Why is will be hard to learn Arabic. . .

Posted By admin on June 21, 2009

So you’d like to learn Arabic. Got a decade or so? | csmonitor.com

The written Arabic is common to all Arab nations and is the language of the Koran – partly the mixing of a Meccan dialect with a poetic vernacular. It became fixed in the late 8th century, and has been more or less conserved since then. “I can’t think of another language which has not changed appreciably in 1,400 years,” says Wheeler Thackston, a Near Eastern languages professor at Harvard University.

Arabs themselves know this Arabic only through textbook education. It resembles what they grow up speaking at home as much as Latin resembles English, Professor Thackston says. They use it mostly to write and in more formal situations. It’s the language of politicians and journalists, for example.

On the other hand, the spoken dialects – though they share characteristics with the written standard – vary by region, nation, and often, even by village. And they’re constantly evolving.

As if that’s not complicated enough, most Arabs, depending on the extent of their education and the circumstances of a given moment, will mix and match their own dialect with this literary Arabic. Osama bin Laden spoke such a version of Arabic in his widely broadcast tapes. That means any translator hoping for a steady paycheck needs to know both the written standard as well as at least one dialect. Linguists say a minimum of three years is needed for mastery of the written language alone.

Most US language classes, however, teach only the written Arabic, also known as Fusha. That’s partly for practical reasons: On what basis does an instructor select from more than a dozen different dialects, each potentially fraught with political sensitivities?

Lisa’s new video

Posted By admin on June 21, 2009

Be The Rain
Check out my wife’s video at the new “Be The Rain” site

Be the Rain – by Lisa Kelly

A extemporaneous poem from a scrap of paper from a meeting I don’t remember

Posted By admin on March 24, 2009

Loose ends – how long?

List the priorities for the next weeks.

A letter needs to be written.

Arrow.  Scribble

Resources – field – stories – pictures

Thinkers

Mechanisms – to get articles.

Strategy

We feel behind.

A conversation – in the next 6 weeks.

the next 4 years.

She has lots of info . . . let’s meet again.

Part of the evangelical problem is knowing which brother we are | Marvin Olasky

Posted By admin on February 24, 2009

This is an excellent article which demonstrates much love, Christ-likeness and understanding in our current American culture war. 

WORLD Magazine | Prodigal sons | Marvin Olasky | Feb 28, 09

Prodigal sons

Part of the evangelical problem is knowing which brother we are | Marvin Olasky

As Tim Keller points out in The Prodigal God (Dutton, 2008), the parable of the prodigal son should have a plural in its name: sons. We all know of the younger brother’s libertine living, but the elder brother has a more subtle problem: He is self-righteous and lacks joy.

Part of the evangelical political problem in contemporary America is that much of the press and public sees us as elder brothers. Sometimes we are that way in reaction to younger brothers. Sometimes younger brothers go their way in reaction to us.

In higher education, younger brother colleges are party schools that proffer sex and stimulants. Some Christian colleges try to avoid that by imposing tight rules in elder brother fashion. Those rules may lead to external conformity rather than deep belief. Both younger brother and elder brother colleges divert students from learning more about God.

WORLD Magazine | Prodigal sons | Marvin Olasky | Feb 28, 09


In journalism, younger brother magazines ranging from Rolling Stone to People sell a continuation of younger brother college life. Elder brother reporters tend to be self-righteous fault-finders—and it’s always someone else’s fault. Elder brother journalism lacks love, charity, compassion, and a sense that all of us are in this mess together. Christian publications that look only at sin among secularists can also be elder brothers.

In the realm of “social justice,” younger brothers want governmental redistribution so that everyone, regardless of conduct, gets part of the national inheritance. Some recipients of Washington’s largesse are widows and orphans, but others are younger brothers or sisters who should go home but do not because government checks allow them to keep destroying themselves. Elder brothers, though, wax sarcastic about wastrels while they overlook the needy. “Social justice” turns into either social universalism or Social Darwinism.

The gay rights debate is another younger vs. elder brother combat zone. While covering Manhattan’s annual humongous Gay Pride parade I didn’t see any lip-locks except when the marchers observed a dozen souls from a church waving Bibles and screaming at them, “You’re going to hell, sodomite” or “You’re an abomination in the sight of God.” The presence of elder brothers allowed younger brothers to feel self-righteous: ironically, ranting reminders about sin provided the opportunity to forget about sin.

Younger brothers who perceive self-righteousness or joylessness in their elders head toward mockery. On the Comedy Network, Jon Stewart is a snarky younger brother and Stephen Colbert pretends to be an elder as he parodies FOX’s tut-tutting Bill O’Reilly. Elder brothers tend to forget that truth without love is like sodium without chloride: Poison, not salt.

What’s rare on television and in life are third brothers who, because they know deeply that the Father loves them, have love for and patience with both elder and younger brothers. Third brothers, knowing they have been forgiven, are not prideful.

A third brother Christian college helps students to see that all people are made in the image of God and all people are sinners. Because of that, beauty shows up where we expect banality, and evil emerges where we anticipate excellence. At a third brother college students become bilingual and bicultural, able to move in both Christian and secular circles without ignoring the problems of the former or the knowledge generated in the latter, through common grace.

