WORDPLAY Wordplay. It is associated primarily with writers, poets, comedians and other performers. They derive their inspiration in part from this. But  smart entrepreneurs and advertising-makers too use it frequently as packaging for their product, to entice customers in this way. Remember  though: What you throw away is the packaging! Politicians, lawyers and others are keen to use it, to win their case. It also is food for  psychologists and psychiatrists. And, of course, linguists and language scientists, in particular, like to interfere with wordplay.  Spoken and written language are the most common ways in which we communicate with each other. And like everything else in the hands of  human beings, both can be used and (ab)used. We let ourselves be lead by it, and we let ourselves be lead astray by it. How conscious are we  of this? Seeing, hearing, smelling, feeling and tasting your own language anew, can lead to all sorts of surprises. Surprises that wake you up and that  make you even aware again, of your situation.  Therefore, below, through wordplay, I will look differently at mostly everyday used and simple words.  25-09-14 AND STILL IT IS GOOGLE GARGLE GARGLE You would expect that putting Homo Sapiens, Latin for “Wise Man” according to the English Wikipedia (females as always discredited!), into the system of Google  Translate would give no difference in whatever language. It is Latin, so it stays Latin. But no, when asked to translate it from Dutch to English, this is what it states  as being the right translation: If we reverse the translation, so from English to Dutch, we get what we expect:  We even get a nice English definition. Well, more a kind of Google English definition. And then we start to think: Can it be that this Google  Gargle Gargle also takes place with regard to other languages. So I tried about six and no, it does not. This, for instance, is what you get when  you let Google translate Homo Sapiens from German to English:  As you can see, no problem. It even gives a “See also: homo”, which when clicked leads you to translation of homo to gay, queer, fag, poof and  so on. And really rather amazing in a way is that even translating from Afrikaans (a language with many Dutch words) Homo Sapiens stays  Homo Sapiens.  So, what does this mean? That all Dutch Homo Sapiens are Gay? Or that the Dutch are so stupid that they think Homo Sapiens means Gay  Sapiens? Or do the English think that about the Dutch Homo Sapiens and is that why it is translated thus? Oh, and by the way Google Translate  is at least consistent, as you can see below:  By the way, the Google Gargle Gargle directly below has at least been put right.  19-03-13 GOOGLE GARGLE GARGLE October 2010 I pointed already to the noteworthy fact that the abbreviation for the United States of North-America has changed more and more from U.S.A. to U.S.  and finally to US, which effectively means “us” (see my page: Wordplay under 30-10-11). Today I used the North-American Google translation system to translate the Dutch sentence: “Het ontneemt ons deze mogelijkheden” (translation should be: It  deprives us of our possibilities) to English (better to North-American). By “coincidence” I pasted the Dutch sentence written in capitals in the system. The gibberish  below is the translation according to Google: To see if this is a one time only mistake I tried another sentence and only the word “us”. These are the results in CAPITALS: So, if we, Dutch, translate by way of the North-American Google translation system something of “us” in capitals to North-American, we immediately are all of North-  America and we have to give North-America our bread.  26-02-13 PAPALOLATRY Papalolatry is a new word, coined by former catholic priest Matthew Fox and used on the Bottom Up Radio Show. The interview Rob Kall of the Bottom Up Radio  Show had with this former priest on February 13 can be read in the transcript: “Transcript: Former Catholic Priest Matthew Fox on Ratzinger, Opus Dei and the  Broken Catholic Church”. Matthew Fox says:  I mean, the real issues are not about Popes, the real issues are about the survival of the planet for God's sake! You know, these are the Spiritual issues of our time, and of  course, melting our war machine into real work for real people. There's so much unemployment in the world, when there's so much work that needs doing and so forth, it  makes no sense. Humans have to wake up. That's what has to happen, and a healthy church would be leading the way in that, it wouldn't be narcissistically preoccupied  with it's own make believe heroes, idols. "Papalolatry," I call it. The new sin of our time. When the television marries the Vatican, you have Papalolatry. And it's an idol,  it's an idolatry, it's not real religion. Projection.  