Poucas palavras:

Blog criado por Bruno Coriolano de Almeida Costa, professor de Língua Inglesa desde 2002. Esse espaço surgiu em 2007 com o objetivo de unir alguns estudiosos e professores desse idioma. Abordamos, de forma rápida e simples, vários aspectos da Língua Inglesa e suas culturas. Agradeço a sua visita.

"Se tivesse perguntado ao cliente o que ele queria, ele teria dito: 'Um cavalo mais rápido!"

Mostrando postagens com marcador English. Mostrar todas as postagens
Mostrando postagens com marcador English. Mostrar todas as postagens

domingo, 23 de agosto de 2015

Sherlock Holmes




listening (here)


Sherlock Holmes
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, the creator of the world famous detective, Sherlock Holmes, was not above telling tales about himself in which he was the laughing stock. Here is one of those stories.
As he tells it, he was waiting at a taxi stand outside the railway station in Paris.
When a taxi pulled up, he put his suitcase in it and got in himself. As he was about to tell the taxi driver where he wanted to go, the driver asked him:
"Where can I take you, Mr. Doyle?" Doyle was flabbergasted. He asked the driver whether he knew him by sight.
The driver said: "No Sir, I have never seen you before." The puzzled Doyle asked him what made him think that he was Conan Doyle.
The driver replied: "This morning's paper had a story about you being on vacation in Marseilles. This is the taxi stand where people who return from Marseilles always come to. Your skin colour tells me you have been on vacation. The ink spot on your right index finger suggests to me that you are a writer. Your clothing is very English, and not French. Adding up all those pieces of information, I deduce that you are Sir Arthur Conan Doyle." Doyle said:
"This is truly amazing. You are a real life counter part to my fictional creation, Sherlock Holmes."
"There is one other thing," the driver said.
"What is that?"
"Your name is on the front of your suitcase."

Vocabulary Help

  • tales - histórias
  • laughing stock - objeto de gozação, riso
  • railway station - estação ferroviária
  • flabbergasted - surpreso
  • puzzled - surpreso, espantado
  • skin - pele
  • ink spot - marca de tinta
  • clothing - vestuário
  • amazing - surpreendente

PORTAL DA LÍNGUA INGLESA has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-partly internet websites referred to in this post, and does not guarantee that any context on such websites are, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
In some instances, I have been unable to trace the owners of the pictures used here; therefore, I would appreciate any information that would enable me to do so. Thank you very much.
Is something important missing? Report an error or suggest an improvement. Please, I strive for accuracy and fairness. If you see something that doesn't look right, contact me!
Did you spot a typo?
Do you have any tips or examples to improve this page?
Do you disagree with something on this page?
Use one of your social-media accounts to share this page:


terça-feira, 10 de março de 2015

Death To False Idols!

Look at this one: 


Having destroyed the palace as being a monument to 'false idols', the ISIS extremists then proceed to tweet a selfie of themselves standing in front of the ruins to their 'fans'. Where’s the irony here?


Cartoon by Morten Morland from The Times.
PORTAL DA LÍNGUA INGLESA has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-partly internet websites referred to in this post, and does not guarantee that any context on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
Is something important missing? Report an error or suggest an improvement. Please, I strive for accuracy and fairness. If you see something that doesn't look right, contact me!
Did you spot a typo?
Do you have any tips or examples to improve this page?
Do you disagree with something on this page?
Use one of your social-media accounts to share this page:


quinta-feira, 11 de setembro de 2014

[JOKE] CANNIBALS AND CLOWNS


Why don't cannibals eat clowns?

Because they taste funny.


Vocabulary

  • eat (eat, ate, eaten) - comer
  • clown - palhaço
  • taste funny - possuem um gosto engraçado


Sent by Rubens Queiroz de Almeida


PORTAL DA LÍNGUA INGLESA has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-partly internet websites referred to in this post, and does not guarantee that any context on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
In some instances, I have been unable to trace the owners of the pictures used here; therefore, I would appreciate any information that would enable me to do so. Thank you very much.
Is something important missing? Report an error or suggest an improvement.
Did you spot a typo?
Do you have any tips or examples to improve this page?
Do you disagree with something on this page?

