Category Archives: Uncategorized

This bumper sticker appears to be anti-George Bush. I’m led to believe that this is related to the now famous “Bushisms”. President Bush was known for having moments where he did not use the right word. This led to people making fun of him. A notable example of this is him talking about “putting food on your family” when he meant to say “put food on the table”.

While this anti-Bush slogan seems to work, there are people in the world that do not know about his mistakes and likely believe that the democrats are just using poor grammar. This image at first glance seems to shout “We have poor grammar”. That’s all I could think when I first saw this image. It took me a few seconds to see the anti-Bush slogan at the top. The message only confuses people that do not understand its true meaning.

This image intends to show people that we had a president that was not fit for office, due to his poor usage of his own native language. The audience is supposed to be aware of the many mistakes of Bush, but not all people would know. People with this slogan likely believe that everyone is aware of Bush’s flawed speeches and that the readers are also democrats, which is not the case. In order to understand this slogan, people would need to be up-to-date on politics, which is a large assumption. It also assumes that there are a lot of anti-Bush people that will be reading this, which might not be the case.

In my opinion, this slogan is poorly thought out and almost ineffective, due to the anti-Bush portion of the sticker’s size. If this was larger, then maybe that would assist in people understanding the true message. Possibly adding more to the slogan would help as well. Perhaps providing information on who “we” are or why “We’re gooder” would make people more inclined to agree. This image is definitely confusing to the average person who doesn’t pay much attention to politics, which does not do it much justice.

As a cellist, I have been exposed to many different pieces ranging from Dmitri Shostakovich’s “Waltz No. 2” to Santana’s “Smooth”. While practicing, I noticed that music style has changed significantly over time. Currently, popular music sounds nothing like music of the classical era or romantic era. Looking back, music has changed many ways. Looking at pieces from composers such as Johann Sebastian Bach, Ludwig van Beethoven, and Richard Wagner, you can see the shift in musical patterns.

Before the 1900, what we know as “classical music” was very popular. However, this era (spanning from roughly 1600 to 1910) can be broken down into 3 distinct periods, baroque, classical, and romantic. I intend to look at the details of each period and the reasons for the change in style. I’m also thinking if I should compare that overall era to more modern music from the 1950s on (rock, rap, disco, etc.). I could use some feedback on that.

My idea for analyzing the shift is looking at 3 distinctly different pieces of music from each period, I’m likely going to use some excerpts of G.F. Handel’s “Water Music”, Mozart’s “Symphony no 25”, and Gustav Holst’s “Jupiter, Bringer of Jolity”. I’ve personally played all of these pieces, so I am familiar with the sound and rhythm of each.

Food for thought:
Was it new technology that changed the composer’s ideas for music?

Did new materials for instrument construction change tone, thus changing what composers wanted in their music?

Did world events shape the music in any way?

A very interesting magazine add that encourages working out had a very…interesting second message.

I find this add to be very poorly thought out. While the outermost message is “working out is important”, there is a definite second impression left on the reader. I feel as though women reacted very negatively to this advertisement, since it is encouraging men to cheat on them.

While this article did not intend for an emotional reaction from the audience, it definitely received one, and it was very negative. A better idea for the add could be “Treat your workout like your girlfriend. Don’t cheat” or something along those lines.

As credible as Reebok is, this certainly did not help the company going forward. There was likely a ton of backlash after this event. It likely took awhile to build the company’s credibility back up after a mistake of this magnitude.

It seems as though whoever was publishing this add was not thinking clearly. There is no logic to this ad, because cheating on your girlfriend is definitely worse than cheating on a workout. I feel as though the company needed an ad, and some people just threw this together at 3 in the morning.

People really need to think about what they are publishing BEFORE it’s published. If people could do this, then the world would be a better place. Think before you say something. Think before you publish an ad. Think before you tweet something. It can save lives.

Artifact 1: JFK vs Khrushchev

Artifact 2: Trump vs Kim Jong Un

Apparently, there’s a group of people in the world that want to take the English language back to its original Germanic roots. In an interesting video that I stumbled across, the channel host describes a small movement to revert English back to its “purest form”. This essentially means that all of the Romance and Greek loanwords would be swapped out for words from Old English or other Germanic languages.

I find this fascinating, because it makes our spoken language sound much more interesting. Some people may find it strange to substitute words for odd Germanic counterparts, but I think it’s a fun little experiment.

For example, the video mentioned how the phrase “A famous actor I’ve seen on the television” became “A nameknown showplayer I’ve seen on the farseer”.

I personally did not think of this as weird, because of my studies with the German language. The German word for actor is “der Schauspieler” which literally translates to “Show-Player” and the word for “television” is “der Fernseher” which means “far-seer”.