Third brother journalism rises out of the history lecture in chapter seven of the book of Acts: Stephen, with neither an elder brother’s pridefulness nor a younger brother’s sarcasm, realistically emphasizes the fallenness of his people and the holiness of God. He does not seek life’s meaning in the formation of or adherence to a man-made religion that sets up a code of morality.

Third brother politics is also different. The Founders fought for both liberty and virtue: Elder brothers tend to forget the former, younger brothers the latter. Third brothers know that we can never have enough laws to banish sin. They tell the truth but do not rant at abortionists and gay rights activists. They control their tongues and lungs not because killing babies and killing marriage is right, but because their goal is to change hearts.

Third brothers ask pointed questions, and here are ones for each of us to answer: Am I a younger, elder, or third brother? Can we, through God’s grace, leave behind elder- and younger-brotherism?

If you have a question or comment for Marvin Olasky, send it to molasky@worldmag.com.
Copyright © 2009 WORLD Magazine
February 28, 2009, Vol. 24, No. 4

Awesome Judah Quotes

Posted By admin on February 10, 2009

The joys of my son’s wit. We have lunch together throughout the week, as he comes home from school for an hour for lunch. It’s a fun time of connection, and fun in a culinary sense as well. Today, as I was whipping up a concoction for myself, and he was halfway through his meal, he got out of his chair, with his foiled covered pudding in hand – whipped off the top, throwing it in the sink, and said “I gotta let this breath a bit”. I said “Oh!” holding back chuckles and amazement “Where did you learn to do that?” “Little House on the Prairie” he informed me. I tell you, TV these days – such a corrupting influence.

Fun with Gmail – tip of day

Posted By admin on February 5, 2009

First of all, Gmail continues to impress and astound me. I could go on about it, but let me just make this recommendation for those who rely on me for tech help – get an account. Don’t use Mail, or Outlook, or any other client unless you know how to manage it well. I have too many friends who have been too frustrated and hampered in their productivity. Now – the cool trick of the day. In your Gmail account, click on setting in the top right. Then go to labs. Then enable “Mouse Gestures”. Save. Then, when reading an email, hold your right mouse button, and have fun navigating like a supah stah! ~M

What nature tells us and cities make us forget

Posted By admin on January 11, 2009

My thought today, and what  will be my first blog post I guess, will not be an essay, but just a half formulated thought which I put out their, perhaps to season or ferment into something of more value later, is about nature, urbanization, and God.

An old book, written long before Thoreau had his revelations in the woods, talks about seeing and understanding God through the nature He created.  In some ways at least, even the most staunch scientific positivist, who puts all their faith in the natural world, is moved with awe the more nature is experienced and contemplated.  In nature, there is beauty, and a breath catching, perspective granting connection with something else – something outside of us, but very personal.

In nature (here I’m imagining the woods in New England, but imagine what you will) we witness incredible breadth and diversity, harmony with individuality, and complexity with commonality.  We see competition, yet community, and always innovation, and always beauty, but in many varied forms.  We see perfection in use of resources, details thought through, a lack of anxiety, with constant strife for survival of self and clan.  We see that each terrain is a poem, each season a movement, and each species an instrument, each creature a note. 

But aside from grandiose scenes from The Blue Planet or National Geographic, there is much in the mundane to see -the simple realities, causes and effects, partnerships between our work and the environment in which we live, dependence on sun and rain and soil, which is seen in any agricultural community, like the farmer who lives next door to us in our small, Swiss community

There are aspects to life confusing to city dwellers, which are easy to understand for those in contact with God’s creation, because they see and understand this implicitly each day, as they work in soil and sun.

But on this planet, we are moving to the city.  And in big numbers.  1 billion in 1960, 3 billion in 1985, and 4 billion by 2017, according to the  World Urbanization Report . We live not only in houses that we made, houses made with materials we’ve made.  We see nature, that we’ve gather and shipped to designated plots, books, or channels.  We eat of nature that we’ve processed or modified.   We enjoy nature, as we’ve planned it in our parks (if we’re in the minority of well planned cities with such features, though most cities do not have well planned parks).  We change the terrain, and modify it, and control each facet which conflicts with a controlled well planned design.   Now, to clarify, I’m certainly not saying that we’re to let nature run it’s course and do what it wishes with us and we just deal with it . . .cause it’s ‘natural’.  Floods and monsoons and tidal waves should be planned for, warned against, and managed.  Such a fatalistic approach ends up in the tragedies in Indonesia and Pakistan, which were horrific, but the worst aspects of which could have been avoided.  No, I’m talking in general about what we loose in the general urbanization trend.  So, my thought today is not about the danger of urbanization in terms of economics, environmental impact, social changes, or family or cultural impacts, but urbanization in terms of the subtle yet damning innuendo that all around me, everything that is, or that I need, man has himself created it.  That I or my fellow man has authored or created or improved upon things to such a degree that the mystery, inspiration, or created-ness disappears, that in my own eyes, I am sufficient, and I create the world around me to say what I want it to say, and ignore what since it came into existence, creation has been crying out – that there is more to this world than simply me – that man is not the center, that there are some wonderful truths which we may not know, but that we can know.  As we move into the cities, and the virtual world, which is even more of a world of our own creating, what are we at risk of missing?