Foreign language study is more than pronunciation. I want to thank Ernie Amsden for his well-argued Jan. 10 letter in rebuttal to Professor Balmer’s contention that we ought to change how we pronounce French towns and names here in Vermont.
Balmer’s intentions are good, but the emphasis misplaced. Welcome to America, the melting pot, where language has been evolving since Colonial days. As new people arrive, aspects of their cultures, including language, become assimilated and transformed in the process.
At the time our capital was named MONTPEELYER, with one L, the spelling of the French city Montpellier was not yet standardized. It will be an even harder sell to get my friends in Iowa to stop calling their capital DUHMOYN, or in Wisconsin to change how they say PRAIRIE DUH SHEEN (Prairie du Chien), or in North Carolina SHARLOT. At least in Vermont our “Charlotte” comes closer to the French original — but wait! Both were named for a German Princess Charlotte!
How about MADrid, Maine and BERlin, Vermont and New Hampshire, all with the accent on the first syllable? And SAINT LEWIS? The list goes on and on.
However, I agree with Balmer on one point: that we should actively encourage students at all levels to study, if not master, a foreign language. For in doing so, they will not only learn to wrap their tongues around some foreign words, but more importantly realize that the language we speak is closely linked to how we perceive the world. That’s the important thing. Broadening our understanding of the diverse cultures here in America, and in the wider world, can only open our eyes and minds to the amazing and complex society that we live in. Meanwhile we will welcome new immigrants, and we may not always pronounce their names right. English-speakers may have trouble saying Karolina Wojciechowski, Khaled Al Mobayed, or Thomas Onwuatuegwu. We will do our best, listen when corrected, smile and try again. In time, the newcomers may have to accept that folks around them pronounce their names incorrectly — or differently — than they’re used to.
Peter J. ThompsonPost Mills
At a public meeting of Lebanon’s Planning Board on Sept. 28, developer Doug Homan said, in reference to his proposed “Houses on the Hill” subdivision, “We have a project before you right now that has about a negative million dollars to the tax base.” According to Lebanon’s subdivision regulations [12.3.C], a proposal must be denied as “scattered and premature” if it “would necessitate an excessive expenditure of public funds.
As a resident of Lebanon, I would like to ask the Planning Board: If an annual million dollar net loss is not excessive, what is?
Sheila Moran Lebanon
Firefighters Aid Honduras
Fire departments of the Upper Valley and beyond have donated equipment and personal firefighting gear to ACTS (Americans Caring Teaching and Sharing) for shipment to Yoro, a frontier city in north central Honduras. For nearly 30 years ACTS, a largely Upper Valley volunteer organization, has been helping to create infrastructure for medical care, public health, elementary school and adult education, dentistry, agriculture, clean water, micro banking, literacy, cancer prevention, community leadership and more in the third-poorest country of the Western Hemisphere.
In Yoro, not far from where the ACTS volunteers work, six full-time firefighters and 10 volunteers risk their lives to protect nearly 100,000 people with woefully inadequate equipment.
A year ago, the Hanover Fire Department asked if serviceable gear that was no longer of use to them might be of value in Honduras. Thus began a remarkable connection between a brotherhood of firefighters. Since that initial inquiry, ACTS has facilitated multiple shipments of gear donated by the fire departments of Hanover, Norwich, Lebanon, Etna, Springfield, N.H., Barnard, Windsor and Shelburne, Vt.
A month ago, three ACTS volunteers stood on a warehouse platform in the city of San Pedro Sula, Honduras as firefighters from Yoro arrived in a battered truck to pick up donated self-contained breathing units. Those Honduran firefighters, or bomberos, could fully appreciate, as perhaps only firefighters can, that those masks, regulators and cylinders might someday make the difference between life and death in the dangerous situations they face.
They passionately urged us to bring back their thanks to their brother and sister bomberos, and we are pleased to do so.
Dean Seibert Norwich
Dealing with Trump’s Tweets
How are we to respond to Trump’s tweets? From them we read pronouncements that include primarily: virulent attacks on persons who are critical of him (Meryl Streep), adverse comments about another’s appearance (Alicia Machado), mocking a New York Times reporter with a disability (Serge Kovaleski), threat of “retributions or consequences” against companies doing offshore business (Toyota), denigration of news organizations (New York Times).
Even if you brushed up your critical thinking skills, it is questionable whether you could understand the tweets insofar as they lack context and meaningful explanation.
Tweeting is a safe way to promote one’s belief and to deal with conflict. There remains a separation between what one says and the response from others. A tweet’s purpose is not to expand knowledge or understanding of an issue but to pronounce one’s belief and position.
Restricting comments to 140 characters severely limits both substance and details. Understanding depends on reading between the lines as context is omitted. The adverse effects of misinterpreting a Trump tweet are serious in view of Trump’s manic need to express himself and his power as president to affect others’ views both at home and abroad.
What effect will this form of communication have on the national political scene? Tweets need not be damaging. To be sure, they can function in many ways: as headlines they can be a quick way to dramatize a position, to make a startling announcement, to provide a hint of things to come. Trump has tended to make impetuous statements both for and against some person or thing.
The potential for misunderstanding is serious. But imagine if Trump used his tweets as springboards for further political discourse, even with the press. As headlines, the tweets would satisfy his need for public attention. Allowing for follow-up could generate a political dialogue, during which he could elaborate and explain the context and purpose relevant to the headline and even respond to questions if asked.
A functioning democracy requires a political dialogue that explores issues in depth, not the sniping and caustic statements among contending factions that dominate the current political scene.
Bob ScobieLebanon