Becoming a Garbage Collector

I’m not fond of absolutes (unless, of course, I decree them).  Once again, I’m up against them, though, and they’re ticking me off.

They tell me Mandarin is a perfect language.  If one is born in the right place and/or studies hard enough, one can speak “perfect Mandarin”.  I don’t know what that sounds like, ’cause it’s all the same to me.  (I’m just beginning to be able to differentiate Mandarin and Cantonese.)

I think need to get a tattoo on my forehead: NO, I CANNOT TEACH YOU PERFECT ENGLISH!  I can’t teach you to read it perfectly because you will never know every word in the English language.  I can’t teach you to speak it perfectly because there are as many ways to pronounce each word as there are dialects and sub-dialects and accents and speech impediments.  I can’t teach you to write perfectly because English is too new, and there are too many rules which change either from place to place, or from time to time.

If you’re studying English literature, let us have a little chat about opinions.  You are not going to get 100% on any essay because there is no way you are going to get two English teachers to agree on anything literary.  If our language is hazy, so is our literature.

I’m also not interested.  Mediocrity fascinates me and I am not likely to be deterred in my pursuit of it. I am also of the opinion that communication can only be perfect in that very moment it occurs because communication depends on so many factors that perfection is unattainable.  Communication requires at least two people, which necessarily reduces the odds of being understood to half.  By the time one considers such things as being heard (is it too noisy in the cafeteria?), being heard properly (was that “man” or “ban”?) and context (birdy: fowl, the victim in a game of badminton, or my great-grandmother?), I’d say we have almost no chance of being understood through language.

Do you not find it strange that science (e.g. chemistry) is explored in sterile vacuums while the arts are left right in the middle of the chaos to be corrupted and polluted?

I think I’d like to be a garbage collector.  There are absolutes in garbage collecting: it’s either collected or it’s not.    I could teach my students to collect garbage and then they’d get 100% in garbage-collecting class, and everyone would be happy.

Gibran-in-the-making

I did manage to get a copy of the Really Great Imagery piece from the writers’ meetup.

If Marie-Claire Blais’ ability with language can drive me off the deep end, you can imagine what this does to me:

from The Sea

by James Chaarani

My mind moved to the horizon, looking for the sun that was tanning my skin. It was too hazy to see, but in that haze you became clear in my mind. I stared at the waves which were bigger than you. I watched them hit the rocks, splash my shins and touch my lips. I tasted the salt and felt like a God—I found a heaven to watch you from.

I could then see you in your prison that you built for yourself.

Do You Know How Long I Contemplated The Question Mark Inside The Parentheses In The Last Paragraph?

I’m reading Marie-Claire Blais’ American Notebooks (Linda Gaboriau’s English translation).  She has a few sentences  in there about writing in a language which makes no sense; she is referring to English.  The woman must have spoken a fair amount of English at the time, as she had won a Guggenheim Fellowship.

I am dumbfounded by the thought.  Blais is one of those people I put up on Literary Mount Olympus, with all the other gods of language.  What the hell can she mean by “express myself awkwardly in a language I hardly speak”?  This doesn’t bode well for me, who gets so absolutely defeated by the English language (mother tongue and sole means of communication) that Roget’s thesaurus gets yet another flying lesson.

Sometimes my ESL students will growl in frustration when they can’t find a word.  I do laugh at them but it’s in empathy.  While all communication is certainly a large boulder in the path of my life, language is the most aggravating.  Humans invented language to make communication easier; you may ask my poor Roget’s how effective that’s been.

At least Blais seems comfortable writing in French.  Why have I chosen (wait, did I choose it or does some Fate have a sick sense of humour?) to make my living through language?

As a teenager, I made money by cleaning houses.  There is a certain appeal…

You named your rabbit WHAT?!

One of my Chinese students got two pet rabbits this past weekend.  They’re both small, and curl up into a little ball when they sleep.  One rabbit is black-and-white, so they named it “small rock”.  The other rabbit is creamy white, so they named it “steamed bun”.

When I finished killing myself with laughter, it took a few minutes to explain the pun to my student.

