it's their thing it's cool that they get paid to do it. But really, thinking of all the time they must spend with grammar and mechanical rules makes me want to cry a little. The part that depresses me most is that most people will never notice the errors they point out, nor be bothered to read this section of the NYTimes to enlighten themselves.

I don't even know what a modifier is.

I feel like these kinds of things are just useless. I can still be a very literate human being and successful writer without knowing what a modifier is, much less how to keep it from dangling. But such is life that sometimes we must learn things that do not interest us, and so I begin my investigation of the dangling modifier.

So basically, if a modifier is not directly followed by something that is being described, the modifier is dangling. Apparently dangling modifiers make it seem that some participles are not referring to what they seem to be referring to. I don't really know. I don't even know what a participle is. I understand the authors point in some ways, because in some sentences it is obvious that revision is needed. But why do they have to name it?

Oh, these helped.

Black Things

The narrator begins Sula with the words: "In that place, where they tore up the nightshade and blackberry patches from their roots to make room for the Medallion City Golf Course, there was once a neighborhood" (3). This one sentence sets the tone for the story and gives us an idea of the narrator's point of view. By using the phrase "tore up," we know that the narrator is partial to the nightshade and blackberry patches (3). He or she believes that they were forcefully and probably unfairly removed from their home. Also, the "nightshade" and "blackberry patches" appear to be metaphors for a black community because of their dark flowers and fruit (3). By these rhetorical devices, the reader can infer that the narrator is from the neighborhood that was uprooted by the building of the golf course, and is most likely black. This gives us the idea that the rest of the novel will relate to this scenario and we are expectant of what is to come from the very first sentence.

Nightshade

Blackberries

Reality's Antithesis

Our reality is imperfect; there is no reality more perfect.

Art is beautiful. Art lies. Art shows truth. Truth is ugly. Reality is true.

Reality seeks perfection; perfection isn't real.

KMN

So... memoirs, essays, and life stories on postcards. They have a surprisingly large amount in common. All of them are shorter genres, though really that is a very vague claim because you could technically write any of them however long you wanted. The main point is that they are all "nonfiction." They are all expected to be "real."However, they are all altered versions of reality. Memoirs are supposedly real events that have happened in someone's life, yet they are written many years later from only one person's perspective so many aspects may change. Essays are also one person's opinion on a matter, and that perspective may not be reality yet it is classified as nonfiction. The life stories on the back of the postcards are people's lives made interesting. They are not the truth, or a summary of a life, but they are entertaining and based on reality.

Collage

In Agreement

G
In point 194, Shields claims "good nonfiction has to be as carefully shaped as good fiction, and I'm not bothered at all by this artifice" (66). I agree with this idea because nonfiction is just as much art as fiction. Nonfiction is not just the plain, bare facts. Nonfiction can also be made interesting and story-like, and this is the trick it plays. We think the interesting and story-like parts are also the facts, but they are actually created by the writer. Nonfiction without this artistic manipulation would not be good nonfiction, it must be shaped like fiction in order to become good nonfiction.

H
In point 242, Shields claims "our culture is obsessed with real events because we experience hardly any" (82). This is so true. We are crazy about celebrity reality T.V. shows and breaking news on twitter because we want not only to experience real events but also to experience every real event. We cannot bare the thought of not knowing or not being there. Yet the irony is that those experiences aren't real either. Every line in reality T.V. is scripted, and the news is fed to us precisely in a way to get a reaction or depict a desired image.

I
In point 248, Shields claims "we're living in a newsy time" (84). Couldn't agree more. Everything is news! Someone from a movie has a baby, their face is all over the magazines. An organization makes a decision in Thailand and we hear about it in Colombia. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, and I don't think Shields is either, I think it's just the nature of our culture to want to know everything. It's part of our search for reality: we want to be a part of reality everywhere.

Commentary Commentary

So I'm just going to listen to the audio comments and comment about them as I go.

Oops I'd forgotten about using "proper" on the first page. You told me to take it out and I didn't. My bad.
I'm glad the part about syntactical patterns was good, I was quite proud of my analysis there.
My bad again with the wrong formatting of the long quotation, I forgot to look it up.
About the "diverse and realistic creation" part, I think I had something else there that was similar but I changed it to what it is now.
Overall, I agree with all of your comments about things that could have been changed but I'm happy with both my grade and my paper.