I also found it interesting how so many basic sentence words are Germanic in origin. In the above sentence, there were only three words that were not of Germanic origin. These words can be traced to German and still recognizable, such as “seen” coming from “gesehen” or “on the” coming from “auf dem”

All in all, I feel like the movement to “purify” English is not worth the time, but I do see it as an interesting concept. I would personally do this if I had spare time just to see how different the language would become. What do you think? Would you like to see a “purified” English?

In season 12 episode 22 of Supernatural, Sam Winchester is tasked with rallying fellow hunters together to fight a common enemy. He was able to expertly voice his opinions and feelings towards his audience and win them over to his side. He did so using emotional appeals, powerful delivery, and his own credibility as a famous hunter.

Sam was able to appeal to the emotions of the audience by explaining how the enemy is after all of them. This brings fear into the minds of the other hunters, but they quickly realize that Sam has a point. They realize that if they don’t act, then they’ll be the next ones dead. At this point in the show, other hunters were being hunted by the enemy, and the audience knew that these killings needed to stop.

Sam was also able to deliver his speech extremely well. He spoke with pure confidence, which led the others to believe that he knew what he was talking about. There were no stutters in his delivery, which makes the speech and its message even more powerful. Because of his powerful voice and good choice of words, Sam seemed like he was sure that his plan would work.

Finally, Sam used his credibility as another persuasive tool. The audience knows that Sam and his brother had faced many enemies before. The brothers always found a way to win, no matter who the enemy was. This boosted the faith that the other hunters had in Sam and his plan to take down the enemy.

All in all, even when in a tough situation, Sam Winchester was able to persuade others into following him into what could turn into certain death. He used his own emotions, credibility, and speaking skills to prove that the audience was following the right person.

In all of the foreign languages that I have studied, I repeatedly see the same phenomenon, word gender. I always see at least 2 word genders, masculine and feminine. Sometimes I see a third gender, neuter. Some languages even consider plural to be a gender. This always baffled me. Where in the development of language did this occur, and why did it occur? To most people that I know, the lack of word gender does not hinder their ability to properly communicate in English.

In French, there are 2 genders, masculine and feminine (some people argue plural as a third gender). The gender of nouns impact adjectives in the sentence as well. Feminine nouns result in an extra “e” on the end of adjectives, and plural nouns add an “s” at the end of adjectives. From what I have personally studied, the impact on spoken French is essentially nonexistent.

Now things get slightly more complicated when you look at German and Russian. First of all, they add another gender into the mix, neuter. Second of all, the nouns (or articles in German’s case) change depending on the word’s function in a sentence. For example, in German, if a masculine word is the subject of the sentence, the article for the noun is “der”. However, if the noun is the direct object, the article changes to “den”. This is referred to as declension. Another aspect of this confusing scenario is the presence of a case system. German has 4 cases, Nominative (Subject), Accusative (Direct Object), Dative (Indirect Object), and Genitive (Possession). Depending on case and gender, the article (and occasionally word spelling) changes. It impacts spoken German heavily, since it shows the difference between “The dog bites the man” and “The man bites the dog”.

The situation is the same in Russian, but even more complicated. Now there are 2 more cases than in German, which are Instrumental and Prepositional. These 2 cases are used after certain prepositions and only after said prepositions. Even more complicated is the fact that now the entire spelling of the noun changes to match case and gender, since articles don’t even exist in Russian. Once again, it impacts the spoken form of the language, so you can tell who is performing the action and what is receiving the action. This allows for less confusion, because no one will think that “The ball kicked the boy”.

All in all, the concept of gender and declension is very strange to me. I can see how it affects languages, but I feel like you can usually tell by context the function of each word. Given the sentence “John gives me the sweater” I know for a fact that John is the one giving the sweater to me, not any other potential misinterpretation.

In this video from earlier this year, Nintendo is advertising one of their newest products, the Nintendo Switch. The ad is simple in nature, just showing off the main capability of the system, taking it on the go without having to turn your game off. For quick reference, there is a dock that allows the picture to be projected onto a monitor.

Regarding the persuasive techniques used for this ad, there were very few utilized, and it was a poor use of said techniques. It seems as though Nintendo only relied on their ethos as a persuasive technique. All the commercial did was show a man playing in his home and then taking the system on the go. The only words shown on screen were “Nintendo Switch” at the beginning and end of the commercial and Nintendo’s signature logo.

I feel as though Nintendo did not put much thought into this commercial, especially since it was one of the first commercials aired promoting the new console. The only thing that I think was good with the commercial was the advertisement of the game that was being played, The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild. The graphics were incredible in comparison to past Nintendo systems, but it still lacked any type of “grabber”.

I believe that Nintendo should have made the commercial more exciting, in order to stimulate more hype in the gaming community. Watching this commercial, I think “Hey that looks neat” not “Wow, I need to go buy this and experience it for myself”. The latter thought is what Nintendo should have been aiming for.