Use one of your social-media accounts to share this page:






quinta-feira, 21 de agosto de 2014

The Origins of 10 Nicknames


1.  WHY IS DICK FROM RICHARD?


The name Richard is very old and was popular during the Middle Ages. In the 12th and 13th centuries, everything was written by hand and Richard nicknames like Rich and Rick were common just to save time. Rhyming nicknames were also common and eventually Rick gave way to Dick and Hick, while Rich became Hitch. Dick, of course, is the only rhyming nickname that stuck over time. And boy did it stick. At one point in England, the name Dick was so popular that the phrase "every Tom, Dick, or Harry" was used to describe Everyman.

2.  WHY IS BILL FROM WILLIAM?


There are many theories on why Bill became a nickname for William; the most obvious is that it was part of the Middle Ages trend of letter swapping. Much how Dick is a rhyming nickname for Rick, the same is true of Bill and Will. Because hard consonants are easier to pronounce than soft ones, some believe Will morphed into Bill for phonetic reasons. Interestingly, when William III ruled over in England in the late 17th century, his subjects mockingly referred to him as "King Billy."

3.  WHY IS HANK FROM HENRY?


The name Henry dates back to medieval England. (Curiously, at that time, Hank was a diminutive for John.) So how do we get Hank from Henry? Well, one theory says that Hendrick is the Dutch form of the English name Henry. Henk is the diminutive form of Hendrick, ergo, Hank from Henk. Hanks were hugely popular here in the States for many decades, though by the early 90s it no longer appeared in the top 1,000 names for baby boys. But Hank is making a comeback! In 2010, it cracked the top 1,000, settling at 806. By 2012 it was up to 685.


4.  WHY IS JACK FROM JOHN?


The name Jack dates back to about 1,200 and was originally used as a generic name for peasants. Over time, Jack worked his way into words such as lumberjack and steeplejack. Even jackass, the commonly used term for a donkey, retains its generic essence in the word Jack. Of course, John was once used as a generic name for English commoners and peasants, (John Doe) which could be why Jack came became his nickname. But the more likely explanation is that Normans added -kin when they wanted to make a diminutive. And Jen was their way of saying John. So little John became Jenkin and time turned that into Jakin, which ultimately became Jack.

5.  WHY IS CHUCK FROM CHARLES?


"Dear Chuck" was an English term of endearment and Shakespeare, in Macbeth, used the phrase to refer to Lady Macbeth. What's this have to do with Charles? Not much, but it's interesting. However, Charles in Middle English was Chukken and that's probably where the nickname was born. 

6.  WHY IS PEGGY FROM MARGARET?


The name Margaret has a variety of different nicknames. Some are obvious, as in Meg, Mog and Maggie, while others are downright strange, like Daisy. But it's the Mog/Meg we want to concentrate on here as those nicknames later morphed into the rhymed forms Pog(gy) and Peg(gy).

7.  WHY IS TED FROM EDWARD?


The name Ted is yet another result of the Old English tradition of letter swapping. Since there were a limited number of first names in the Middle Ages, letter swapping allowed people to differentiate between people with the same name. It was common to replace the first letter of a name that began with a vowel, as in Edward, with an easier to pronounce consonant, such as T. Of course, Ted was already a popular nickname for Theodore, which makes it one of the only nicknames derived from two different first names. Can you name the others?

8.  WHY IS HARRY FROM HENRY?


Since Medieval times, Harry has been a consistently popular nickname for boys named Henry in England. Henry was also very popular among British monarchs, most of whom preferred to be called Harry by their subjects. This is a tradition that continues today as Prince Henry of Wales , as he was Christened, goes by Prince Harry. Of course, Harry is now used as a given name for boys. In 2006, it was the 593rd most popular name for boys in the United States. One reason for its upsurge in popularity is the huge success of those amazing Harry Potter books.

9.  WHY IS JIM FROM JAMES?


There are no definitive theories on how Jim became the commonly used nickname for James, but the name dates back to at least the 1820s. For decades, Jims were pretty unpopular due to the "Jim Crow Law," which was attributed to an early 19th century song and dance called "Jump Jim Crow," performed by white actors in blackface. The name "Jim Crow" soon became associated with African Americans and by 1904, Jim Crow aimed to promote segregation in the South. Jim has since shed its racial past, and is once again a popular first name for boys all by itself, sans James.

