Es ist Deutsche Woche. Mein Computer ist jetzt im Deutsch. Ich lese deutsche Kinderbücher und ich fernsehe deutsche TV.
Der Pilotfilm für "Alarm für Cobra 11" war sehr lange. Ich dachte, es wäre 90 Minuten lang, aber es war sicherlich mehr. Es war interessant, und sehr laut. Vielen schnell Autounfälle.
Ich möchte von einigen "Tim und Struppi" Bücher. Ich habe zwei "Tintin" Bücher im Estnisch, aber keine im Deutsch.
"Tintin" ist sehr cool.
Ich bin müde. Es war eine lange Tag.
Monday, November 1, 2010
Thursday, October 28, 2010
I come from a tree
This is something that has been puzzling me for some time:
Tere hommikust!
Tulen tammikust!
Toon teile sooja sepikut
It's in a book I have at home. A class says it in unison with a clap as a way to begin the school day, as they are about to take a bus to Tallinn for a school excursion.
Now, to the best of my ability, this translates as:
Good Morning!
I come from an oak tree (or, maybe, a dam)!
I bring you warm wheat bread.
Which could possibly be accused of "not making any sense". Is it normal to declare you come from a tree/dam and offer warm bread to your teacher in the morning in some parts of the world?
Tere hommikust!
Tulen tammikust!
Toon teile sooja sepikut
It's in a book I have at home. A class says it in unison with a clap as a way to begin the school day, as they are about to take a bus to Tallinn for a school excursion.
Now, to the best of my ability, this translates as:
Good Morning!
I come from an oak tree (or, maybe, a dam)!
I bring you warm wheat bread.
Which could possibly be accused of "not making any sense". Is it normal to declare you come from a tree/dam and offer warm bread to your teacher in the morning in some parts of the world?
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Estonian Week
Okay, trying to learn two languages at the same time is finally starting to take it's toll.
I've gotten to the point now when I'll remember the German word when I'm trying to think of the Estonian one (and vice versa) - usually in the middle of a sentence.
"Ma olen kolmkümmend Jahre alte... wait a minute..."
I'll stare at a plate for fifteen minutes, trying to remember what it's called in German, but the only word that will come to mind is "taldrik". Eventually, I'll have to look up words I already know just because I can't get the other word out of the way.
I've recently decided to try something different - alternate weeks for each language. Last week was German Week: I read German poetry, went over German grammar, made a point of trying to remember the German names for things, tried to speak in German sentences when I could get away with it and had the language settings on my computer switched to German (which was, admittedly, an accident - but a happy one).
This week was supposed to be Estonian Week. Apart from the German lesson, I was going to try to focus on Estonian. I switched over my computer settings, tried to make a point of reading Estonian poetry and news, tried to remember the Estonian word for things as much as possible... I even made a point of not watching German news or listening to German radio even though I had the opportunity to do so.
Now, I should probably point out then when I say "read poetry" I'm probably referring to side-by-side text with the English translation. When I say "reading the news" actually mean "looking at the words and trying to see if I recognise some of them". When I say "listen to the radio" (or something like that) I mean "listen to the sounds coming out of the radio and occasionally picking up one or two words I know".
Anyway, so far Estonian Week has been a bit of a struggle. I find myself going through German withdrawals. I want to read the German poetry books - I have to remind myself to put them down and pick up something Estonian instead. I want to watch the German DVDs that just happened to arrive in the mail at the beginning of the week. I know I should watch another episode of Tuulepealne Maa (which is an enjoyable TV series which can be best described as "The Estonian answer to Band of Brothers") - and I probably will before the week is out - but I have these shiny new DVDs and I want to play with them...
Also, I keep thinking of the German word when I'm trying to come up with Estonian sentences. I sometimes found Estonian creeping into German Week, but German seems to be trying to invade Estonian Week quite aggressively (not entirely unlike approximately 700 years of European history, that).
It's as though my brain just doesn't want to let the German go. It is much easier than Estonian...
Oh, well.
C'est la vie.
Oh, wait, that's French. Scheibenkleister!
I've gotten to the point now when I'll remember the German word when I'm trying to think of the Estonian one (and vice versa) - usually in the middle of a sentence.
"Ma olen kolmkümmend Jahre alte... wait a minute..."
I'll stare at a plate for fifteen minutes, trying to remember what it's called in German, but the only word that will come to mind is "taldrik". Eventually, I'll have to look up words I already know just because I can't get the other word out of the way.
I've recently decided to try something different - alternate weeks for each language. Last week was German Week: I read German poetry, went over German grammar, made a point of trying to remember the German names for things, tried to speak in German sentences when I could get away with it and had the language settings on my computer switched to German (which was, admittedly, an accident - but a happy one).