I myself would let the word encompass a lot more even, than only the marriage between the Mainstream Media and the Vatican. As Matthew Fox makes clear the  word is a combination of the words papa and idolatry. Idolatry according to the English Wikipedia is: “... a pejorative term for the worship of an idol, a physical object  such as a cult image, as a god, or practices believed to verge on worship, such as giving undue honour and regard to created forms other than God.” The first word, of course, is one of the ways the pope is named by his followers. But in a large part of the world it also the word for the father of the nuclear family. The reason is,  that the word is one of the first and most easy sounds children consciously learn to make, like mama. But as human children, we are educated and programmed since centuries that papa comes first and foremost. We are educated and programmed to believe, that  humans are the top of all life on Earth. And we are educated and programmed to believe, that the male human is at the top of all other humans, meaning female  humans and child humans. We therefore have in most there-is-just-one-god-beliefs a god who is male. Which makes all male humans stand closer to this god than  female humans and child humans, again higher on top of all life. In a lot of spiritualistic beliefs this is the predominant dogma. But also in many of the materialistic  beliefs like science and technology the male is put before and above the female. That is why it is said the male human works (because he does things outside of the home and nuclear family). And the female human does not work (because she does things inside of the home and nuclear family). In this way through spiritualistic  and materialistic belief systems the direct or nuclear family is predominantly ruled, governed and dictated by the papas or male humans, who are led to believe that  they are better than the mammas or female humans and the child humans, and therefore think they should be treated as such. That is papalolatry to me! The idolisation of the male, papa human above all other humans, be it in society as a whole or in the direct, nuclear family. And the  idolisation of the pope is just one example. It just shows, that humans have not transcended by 1% even their animal nature. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idolatry  http://www.opednews.com/articles/1/Transcript-Former-Catholi-by-Rob-Kall-130220-447.html http://www.opednews.com/articles/1/Transcript-Part-II-Former-by-Rob-Kall-130220-919.html  30-10-11  Thoughtless advertisers? The HEMA (H.E.M.A.) is a Dutch dimestore chain, according to the English Wikipedia. It sells in its restaurant also its own products. Which of  course need advertising labels to explain what it is and what is in it. At the moment they sell sauce, which is labeled as: “Sa/uCE”. The  advertisers idea of playing with forms and sizes of letters. But it also sells a product called “vitamin water”. And this is labeled as: “VITAMIN  WAt/eR”. For me, it reads at first glance as: “VITAMIN WAR”. Is this a joke by an advertiser? Thoughtless work or the unconscious at work? Or  is it intentional?  30-10-11  United States Again, for the N.L.P.-ers (Neuro-Linguistic-Programming-believers) among us. Since a very long time the word combination: ”United States”  exists. Especially in the combination with “America”, as: “United States of America”. Also this has been abbreviated since a very long time to  “U.S. of A.” or shorter still “U.S.” Nowadays it has become a standard to even leave out the punctuation marks. Among other things because of  laziness and because advertising and other texts are paid per punctuation mark. And this modernity of the omission of punctuation marks leads  to, yes, “US”. What do N.L.P-ers think about this kind of possible conscious and unconscious indoctrination by word usage? Particularly in the  psychological phenomenon “THEM OR US”? So, on the basis of the newer phrase "United States of Europe" and the preference in Europe for the  English language as a common language, we now have “US of Europe” and “US of America” (what, in fact, really should be “North-America”).  Europe though prefers the phrase "European Union", which is shortened to “E.U.” and so to “EU”. For many countries in Europe, amongst which  The Netherlands, meaningless. But for Romania, among others, the abbreviation without punctuation marks is very laughable, because “eu” is  a word for “I” in the Romanian language. So now, we not only have “US”, but also “EU” (I).  