Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10
81
Let’s take up the many-splendored word “all” to answer a very interesting question raised about its usage way back in 2015 by a member of Jose Carillo’s English Forum.

Here’s the question of Justine Aragones: “Why is the indefinite pronoun ‘all’ treated as singular rather than plural in this popular saying: ‘The limits of our language are the limits of our mind, and all we really know is what we have words for’?”

                                          IMAGE CREDIT: LINKED-IN.COM

“Another thing: ‘Is the use of the comma after “coherent” in the sentence that follows more a matter of style than an obligatory punctuation? ‘Next make yourself thoroughly familiar with the various tools of English for putting words together into grammatically and structurally correct, coherent, and clear statements.’”

My reply to Justine’s questions:

The pronoun “all” can be singular or plural depending on context. It could mean “totality,” as in “All that I have is yours” (singular); “everybody,” as in “All are required to come tomorrow” (plural); and “everything,” as in “All is fair in love and war” (singular).

But “all” has an entirely different sense in this sentence: “The limits of our language are the limits of our mind, and all we really know is what we have words for.” It’s functioning as an adjective to mean “only” or “nothing but,” and it makes the noun phrase “all we really know” singular in sense. This is why the singular “is” is used in the clause “all we really know is what we have words for.”

Now about the use of the serial comma in your other sentence: “Next make yourself thoroughly familiar with the various tools of English for putting words together into grammatically and structurally correct, coherent, and clear statements.”

Yes, using the comma after “coherent” in that sentence is a punctuation style called the Oxford comma. For serial enumeration sentences, many publications—including The Manila Times—actually do away with that last comma between the last serial item and the one preceding it. They construct the sentence this way as a matter of style: “Next make yourself thoroughly familiar with the various tools of English for putting words together into grammatically and structurally correct, coherent and clear statements.”

As for me, though, I prefer to use the Oxford comma every time as my personal style. Here, in a nutshell, are my reasons for doing so:

The serial comma’s usefulness might not be readily appreciated when the sentence has a serial list of items consisting of only a single word or two, as in “She bought some apples, oranges and pears” and “For the role of Hamlet, the choices are Fred Santos, Tony Cruz, Jimmy Reyes and George Perez.” 

But see what happens when the enumerated items are long phrases with, say, more than four or five words: “The major businesses in the domestic pet services industry are traditional veterinary services, fancy pet grooming and makeover shops, a wide assortment of animal and bird food, freshwater and marine fish of various kinds and aquarium equipment and supplies for industrial and home use.”

Now try figuring out where each enumerative item ends and begins in the phrase “freshwater and marine fish of various kinds and aquarium equipment and supplies for industrial and home use.”

In contrast, see how clear and unequivocal the last two items in the list become when we deploy a serial comma between “various kinds” and “aquarium equipment”:

“The major businesses in the domestic pet services industry are traditional veterinary services, fancy pet grooming and makeover shops, a wide assortment of animal and bird food, freshwater and marine fish of various kinds, and aquarium equipment and supplies for industrial and home use.”

This is why I think it’s better to use a serial comma by default regardless of the length of the phrase for each item in an enumerative sequence.

Visit Jose Carillo’s English Forum at http://josecarilloforum.com. Visit me on Facebook. Follow me at Twitter.com @J8Carillo.
82
I think it’s high time for a full review of the choice between the function words “can” and “could,” “will” and “would,” and also “shall” and “should.” From my experience as an editor, they continue to be frequent pitfalls to many English learners and even some long-time writers in English.

The most important thing to remember about these word-pairs is that they aren’t meant for conveying simple facts or absolute certainties. They are distinct grammatical forms called modal auxiliaries or modals, and they work in tandem with a given verb to convey varying shades of necessity, advice, ability, expectation, permission, possibility, or conditionality.


 
“Can” or “could.” These two modals convey the idea of ability, possibility, permission, or potential to perform an action or do a task—“can” is the present-tense form, and “could” the past-tense form. Use “can” to convey a current ability, as in “As a single woman I can write novels,” but use “could not” when that ability has been lost, as in “As a mom of three hyperactive toddlers I could not write novels anymore.” Use “can” to convey possibility: “The team can win if its members are more disciplined.” Use “can” to ask permission: “Can I go out with my playmates now?” And use “can” to indicate potential: “With his political acumen, he can be presidential timber.”

