Author: jbenton

“A network called ‘Internet,'” an awesome 1993 introduction to the subject from the CBC. Ah, the days when “the Internet” was just “Internet,” kind of like “Skeletor,” “She-Ra,” or “Beyonce.” Also, the days when “Internet” was, for CBC purposes, a synonym for “Usenet.”
Six days before this piece aired, I was busy posting on rec.sport.basketball.college, comparing the careers of UNC centers Eric Montross and Scott Williams.

I’ve been rereading The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language the last few nights. (Yeah, I’m a geek.) For anyone even remotely interested in language, it’s an interesting primer on the language’s evolution over the centuries. (It’s particularly fascinating on dialects — the ways in which, say, New Zealand English differs from Australian English, or how what people speak in Alabama differs from what they speak in Minnesota.)
Anyway, last night I was reading a short section on West Indies English, and how it’s a unique variant in part because the region has both British and American English influences in close proximity. That’s when I noticed this (you can see it here, in the box at page bottom):
“Puerto Rico became part of the USA following the Spanish-American war in 1898. Donuts is one of the consequences.”
The donut reference is to an accompanying photo of “Raul’s Mini Donuts”; the point the author is making is that Puerto Ricans spell the word “donuts” and not the British “doughnuts.”
But: “Donuts is one of the consequences”? Donuts is?
Is this right? It’s a book about the English language, so I presume an editor would have caught it if it’s wrong. And I can understand the way in which “donuts” is being used as a concept, not a number of items. (As in, “The donut is one of the consequences.”) We’re talking about the Platonic ideal of a donut, the ur-donut. Or if the word donuts had been put in quotes, making it a clear reference to the word “Donuts” in the Raul’s sign, I could sign on.
But isn’t it wrong the way it’s written? Or am I showing my American English bias? I know I’ve got some copy-editor readers — hook me up, people.

Here’s my column from today’s paper, on the perils of principal turnover.

Summer 2001: Hoodlum breaks into my car, tries to steal CD player. Luckily, hoodlum is stoopid and can’t figure out how to get it out. Steals a cell phone.
September 2002: Hoodlum smashes left rear window, breaks into my car, successfully steals CD player. Also randomly pours a bottle of Coke on my backseat.
August 2003: Hoodlum smashes right rear window (thank heavens for variety!), breaks into my car, successfully steals my CD player. Also takes about $40 (estim.) in change. Leaves my TollTag and my Texas state map.
Last night: You’ll never guess! Hoodlum smashes my left rear window, breaks into my car, successfully steals my CD player. Completely rips apart the car’s central console in the process, ripping out my air conditioner and fucking up the electronics so that my turn signals (and god knows what else) don’t work. Steals about $60 (estim.) in change. Leaves my TollTag, my Mapsco, and my Parking Spot repeat-customer card.
Those motherfuckers who run my fucking apartment complex did their usual blame-the-victim schtick when I called them a minute ago. (“Oh, you must have left some valuables in clear view!” Um, actually no, fuckface — even took off the detachable face on my stereo.)
At least I’ve established a number of meaningful business relationships with auto-glass repair shops, thanks to all the smashing experiences Post Uptown Village has provided me. I think this is the latest in a long string of incidents conspiring to tell me something: It is time to move far, far away from here.
I’ve said it before, and if history tells us anything, I’ll probably say it again. But to Hoodlums No. 1 through 4 and the mind-blowing cretins at Post Properties, I give a rousing:
Thanks, assholes!

Long-time readers may remember Jessie Deeter, who was one of my fellow Pew Fellows last fall. She went to Sierra Leone to make a documentary about U.N. peacekeeping. She blogged on one of my servers while she was there. (She also shot, with her hubby Rob, these photos for Slate.)
Well, she’s back in Africa for some more reporting, and back blogging again. Check it out. Plus, some of her video is now up on the Pew site.

Why George Orwell hated Esperanto: “Apparently, Orwell, during his down-and-out phase in Paris, had to accept a room in the lodgings of a cousin. The fact that she and her live-in lover spoke only Esperanto together at home — a language he could not understand — left him less than enthusiastic.”
There is something about a couple speaking only Esperanto to one another that is really romantic. And I’m not even kidding.

If you’ll excuse what appears to be a porn focus on this blog of late, the LA Times does its usual excellent job on the porn/HIV story.

Here’s my story from today’s front page, on how the Texas House has slipped an unusual and unnoticed clause into its school finance bill: eliminating the high school TAKS test. Reports from the field suggest this story is even being talked about on the radio in Austin — so it must be important.
Also, here’s my sidebar.

I’m on TXCN tonight (assuming they found time to edit out my stumbles). And that story that was supposed to be on today’s front page will be on tomorrow’s.

This is a crime against humanity.