24-10-11  Recreation For amongst others the Neuro-Linguistic-Programming-believers among us. Explain why we define the word “recreation” with: “Recreation is an  activity of leisure, leisure being discretionary time. The "need to do something for recreation" is an essential element of human biology and  psychology. Recreational activities are often done for enjoyment, amusement, or pleasure and are considered to be "fun". The term recreation  implies participation to be healthy refreshing mind and body.” (internet reference (24-10-11): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recreation).  Re-creation literally means: Making anew. Making something, creating something takes effort, strain, stress. So making something anew, re-  creating something, also takes effort, strain and stress. Someone baking bread daily, re-creates bread daily. Someone, who sows seed every  year and harvests the new seed every year, re-creates seed annually. So, what has recreation to do with relaxation?  25-07-11  A cunning article?  On the 24th of July an article was added on the website of the English news medium “The Guardian” regarding the atrocities on Friday the 22nd  of July in Norway, titled: “The news coverage of the Norway mass-killings was fact-free conjecture”.  Although I totally agree with the author Charlie Brooker that many of the so-called experts are really “guessers”, who just “guess” (and not  only in this instance), I also am annoyed by his article. The article seems straightforward and trustworthy the first time one reads it. For  instance, it seems very logical that Brooker states: “Presumably he wanted to make a name for himself, which is why I won't identify him. His  name deserves to be forgotten. Discarded. Deleted. Labels like "madman", "monster", or "maniac" won't do, either. There's a perverse  glorification in terms like that. If the media's going to call him anything, it should call him pathetic; a nothing.” And that, for this reason, he  does not mention the name of the “nothing”, nor his religion: Christian, nor his nationality: Norwegian, also seems clear enough. But at a  second look, we see the article is literally sprinkled with the words and terms “al-Qaida” and “muslim”.  And while Brooker states that labels won’t do, it is remarkable that he himself has to use at least 24 times the labels “al-Qaida” and “muslim”,  while the label “Norwegian” with regard to the nationality of the “nothing” is mentioned only once and the label “christian” zero times. Why? Is  it because this is the only way this main stream medium accepts the tenor of this article? Or is Charlie Brooker on the one hand trying to make  the obvious point, that this is an act of a monster, while on the other hand simultaneously, the hidden point that Muslims are still worse? The  most sick point really is that both christians and muslims believe in the same god. But this god seems to make the fundamentalists and  extremists among them, really a small percentage of these believers, hate each other so much, that they have been killing each other since the  birth of their respective religions. So for almost 2,000 years already.  Instead of in one “we”, these believers in this same god most of the time think in “us or them”. But is the saying not: Together we stand,  divided we fall? Also in this article, meant or not meant, the “us” is nearly not mentioned, because "us" doesn’t do things wrong, and “them” is  mentioned often, mostly in an especially negative way. To me, the article therefore reads as an insincere and two-faced play of words. What we  do remember ultimately, are the many times repeated terms. The Russians people have a saying: Repetition is the mother of the study. And  the way to advertise is by screaming the same slogan over and over again. But what we don’t remember, are the facts, that this was the act of  a Norwegian and a christian, because that the one is hardly mentioned, the other not at all.  29-05-11  Directors  Most so-called directors re-direct everything as much and as quickly as possible to their self-interest, but especially to their own pockets.  20-04-11  Stephen Hawking is an astrologer  Today I bought a D.V.D. published by Discovery Channel. The title: “Stephen Hawking’s Universe”. According to the Dutch description on the  D.V.D. jacket Stephen Hawking is “one of the very best astrologers in the world” and “a pioneer of the new generation of astrologers”.  