The modal “could” likewise conveys a deferential or polite request, offer, or suggestion: “Could you tell me how to leave the send-off party now without offending the boss?” But among social, age, or professional coequals, “can” is more suitable without raising eyebrows: “Can you tell me how to leave the send-off party now without offending the boss?”

“Will” or “would.” The usual function of “will” is to be a verbal auxiliary for expressing the simple futurity of an action, as in “Evelyn will go to Tokyo tomorrow.” As a modal, however, “will” works to convey choice, willingness, intention, consent, or habitual or customary action. Choice: “I will take the train instead of the bus.” Willingness: “I will go if you wish.” Intention: “I will prove you wrong.” Consent: “Yes, the school will admit you.” Habitual or customary action: “She will get angry over trivial things.”

In the past tense, the modal “will” inflects to “would.” To convey choice: “That year, I would fly first class rather than economy.” To convey willingness: “In my mid-twenties, I would go wherever I was assigned.” To convey habitual or customary action: “After breaking up with her fiancé, Joanna would get angry over trivial things.”

In conditional sentences, the modal “would” works to express probability or presumption of something happening in both present and past, as in “That overambitious politician (would win, would have won) hands down if not for the very serious corruption allegations against him.”

Likewise, the modal “would” conveys politeness and deference in expressing intent or desire, as in “Would you consider my daughter for that overseas job?” This differs from the rather pointed request conveyed when the modal “will” is used: “Will you consider my daughter for that overseas job?”

As quick exercise, are “will” and “would” used correctly in these two questions? “Will it rain tomorrow? If it wouldn’t, would it be a sunny day?”

Yes, both are correct. The first question uses “will” as a verbal auxiliary to express simple futurity; the second is a conditional construction where (a) the “if”-clause uses the modal “wouldn’t” to express negative possibility, and (b) where the result clause also uses the modal “would” to express expectation of a desired outcome in question form. 

“Shall” or “should.”  In American English (the English we use in the Philippines), the modals “shall” or “should” are used sparingly to state polite questions (suggestive that permission is being asked) in the first-person, as in “Should I get a taxi for you now, ma’am?” More commonly, the modal “shall” is used in formal written directives and records of corporate proceedings, as in “All workers shall be responsible for the upkeep of their respective work areas.”

This review should have given you greater confidence in using these modals. 

Read this essay and listen to its voice recording in The Manila Times:
Still baffled when to use “can” or “could” and “will” or “would”?      

Next: Are you using “were” in the indicative or subjunctive mood?       November 30, 2023   

Visit Jose Carillo’s English Forum, http://josecarilloforum.com. You can follow me on Facebook and Twitter and e-mail me at j8carillo@yahoo.com.
83
Lounge / Band-Maid, all-female Japanese band (rock, metal, pop, jazz, blues)
« Last post by Gerry T. Galacio on November 20, 2023, 11:23:10 PM »


Band-Maid is an all-female Japanese band that’s considered as one of the best rock bands in the world today. The band combines genres such as rock (hard, progressive, punk), metal, pop, blues, and jazz. Formed in 2013, the band is composed of Miku (founder, rhythm guitarist, lyricist, vocalist), Saiki (vocalist), Kanami (songwriter, lead guitarist), Misa (bassist), and Akane (drummer). For more information about this band, please surf to my blog post at https://campusconnection.blogspot.com/2022/02/band-maid.html

For starters, you can listen to:

"Thrill" (the band's first MV; 2015) at https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Uds7g3M-4lQ

"Freedom" (the band's anthem with a great drum solo) at https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FHpuEqMAcDg (this upbeat song will perk up your energy for days)

"Daydreaming" (midtempo power ballad; watch out for the guitar solo) at https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RCaeUkrItyY

"Secret Maiko Lips," "Gion-cho" by Band-Maiko, alter ego of Band-Maid; combines electronic instruments with traditional instruments, with the girls in kimonos

"Manners" (a blend of rock, jazz, and blues with a great bassline)

"Dice +Hate?" (bass versus lead guitar) in Lollapalooza 2023

"Wonderland" (blend of rock, pop, jazz, and blues)

"Domination" (another anthem; watch how fast the bassist switches from using a pick to slapping)

"Blooming" (featured in Netflix movie "Kate")

