Cell phones are everywhere, but should cell phones be used everywhere?

This year in California, a new law went into effect banning (making illegal) the use of cell phones while driving without a hands-free (not holding it with one’s hand) device.  Some critics say that this new law doesn’t do enough, that even using a hands-free phone doesn’t remove the  distraction of (taking attention away from) talking on the phone.

Other than laws related to cell phones and driving, there are no others that I know of that restrict (not allow) cell phone use.  However, many people believe that using a cell phone in some public places is rude (not polite) and annoying (irritating).

What do you think?  Where is it acceptable and not acceptable to use a cell phone?

~ Lucy

….

 Loading ...

QUESTION:
Hazem in Egypt wants to know the meaning of this saying: “Spare the rod and spoil the child.”

ANSWER:
Spare the rod and spoil the child is a saying that means that children will not behave well if they are not punished when they do something wrong and that punishment should be physical punishment, such as a spanking, where children are hit on their bottoms (the part of the body we sit on).

A rod is a thin, straight stick made or wood or metal.  To spare someone is to stop yourself from causing pain, worry, or injury to another person.  To spoil someone, usually a child, is to give that person everything he or she wants, or to be too lenient (tolerant) when they do something wrong.  Spoiled children don’t listen to adults when they tell them to do, or not to do, something.

Today, few people in the U.S. live by (believe and live according to) this saying.  While some Americans still use corporal punishment with their children, which is the name given to all types of physical punishment, it is not very socially acceptable.  People fear that corporal punishment goes too far in hurting a child and may cross the line into physical abuse, which is when someone causes serious pain or injury by using a lot of violence.  With few exceptions, schools, for example, no longer use any kind of corporal punishment for fear that parents will consider it abuse.

This saying, then, is well known, but not generally considered a socially-acceptable sentiment (opinion; view) these days.

Thanks, Hazem, for the question, and I hope this is helpful.

~ Lucy

Americans love to rank (to put in order) almost everything, as if it were some sort of competition.  We have awards for almost everything nowadays, and nearly every day the newspaper has a list of the best or worst of one thing or another.  The latest ranking is from the American College of Sports Medicine, which has an American Fitness Index.  Fitness refers to how physically healthy you are, usually related to how much you do physical exercise (run, jog, play sports, surf the Internet (okay, not that last one!)).  An index is a measurement of something.  The American Fitness Index looks at several factors (things, topics) to determine which US city is the “healthiest.”  These include:

• Availability of parks, walking and bike trails (paths, places where you can walk and ride a bike), and public transportation (busses, subways, etc.);
• Percentage of people who exercise regularly, maintain a healthy weight (are not too fat or too thin), and eat the recommended amounts of vegetables and fruits each day;
• Percentage of people who have access to (are able to use regularly) health care and have health insurance (remember that the US currently has no “national” health care service – most people have to buy their own insurance or get it through their employer);
• Percentage of people who do not smoke.

So which cities are healthiest?   Number one is our nation’s capital, Washington D.C., which surprised me a little, although Washington has lots of places to walk and ride bikes, has an excellent public transportation system, and has many people who work for the federal (national) government and therefore have health insurance.  Second was the place where I was born and raised (grew up), the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, in Minnesota.  Here is a list of some of the other top cities:

• Denver, Colorado
• Boston, Massachusetts
• San Francisco, California
• Seattle, Washington
• Portland, Oregon
• San Diego, California
• Austin, Texas
• Virginia Beach, Virginia
• Hartford, Connecticut
• Sacramento, California
• San Jose, California
• Cincinnati, Ohio
• Atlanta, Georgia

Notice the several are in California, but not Los Angeles.  I guess if I want to be healthier, I should move back to Minnesota!

~Jeff

BusinessWeek magazine had an article recently about people who surf the Internet while watching television at the same time.  About one out of every ten TV watchers are simultaneously (at the same time) looking at their computers, trying to do two things at the same time.  Multiscreening (watching more than one screen at a time) is just one part of a more general trend of people multitasking (doing more than one thing at once).  Some people think that with all of the new technology now available to us, people are multitasking now more than ever.  I admit that I “multiscreen” probably about once a week, especially if it is a TV show that isn’t too demanding (doesn’t require a lot of concentration), such as a reality show or a sports game.

Many psychologists think that multitasking is a bad idea, however, since we are not able to fully concentrate on two things at once, and so do both things badly.  But I suppose that with tasks such as TV watching and web surfing, it doesn’t matter too much if we aren’t concentrating very hard – especially if you are reading my blog posts while watching The Simpsons, for example.

~Jeff

Talking about Twilight, the book and the movie, in Tuesday’s blog comments got me thinking about books that have been made into movies.  These types of screen adaptations (television or film versions) are so common today, ranging from classics (old, respected books) to modern bestsellers (books that are extremely popular).

Personally, I have a very hard time seeing a screen adaptation after I’ve read a book.  In fact, I usually avoid it.  There are two main reasons.  First, the film version has no choice but to leave out parts of the book because of time constraints (not having enough time) and this, to me, changes the nature or scope (range) of the story.  Second, seeing a screen adaptation results in me replacing the images (pictures) I’ve formed in my mind about the book with those on the screen.  This is especially troublesome (a problem) when the ways I picture the main characters don’t match those in the film, and the film images replace those I’ve created in my own mind.  I can’t resist it.  It happens every time, and for me, that’s a sad thing.