She laughed.  She’s not re-naming the rabbit.

Ampleforth’s wisdom

I’ve been re-reading Orwell’s 1984, for a grade 12 student.  Though it’s not one of my favourite books, I like it well enough.  Haven’t read it since, let’s see, oh, 1984….

When Winston gets arrested and sent to prison, he meets up with the poet Ampleforth.  Ampleforth is in for poetry crime: he left the word, “God”, at the end of a line in a Kipling poem, because he couldn’t find another word to rhyme with “rod”.

“Has it ever occurred to you,” he (Ampleforth)said, “that the whole history of English poetry has been determined by the fact that the English language lacks rhymes?” (Orwell, 1984)

Apparently, that thought had not occurred to Winston.  I don’t like Winston, much.  Of course, I don’t rhyme my poetry, but I do get frustrated when poets repeat words, or strangle a rhyme out of something non-existent just because they’ve decided to follow some ridiculous rule.  Ampleforth’s thought occurs to me on a regular basis.

The new thought (okay, new for me) which rattled my little brain was that our society is not much different than Oceania.  There are words we are not permitted to use.  No, North Americans aren’t likely to be imprisoned for using a word, but they will lose their jobs, be ridiculed, be ostracised.  I’m not referring to a thought (although, go ahead and tell everyone at work there is a God and you’ve seen his face, and see what happens); I’m referring to actual words.

I’m not allowed to teach my students certain choice words.  Yes, curses are on the list, but also anything refering to sex, bodily functions, specific religions, alternative lifestyles, any word which might be used as an insult; the list is actually fairly long.  At the tutoring centre I work in, a six-year-old boy was literally yelled at for figuring out what happens if you put an “f” in front of “art” (I wasn’t yelled at, but got an extremely disapproving look for congratulating him… and snickering).

The whole history of the English language, my dear Ampleforth, has been determined by people who like to make rules.  Why don’t we make a few more arbitrary rules (who, by the way, gets to decide which words are polite and which words are not: the same people who decided leaving your hat on indoors was rude?) and install some telescreens?  Perhaps then we will achieve our Utopian society.

I’m re-reading Brave New World next.  If there are Thought Police, they’ll be on my case in no time.  I am The Savage!

The absolute power of… beds

I have a new guru.  His name is James Geary.  His short article on beds was in the November 2008 issue of Ode.  Here are my favourite parts:

Beds.  We can’t help but make an impression on them.  Like a child’s finger-painting, the chalk outline around a corpse on the pavement, they retain an image of us.  Think of all they contain – skin, sweat, semen, blood, all the puke and spume of life.  Beds are fossil records of our lives… No wonder they’re a mess!  After all, so much happens there.  We begin and end in beds. (James Geary, Ode Magazine, Vol. 6, Issue 9, November 2008, p.74)

I’ve been procrastinating work by reading Geary’s blog.  While I’m not moved by his current fixation on aphorisms, I like the musings on banal things, like light bulbs and teeth.

When I have a student who is procrastinating with  “why on earth would I have to learn to write properly?”, I try to explain the absolute power of words.  I try to show them how “scared” means one thing, while “petrified” means another.  I try to show them how “mother” is not just the person who hassles them about homework and healthy food, but is a concept which is part of the larger picture of family, and continuation of the human race, etc.

I’ve never though about showing my students the word, “bed”.

It’s pretty rare I find a fellow wordsmith who is equally floored by language.  It seems most people are not stunned into a catatonic state by all the implications of a word.

Long live catatonia!

Sheila and her books

When I read the Shopaholic books, I identified with the main character.  Not because I knew what the heck a Jimmy Choo shoe looked like, but because I understand the need which arises when faced with an item which will fill your soul to the brim, remove you from all your cares, and stimulate all your senses at once.

‘Course, my vice is books, not clothes, but the physical reaction is the same.