"Influencer"

"Onset" (instrumental)

"From Now On" (instrumental)

"Endless Story" (the song that Band-Maid usually closes their concerts with)

"About Us" (slow tempo song; tribute to fans during pandemic)

"Catharsis" (acoustic version)

Band-Maid GIF:

84
Lounge / Facebook page "Family Code of the Philippines"
« Last post by Gerry T. Galacio on November 20, 2023, 10:03:36 PM »
Link: https://www.facebook.com/familycodephilippines/

Some of the topics discussed in this FB page are:

1. "Alienation of affection": Can you file a civil case for damages against the homewrecker who took your spouse away from you and your children?

2. "Irreconcilable marital differences" as ground for divorce in the current divorce bills in the House of Representatives and the Senate

3. Protecting teachers from baseless allegations of child abuse under RA 7610 "Anti-Child Abuse Law" | Senate Bills 540 and 632, House Bills 364, 549, and 6940 on protecting teachers by amending RA 7610

4. If your wife or husband (or your
live-in partner) wins the lotto or any game of chance, will you have a share in it? | Systems of property relations between spouses or between live-in partners under the Family Code

5. A wedding through videoconferencing and solemnized by a provincial governor? A wedding where the bride and groom are abroad but the solemnizing officer (priest, rabbi, imam, or minister) is in the Philippines?

6. Legislation to protect Filipino children or teenagers who are social media influencers? Social media activities as "child labor" that needs to be regulated? | Articles 225 up to 227 of the Family Code

7. Supreme Court tears down the "iron barrier" (aka "iron curtain") between the legitimate and illegitimate sides of a family

8. New terms for legitimate children ("marital children") and illegitimate children ("non-marital children")

9. If your foreigner-husband divorced you and now refuses to give your child financial support because he claims he's not bound by the Philippine law on support, can you charge him criminally under RA 9262 VAWC?

10. Harmonizing Articles 14, 96, 124, 211, and 225 of the Family Code with Republic Act 9710 or the "Magna Carta of Women"

11. A child is presumed legitimate even if it's the result of sexual relations between the wife and a man who's not her husband — if it's born before the marriage is declared void; "Legitimacy" versus "filiation"

12. Are you divorced from your foreign spouse? Judicial recognition of a foreign divorce | Senate Bill No. 554 filed by Sen. Pia Cayetano seeks to amend Articles 13 and 26 of the Family Code to make it easier for divorced Filipinos to remarry through administrative recognition of a foreign divorce

13. If you're an illegitimate (nonmarital) child, you can force your biological father to acknowledge you by filing with the Family Court a "petition for compulsory recognition of an illegitimate child"; Should filiation between an illegitimate child and the alleged father be established first before support can be demanded?

14. Protecting the children of OFWs under the "Parens Patriae" doctrine | House Bill 8560 or the "Overseas Filipino Workers’ Left Behind Children Protection Act" filed by OFW party-list Rep. Marissa Magsino

15. Protecting teachers from baseless allegations of child abuse under RA 7610 "Anti-Child Abuse Law"

16. IVF (in vitro fertilization), surrogacy, and artificial insemination under the Family Code of the Philippines

17. If the father abandons his wife and legitimate children and fails or refuses to support them, can the wife ask the court to have her children's surname changed from their father's surname to her maiden surname?

18. Declaration of nullity of marriage under Art. 36 Family Code (psychological incapacity), extramarital affairs, and the "doctrine of unclean hands"; Can the spouse who's suffering from psychological incapacity file the petition to have the marriage declared void?

19. Marital infidelity is a form of psychological violence that's punishable under RA 9262 "Anti-Violence Against Women and their Children Act of 2004"

20. Things to do if (1) you're planning to get married to someone whose previous marriage was declared void, or (2) you're the child of parents whose marriage was declared void

21. Does RA 9255 — the law that gives illegitimate children the right or choice to use the surname of their biological father — apply only to illegitimate children who were born on or after March 19, 2004?