10.              WHY IS SALLY FROM SARAH?


Sally was primarily used as a nickname for Sarah in England and France. Like some English nicknames, Sally was derived by replacing the R in Sarah with an L. Same is true for Molly, a common nickname for Mary. Though Sally from the Peanuts never ages, the name itself does and has declined in popularity in recent years. Today, most girls prefer the original Hebrew name Sarah.


NOMES DAS PROFISSÕES EM INGLÊS:
Esta é uma lista com as principais profissões e suas traduções para português.

PORTAL DA LÍNGUA INGLESA has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-partly internet websites referred to in this post, and does not guarantee that any context on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
In some instances, I have been unable to trace the owners of the pictures used here; therefore, I would appreciate any information that would enable me to do so. Thank you very much.
Is something important missing? Report an error or suggest an improvement.
Did you spot a typo?
Do you have any tips or examples to improve this page?
Do you disagree with something on this page?
Use one of your social-media accounts to share this page:


segunda-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2014

The illustrated guide to a Ph.D.

Every fall, I explain to a fresh batch of Ph.D. students what a Ph.D. is.
It's hard to describe it in words.
So, I use pictures.

Read below for the illustrated guide to a Ph.D.


Imagine a circle that contains all of human knowledge:



By the time you finish elementary school, you know a little:




By the time you finish high school, you know a bit more:



With a bachelor's degree, you gain a specialty:




A master's degree deepens that specialty:




Reading research papers takes you to the edge of human knowledge:




Once you're at the boundary, you focus:




You push at the boundary for a few years:




Until one day, the boundary gives way:





And, that dent you've made is called a Ph.D.:




Of course, the world looks different to you now:




So, don't forget the bigger picture:




Keep pushing.

From /link/


segunda-feira, 5 de agosto de 2013

O que significa a gíria “take a Squirt” em inglês?




Essa expressão, eu vi enquanto assistia o episódio 02 da segunda temporada de two and a half men – “que peitão”. Confesso que não conhecia essa gíria, mas peguei pelo contexto.

Charlie estava conversando com seu irmão, Alan Harper e, de repente, ele solta um:

“Why don’t you make some coffee while a go take a squirt?” (é só ler o print da cena).

Logo, Charlie disse, na verdade, que iria “mijar”, “urinar” ... então, ‘take a squirt” significa “pee”, ou seja, mijar. Se você procurar no dicionário, deverá achar algo do tipo: “jorrar”, “ato de jorrar”, “seringar...”

Para o contexto, temos mesmo é significado de urinar...


See you next time.

segunda-feira, 10 de dezembro de 2012

O que significa “Chewables”?





Recebi um e-mail de um leitor perguntando o que significava “Chewables”, que ele tinha visto em um recipiente.

“Chewables” significa “mastigáveis”. É só conferir lá no dicionário do próprio blog.

LEIAM:

Flintstones Chewable Vitamins are supplemental multivitamins for children based on the animated sitcom The Flintstones. They were introduced in 1968 by Miles Laboratories and taste faintly like candy.


PORTAL DA LÍNGUA INGLESA has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-partly internet websites referred to in this post, and does not guarantee that any context on such websites are, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
In some instances, I have been unable to trace the owners of the pictures used here; therefore, I would appreciate any information that would enable me to do so. Thank you very much.
Is something important missing? Report an error or suggest an improvement. Please, I strive for accuracy and fairness. If you see something that does not look right, contact me!
Did you spot a typo?
Do you have any tips or examples to improve this page?
Do you disagree with something on this page?

Use one of your social-media accounts to share this page:

domingo, 2 de dezembro de 2012

The Recorded Voice Of Virginia Woolf.

The only known surviving recording of Virginia Woolf's voice. It is part of a BBC radio broadcast from April 29th, 1937. The talk was called "Craftsmanship" and was part of a series entitled "Words Fail Me". The text was published as an essay in "The Death of the Moth and Other Essays" (1942). My transcript of the recorded portion follows.





