Language memo: hoch

So, I've forgotten this a couple of times, and I thought I'd write it down somewhere to see if it will help me remember it:

Hoch, höher, am höchsten

The normal form has a 'c' but no umlaut. The comparative has an umlaut but no 'c', and the superlative has both.

Mount Louisa ist hoch, Castle Hill ist höher, aber Mt Stuart ist am höchsten.

The Dress

Clothes intimidate me.

It's one of the reasons why I have a tendency to dress as plainly as I do - I'm not afraid of jeans. I feel I am capable of wearing a pair of jeans and a T-Shirt without looking like a complete moron. I still look like a bit of a dork, but I look like a dork who at least dresses with some level of competence. Once I start trying to "mix it up" a bit, the appearance of competence begins to wane...

There are at least two very good reasons for my tendency to dress plainly and serviceably. The first is that I am not to be trusted with "interesting" clothes. When I was a child I had a tendency to dress myself in such a way that it looked like my wardrobe had been selected by a colour-blind gibbon.

I found a photo of myself the other day when I was twelve, wearing one of my favourite shirts with one of my favourite jackets. The shirt was fluoro green with orange and blue swirls, and looked a little bit like the designer of the material had been inspired by watching a performance artist consume a number of highlighters and then throw up. The jacket was fire-engine red. The fact that I owned and loved both of these items of clothing is a little disappointing. The fact that I thought I could wear them at the same time is just down-right disturbing.

So these days I deliberately work within a very limited palette, and abide as far as possible by what I call the "don't dress like a moron" rule: only wear one 'interesting' thing at any given time and, if possible, cover it up or replace it with something less interesting.

The second reason can be best summed up by telling you about a recent shopping expedition in Sydney. It's actually almost identical to the last couple of shopping expeditions I've had in Sydney.

When I stay in Sydney, I stay at the Hide Park Inn. I found this hotel when looking for somewhere potentially self-catering that was close to a) a train station and b) parks and gardens. I liked it so much I went back there for subsequent Sydney visits. It's a short walk from the Museum Station, it's across the street from Hyde Park, it's in the vicinity of a couple of museums and it's only about ten minutes' walk away from the state gallery and the botanical gardens. From that location I can get to pretty much everywhere I want to go in Sydney by either walking or catching a train.

It's also a short walk away from the CDB and quite a large number of shops, so when the light started to fade while I was enjoying some quality park time on my last visit, something in my head said: "It's silly to go to Sydney for the parks and gardens when thou art so close to the Pitt Street Mall. Go thou, therefore, unto Westfield or such like and find thyself something nice to purchase." (I don't always talk to myself with retired pronouns, but sometimes it's just fun).

So, I went to Westfield and started amusing myself by trawling through all the shops filled with pretty clothes. I saw many nice things in the windows, and would occasionally see something that I really liked - a dress that was pretty, not completely ridiculous, and in a cut and colour that appealed to me.

I looked at some of those dresses, thinking: "I'd like to be the kind of person who wears dresses like that." This thought would be followed by "you know, I've lost some weight, I've found a figure, the last few times I looked in a mirror I thought I might even be able to pull of being kind-of-almost pretty if I just dressed a bit better... Maybe I could be the kind of person who wears dresses like this." Which was usually followed by "My, that is rather expensive. I'm not that interested."

Finally, though, I decided that it was probably good to own at least one decent dress, even if it was rather expensive, so I went into a shop, found something I liked, and went to try it on. It was the largest size they had - but a size I usually wear, so I was quietly confident...

It was too small, but it was enough. Putting on the pretty dress just served to point out how much the mental image I had of myself was incorrect. The figure I thought I had was not the figure I actually had. The face I thought I had was also thrown into a rather harsher light in the change room too, it must be said. Instead of helping me look and feel a bit pretty for a change, it pointed out just how pretty I wasn't.

As I put the dress back on the rack, the shop that was previously full of possibilities suddenly turned into something that was full of the same sort of thing - things that I can't pull off. The other shops? Also full of things I can't pull off. I'm sure there's a pretty dress out there somewhere that I might be able to wear without looking like that girl in the movies who always wears the wrong clothes, but it wasn't in any of the shops I saw.

So, then I did what women with poor body image issues have been doing since the dawn of time. I went looking at shoes. The shop I walked into didn't have a single pair of women's shoes that would fit my gigantic feet. I really wasn't in the mood to by something practical from the men's section, and I decided it was time to stop looking at anything that could be described as "something to wear".

