Searching for something else (because a query on a specific illness raises all sort of alarms from the health authorities that mine deeply into such thing for the sake of public health and tracking the drift of disease), I came across an interesting training module, from April of 2009, which curiously captured the sentiment and official disposition of an exercise in outbreaks a few years hence.
Tuesday 5 August 2014
time-capsule or animal reservoir/arthopod vector
d'oc or au contraire
Continuing my want for accompaniment and stares in stopped traffic—of which there is a good deal of and part of my motivation, although it’s getting harder and harder to tell blathering to one’s self from blathering to someone far distance or shouting orders at one’s communication devices but perhaps the call and response pace of a foreign language audio-textbook looks less than natural, during my commute—which sometimes can take a significant amount of time, I try to recite at least the introductory lessons of the library’s collection.
I am preparing for our next vacation and always figure it is worth risking a little confusion or letting something learnt expire in the meantime due to disuse to exercise the mouth. I think American English especially is not a very enunciative one and the work-out and exaggeration are necessary for any progress—whatever might stick during these sessions, since I am paying more attention to the road. I knew the German interjection Doch! for really or uh-huh, but while listening to the parallel structured lessons, I learned that the come-back phrase is really a formal and polite contradiction of a question framed in the negative, akin to yes indeed.
The French equivalent is si as opposed to the usually oui, which I never appreciated before. Both languages have two ways of saying yes and one word (form) for no. English, it turns out, once utilized four forms that followed this pattern and were appropriate responses, depending on how the question was posed—yes/no for negative questions and yea/nay for positive ones:
Will she not stay? Yes, she will.
Will he not go? No, he will not.
Will she stay? Yea, she will.
Will he go? Nay, he will not.
Monday 4 August 2014
carbon-sink
The Times of India has a tantalizing little article to re-calibrate the direction of environmental research, turning it back towards carbon-sequestration through a study on ant colonies. Of course, forests and coral reefs perform the same function on a much larger scale than one teeny-tiny bite of breath at a time—trapping whole bucket-fulls of greenhouse gases at once, if left alone.
Careful atmospheric measurements and observation suggests that the creatures make a mortar of limestone to shore up their tunnels and nests. Such examination of ant farms is really a foil to one of the greatest contributing factors to environmental change—behind industrial pollutants and ecological destruction: through mechanised and deep ploughing and tilling, layers of carbon-dioxide that would otherwise mellow underground is released by the acre. I do not believe that the ill-effects of modern cultivation is just the undoing the carefully coordinated work of ants and other chthonic beings.
catagories: ๐ก️, environment
claire obscure
In as much as the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand and wife in Sarajevo was not the sole catalyst and cause of the outbreak of World War, I appreciated the message of a documentary produced a few years ago that conveyed that those preceding years were not just a prelude, the eve of war. Aside from advances in mechanization, transportation and the migration of populations from rural to urban-areas, a singular event did lead to the diversion of much of that new and untempered energy towards the build-up of navies and military power: shortly after the invention of the airplane and the science of aerodynamics, French inventor and aeronaut Louis Blรฉriot successfully flew across the English Channel (La Manche) in the summer of 1909.
catagories: ๐ซ๐ท, ๐ฌ๐ง, ๐, ๐ก, ๐, foreign policy, revolution, travel