This week was supposed to be Estonian Week. Apart from the German lesson, I was going to try to focus on Estonian. I switched over my computer settings, tried to make a point of reading Estonian poetry and news, tried to remember the Estonian word for things as much as possible... I even made a point of not watching German news or listening to German radio even though I had the opportunity to do so.
Now, I should probably point out then when I say "read poetry" I'm probably referring to side-by-side text with the English translation. When I say "reading the news" actually mean "looking at the words and trying to see if I recognise some of them". When I say "listen to the radio" (or something like that) I mean "listen to the sounds coming out of the radio and occasionally picking up one or two words I know".
Anyway, so far Estonian Week has been a bit of a struggle. I find myself going through German withdrawals. I want to read the German poetry books - I have to remind myself to put them down and pick up something Estonian instead. I want to watch the German DVDs that just happened to arrive in the mail at the beginning of the week. I know I should watch another episode of Tuulepealne Maa (which is an enjoyable TV series which can be best described as "The Estonian answer to Band of Brothers") - and I probably will before the week is out - but I have these shiny new DVDs and I want to play with them...
Also, I keep thinking of the German word when I'm trying to come up with Estonian sentences. I sometimes found Estonian creeping into German Week, but German seems to be trying to invade Estonian Week quite aggressively (not entirely unlike approximately 700 years of European history, that).
It's as though my brain just doesn't want to let the German go. It is much easier than Estonian...
Oh, well.
C'est la vie.
Oh, wait, that's French. Scheibenkleister!
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Sauerkraut
Let me make this absolutely clear:
Only German plebs eat sauerkraut straight out of the jar. It's an ingredient, like seeded mustard.
If you have "tried" sauerkraut before and you didn't like it, it's probably because you tried eating it straight out of the jar/tin. Don't do that - it will never taste good that way.
You need to a) mix it with other stuff, and b) cook it.
For example, if you want something quick and easy you can fry some onion and apple and mix in the tinned sauerkraut - maybe top it off with some caraway seads or something. It's a great accompaniment to sausages.
Or, as the main meal, you could try stewing it with ham, bacon hocks, pearl barley, extra (fresh) cabbage and some white wine vinegar. Add in a couple of bay leaves and some peppercorns during the cooking (to be removed before eating) and it tastes fabulous. Serve with boiled potatoes and buttered black rye bread.
Or head online and find some other recipe that takes your fancy. Just, please, for taste's sake, don't eat it straight from the jar.
Only German plebs eat sauerkraut straight out of the jar. It's an ingredient, like seeded mustard.
If you have "tried" sauerkraut before and you didn't like it, it's probably because you tried eating it straight out of the jar/tin. Don't do that - it will never taste good that way.
You need to a) mix it with other stuff, and b) cook it.
For example, if you want something quick and easy you can fry some onion and apple and mix in the tinned sauerkraut - maybe top it off with some caraway seads or something. It's a great accompaniment to sausages.
Or, as the main meal, you could try stewing it with ham, bacon hocks, pearl barley, extra (fresh) cabbage and some white wine vinegar. Add in a couple of bay leaves and some peppercorns during the cooking (to be removed before eating) and it tastes fabulous. Serve with boiled potatoes and buttered black rye bread.
Or head online and find some other recipe that takes your fancy. Just, please, for taste's sake, don't eat it straight from the jar.
Google Chrome on väga huvitav
Yup. I changed my language settings on my computer's system over to Eesti today, and sure enough Chrome is talking to me in Eesti, taking me to the Eesti version of major websites (when they exist) and offering Eesti options when it tries to correct my spelling.
See on tore! I love the way it completely alters minu language environment.
I'm even impressed that it does this by listening to my system settings rather than waiting for me to change them within the program. Yes, on one level that's a little bit creepy, but imagine how much time you'll save if English is not your person default language setting.
See on tore! I love the way it completely alters minu language environment.
I'm even impressed that it does this by listening to my system settings rather than waiting for me to change them within the program. Yes, on one level that's a little bit creepy, but imagine how much time you'll save if English is not your person default language setting.
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Crazy Tom's pizza recipe
A couple of years ago I spent the weekend with a group of people crazy enough to travel to Julia Creek for a triathlon. One of them was an English guy by the name of "Tom". At least, I think his name was Tom. I can't really remember these sorts of details (heck, I can barely remember my own name sometimes).
Anyway, Tom had spent some time in South Africa, where they apparently put banana on pizza. He was lamenting about the fact that he can't convince any pizza shops in Australia to use banana as an ingredient.
I told him the entire concept of banana on a pizza was ridiculous. He said people who put beetroot on hamburgers can't throw stones, which I figured was a fair cop.
Ever since then, I've been wondering exactly what pizza would taste like with banana. Last night I was making pizza for dinner, and I finally decided I may as well give it a try.