82

82
Art is not truth; art is a lie that enables us to recognize truth.

Sounds a lot like
Art is a lie that enables us to realize the truth
which is an aphorism by Pablo Picasso.

 So, assuming it's not just a crazy coincidence, David Shields was alluding to Picasso's words. It also relates back to the opening aphorism, "art is theft," which is also by Picasso. We can draw two conclusions from this: 1) Shields is a fan of Picasso and 2) Shields agrees with Picasso.
The point of this manifesto is that art cannot be sold as property, it should be available for use and growth by all similar to scientific findings. Here he demonstrates that belief by putting it into action with Picasso's quote. The aphorism also shows that art's main use is to show us things. The purpose of art is to learn something from it or see something in it. Basically, the point of art is more than art. So, it should be impossible to copyright or even steal because art is not even itself, it is something that leads us to something more. And, according to Picasso and Shields, that something more is truth.

Over-Soul Questions

A. The mind is the opposite of the soul, it is the "scale of the senses and the understanding." The mind is the fact that is "external and fugitive."
B. On page two, the word "beatitude" is used synonymously with blessing or happiness
C. The parallel structure shows not only emphasis on these ideas, but also connects them into one single idea. The multiple ideas are synthesized into one flowing string by the parallel structure.D. According to Emerson, revelation answers questions about life and "creation". It is also "the disclosure of the soul".
E. What do you mean "diagram"...?
F. According to Emerson, God must always be available and accessible to any who may call on him. He should also be "a shoulder to cry on". God is there for people whether they believe they need him or not, he is an ambiguous God not tied to any religion. He is in everyone's souls. We are unaware of him, but we will notice him at points in our lives when we see his work on us. 

Manifestoooo

So I don't really get it. But I can still guess.

First of all, I like the "Futurist Manifesto" a lot better than the "Cartagena Manifesto". Also, I did kind of get it, which is probably one of the reasons I like it better. Well I mean I didn't exactly 100% fully understand the deeper meaning behind it - I'm still trying to figure out if it's satirical or just really messed up - but I could figure out what a manifesto is. Also, the "Futurist Manifesto" is brief, bullet-pointed, and numbered so it's easy to see what they're saying and what the point is.

I'm pretty sure a manifesto is a declaration of your beliefs and aims, like a step by step explanation of your purpose. I guess it can belong to a group of people or just one person, I don't think it matters, but the content should have an intention. Or maybe not have an intention, it should explain an intention. The way writing is thinking, a manifesto is the working out and publishing of someone's thoughts and motives.

It was easier to figure that out from the "Futurist Manifesto" than Reality Hunger. Technically, Reality Hunger is also nicely numbered by points just as is the "Futurist Manifesto," but the little points aren't clear, maximum-three-sentence explanations. Instead, said numbered points are long, confusing, and seemingly (as well as ironically) pointless. We can infer from the title and the various quotes juxtaposed with the text that this novel, or I guess I should say manifesto, is about a search, or perhaps even plea, for reality in art. The first chapter is a little cryptic but it basically talks about things represented by art work and TV shows and other mediums of the like. And then it loses me because I can't quite see the significance of it all just yet. But it seems really abstract and mind-blowing so I'm looking forward to reading the rest.

The Adventure of English: The Power of Language

As we have learned over and over again in this course, language is extremely political. In this episode we can see how widespread English use in an area means British power in that area.

For example, in India British traders at first learned the Indian language and accquired some styles of Indian dress and customs. At that time, Great Britian was merely a trading partner. However, as the British took rule over areas a little at a time they stopped adapting to Indian customs and a new relationship began to form.

The English were the ruling power and, therefore, the highest class. They did not speak the Indian language, they spoke Enligsh. This meant that all of the best jobs were with the British in English. English became a sign of wealth and education that made people want to learn it.

The other side to the power of the English language in that sense is that by refusing to learn the Indian languages the British declared it as inferior. The same is true for their refusal to follow Indian customs and styles of dress. As people switched to English it was a form of control of the population and proving the power that the English held. By having everyone speak the English language, this forced their thoughts and words to be moulded by the words and rules of the language. Language also shapes culture, and thus shaped the Indian culture by nudging the British culture their way.