22. Dissolving a marriage has become easier with the Supreme Court’s ruling that "psychological incapacity" in Art. 36 of the Family Code is not a medical but a legal concept

23. Legitimate children can use their mother's surname, instead of their father's surname | Supreme Court ruling in "Alanis III vs. Court of Appeals" (2020)

24. Should adultery and concubinage be decriminalized?
85
November 19, 2023—Now available at National Book Store and Fully Booked branches in key cities nationwide is the third updated edition of Jose Carillo’s best-selling book English Plain and Simple: No-Nonsense Ways to Learn Today’s Global Language. Hailed by leading academicians, journalists, and critics upon its release in 2005 as “a charmer of a book that delights as well as instructs,” it won the National Book Award for linguistics from the Manila Critics Circle that same year.


 
The Manila Times Publishing Corp. accepts direct volume orders for the 500-page book for delivery to institutional and corporate buyers and interested individual distributors. Copies can also be ordered from Lazada or Shoppee for immediate delivery to individual customers in Metro Manila.

English Plain and Simple brings together Jose Carillo's first collection of grammar lessons and advice that originally appeared in his long-running Manila Times column that started coming out six days a week in 2002. Two more volumes drawing material from his Times columns followed, namely The 10 Most Annoying English Grammar Errors (2008) and Give Your English the Winning Edge (2009).



In his foreword to English Plain and Simple, Dr. Jose Y. Dalisay, Ph.D, professor emeritus of English at the University of the Philippines and Hall of Famer of the Carlos Palanca Awards for Literature, says: “There are many guides to English that the avid student can pick up, but quite a few, I think, actually do more harm than good as ponderous rulebooks meant for rote memorization. But every now and then comes a charmer of a book that delights as well as it instructs. English Plain and Simple is one such gem, for which we have the pseudonymous Mr. Carillo to thank. Whether he was walking me through the hierarchy of adjectives or discovering Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Carillo never failed to show me something new and cause me to smile in recognition of a shared experience.”

In the latest edition of English Plain and Simple, the author finally revealed his identity after over 20 years of using Jose Carillo as pen name and explains why he used it. The author is the veteran newspaper journalist and communications executive Carlos O. Llorin Jr., a former college newspaper editor-in-chief (the weekly Dawn, University of the East), marketing field researcher (Asia Research Inc.), national newspaper reporter (Philippines Herald), and ad agency public relations manager (J. Romero & Associates). He worked for San Miguel Corporation for 18 years as editorial services head, audio-visual group head, senior communications assistant, and product manager, then as corporate communications manager for rhe company's Magnolia Divison with the rank of assistant vice president.

He won nine major Philippine industry awards as editor in chief of the company’s monthly magazine Kaunlaran and fortnightly newsletter. As executive director of San Miguel’s Magnolia Youth Achievement Awards, he won a Gold Quill Award from the U.S.-based International Association of Business Communicators (IABC) in 1989 and the Golden World Award from the U.K.-based International Public Relations Association (IPRA) in 1990.

Llorin took optional early retirement as assistant vice president for communications of San Miguel’s Magnolia Division in 1993, later running the English-language services company Asia Herald Inc. as general manager for five years until 2007. Currently, aside from writing his weekly column in The Manila Times, he is an independent writer and book editor as well as editing and communication consultant for corporate, institutional, and individual clients.

Describing the rationale for writing his three English-usage books, Carlos Llorin Jr. says: “As with my weekly columns in the Manila Times, they aim to help nonnative English speakers improve their written English without having to go back to the classroom and, frankly, also to make Filipinos keenly aware that if their English is bad, it’s largely due to the Philippine culture’s fervid addiction to legalese. This done, his English-usage books then gently walk the reader through the basic and practical and later the finer aspects of English grammar and semantics, revisiting all of the parts of speech and their rudiments. The emphasis is to train themselves to think, speak, and write in clear and simple English.
86
PLAYLIST UPDATE FOR NOVEMBER 11 - 17, 2023 OF THE FORUM’S FACEBOOK GATEWAY

Simply click the web links to the 14 featured English grammar refreshers and general interest stories this week along with selected postings published in the Forum in previous years:

1. Getting To Know The World’s Genocidal History: “The world in 710 words”


The world was simply too heavy, too massive, and too fast-moving for Archimedes
          to lift with a lever—and on what did he think he would be standing on?


