Parlez-vous Globish?

When I was much younger, I fancied myself as a linguist. I have to say that experience has proved to me that I'm not really that good, but one of the languages I looked at was Esperanto, which for anyone not aware, was an attempt to create an artificial universal language. It still has its devotees, but hasn't really taken off - mainly because English has arisen as a de facto universal language, partly because it's what the Americans speak (well, sort of) and partly because it is the language of the internet. Problem is that different countries have developed their own versions of English (what at one time we would have probably called "pidgin") and they can't necessarily understand each other that well, even though they claim to be speaking the same language. Now a Frenchman has come up with the idea of formalising a simplified form of English, which he calls Globish. Part of his idea is a reduced vocabulary of just 1500 words. You can look up a list of these words at http://perso.orange.fr/yvanbaptiste/audioglob/index.htm
and I have to say they make for somewhat strange reading. Would you have included words like activist, campaign, fertile and sympathy for example. Good idea, but not sure about the detail.

Heads I win, tails I win.

The Home Secretary has said that a terrorist attack over the Christmas period is "highly likely". So if there is one, he'll be able to claim credit for foreseeing it, and if there isn't one he'll be able to claim credit for forestalling it. Now there's clever!

Not before time

My daily paper is advertising a "Free Gordon Ramsay Calendar". So they've locked the foul-mouthed bugger up at last then?

Respect.

Have you seen the story about Josie Grove? If you haven't, you'll find it on the net, and I'm not going to try and tell it here - I can't type when my eyes are full of tears. It makes me extremely sad, extremely angry and enormously, enormously proud - of what I'm not really sure. Perhaps just proud to belong to the same human race - to be associated, however obliquely, with a young lady of such maturity, serenity and courage. My problems pale into insignificance beside those of her and her family. They will be constantly in my thoughts.

Stating the obvious.

So knife amnesties have no appreciable effect on knife crime? Now there's a surprise! That's not to say there is no merit in them, but anyone with half a brain could work out that the only people likely to give knives up under such amnesties would be those who had little or no intention of using them.

Credit where it's due.

Remember Headingley 1981 - 3rd test against Australia? For those who don't, Australia batted first and made 401-9 declared. They then bowled out England for 174 and enforced the follow-on. England made a better fist of it in the second innings (mainly thanks to Botham) and made 356, but this left Australia with only 129 to get to win. But we bowled them out for only 111 for a famous victory. As I recall, everybody was saying "Well done England" and not "How could Australia have lost - they were rubbish". Now the reverse has happened in the second test over there, and is anyone saying "Well done Australia"? Are they buggery - no, it's all about how rubbish we were, losing from an apparently invincible position. We are a small-minded and self-centered race when it comes to sport, aren't we?

Good will toward men?

With the festive season fast approaching, the question once again arises - who is it for? Some years ago, Birmingham decided to call it "Winterval" and was roundly criticised for doing so. I couldn't understand why then, and I still can't. Christmas is Christmas - nothing can change that, and Christians will celebrate it as such, but does that mean that only they are entitled to have a good time? What about those of other faiths, or indeed those of no faith? Are they supposed to stay indoors and hide themselves away? The Winterval idea was an attempt to make the point that this is a time of good cheer for all who want to take part - each in their own way, and according to their own beliefs, or non-beliefs. Those who insist that it's Christmas or nothing would exclude all those who hold views different from their own - hardly a Christian attitude - and perhaps they should be reminded that it was originally a pagan festival anyway.

Why is why the hardest word?

The Eddington report makes it pretty clear now that road pricing is inevitable. The only way, we are told, of easing congestion - by hitting you in the pocket if you travel on busy roads at busy times. Quite apart from the fact that this discriminates against the less-well-off motorist, perhaps the question which should be being asked is why motorists find themselves sitting in traffic jams on busy roads. They're certainly not doing it for fun! Could it have anything to do with the fact that most people work in towns and cities, and most workplaces start work and finish at about the same time? All things which are out of the control of the poor commuter, who is the one who ends up spending their time queuing to get to work and then again to get home, and who will now it seems have to pay for the privilege. Perhaps dispersal of workplaces and staggering of start and finish times should be looked at first?

Maths 101.

I've posted before on the dangers of misusing and misunderstanding mathematical data. In a recent case a defendant was convicted on the basis of DNA evidence. The prosecution maintained that DNA had been found at the scene of the crime, and that there was only "one chance in a billion" that it was not that of the defendant. How they arrived at this figure was not explained, and I have the feeling that it was just plucked out of the air for effect, but even if we take it as accurate, there are more than 6.5 billion people in the world, which means that there are probably 6 or 7 people out there who would fit that DNA profile. So in the absence of any other evidence you could say that there is only a 15% chance that they have got the right person. It all depends on the way you look at it, doesn't it?

Keep a sense of proportion.

We do seem to have gone overboard about this Polonium 210 business (I have to admit I thought polonium was what my Mum used to put on my sandwiches!). Obviously the whole business is very worrying, but as I understand it, you would have to have been pretty intimate with Mr Litvinenko to have picked up anything vaguely approaching a worrying amount of radiation, so why we're making such a big thing about insignificant (health-wise, that is) traces found here and there is beyond me. All we're doing is risking worrying people unnecessarily.