This happened with one of my favorite novels, I Claudius, by Robert Graves.  This is a historical novel (story about real people in history) about the first Roman emperors (rulers).  In the 1970s, the BBC produced a miniseries (show with several parts) based on this novel, which many people had told me was excellent.  I finally rented the miniseries, but I couldn’t get the through the first episode.  The main character, played by an outstanding British actor, was completely different from how I had imagined him to be, and I couldn’t get past that (forget about it and move on).  Now, when I re-read the book, I can only see that actor, not the character I had created in my mind as I read the book the first time.  Another of my favorite books, Lonesome Dove by Larry McMurty, another historical novel, this time about the American west, has also been made into a miniseries.  Although this, too, received excellent reviews, I can’t bring myself (convince myself; force myself) to see it. I know that this is my loss, and I’m missing out on some very good films.

Are you like me?  Do you also have this problem?  Or, can you separate the book and the film, and not be influenced by the other?

~ Lucy

There are three phrases that are quite similar, but that have very different meanings: “on edge,” “on the edge,” and “over the edge.”

We use on edge to describe someone who is nervous and anxious, someone who is the opposite of relaxed.  For example, if your wife is pregnant and the baby will be born any day now, you may be feeling on edge, though your wife may be feeling even more on edge!  Someone who is trying to stop smoking may also be very much on edge.

On the edge can literally mean on the outer part of something.  For instance, you may be sitting on the edge of the swimming pool when your brother walks by and pushes you into the water.  However, on the edge is also often used metaphorically (not literally) to talk about something that is just about to happen, or to talk about someone who is just about to do something.  For example, we might say: “She was on the edge of becoming a singing star when she lost her voice in the accident.”  Or: “He was on the edge of winning the election when the newspaper reporters found out about his gambling problem.”

Finally, over the edge is used to describe someone who is insane (crazy), and is usually used in situations where the person was sane (not crazy) at some point, but because something happened, has now gone insane.  For example, you could say: “The boss has always wanted to know what each employee was working on, but I think he’s gone over the edge by making his employees report to him every 15 minutes!”  Or: “Dina is a huge fan of Rob Pattinson, but she went over the edge when she changed her name to Dina Pattinson!”

So I hope that none of you are on edge, that you are all on the edge of finding whatever will make you happiest, and no one you know has gone over the edge!

~ Lucy

I was watching a news report recently about the discovery of Ida, a prehistoric (before recorded or written history) lemur that may be part of our evolutionary history as humans.  The scientist reporting the news, who was not a native English speaker, used the phrase “Grand-grand-grand-grand-father” in answering a question about whether or not the lemur might be ‘related’ to human beings.  (To be related means to share some genetic connection to another person or, in this case, animal.)    I understood what he was trying to say, but that is not quite the correct form.

The father of my father is my grandfather.  Logically, you would think that my grandfather’s father would be my “grand-grandfather,” but that is not how we say it.  Instead, after your grandfather, you add the word “great,” so my grandfather’s father is my great-grandfather.  What do we call my great-grandfather’s father?  He is my great-great-grandfather.  You continue to add “great” for every additional generation you want, so you could talk about your great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather (or grandmother, of course).

A similar system is used in talking about your children and your children’s children.  Your child’s child is called your grandchild, and his child would be your great-grandchild, and so forth.  I have a niece (my brother’s daughter) and nephew (my brother’s son) who each have children.  What do I call them?  Here things get a little confusing, because it is possible to call them my grandnieces and grandnephews, or my great-nieces and great-nephews.  They would call me their great-uncle or granduncle.  Great-uncle and great-aunt are much more popular, however, at least in US English.  After this, you keep adding “greats” as you do with grandparents.

To review: If you are talking about your parent’s parents, you start with “grand” and then add “great(s).”  If you are talking about uncles, aunts, nieces, and nephews, then you can either start with “great” or use “grand” as you do with grandmother/grandfather.

Now you may be asking: What about my cousins, the children of my uncles and aunts?  For an explanation of that, see this page or take a look at the chart below (from Wikipedia).

English Terms for Relatives

~Jeff

This is the time of year when many Americans go on vacation. In 2008, a poll was conducted asking 2,500 American adults the following question:

“If you could spend a vacation in any country in the world, outside the United States, and you would not have to worry about the cost, what one country would you choose?”

Here are the top 15 destinations (places to go):

1. Italy
2. Australia
3. Great Britain (England, Scotland, and Wales)
4. France
5. Ireland
6. Greece
7. Japan
8. Germany
9. Canada
10. Spain
11. New Zealand
12. Switzerland
13. Mexico
14. Bahamas
15. Jamaica

(*Harris Poll conducted June 9 and 16, 2008)

I have been to only five of these destinations, but I’d like to visit them all, plus many more not on this list.

How about you?  Which country, on or off this list, have you never been to, but would like to visit?

~ Lucy