2. Use and Misuse: "Avoid using ‘and/or’ because it's a ‘grammatical abomination’” Contributed by Gerry T. Galacio



RELATED READING: “Should academics use ‘and/or’ in their writing?" by Trinka



3. Badly Written, Badly Spoken: “The need to be grammatically correct in our English”




4. Getting To Know English Retrospective: “The perplexing workings of the double possessive”




5. Notable Works by Our Very Own: "Literature as History" by F. Sionil Jose, Philippine National Artist for Literature




6. Time Out From English Grammar: “How the human brain establishes and reinforces beliefs as truths”




7. A Forum Lounge Retrospective: “Open Dialogue: Religions and the basis for faith”    
 



8. Essays by Joe Carillo: “English in a used jar“




9. Language Humor At Its Finest: “News headlines that went awry”




10. Getting to Know English: “We shouldn’t mistake mass nouns for collective nouns“




11. Use and Misuse: "Fused sentences are very serious, very annoying grammar violations”




12. Advice and Dissent: "The prophet of Gaia feels the climate change issue is ‘as severe as war’”    




13. Readings in Language Retrospective: "Thinking in numbers as effective, pleasant antidote for numerophobia"
   




14. You Asked Me This Question Retrospective: "What's the correct usage for the verbs ‘brought’ and ‘taken’?"


 


87
Use and Misuse / Avoid using "and/or" because it's a "grammatical abomination"
« Last post by Gerry T. Galacio on November 16, 2023, 02:23:53 PM »
 A. Bryan A. Garner is the author of "Garner’s Modern American Usage," "The Redbook: A Manual on Legal Style," "Harvard Business Review Guide to Better Business Writing," and "Legal Writing in Plain English." He has also co-authored two books with the late US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. He has trained more than 150,000 American lawyers on the Plain English style of legal writing and has edited all current editions of the authoritative Black's Law Dictionary.


In "The Redbook: A Manual on Legal Style," Garner says:

"The slash . . . has few uses in formal writing except with dates and fractions. It is best known as the star character in two grammatical abominations: and/or and he/she. It is especially unfit for legal writing because it is inherently ambiguous."

Garner includes "and/or" in his "Dirty Dozen" list of words and phrases that legal writers should avoid. He says that American courts have ruled, as early as 1932, that 'and/or' is not part of the English language.

B. In the UK House of Lords, Viscount Simon LC in "Bonitto v Fuerst Bros and Co Ltd" (1944) described "and/or" as a "bastard conjunction."

C. Recent Australian court rulings condemning "and/or":

  • Harrison Green vs. The Queen (2000)
  • Extraman et al vs. Blenkinship et al (2008)
  • Canberra Data vs. Vibe Construction (March 2010)

D. Recent US court rulings condemning "and/or":

  • California Trout Inc v State Water Resources Bd, 255 Cal Rpter 184 at 194, 1989: "And/or" is taboo in legislative drafting.
  • In Re Estate Of Massey (Superior Court Of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Probate Part, Monmouth County, October 1998)
  • State of New Jersey vs. Zaair Tuck (Superior Court Of New Jersey Appellate Division, January 2006)
  • State of New Jersey v. Victor Gonzales (Superior Court Of New Jersey Appellate Division, January 2016)

E. Louis-Philippe Pigeon, former Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada:

"And/or" seems to be used by writers whose main concern is to appear erudite. In my opinion, quite the opposite impression is created. Use of this conjunction which is not a conjunction is repugnant to the spirit of the language, English or French. (Drafting and Interpreting Legislation, 1988)

F. Some 1930s US court rulings condemning "and/or":

  • Minor v. Thomasson, 236 Ala. 247, 182 So. 16, 18 (Ala.1938) ("the interloping disjunctive -conjunctive-conjunctive-disjunctive conjunction")
  • Cochrane v. Florida East Coast R. Co., 107 Fla. 431, 145 So. 217, 218 (Fla.1932) ("one of those inexcusable barbarisms which was sired by indolence and dammed by indifference ... senseless jargon")
  • Bell v. Wayne United Gas Co., 116 W.Va. 280, 281, 181 S.E. 609, 618 (W.Va.1935) ("a disingenuous, modernistic hybrid, inept and irritating")
  • State ex rel. Adler v. Douglas, 339 Mo. 187, 95 S.W.2d 1179, 1180 (Mo.1936) ("meaningless symbol")
  • American Gen. Ins. Co. v. Webster, 118 S.W.2d 1082, 1084 (Tex.Civ.App. 1938) ("the abominable invention")

G. Michigan Bar Journal, August 2003, by Scott P. Stolley:

The real problem with "and/or" is that it plays into the hands of a bad faith-reader. Which one is favorable? And or Or? The bad faith-reader can pick one or the other, or both — whatever reading is better from that reader’s perspective.