I finally found a copy of Dorothy Butler’s Cushla and Her Books.  I read this book when I was in my early teens (wonder how it came to be in the small-town library, which was comprised mainly of Harlequin Romances).  I probably picked it up because the photograph on the cover shows two hippie-type parents with long hair, and that’s pretty much all that was moving me at the time.  However, something inside the book must have moved me, because I have remembered it every time I’ve been faced with a bored baby.

Cushla was born with numerous health problems, and these invariably lead to learning delays.  What strikes me now is the way her parents chose to deal with these problems: experimentation.  They tested things until they found what worked for their daughter.  What a logical way to raise a child.  They used a constant supply of books to keep Cushla stimulated, and they believe the books are the reason she overcame her developmental delays.

Wicked cool, man.

I didn’t have the chance to overcome developmental delays with my own children, because they were read to immediately.  My father gave me a copy of Timothy Findley’s Headhunter the week before my first child was born, and I couldn’t think of anything else to do with the baby for the one hour he was awake on his first night, so I read him Headhunter.  We haven’t stopped reading since.  I suspect my daughter may have inherited a reading and writing disability from her father and paternal grandmother, but she was also read to from day one, so I’ll never know if she didn’t inherit the disability to the same degree as her relatives, or if she lost it through reading.

I miss reading to my kids.  They still pile on the bed with me, but with their own books.  I don’t get to read Mog stories anymore.  I have a little niece and a nephew who are now victim to my desires for kids’ books.

Sometimes I think my students would benefit from ditching school and sitting on a large bed with a large pile of kids’ books; most of them missed that part of childhood.  Perhaps after we read for an hour or two, I could take them on a field trip to a second-hand bookstore….

The Proper Way To Do This…

Eighty percent of English is supposedly comprised of nouns.  Many other languages are verb-heavy, and not so hot on the nouns; to each their own.

It would make sense to begin learning English by learning nouns, then, wouldn’t it?  Even if your first language was learned by beginning with verbs? Everyone who has learned English in my presence, regardless of age or other languages, has begun with nouns; verbs came later; grammar was slowly acquired with no deliberate effort.

In China, they teach English by beginning with verbs.  This was explained to me as if this is The Proper Way to do things.

In my opinion, the origins of Chinglish are now explained.

While we could spin the Linguists in circles arguing The Proper Way to do things, I can only argue this: my students need to communicate with me. I speak English (no verb-oriented languages), and will likely only understand a mangled sentence if it’s noun-oriented.  I can correct a mangled, noun-oriented sentence.  I cannot correct a mangled, verb-oriented sentence if I have no idea who or what the subject might be.

Let’s call English a teacher/student-oriented language.  Doesn’t matter what The Proper Way might be, the only relevant things are the teacher and the student (in no particular order).

Makes life simple for me.

Whole language

I’ve always taught English as a whole language, even before I knew the term.  It strikes me as utterly odd for anyone to even consider teaching a language from any other perspective.  No, not “strikes”, “pummels”.

I can see, perhaps, some people becoming interested in the linguistic aspects of a language after they have become fluent, but there is no logic in beginning a language that way.

Language is communication.  Language has nuances which cannot be put into a worksheet.  Language is entirely social: we don’t need language if there are no other people around.

Language does not make any sense in parts.  If one were to look at the process of walking, and break it down into a thousand muscle movements, and learn each of those muscle movements separately, how long would it take to learn to walk?  Would you ever learn to walk effectively, especially if you suddenly had to change one of those muscle movements just because you moved to a country where they turned their foot slightly out rather than in?

If you want a language which works well in parts try mathematics.

Curating

“Curate” is a curious word.  According to the 1888 edition of Chambers’s Eymological Dictionary, the word comes from the Latin cura, to care.  We have used the term to apply to “inferior clergymen” (how is it the people who do the hardest work are considered to be inferior?); to one who handles art, music and books of infinitesimal quantities and values; to one who cares for anything in a superintendent’s capacity.

Curating an art show is, in itself, a type of art.  Arranging finger-paintings on the refrigerator is, apparently, not curating.

“Curate” is not the same as “curator”.  Curating an entire parish is not an enviable job.  Curating an entire library of ancient books is an enviable job.

…and to think I teach this language for a living…