To remedy the obnoxious “I just read an article on…” phrase that often pretentiously finds its way into conversation (feel free to roll eyes here), I’ve posted a few quality reads BELOW. Enjoy at your own interest:
FABOOSH, OBVI: UNC Professor and Linguist Connie Eble on the evolution of college slang. I had her as a professor a year ago and very much enjoyed her class. She’s not a young professor, which is what you’d expect–in fact, she’s very old-fashioned in how she runs the class (she NEVER used a powerpoint). She’s not an easy professor, that’s for sure–her class is one I’d love to retake and improve my grade.But alas, I’ll just read her compilation of funny slang terms.
The definition of “Intextication” is a gem. (http://endeavors.unc.edu/faboosh_obvi)
ON CLARITY, BIG WORDS and SOUNDING SMART: Another Endeavors magazine article. I absolutely love it’s discussion point. Using ‘big words’ or ‘long sentences’ is something that I personally struggle with in my writing. It seems logical that ‘technical’ words lead to greater precision/clarity (and sometimes they do) but most of the time they just muddle the sentence. This is something I wish I would have learned through a simple UNC Journalism course…why didn’t I minor in that? Anyway, there’s a stellar example of a ‘muddled’ sentence in this article that talks about Linguists.
Just read it: (http://endeavors.unc.edu/clarity_big_words_sounding_smart).
ROOM TO READ: I would also absolutely love to be involved with this organization in some way. I love that it is working toward providing libraries and reading materials to children at their schools and in their communities. More specifically, they have activists working to ensure that girls receive the same education as boys in their communities. If only, I had a year to go off and explore…I’ve always thought about that…
Why do I have to be so darn practical? (http://www.roomtoread.org/).
READING for PLEASURE or for EDUCATION: The musings by this author are somewhat rambling and border on pretentious (he lists all his favorite books that make him ‘well read’) I’m glad I read the article, but it’s only interesting (and worth your time) for this paragraph:
My only goal is to enjoy reading. I learn that he average American teenager spends 17 minutes a weekend in voluntary reading. Surely that statistic is wrong. Do they mean reading of “serious” novels? I would certainly count science fiction, graphic novels, vampires, Harry Potter, newspapers, magazines, blogs–anything. Just to read for yourself for pleasure is the point. Dickens will come later, Henry James perhaps never. (http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2011/04/death_disports_with_writers_mo.html)
LONG BOOKS are MONUMENTAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS, RATHER than PLEASURABLE PURSUITS: Yep, that accurately sums up this article. I may have to disagree on this somewhat as I’ve thoroughly enjoyed all the ‘long’ books I’ve read. But I’ve just read books like Emma, Anna Karenina, Little Women, Gone With the Wind. Girly novels. Still, reading through a saga that spans time the way Karenina and Gone With the Wind do, is an experience that brings satisfaction upon conclusion unlike any other. However, I still have this insatiable desire to finish a 1000-pager that’s not as enjoyable.
As this writer puts it: “Reading a novel of punishing difficulty and length is a version of climbing Everest for people who prefer not to leave the house. And people who climb Everest don’t howl with exhilaration at the summit because the mountain was a good or a well made or an interesting mountain per se, but because they’re overawed at themselves for having done such a fantastically difficult thing,” (http://www.themillions.com/2011/05/the-stockholm-syndrome-theory-of-long-novels.html).