Original sentence using "and/or":

"The negligence of Defendant Jones and/or Defendant Smith proximately caused Plaintiff ’s injuries."

Alternatives:

"The negligence of Defendant Jones or Defendant Smith proximately caused Plaintiff ’s injuries."

" … of Defendant Jones or Defendant Smith, or both"

H. Philippine Supreme Court decisions on proper interpretation of "and/or":

(1) "China Banking Corporation and CBC Properties and Computer Center Inc., Petitioners v. The members of the Board of Trustees, Home Development Mutual Fund (HDMF); HDMF President; and the Home Mutual development Fund, Respondents." G.R. No. 131787, May 19, 1999

(2) "Antonio D. Dayao, Rolando P. Ramirez and Adelio R. Capco, Petitioners, vs. Commission on Elections and LPG Marketers Association Inc., Respondents." G.R. No. 193643, January 29, 2013

Overview of the Supreme Court rulings:

(1) Chinabank vs. HDMF, 1999:

Section 19 of P.D. No. 1752 intended that an employer with a provident plan or an employee housing plan superior to that of the fund may obtain exemption from coverage. If the law had intended that the employer should have both a superior provident plan and a housing plan in order to qualify for exemption, it would have used the word "and" instead of "and/or."

(2) Dayao vs. Comelec, 2013:

The legal meaning of the term "and/or" between "refusal" and "cancellation" should be taken in its ordinary significance — "refusal and/or cancellation" means "refusal and cancellation" or "refusal or cancellation." It has been held that the intention of the legislature in using the term "and/or" is that the word "and" and the word "or" are to be used interchangeably.

The word "or," on the other hand, is a disjunctive term signifying disassociation and independence of one thing from the other things enumerated; it should, as a rule, be construed in the sense in which it ordinarily implies, as a disjunctive word. As such, "refusal or cancellation," consistent with their disjunctive meanings, must be taken individually to mean that they are separate instances when the Comelec can exercise its power to screen the qualifications of party-list organizations for purposes of participation in the party-list system of representation.

That this is the clear intent of the law is bolstered by the use simply of the word "or" in the first sentence of Section 6 that "the Comelec may, motu propio or upon verified complaint of any interested party, refuse or cancel, after due notice and hearing, the registration of any national, regional or sectoral party, organization or coalition."

Plain English summary:

(1) The controversies in both cases cited above could have been prevented if our legislators had avoided using the phrase "and/or" and had clarified matters by choosing between "and" or "or."

And yet, if you look at the House bills and Senate bills that have been filed in the current 19th Congress, you will still see "and/or" being used.

(2) In coming up with its rulings in these two cases, the Supreme Court followed the rule in Statutory Construction that every word in a statute must be given effect.

It's astounding that the researchers who helped the justices who wrote these rulings seem to have been unaware of the numerous rulings from courts in the US, UK, and Australia that have condemned the use of "and/or."
---------------------

RELATED READING:
"Should Academics Use ‘And/Or’ In Their Writing?" by Trinka

88
Getting to Know English / The world in 710 words
« Last post by Joe Carillo on November 16, 2023, 12:44:32 AM »
If I were asked to describe the world today, I would say that it had hardly changed since 2,200 years ago when Archimedes, the Greek mathematician and physicist, bragged that he could move the world if only he had the lever to lift it. For all his ingenuity, I think he went way too far off in making that claim. He definitely couldn’t have done that. This is because the world is an ovaloid sphere 12,760 km in diameter rotating on its axis in 23 hours, 56 minutes, and 4.09 seconds and it is revolving around the sun. It has a mass in tons of about 5.98 x 10 raised to the 21st power and a volume in cubic meters of about 1.08 x 10 raised to the 21st power. That’s simply too heavy, too massive, and too fast-moving for Archimedes to lift with a lever.

                     IMAGE CREDIT: WIKIPEDIA COMMONS
The world was simply too heavy, too massive, and too fast-moving for Archimedes
to lift with a lever—and on what did he think he would be standing on?