"Language of Empire." The Adventure of English. Dir. Nigel Wattis. Melvyn Bragg. LWT, 2003. 

The Adventure of English: Important People

Swift hated people shortening and abbreviating words. He preferred Latin and Greek because they never changed. Swift wanted to save the English language by never letting it change. He wanted to create an academy to protect English from change and slang and to make sure everyone spoke it correctly. He believed that only Classical English would endure. His plans for the academy were ruined when the German king, who neither spoke nor cared about English, took power.

Dr. Samuel Johnson was next with his idea for the dictionary. He finished it in seven years but it was far from complete. He left out words he couldn't understand, proper nouns, words in law and medicine, and included old words written by important people even if they weren't in use anymore.

William Cobbet taught himself grammar rules to be able to move up in class. He thought the only way to move up in society was writing correctly, and once you did that you would speak correctly as well. 

Thomas Sheraton took up the role of National Elocutionist and made a book about how to speak and write correctly, including how to pronounce words correctly. 

Robert Burns published a book of poems specifically in the Scottish dialect and gave pride to the Scottish people and their way of speech. 

William Wordsworth began to write poetry as it moved from specifically work of the upper class to romantic and revolutionary language. He felt that poetry should be written in a language that people actually used. But he felt that poetry should not be composed of simple language. 

Jane Austen helped the novel acquire legitimacy in the intellectual world with the wit and depth that she included in her novels. She wrote about social life in her time, but did not use language of the streets. She wrote very correct and intelligent English. She also refused to mention or allude to human body parts or words of work or trade because it was not proper.

In the past, English was seen as an "unruly mob" that needed to be controlled by order, grammar, and many many rules. It was an age of prescriptionism. The problem with this theory was that, although many versions of English were being used, only one was viewed as correct. This lead to prejudice and discrimination based on use of language. As stated many times in the video, language and class went hand and hand. People were put into classes based on how they spoke because it was seen as a reflection of their intellect. 

Now, most people view language from a more descriptivist point of view. And, even the prescriptionists aren't nearly as strict as they used to be. It is recognized that many different versions of English exist, and people are more tolerant of accents as English spreads as a very common second language. Also, English words and phrases are spreading faster and wider than ever before with the internet. Phrases or words (or whatever they are, I don't even know) such as YOLO, BRB, TTYL, and the notorious #hashtag are everywhere. This means that the English language is changing at such a rate that it would be impossible to prescribe strict rules for it.
"Speaking Proper." The Adventure of English. Dir. Nigel Wattis. Melvyn Bragg. LWT, 2003. 

The Story of English Episode Six: O Pioneers!

This episode was the most interesting to me so far because it focused on accents that I've heard and can relate to. I liked the part about how the American accent developed in a way through the Webster's dictionary as it taught people to put equal weight on both syllables. Nearly all of the newcomers to the New World used this dictionary to learn the new language and, as a result, they learned to speak with an American accent. This accent has now come to be known as American English.

The part about the differences between Canadian and American accents was also cool because I have a lot Canadian friends and though I have spent much time making fun of their accents I had never known why they were different from mine. Now I know. Though the one thing I didn't really understand so well was why the Loyalists' speech was different from everyone else's to begin with... Excuse my rusty US history. 

The comparison between the Canadian "ey" and American "a huh" was helpful because I had never though about the "ey" from a Canadain point of view: it's just something everyone says because everyone hears it all the time because everyone says it. I guess it could also be similar to "y'all" in that way because people who say "y'all" don't notice it nearly as much as people who don't. 

Some cool fun fact about the origins of phrases and stuff:

• The term 'bucks' for money comes from trading buckskins
• Wide-spread beaver hunting and skin trading lead to terms like "eager beaver"
• The phrase (and its variations) "pan out" from gold mining 
• The words bum and bummer actually come from German, which is nifty because I say that all the time

And, of course, the socially-awkward and politically-charged passing comment:

"These cowboys are not recently arrived Mexican immigrants, they're Americans"

"Pioneers! O Pioneers!." The Story of English. Writ. Robert McCrum and Robert MacNeil. Dir. Vivian Ducat, Howard Reid, William Cran. BBC MCML XXXVI. YouTube. 

