| Earl's path along northeast is not well-worn By SETH BORENSTEIN 2010-09-02T21:48:16ZWASHINGTON (AP) -- Pushed by an ill-timed trough of low pressure, Hurricane Earl is heading uncomfortably close to an area relatively few hurricanes tend to go: the Northeast coastline.... hosted.ap.org |
Let's put a stop to this cliche – right now|Mind your language At this moment in time, an even more annoying expression has emerged. It's just not rightRight now the most irritating expression doing the rounds is … right now. It's everywhere – TV, radio and in the public prints – giving apparent urgency to what are usually vague general statements about tendencies in contemporary society. Nick Clegg has even tried, somewhat fruitlessly, to turn it into a soundbite: "This is the right government for right now." Ugh.Here are some other examples:"AKA Radric Davis is rap's go-to guy right now." (Guardian Guide)"There is a huge focus self-evidently on the global economy right now." (Tony Blair)"Right now it is a political jungle out there." (Nancy McLernon)"Right now the issues are around the economy, around the Green new deal, around social justice and fairness." (Caroline Lucas MP)"If we were in the euro right now, all of your taxes, all of your national insurance – some of that would be taken to bail out Greece." (David Cameron)"I wouldn't be able to be playing this very important role right now as the party goes forward" (Harriet Harman, deputy Labour party leader, on Radio 4's Woman's Hour)Now read those sentences without the "right now". They mean exactly the same. The right now adds nothing. It doesn't mean "right now" as in "I need to go for a wee right now!" What, I ask, is wrong with that serviceable old periphrasis "at this moment in time"?This isn't the only fashionable phrase that has emerged in recent years, usually from America, to infect our language – rogue memes subtly infesting our speech patterns and thus changing the way we think. Their function seems to be to associate the users with something they feel is modern, fashionable and cool. Indeed "cool" itself has had a very good run of late, tending to come towards at the end of an informal business discussions and meaning: "Excellent. We are in agreement. Let us proceed on the basis of our consensus."Or take the expression "Can I get an espresso and a bagel". This use of the word "get" crossed the Atlantic and replaced the perfectly acceptable and polite: "I wonder if I might have a buttered scone and a pot of Earl Grey" some time in the Gordon Gekko 1980s when "getting" seemed the most important thing in the world. It felt insistent, edgy, impatient. For a brief few seconds the speaker was in a trendy New York coffee bar, not just his or her local greasy spoon.Harman in the above quotation also comes close to a "going forward". You know the one: "We will be able to leverage synergies from this, going forward." It is a wholly redundant way of saying "in the future" – redundant because it is always in a sentence implying or formed in the future tense. Yet the people who say it just can't help saying it. It is their badge of acceptance within a particular narrow community. It shows they are corporate, entrepreneurial, in with the particular in-crowd that's particularly in right now (oops) – the business/marketing community. That's why politicians say it: it is a signifier to show they are on message with the corporate world.I'm pretty sure Clegg's somewhat uncomfortable use of the phrase will have come at Cameron's suggestion. He is a serial user, as in his first speech as prime minister: "And I think the service our country needs right now is to face up to our really big challenges ..."You can imagine, as he was checking Clegg's notes for the keynote Lib Dem speech, Cameron might have said: "Why not try this line: 'This is the right government for right now'? I was going to use it myself, but your need is greater than mine, old chum."So by their expressions shalt thou know them – who they want to impress, whose gang they want to be in, even what particular fantasy world is playing out in their minds. Right now, it is a hyped up, jargon-ridden US corporatism that holds sway so that's the way we want to speak.But, you know what? You won't likely find me slipping into modish Americanisms any time soon. No way, Jose!LanguageNick CleggRichard Alcockguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Light drinking during pregnancy 'does children no harm' Study reporting on group now aged five says none suffered as a result of their mothers having an occasional drink while pregnantLight drinking in pregnancy does babies no harm in the long run, according to a substantial new study which challenges the government's advice that women should abstain completely for nine months.The study showed that the children of mothers who drank one or two units of alcohol a week during pregnancy have suffered no ill-effects by the time they are five. They do not have behavioural difficulties and nor are they behind in their intellectual development.The work is published online today in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. It should help to give women credible information on which to base their choice, said joint author Dr Yvonne Kelly of University College London's department of epidemiology and public health."This isn't about heavy consumption or foetal alcohol syndrome in any sense or about binge-drinking," said Kelly. "It is about the occasional drink and whether that is associated with developmental problems."She did not want to comment on the current advice from government. "I'm not sure we're in the business of acting as advocates but if women have information, it is plausible that they can make informed choices," she said.The study is based on a large sample from the millennium cohort study – 11,500 children who were born between September 2000 and January 2002. The mothers were interviewed in person about their drinking patterns while they were pregnant.They were placed in one of five categories: teetotal; those who drank but not in pregnancy; light drinkers (one to two units per week); moderate (three to six units a week or three to five at one sitting); and binge or heavy drinkers (seven or more units a week or six at one sitting).Just under 6% of the women never drank and 60% abstained during pregnancy. Just under 26% said they were light drinkers, 5.5% were moderate drinkers and 2.5% were binge or heavy drinkers.The team have already published their results for children up to the age of three. The latest paper follows them to the age of five, to ensure there is no "sleeper" effect of the alcohol their mothers drank during pregnancy.They found that children whose mothers had been heavy drinkers were more likely to be hyperactive and have behavioural and emotional problems than those whose mothers abstained during pregnancy.But there was no evidence to suggest that the children of light drinkers, whose mothers had no more than the odd glass of wine a week, had been in any way harmed.Women who drank occasionally tended to be from more advantaged socioeconomic backgrounds, which the authors took into account in their calculations.Their children were 30% less likely to have behavioural problems and had higher scores in mental development tests than those of women who abstained in pregnancy.But the government reiterated its advice that pregnant women should not drink at all."After assessing the available evidence, we cannot say with confidence that drinking during pregnancy is safe and will not harm your baby," said a spokesperson."Therefore, as a precautionary measure, our advice to pregnant women and women trying to conceive is to avoid alcohol."Dr Anthony Falconer, president of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, said current evidence showed one to two units a week was acceptable. The key public health message is that "light drinking is fine but heavy and binge drinking should be avoided", he said."Anecdotally, the majority of women are responsible and tend to stop drinking once they find out they are pregnant," he said. "But with rising levels of binge drinking among younger women, we are concerned about those who find it difficult to wean themselves off alcohol, as heavy, sustained drinking will damage the foetus."These women should be given the support they need, not just during pregnancy but in the longer term."PregnancyWomenAlcoholChildrenHealthFood & drinkSarah Boseleyguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Denver Zoo hatches 4 Komodo dragons By 2010-10-15T02:56:52ZDENVER (AP) -- The Denver Zoo says it's become the only zoo in the world to hatch endangered Komodo dragons for a third time.... hosted.ap.org |
Image shows echoes from before big bang Concentric circles on an image of the early universe are an imprint of violent events before the big bang, according to a new study. abc.net.au |