Despite his overarching audacity, Archimedes was understandably not in a position to know during his time those attributes of the world. It was in fact only 1,750 years later that the Polish astronomer and polymath Nicolaus Copernicus, after long and sustained observation, concluded that Earth wasn’t the center of the universe but was just one of the planets orbiting the bigger—and he thought stationary—sun. But on this even Copernicus himself was only partly right. Centuries later, in the early 1600s, the Italian astronomer-mathematician Galileo Galilee demonstrated that the sun wasn’t stationary in the heavens at all. It was rotating on it own axis in a perpetually moving spiral arm of the galaxy that we now call the Milky Way.

All these are now well-established certainties about Archimedes’s world and ours. Even with this body of knowledge, however, most of humanity are still as mired as ever in superstition, in belief without proof, and in religious fundamentalism. Still, organized religion, superstition, and nationhood have been strong civilizing forces that marshaled both the motive and creative energies for such marvels as the Stonehenge in England, the Great Pyramids of Egypt, the stately cathedrals in Europe, the great mosques in the Middle East and Asia, the Borobudur temples in Cambodia, and the huge statues of Buddha in Afghanistan.

Through the centuries, however, enmity and intolerance have always plagued mankind, leading to so many of the horrible depredations by either side of the major religious or geopolitical divides. Just to mention the major ones—the long series of expeditions in the Middle Ages by armed Holy  Crusaders from Europe to wage punitive wars against Islamist believers so they can wrest Jerusalem from Muslim rule back to the Christian fold, leading to casualties estimated at 2 to 6 million people just from Western Europe alone; in World Wars I and II, the long and bitterly fought conflict among the various world powers, resulting in horrendous destruction, combatant casualties estimated at 20 million, and civilian casualties at 40 million; in September 11, 2001, the suicide aerial crash-bombing by Islamist terrorists of the World Trade Center in New York City in 2001 wiped out almost 3,000 noncombatant lives; from February 24, 2022 to date, the sustained large-scale armed attacks waged by the Russian Federation against Ukraine led to recorded estimates of 7,550 killed and 14,638 injured; and today, at this very moment, a bloody war is being savagely fought between Israel and  Hamas-led Palestinian militants, a war triggered by the latter’s stealthy invasion of Israel last October 7 during which an estimated 1,200 Israelites were massacred at the Gaza Strip and over 200 civilians and soldiers were taken as hostages.*

Thus, the great flowering of scientific knowledge and rational thinking that began with Archimedes and pursued with vigor by the great scientific minds of Copernicus, Galileo Galilee, Isaac Newton, Charles Darwin, and Albert Einstein have amounted to nothing much in fostering amity and peace among the world’s peoples. It is then not a surprise that today, on a shocking improvement on Archimedes’ claim that he could upend the world with a lever, nations of various religious, political, or ideological persuasions could claim that they could move the world simply by virtue of pure belief—no lever, no fulcrum, no hands or physical effort even—just their firm belief and their leaders’ overpowering threat of violence and annihilation against nonbelievers.
---------------------
*These casualty figures have been collated from figures of the United Nations Human Rights Commission, LumenCandela.com, and other observers as published in Wikipedia.

This is a condensed and updated version of the author’s 854-word essay that appeared in this column in the June 21, 2017 issue of The Manila Times.

Read this essay and listen to its voice recording in The Manila Times:
The world in 710 words      

Next: Don’t let “can,” “could,” “will,” and “would” baffle you anymore        November 16, 2023   

Visit Jose Carillo’s English Forum, http://josecarilloforum.com. You can follow me on Facebook and Twitter and e-mail me at j8carillo@yahoo.com.
89
PLAYLIST UPDATE FOR NOVEMBER 4 - 10, 2023 OF THE FORUM’S FACEBOOK GATEWAY

Simply click the web links to the 14 featured English grammar refreshers and general interest stories this week along with selected postings published in the Forum in previous years:

