A fun word nerd find: the French word jour, meaning “day” (as in “bonjour”), comes from the Latin word diurnus, meaning “daily.” It’s the adjectival form of dies, the Latin word for “day.” Incidentally, in spite of the similarities, our English word day is “in no way related to Latin dies,” according to the OED. (It is very much related, however, to the German tag.)
Speaking of the OED, their March 2011 update added OMG, LOL, IMHO, BFF, TMI, and others to the dictionary. That’s noteworthy in itself (and being a descriptivist, I’m glad to see them there), but this bit surprised me:
As is often the case, OED‘s research has revealed some unexpected historical perspectives: our first quotation for OMG is from a personal letter from 1917; the letters LOL had a previous life, starting in 1960, denoting an elderly woman (or ‘little old lady’; see LOL n./1); and the entry for FYI [FYI phr., adj., and n.], for example, shows it originated in the language of memoranda in 1941.
1917! I had no idea.
Other new additions: to heart (as a verb, as in “I heart etymology”) and smack talk.
Remember Crosswrite, that proof-of-concept I did for web-based audio transcription? Well, I’ve fleshed it out a bit.
You can now upload files (either through the buttons on the left or via FTP) and it automatically saves your transcripts to text files (no database required) every second.
I don’t have a live demo of the app (since I don’t really want people uploading their MP3s to my server), but the code is on Github as usual. If you run into problems with it or have feature requests, either add an issue on Github or email me.
When I was a kid, my mom used to have us memorize poems. She’d write the poem out on a whiteboard and we’d recite it a few times, then she’d start erasing a few words, have us recite it again, erase a few more, and so on. And it worked.
Turns out it’s super easy to do the same kind of thing in a web app. Here’s Erasure:
If you click on an erased word, it’ll briefly become visible again. (But of course you only want to do that if you’re really stuck.)
The more I read the scriptures, the more they reveal themselves to me. It’s almost like a fractal. From far out, it seems like there’s not that much detail, but the more you zoom into the fractal, the more you find. And there’s no limit to how far you can zoom in. Infinite beauty.
I’ve noticed, too, that when I’m not as diligent in reading and studying the scriptures, they seem to lose their color, becoming flat and boring and dry (at least in my mind). But as soon as I get back into them, they burst into vibrant color and three-dimensionality, vivid and electrifying enough to remind me that this earth is not my true home and that there’s a world even more real than this one waiting for me.
Put another way, the further I get from the scriptures, the darker and hazier things get, spiritually, but when I return to the word of God that I love so much, it’s like the world fills with light so piercing and clear that there’s no way I can deny that there is a God and that he’s full of love and joy and truth.
David Whitmer repeatedly insisted that the translation process occurred in full view of Joseph Smith’s family and associates. (The common image of a curtain hanging between the Prophet and his scribes, sometimes seen in illustrations of the story of the Book of Mormon, is based on a misunderstanding. There was indeed a curtain, at least in the latter stages of the translation process. However, that curtain was suspended not between the translator and his scribe but near the front door of the Peter Whitmer home, in order to prevent idle passersby and gawkers from interfering with the work.)
This was the first I’d heard that the curtain wasn’t between Joseph and scribe. Makes me realize just how little I know about Church history. (Which is one of the reasons we’re doing the Mormon Texts Project.)
Beyond that, the article has two other anecdotes I found fascinating. First, from David Whitmer:
He could not translate unless he was humble and possessed the right feelings towards every one. To illustrate, so you can see. One morning when he was getting ready to continue the translation, something went wrong about the house and he was put out about it. Something that Emma, his wife, had done. Oliver and I went up stairs, and Joseph came up soon after to continue the translation, but he could not do anything. He could not translate a single syllable. He went down stairs, out into the orchard and made supplication to the Lord; was gone about an hour—came back to the house, asked Emma’s forgiveness and then came up stairs where we were and the translation went on all right. He could do nothing save he was humble and faithful.
I can relate — if I get put out about anything, bam, the Spirit’s gone. (Also, now that I’m twenty-eight, it’s dawning on me just how young Joseph was when he was translating the Book of Mormon. Wow.)
The second is from Martin Harris via Edward Stevenson:
By aid of the seer stone, sentences would appear and were read by the Prophet and written by Martin, and when finished he would say, “Written,” and if correctly written, that sentence would disappear and another appear in its place, but if not written correctly it remained until corrected, so that the translation was just as it was engraven on the plates, precisely in the language then used. Martin said, after continued translation they would become weary, and would go down to the river and exercise by throwing stones out on the river, etc. While so doing on one occasion, Martin found a stone very much resembling the one used for translating, and on resuming their labor of translation, Martin put in place the stone that he had found. He said that the Prophet remained silent, unusually and intently gazing in darkness, no traces of the usual sentences appearing. Much surprised, Joseph exclaimed, “Martin! What is the matter? All is as dark as Egypt!” Martin’s countenance betrayed him, and the Prophet asked Martin why he had done so. Martin said, to stop the mouths of fools, who had told him that the Prophet had learned those sentences and was merely repeating them, etc.
Joseph Smith himself often disagreed with various of his brethren on different points, yet he never cracked down on them, saying they’d better change this or that, or else. He disagreed with Parley P. Pratt on a number of things, and also with Brigham Young on various things. Brigham said that Joseph didn’t know a thing about business.
Joseph rebuked Parley P. Pratt for things said in the newspaper Parley was editing, but he didn’t remove him from the editorship. “The paper is not interesting enough. You’re not putting the right things in it.” Still he left it entirely up to Parley what to do. This has always been the policy in the Church — a lot of degree of differences. It should not worry us.
Over the past few months I’ve had more people asking how to get prints of my artwork. After hunting around to find a good place, I’ve settled on Imagekind (per a friend’s recommendation).
So, you can now get nice prints of some of my religious art or selected illustrations, in a variety of sizes and formats.
I’m also thinking about putting some of my art up on Zazzle for cards and mugs and things like that. We’ll see. My main goal is to make prints available to people who want them.