Documentary Finally

Here is our documentary on trends.

The Story of English Episode Five: It Don't Matter if You're Black or White

My first impression of this episode: wow this seems so old.

I mean, it is literally called "Black on White." Is it even legal to use terms like that anymore? Not socially. I feel uncomfortable calling the little walking guy, who happens to be colored by white lights, on the crossing sign the white man (as opposed to the red man for stop). It's dumb, cause it's obviously a little white man, but still. Race has been put into little colored boxes, and I'm not saying they fit, but now it's impossible to pick up those boxes with out picking up what's inside of them.

This episode places "white" and "black" races into very different boxes very quickly. From the very first minute to be precise. I think this was a pretty bad move on their part because this immediately places the languages into very different boxes. And, well, this is not always the case.

They spend a lot of time talking about "black cultural traditions," which is weird because if someone tried to tell me about white cultural traditions I would spit at them or something. What does that even mean?

English, as we have learned, is composed of very many varieties of European languages. So the "black" part of it is a combination of very many African and Caribbean languages and cultures, many more than we can count or label.

I just feel like this episode was approached very tactlessly. African influence on English is important and interesting, but the way all the narrator discusses it made me scowl my way through the videos. We talk a lot about race in this class and how it actually doesn't exist, and obviously what I learn affects how I think. I mean last year we basically had a whole unit on it. The way this video approached language from a specifically racial point of view made me really not want to watch it. Obviously it was never really offensive or anything, and as of yet no one has made any really angry remarks in the comments regarding this fact. It was just weird to see race and language put in that way, when it would be extremely strange to see it in a similar documentary made in 2012.

"Black on White." The Story of English. Writ. Robert McCrum and Robert MacNeil. Dir. Vivian Ducat, Howard Reid, William Cran. BBC MCML XXXVI. YouTube. 

The Story of English Episode Four: Gaelic

Thes episode focuses purely oan th' scottish accent an aw as scottish influence oan th' spreid an' evolution ay th' sassenach leid. an' they mentioned aberdeen, sae ay coorse Ah got aw excited. it's a pure strange hin' tae ken 'at someain is a natife sassenach speaker an' 'en nae kin a wuid they say when they spick it. thes happened a coople times tae me durin' th' episode an' Ah was huir uv a grateful fur th' subtitles. the part abit rabbie burns was interestin' coz Ah huvnae reid much ay his poetry an' did nae ken 'at he was sae against th' sassenach leid. Ah only kent 'at he was a famoos scottish poit an' 'at he hud written auld lang syne. haur is a mair traditional version ay th' sang played oan bags, an' haur is a mair modern version ay th' sang, also played oan bags, yit shows incorporation ay sassenach graphite loons styles loch rock intae a huir uv a traditional part ay scottish culture.

Ah also foond it sad 'at th' sassenach leid an' culture was daein' sae much damage tae th' heelain culture ay scootlund. Ah fin' th' accent frae 'at area bonnie an' charmin'. th' fact 'at those tois wee jimmies, john northguid an' calum kin', hud felt th' need tae change th' way they spoke when they moved intae th' lowlands coz ay th' way they waur bein' treated fur their gaelic accents is sic' a sham. we mentioned thes in class a wee bit, 'at coontries ur takin' oan sassenach an' therefair natife languages ur havin' trooble survivin'. when compared tae india, thaur ur mony similarities in th' way sassenach reached baith areas: by force. however, india noo functions largely in sassenach an' knowin' th' leid can be considered a sign ay class an' education. in heelain scootlund, thes isnae th' case. th' traditional leid ay gaelic is fightin' tae bide alife an' keep th' culture ay th' area frae bein' forgotten.

Translation:

This episode focuses purely on the Scottish accent as well as Scottish influence on the spread and evolution of the English language. And they mentioned Aberdeen, so of course I got all excited.

It's a really strange thing to know that someone is a native English speaker and then not understand a word they say when they speak it. This happened a couple times to me during the episode and I was very grateful for the subtitles.

The part about Robert Burns was interesting because I haven't read much of his poetry and did not know that he was so against the English language. I only knew that he was a famous Scottish poet and that he had written Auld Lang Syne. Here is a more traditional version of the song played on bagpipes, and here is a more modern version of the song, also played on bagpipes, yet shows incorporation of English music styles like rock into a very traditional part of Scottish culture.