1. Market Positioning: “Winning the battle for people’s minds”




2. Getting to Know English: “The little-heralded past imperfect tense in English”




3. Use and Misuse: “The problem with our English according to Jose Carillo”




4. You Asked Me This Question: “How do ‘I hope’ and ‘hopefully’ differ and is the latter acceptable usage?”




5. Essays by Jose Carillo: “My misgivings when people wish me ‘More power!’”




6. Students’ Sounding Board: “An assortment of bewildering questions about English usage”    
 



7. Getting To Know English: “The emphatic forms and inverted sentences”




8. Essays by Joe Carillo: “Questionable English grammar in the lyrics of a popular song”




9. Language Humor At Its Finest: “A cavalcade of palindromes”




10. Time Out From English Grammar: “Thomas Edison’s greatest idea ‘wasn’t something anybody could patent or touch’”
   



11. Advice and Dissent: “Minority faiths in Middle East face extinction due to religious intolerance”
   



12. Time Out From English Grammar: “The real wonder is that humans ever discovered science at all”


 

13. Education and Teaching: “The rocky road to idiomatic English”    




14. A Forum Lounge RetrospectIve: “Verbatim: What Is a photocopier?”    





90
Getting to Know English / Winning the battle for people’s minds
« Last post by Joe Carillo on November 09, 2023, 10:31:49 AM »
Why is it that some applicants with sterling credentials and impressive personality—even if they can write job application letters in good English—don’t get any calls at all for a job interview? Why is it that some politicians with impeccable character and an unblemished public-service record get bashed right and left for every conceivable shenanigan they may not even aware or heard about?

The problem in the first case might be that despite the job applicant’s positive attributes, his or her qualifications don’t meet the job requirements or even if they do, the application letter itself doesn’t communicate to the prospective employer a sense of competence and trustworthiness. And in the second case, the problem might be even more complex—the politician’s opponents might have been insidiously besmirching his or her reputation but the latter just ignored it as too inconsequential to bother refuting.


The operative word in both cases is positioning, and this—whether it works for good and bad for you—is the powerful marketing concept presented by the now-classic book Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind by Al Ries and Jack Trout.

The revolutionary idea was originally developed by Ries and Trout—both seasoned advertising agency executives—for marketing, branding, and product advertising. From the time that the book was published over 42 years ago, that idea has found wide, vigorous, and successful application in various fields: in marketing, politics, corporate communications, education, even in organized religion.

Here, in a nutshell, is how Ries and Trout formally defined positioning in their book that took the business and advertising world by storm in 1981:

“Positioning starts with a product. A piece of merchandise, a service, a company, an institution, or even a person. Perhaps yourself.
 
“But positioning is not what you do to a product. Positioning is what you do to the mind of the prospect. That is, you position the product in the mind of the prospect. A newer definition [for it]: ‘How you differentiate yourself in the mind of your prospect.’

“So it’s incorrect to call the concept ‘product positioning’ as if you were doing something to the product itself.

“Not that positioning doesn’t involve change. It does. But changes made in the name, the price, and the packages are really not changes in the product at all. They’re basically cosmetic changes done for the purpose of securing a worthwhile position in the prospect’s mind.”

In the battle for people’s minds, Ries and Trout argue, perception is reality. You may not be the best, but if you position yourself well and pursue that positioning well, you stand a good chance of beating the competition and winning the recognition that you desire.

Thus they strongly recommend: “The best approach to take in our overcommunicated society is the oversimplified message. In communication, as in architecture, less is more. You have to sharpen your message to cut into the mind. You have to jettison the ambiguities, simplify the message, and then simplify it some more if you want to make a long lasting impression.”

“The…paradox is that nothing is more important than communication. With communication going for you, anything is possible. Without it, nothing is possible. No matter how talented and ambitious you may be. What’s called luck is usually an outgrowth of successful communication. Saying the right things to the right person at the right time.

“Positioning is an organized system for finding windows in the mind. It is based on the concept that communication can only take place at the right time and under the right circumstances."

It therefore behooves all of us to always position ourselves purposively for whatever enterprise we find worth pursuing—and not to allow other people or just any entity to make that position for us by default. And to succeed in today’s world, it’s never too early or too late to read Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind and to start applying its prescriptions now—right now.
------------

This is an expanded version of the author’s 390-word essay that appeared in this column in the August 8, 2009 issue of The Manila Times.

Read this essay and listen to its voice recording in The Manila Times:
Winning the battle for people’s minds      

Next: The world in 854 words         November 16, 2023

Visit Jose Carillo’s English Forum, http://josecarilloforum.com. You can follow me on Facebook and Twitter and e-mail me at j8carillo@yahoo.com.
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10