In terms of logos, I did not see any. The only arguable logos is the argument that people will think to buy the system in order to play on the go. However, this is a flawed argument, as there are already handheld gaming devices.

Pathos is arguably present as well, because the “inner gamer” in adults and the gamer children will be motivated to buy the console for the new games and greater number of opportunities to play said games.

Overall, I feel like for an early promotional commercial, Nintendo made a poor decision. Although they are one of the biggest gaming companies in the world, they should have stepped their game up for the new system, especially after the flop of the Switch’s predecessor, the Wii U.

After reading the article, I began to wonder if smartphones are the sole reason for the decline in social activity. Kids these days just seem to feel criticism about being on their phones. We live in a world where it’s becoming more difficult to go outside and walk around. My father always told me stories about how he would be able to get up and go out whenever he wanted as a kid, as long as he was home for dinner. As he grew older, he hitchhiked around without and worries. Now, people would never trust a stranger due to all of the potential harm.

Personally, I was unable to just go outside and play, due to the lack of sidewalks and nearby parks. I needed to be driven to parks and other friends’ houses. As I got older, I began to walk to my one friend’s house, but that was a good 15-20 minute walk. I only started going out after I got my driver’s license. The world we live in is a more dangerous one. I was afraid of getting into car accidents, which is why I refrained from getting my license. Now, a reason for this fear is the number of accidents caused by distracted driving. This can absolutely be attributed to smartphones, as people tend to be focused on them as much as, if not more than, the road.

The article also states that teenagers of the current generation put off getting jobs. This is likely due to the lack of teenage drivers. I did not get my first job until I knew that I could get myself there without any issue. While I do not have my own car, my parents allowed me to use their cars whenever they were not using them. When my parents were kids, they worked at least one job since they were around the age of 13.

Twenge says that kids are not connected to their families, despite being home more than past generations. In terms of family, I feel very connected to my parents, aunts/uncles, and even some cousins. For me to be able to share these stories about my parents is proof of this. Until I started college, I used to go to my grandmother’s house every Wednesday for family dinner. Until I was about 12, my grandmother would watch me while my parents were out. Due to the lack of WiFi, I was able to talk to my grandmother and bond with her. She told me about how different the world was when she was a kid. She told me about the market that her family owned during the “roaring 20s”, how her family made it through the depression without too much of a struggle, how she worked the shop while WWII raged overseas, and then how her kids lived through the Cold War. Every year, there’s a family reunion and I attend it. I see at least 30 people there yearly, and I know all of them. While I cannot speak for other peers, I know for a fact that my friends from high school are also in the same boat as I am.

Finally, how often were you out with your friends throughout high school? Were you out every weekend? Or were you like me, sitting on your phone wondering if you should ask if anyone wants to go out? How close are you with your family?

Personally, I have always found the concept of language fascinating. I’ve studied German for 4 years, French for 2 years, and Russian for 1 year. You would assume that these languages are extremely different, due to how they sound and how they look when written. I love to compare these languages to English and to each other. I’ve been able to make many connections between French and English. On the other hand, I’ve made about an equal number of connections between English and German. I kept asking myself “Why?” It didn’t make sense to me. I decided to do some research on these languages.

Looking at the English language, you see that it is considered Germanic. This does not mean that English comes from German, but it does mean that they come from a common Germanic ancestor.

However, more similarities are seen between French and English or Latin and English. I always wondered why this was the case.

Looking at the diversity of vocabulary in the English language, I found that more English vocabulary is derived from Romance languages, which are langauges based on Latin.

It’s interesting to see that over 50% of commonly used English words are not of Germanic origin. I feel as though this is because of the Norman invasion of the British Isles. As William the Conqueror began to take over, he spoke Old French, which began to mix with the Germanic-based Old English.

Studying German, I found that many common words were not cognates with English. One of the first sentences that I learned was “Wie geht es Ihnen?” which means “How are you?” I would have never been able to tell what that sentence meant, unless I was told. My friends and I had always assumed that English was derived from German, but we were met with a rude awakening.

When I began studying French, I immediately noticed similarities. I always found it fascinating how deceiving language was. Looking at a sheet of verbs in French class, I immediately saw cognate verbs, such as “arriver”, “changer”, and “payer”. I noticed that these differed greatly from the German words, being “ankommen”, “ändern”, and “bezahlen” respectively. It always shocked me that you can connect a Germanic language to a Romance language so easily.

Interestingly enough, there are also many grammar rules borrowed from French. A very noticeable example of this is the formation of plural nouns. The general rule in French is adding an “s” to the end of the noun. This is reflected in English, because one of the more common plural formation rules is adding an “s”. In German, there are 4 categories of nouns, each with their own plural formation rules, depending on the word gender and the ending of the word.

I always wonder why people still consider English a Germanic language. From what I’ve seen, more vocabulary and grammar is derived from French and Latin than other Germanic languages.