It's different - takes a moment to get used to - but it is not unpleasant. Slightly sweet, like pineapple, but with a weird undertone that takes you by surprise when you aren't expecting it. I'd possibly do it again.
It put me in mind of the fancy-pants pizza shop on Ross River Rd which puts beetroot on one of it's gourmet pizzas. And it made me wonder - why are vegetarian pizzas in most take-away pizza joints so darn boring?
If you're a vegetarian, you really only get two options: you can have the exact same ingredients that you would get on a super supreme minus the meat, or you can have cheese and tomato. Why don't they bring in some crazy options that people who eat peperoni pizzas would never consider? Why not have a "fruit salad" pizza with pineapple, banana and cucumber (what? It's a fruit).
It's not so difficult and out-there that a regular pizza shop couldn't do it. You don't have to be "gourmet" to be "not entirely boring".
Anyway, Tom had spent some time in South Africa, where they apparently put banana on pizza. He was lamenting about the fact that he can't convince any pizza shops in Australia to use banana as an ingredient.
I told him the entire concept of banana on a pizza was ridiculous. He said people who put beetroot on hamburgers can't throw stones, which I figured was a fair cop.
Ever since then, I've been wondering exactly what pizza would taste like with banana. Last night I was making pizza for dinner, and I finally decided I may as well give it a try.
It's different - takes a moment to get used to - but it is not unpleasant. Slightly sweet, like pineapple, but with a weird undertone that takes you by surprise when you aren't expecting it. I'd possibly do it again.
It put me in mind of the fancy-pants pizza shop on Ross River Rd which puts beetroot on one of it's gourmet pizzas. And it made me wonder - why are vegetarian pizzas in most take-away pizza joints so darn boring?
If you're a vegetarian, you really only get two options: you can have the exact same ingredients that you would get on a super supreme minus the meat, or you can have cheese and tomato. Why don't they bring in some crazy options that people who eat peperoni pizzas would never consider? Why not have a "fruit salad" pizza with pineapple, banana and cucumber (what? It's a fruit).
It's not so difficult and out-there that a regular pizza shop couldn't do it. You don't have to be "gourmet" to be "not entirely boring".
Hmm, I'm obviously dealing with a moron
So, I submitted a paper to a journal some weeks ago and today I received the comments from the reviewers.
The first reviewer, whose comments I've just been reading through, seemed to struggle with my paper quite a lot.
I'm well aware that my writing style is far from perfect. I have a tendency to be flippant, I frequently digress and I often catch myself using sentences that I had thought were erudite but turned out to be simply obnoxious. Plus, I have a stupid belief that essays, like poems, should be aesthetically interesting rather than simply conveying the facts. I fully expected the comments to come back saying that some of my sentences could be clearer and I should move things around.
This person has basically written back saying entire paragraphs are impossible to understand and my argument is obscured. I can handle that. Such things help one grow. Except...
Except that their comments have indicated they aren't keeping up - or don't feel they should have to. It's as if I'm expected to explicitly outline everything I'm talking about in every single paragraph - they aren't pulling information from one section to inform the next, and I can't shake the feeling they're doing this on purpose. They're struggling with the abbreviations I'm using even though I established them properly in the early paragraphs and have been using them consistently ever since, and that also feels like it's on purpose - like they don't feel they should have to glance back at the beginning of the paper to find out what those abbreviations mean, therefore I should either not use them (or I should re-establish them on a regular basis).
I got to a point partway through reading their extensive comments (for which I'm thankful - I like extensive comments), when I realised what they really want is a simpler style. I have written the paper - quite deliberately - in a slightly circuitous fashion. I present some information and then explain why the information is relevant. I repeat this pattern multiple times, and then in the end I tie all the strings together. Each section makes sense eventually, you just have to read it with the assumption that it is taking you somewhere. You don't even have to wait that long for the pay-off. The "what" is clear in each paragraphs (at least, I believe it is), and a couple of paragraphs later you get the "why". This reviewer clearly wants the "why" first and foremost and continually referred to throughout the "what".
They clearly want me to strip it back and dumb it down so that the reader doesn't have to work as hard to figure out what I'm talking about.
Now, I've had a number of people read over this paper before I submitted it - including someone who checks clarity of writing style for a living. None of them had this much trouble understanding what I had written or the points I was making.
The second reviewer didn't even see the need to make comments on the paper - they just said a few things need to be moved around and that's it.
All of this leads me to believe that the first reviewer is not getting it - either because they can't get it or because they don't want to. It's almost like they've decided that it's hard to understand, so they are going out of their way to not understand it.
And, having formed this (possibly unfounded) opinion of the person writing the comments, I find an old character flaw is coming to the surface: I hate dumbing things down for stupid/lazy people. I can't stand the way everything has to be "easy" these days, and I start feeling my inner snob rise to the bait when someone suggests I should write something in such a way as to make sure people don't have to think about it.