I don't have this problem with jeans. Jeans either fit comfortably or they don't. When they don't fit comfortably, I simply try on a different pair of jeans. I don't fall into a deep funk about my ability to ever look remotely feminine. Pretty dresses, on the other hand? I'm always afraid they are going to take what little self-esteem I have and crush it without pity.

So, yeah. I guess you could say clothes intimidate me.

Nobody Reads The Iliad

I can't be bothered writing two posts tonight (especially since I should be working on an assignment), so I'll just direct anyone who lands here to go look at my other blog, which actually has a real post involving real things:

http://thesharonb.blogspot.com.au/2012/05/dare.html

Sharon on Sydney's

No, no, don't go around trying to figure out the end of that sentence.  It's not an English sentence missing a verb and a thing to be "on".  I've just written "Sharon is in Sydney" in Estonian.  Although, Sharon was on Sydney's monorail about twenty minutes ago.  That was pretty neat, actually.  You got to see the best part of the city center - the bits above the first floor.

Sydney has some awesome buildings in the city center, but you never get a good look at them from the street.  The shop fronts of Sydney are so...  "shopfronty".  You have to look up to get a good look at the architecture of the place.

I can tell you, walking around the streets of Sydney looking up at the buildings is not an effecient way to a) travel, or b) find the shop you were looking for.

So it was nice to take a ride on a form of transport that was right on eye-level with some of the best features of Sydney's buildings.

It's a shame the monorail is going, but I can completely understand why.  As a tourist attraction it's okay, but not earth-shattering.  As a form of public transport it's a bit daft.

The thing goes one way on a loop around a small section of the city proper.  If you (like me) get on at central station and want to get to Paddy's Markets (two stops down from central, but in the wrong direction), you have to pay $5 and take a tour of Sydney before you can get to where you're going.

I thought I'd be saving time by taking a "vehicle" but you'd get there faster (and cheaper) on foot.

Still, I'm glad I managed to go on it before it was removed.  Sydney won't seem the same without a monorail buzzing over the streets.

Lesson to anyone thinking of putting a monorail in their city as a form of public transport:  Work out how to make it go in two directions.  That may require two monorails, but it's a heck of a lot more convenient than doing a round trip every time you want to go somewhere "upstream".

PS.  I'm in the UTS library, using eduroam to get onto the interwebs.  Today was the first time in my life I've used the phrase "thank you, eduroam".  Sometimes wireless is actually useful.

vihkan seda värvi

Today, I learnt how to say "I hate this colour" in Estonian, so I thought I'd better not waste it.

Ma vihkan roosa. See on naeruväärne värvi. Ma vihkan, et naised pean roosa alati kandma. Aga, minu käekell on roosa. Ja minu prillid, ka. Ma kannan roosad riideid, aga see ei mulle meeldi.

So there.

CORRECTION:

Ah, yes.  I neglected to use the partitive case where appropriate, and made a few other errors in terms of plurals and such - things to think on further.  Thanks to "Anonymous" for the following correction:

Ma vihkan roosat. See on naeruväärne värv. Ma vihkan, et naised peavad alati roosat kandma. Aga minu käekell on roosa. Ja minu prillid ka. Ma kannan roosasid riideid, aga see ei mulle meeldi.

As usual, WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE!

"The CRC for Beef Genetic Technologies (Beef CRC) is using the human, mouse and bovine genomes to improve the profitability and productivity of Australian and global beef businesses."

Human and mouse genomes in beef? What the hell is wrong with these people?!?

This is how we create the weird mutant monster zombie cows that roam the streets trying to kill people and eat their brains (and, maybe, also cheese).

Or, this is how people manage to acquire some strange strand of god-knows-what from eating genetically modified beef and turn into weird mutant monster zombie people who roam the streets trying to kill people and eat their brains (and, maybe, also cheese).

Either way, it can't end well.

Translatin' with the Google

The ultimate! Vampire romance part topped 5 million U.S. "I want it with the shackles, I will become a prisoner of you" Eye of gold cupid Edward was a vampire with hidden sad past. For eternal life with Edward, Bella is a partner of fate it was finally found. I fill the loneliness that I can save him like this? Of only are you me? But to think of each two puzzled, attracted each other helplessly. Turn to the enemy target atrocious vampire Bella, love of the fate of no return began. Become hot blood in a continuous dialogue bittersweet, definitive edition of Vampire Love Story!