I also found it sad that the English language and culture was doing so much damage to the highland culture of Scotland. I find the accent from that area beautiful and charming. The fact that those two boys, John Northgood and Calum King, had felt the need to change the way they spoke when they moved into the lowlands because of the way they were being treated for their Gaelic accents is such a shame.

We mentioned this in class a little bit, that countries are taking on English and therefore native languages are having trouble surviving. When compared to India, there are many similarities in the way English reached both areas: by force. However, India now functions largely in English and knowing the language can be considered a sign of class and education. In highland Scotland, this is not the case. The traditional language of Gaelic is fighting to stay alive and keep the culture of the area from being forgotten.

"The Guid Scots Tongue." The Story of English. Writ. Robert McCrum and Robert MacNeil. Dir. Vivian Ducat, Howard Reid. BBC MCML XXXVI. YouTube. 

The Story of English Episode Two: Native English Varieties

Episode two was mainly based on like how English came about in the (now) British Isles and France. I personally preferred episode one because it was more modern and relevant, but hey the old stuff is important too.

I though it was interesting that English was threatening survival of celtic languages in France, England, Scotland, and Wales in a similar way, it may be argued, as is it threatening the survival of other native languages around the world.

The fact that old English is taught like a foreign language was cool because listening to it in the film it didn't seem to foreign. It was semi understandable and very familiar sounding. The sounds were similar and recognizable but the meaning behind them was just missed. The Dutch and German tones are very evident and can be heard in the accent and pronunciation of old English. The quick old English grammar lesson that it is the "form of the words, not word order, which gives the sentence its meaning"(1). Also that it would be easy to make a sentence of words of anglo-saxon origin is cool because I probably use many words of anglo-saxon origin every day and have no idea.

Also a shoutout to Albert the Great because without him this blog post would probably sound a little different. If it weren't for him my language would be pretty much wiped out.

And I liked the story about the man (I couldn't understand his name, much less how to spell it. Erwin Belbie?) with the strong traditional yorkshire accent. It strange how he was finding it difficult to communicate with other English speakers because of the differences in accent because his was so strong. This relates back to a point in my previous post that really there is no correct or good English because even native English speakers have huge varieties in accent and vocabulary.

And it was pretty cool of them to just drop all the fancy endings and replace them with the 's. Definitely deeply appreciated.

1. "The Mother Tongue." The Story of English. Writ. Robert McCrum and Robert MacNeil. Dir. Vivian Ducat, Howard Reid. BBC MCML XXXVI. YouTube. 

The Story of English Episode One: English and Marriage

So there are lots of fun facts about English. Mostly stuff I had no idea about before, like the fact that for all air travel the official language is English. And that in parts of scotland the first language is Gaelic, not English. Crazy stuff.

However, the most interesting part to me was the one with the Indian school girls and how they all viewed English. The introduction to this section was just English in India in general with an interesting interview with Prof. P. Lal. He said, "more indians speaking better english than ever before, and there are more indians speaking worse english than ever before," which was interesting because the narrator had just been talking about how there is no real perfect way to speak English anymore (1). So maybe Lal was wrong in saying that Indians are speaking worse English than before, maybe it is just a new Indian form of English as more and more people adopt the language.

When the school girls were sharing their thoughts I was amazed that the main topic was how English related to marriage. One of the first comments was that "every guy in today's society wants his wife to know english because he wants to move it out in clubs and go to movies and meet his friends" (1). Another girl said, "today 5% of the guys may not insist on english speaking wives but I think 95% of them do" (1). I was surprised at how that was the first thing they began to talk about, and they are all probably around my age. If someone asks me about the language I speak I don't immediately jump to how it relates to marriage. I guess that just shows how people can have language in common yet completely separate cultures.

Also, just a little ps, I found this video if you ever want to give this assignment in a much more condensed form: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rexKqvgPVuA

1. "An English Speaking World." The Story of English. Writ. Robert McCrum and Robert MacNeil. Dir. William Cran, Peter Dale, Vivian Ducat, Howard Reid. BBC MCML XXXVI. YouTube.