Tell me my sentence isn't clear and it will get me thinking about how to do a better job. Tell me to repeat myself multiple times or use simpler words so people don't have to pay that much attention in order to know what I'm talking about and I'll dig my heels in. I'll happily try to write something "better", but I don't want to write something "simpler".
I've talked about this before, in my discussion of graded readers and simplified texts. I hate simplifying things. I'm trying to get over it and understand the role simplified language has in modern society, but I still hate it. The unsimplified version is richer and more interesting. Half the time I'm sure the reader could step-up to the challenge if they wanted to. Why should everything be brought down to the lowest common denominator?
I'm going to change the paper - grudgingly, of course, but I have to address the reviewer's concerns to get the paper published. But there's a good chance I'll be doing it with some spite directed at the reviewer, which is a bad attitude to have.
I have to refrain, reframe and then sit down to fix the paper so that I'm still proud of it, but it's easier for the lazy people to read.
I've also finally got the corrections back for my thesis, and my supervisor also wants me to focus more on repeating myself, so this is going to be a fun week.
The first reviewer, whose comments I've just been reading through, seemed to struggle with my paper quite a lot.
I'm well aware that my writing style is far from perfect. I have a tendency to be flippant, I frequently digress and I often catch myself using sentences that I had thought were erudite but turned out to be simply obnoxious. Plus, I have a stupid belief that essays, like poems, should be aesthetically interesting rather than simply conveying the facts. I fully expected the comments to come back saying that some of my sentences could be clearer and I should move things around.
This person has basically written back saying entire paragraphs are impossible to understand and my argument is obscured. I can handle that. Such things help one grow. Except...
Except that their comments have indicated they aren't keeping up - or don't feel they should have to. It's as if I'm expected to explicitly outline everything I'm talking about in every single paragraph - they aren't pulling information from one section to inform the next, and I can't shake the feeling they're doing this on purpose. They're struggling with the abbreviations I'm using even though I established them properly in the early paragraphs and have been using them consistently ever since, and that also feels like it's on purpose - like they don't feel they should have to glance back at the beginning of the paper to find out what those abbreviations mean, therefore I should either not use them (or I should re-establish them on a regular basis).
I got to a point partway through reading their extensive comments (for which I'm thankful - I like extensive comments), when I realised what they really want is a simpler style. I have written the paper - quite deliberately - in a slightly circuitous fashion. I present some information and then explain why the information is relevant. I repeat this pattern multiple times, and then in the end I tie all the strings together. Each section makes sense eventually, you just have to read it with the assumption that it is taking you somewhere. You don't even have to wait that long for the pay-off. The "what" is clear in each paragraphs (at least, I believe it is), and a couple of paragraphs later you get the "why". This reviewer clearly wants the "why" first and foremost and continually referred to throughout the "what".
They clearly want me to strip it back and dumb it down so that the reader doesn't have to work as hard to figure out what I'm talking about.
Now, I've had a number of people read over this paper before I submitted it - including someone who checks clarity of writing style for a living. None of them had this much trouble understanding what I had written or the points I was making.
The second reviewer didn't even see the need to make comments on the paper - they just said a few things need to be moved around and that's it.
All of this leads me to believe that the first reviewer is not getting it - either because they can't get it or because they don't want to. It's almost like they've decided that it's hard to understand, so they are going out of their way to not understand it.
And, having formed this (possibly unfounded) opinion of the person writing the comments, I find an old character flaw is coming to the surface: I hate dumbing things down for stupid/lazy people. I can't stand the way everything has to be "easy" these days, and I start feeling my inner snob rise to the bait when someone suggests I should write something in such a way as to make sure people don't have to think about it.
Tell me my sentence isn't clear and it will get me thinking about how to do a better job. Tell me to repeat myself multiple times or use simpler words so people don't have to pay that much attention in order to know what I'm talking about and I'll dig my heels in. I'll happily try to write something "better", but I don't want to write something "simpler".
I've talked about this before, in my discussion of graded readers and simplified texts. I hate simplifying things. I'm trying to get over it and understand the role simplified language has in modern society, but I still hate it. The unsimplified version is richer and more interesting. Half the time I'm sure the reader could step-up to the challenge if they wanted to. Why should everything be brought down to the lowest common denominator?
I'm going to change the paper - grudgingly, of course, but I have to address the reviewer's concerns to get the paper published. But there's a good chance I'll be doing it with some spite directed at the reviewer, which is a bad attitude to have.
I have to refrain, reframe and then sit down to fix the paper so that I'm still proud of it, but it's easier for the lazy people to read.
I've also finally got the corrections back for my thesis, and my supervisor also wants me to focus more on repeating myself, so this is going to be a fun week.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)