The Pointy End...

So, I've got my first fencing bruises. I haven't actually had a fencing bout yet, but I have been practising moves against people who aren't entirely sure about where to stand while "fake" lunging.

It's kind of cool, actually. It's starting to feel like I'm involved in a real sport, rather than a series of Tai Chi-style exercises. Can't wait until I get on the wrong side of a pointy-stick for real. You're never really engaged in a physical activity until you've got the bruises to show for it.

Also, I'm getting muscles. I noticed them the other day. The kind of muscles where you move your arm and think - "wait a minute, was that some sort of definition?" I feel all athletic, or something. It's like I'm actually using my arms for a change.

Sport is cool, yeah? I like sport. I should have done sport ages ago.

I finally took the penny-farthing out for a spin the other day - not long, because it was getting dark and I don't have any lights on the bike (or brakes, but who needs 'em?). It had been so long since I've done anything with it that I thought I'd have to go back to basics and focus on getting on and off the thing without hurting myself - but it turns out it's just like riding a bike: you never really forget.

In fact, I think my balance was actually a bit better than the last time I rode it. I have no idea how that would have happened, seeing as I've given up most of the things that encourage me to balance.

By the way, this is an interesting thing with Google maps. If you go to 38 Marine Pde in Cottesloe, Perth, and drag your Streetview man to the yellow strip closest to the house... you see nothing of any interest at all.

However, if you drag your little Streetview man to the strip closest to the beach and turn to face the same house, you will see a woman riding a penny-farthing and towing a stuffed penguin.

It's very strange - they seem to have taken the photos on two different days, and for some reason you land in a different photo based on what side of the street you pick.

The woman apparently tows the penguin to stabilise the bike and make sure she doesn't flip over if she has to stop suddenly. If you rode a penny-farthing, you would totally understand the logic in that.

Behold: Nuts!

So, my "Nut Crunch Bar" comes with a warning that it contains nuts.

I often wonder why people feel they need to warn you about products containing themselves. Is it possible to get a "Nut Crunch Bar" that is completely devoid of nuts - and wasn't even made in a plant that processes nut products? Are there people out there who are so stupid that they would eat something that has the word "Nut" written all over it without expecting to encounter nuts?

It's not like the whole "contains nuts" thing would come as a complete surprise. Not like, say, the presence of milk in potato chips (crisps). No one thinks potato chips would contain anywhere near the amount of weird stuff that comes with the flavourings, so I can see why your packet of "Tomato Flavoured Chips" would need to warn you that it contains milk and wheat.

Interestingly, the "Tomato Flavoured Chips" I saw didn't actually contain anything that came from a tomato, so I supposed that pokes a hole in my whole "It says 'nuts' on the packet" argument.

Still, if I had a tomato allergy, I would probably give the "Tomato Flavoured Chips" a wide berth, regardless of whether or not it listed tomatoes in the ingredients or put a warning in bold letters.

You never see that, actually. A tomato warning. I've met people with tomato allergies, but I've never seen any "Warning: Contains tomato products" labels on anything. I once met someone who was allergic to tomatoes and onions, which basically meant she could only eat corn flakes - and even then there were no guarantees.

I wonder what has to happen before an allergy becomes important enough to get a warning on a packet?

I wonder why some of the packets I pick up list themselves as being "gluten free" or "dairy free", while others don't - it's surprising how often wheat or dairy is present in something that just calls itself "flavours".

I wonder if the "Heinz Baked Beans in Tomato Sauce" sold in Australia is gluten free - the official website only mentions that they are gluten free in the U.K., Canada and Poland. If not, I wonder why they wouldn't be - it's clearly possible to have gluten free baked beans in tomato sauce, as three other countries are doing it.

I wonder why my "Nut Crunch Bar" proudly declares itself to be Halal when it doesn't contain any animal products at all - wouldn't "vegan friendly" be more appropriate? And why does the same company put out an "Almond and Apricot" bar that contains yoghurt (made from milk solids), which does not mention dairy in the allergen warning? It warns you that it contains almonds...

I don't know what makes the least sense, to be frank: the things companies write on their food labels, or the things they actually put in their food.

Vorleser

Reading The Reader was more fun than writing about it.