Remarkably, the information in the DVD case itself speaks of "the very best theoretical physicist" and "a pioneer of the new generation of  cosmologists'. I know Stephen Hawking is a cosmologist. And I know he has stated about cosmology, that it once was regarded as a pseudoscience by the  narrowed scientists. See for instance the Dutch Wikipedia (http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudowetenschap) in the text block “referenties”, item  3. So I already knew, he has something with pseudoscience. Though, today, cosmology is a fully accepted, narrowed science. In the  documentary on this D.V.D. Stephen Hawking talks about the possibility of extraterrestrial life. And hey, this too is still one of the  pseudosciences. Although... that of course is changing very rapidly too. It is no longer a subject that scientists need to approach with  trepidation and need to evade with even more fear. Stephen Hawking does not do that anymore. But according to the D.V.D. jacket Stephen  Hawking now also is a representative, and even one of the very best, of the pseudoscience astrology.  It is not only the D.V.D. jacket, that states this as information. This text can also be read as a description on the site of one of the sellers: What happened here? Is this a joke of an employee and copywriter for the publisher of this D.V.D.? A rush job? Disinterest? Simply being  unfamiliar with the  term astrology? Or is it otherwise intentional?  I myself also always have a problem with the terms astronomy and astrology and their meaning. And not surprising, because they are much  more related to each other than most people know. The English Wikipedia mentions about this among other things:  Historical divergence  Astrology and astronomy were indistinguishable for a very long time - the funding from astrology supported some astronomical research, which was in turn used to  make more accurate ephemerides for use in astrology. In Medieval Europe the word Astronomia was often used to encompass both disciplines as this included the  study of astronomy and astrology jointly and without a real distinction; this was one of the original Seven Liberal Arts. Kings and other rulers generally employed  court astrologers to aid them in the decision making in their kingdoms, thereby funding astronomical research. University medical students were taught astrology as it  was generally used in medical practice.  Astronomy and astrology diverged over the course of the 17th through 19th centuries. Copernicus didn't practice astrology (nor empirical astronomy; his work was  theoretical), but the most important astronomers before Isaac Newton were astrologers by profession -- Tycho Brahe, Johannes Kepler, and Galileo Galilei. Newton  most likely rejected astrology, however (as did his contemporary Christiaan Huygens), and interest in astrology declined after his era, helped by the increasing  popularity of a Cartesian, "mechanistic" cosmology in the Enlightenment.  Also relevant here was the development of better timekeeping instruments, initially for aid in navigation; improved timekeeping made it possible to make more exact  astrological predictions—predictions which could be tested, and which consistently proved to be false.[18] By the end of the 18th century, astronomy was one of the  major sciences of the Enlightenment model, using the recently codified scientific method, and was altogether distinct from astrology.  Internet reference (20-04-11):  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrology_and_astronomy  The Dutch Wikipedia mentions this too, but rather differently:  That this transition (from a mythical to a clearly defined scientific worldview) only took place gradually, is illustrated by the following (often withhold) facts about  some of the pioneers of the modern sciences. - It is known about Isaac Newton that he possessed an extensive library of astrological works. - From age 15, Tycho Brahe was dedicated to astrology. Next to his observatory in Uranienburg the astronomer royal of Denmark had a laboratory built to study  alchemy. His study of the comet of 1577 was for him an occasion for an astrological prediction: He predicted that in the north of Denmark a prince would be born  who would overwhelm Germany and who would disappear in 1632. This prophecy came true: Gustavus Adolphus was born in Finland, overwhelmed Germany and  died in 1632.  - During his youth, Johannes Kepler made almanacs with prophecies and populated the planets with souls and 'Genii' . He came to his three famous laws through  musical analogies and connected an astrological prediction to the disappearance of the brilliant star that he had observed in 1572.  Internet reference (20-04-11) (My own translation):  http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrologie#Scheiding_astrologie_en_astronomie  But whether we go back again to a combination of astrology and astronomy? And whether Stephen Hawking is an advocate of this, and as one  of the very best of today wants to follow Kepler en Newton in their activities and knowledge related to astrology? I doubt it very much.  Up