Transcript:

…Words, English words, are full of echoes, of memories, of associations. They have been out and about, on people's lips, in their houses, in the streets, in the fields, for so many centuries. And that is one of the chief difficulties in writing them today – that they are stored with other meanings, with other memories, and they have contracted so many famous marriages in the past. The splendid word "incarnadine," for example – who can use that without remembering "multitudinous seas"? In the old days, of course, when English was a new language, writers could invent new words and use them. Nowadays it is easy enough to invent new words – they spring to the lips whenever we see a new sight or feel a new sensation – but we cannot use them because the English language is old. You cannot use a brand new word in an old language because of the very obvious yet always mysterious fact that a word is not a single and separate entity, but part of other words. Indeed it is not a word until it is part of a sentence. Words belong to each other, although, of course, only a great poet knows that the word "incarnadine" belongs to "multitudinous seas." To combine new words with old words is fatal to the constitution of the sentence. In order to use new words properly you would have to invent a whole new language; and that, though no doubt we shall come to it, is not at the moment our business. Our business is to see what we can do with the old English language as it is. How can we combine the old words in new orders so that they survive, so that they create beauty, so that they tell the truth? That is the question.

And the person who could answer that question would deserve whatever crown of glory the world has to offer. Think what it would mean if you could teach, or if you could learn the art of writing. Why, every book, every newspaper you'd pick up, would tell the truth, or create beauty. But there is, it would appear, some obstacle in the way, some hindrance to the teaching of words. For though at this moment at least a hundred professors are lecturing on the literature of the past, at least a thousand critics are reviewing the literature of the present, and hundreds upon hundreds of young men and women are passing examinations in English literature with the utmost credit, still – do we write better, do we read better than we read and wrote four hundred years ago when we were un-lectured, un-criticized, untaught? Is our modern Georgian literature a patch on the Elizabethan? Well, where then are we to lay the blame? Not on our professors; not on our reviewers; not on our writers; but on words. It is words that are to blame. They are the wildest, freest, most irresponsible, most un-teachable of all things. Of course, you can catch them and sort them and place them in alphabetical order in dictionaries. But words do not live in dictionaries; they live in the mind. If you want proof of this, consider how often in moments of emotion when we most need words we find none. Yet there is the dictionary; there at our disposal are some half-a-million words all in alphabetical order. But can we use them? No, because words do not live in dictionaries, they live in the mind. Look once more at the dictionary. There beyond a doubt lie plays more splendid than Antony and Cleopatra; poems lovelier than the Ode to a Nightingale; novels beside which Pride and Prejudice or David Copperfield are the crude bunglings of amateurs. It is only a question of finding the right words and putting them in the right order. But we cannot do it because they do not live in dictionaries; they live in the mind. And how do they live in the mind? Variously and strangely, much as human beings live, ranging hither and thither, falling in love, and mating together. It is true that they are much less bound by ceremony and convention than we are. Royal words mate with commoners. English words marry French words, German words, Indian words, Negro words, if they have a fancy. Indeed, the less we enquire into the past of our dear Mother English the better it will be for that lady's reputation. For she has gone a-roving, a-roving fair maid.

Thus to lay down any laws for such irreclaimable vagabonds is worse than useless. A few trifling rules of grammar and spelling is all the constraint we can put on them. All we can say about them, as we peer at them over the edge of that deep, dark and only fitfully illuminated cavern in which they live – the mind – all we can say about them is that they seem to like people to think before they use them, and to feel before they use them, but to think and feel not about them, but about something different. They are highly sensitive, easily made self-conscious. They do not like to have their purity or their impurity discussed. If you start a Society for Pure English, they will show their resentment by starting another for impure English – hence the unnatural violence of much modern speech; it is a protest against the puritans. They are highly democratic, too; they believe that one word is as good as another; uneducated words are as good as educated words, uncultivated words as good as cultivated words, there are no ranks or titles in their society. Nor do they like being lifted out on the point of a pen and examined separately. They hang together, in sentences, paragraphs, sometimes for whole pages at a time. They hate being useful; they hate making money; they hate being lectured about in public. In short, they hate anything that stamps them with one meaning or confines them to one attitude, for it is their nature to change.


Perhaps that is their most striking peculiarity – their need of change. It is because the truth they try to catch is many-sided, and they convey it by being many-sided, flashing first this way, then that. Thus they mean one thing to one person, another thing to another person; they are unintelligible to one generation, plain as a pikestaff to the next. And it is because of this complexity, this power to mean different things to different people, that they survive. Perhaps then one reason why we have no great poet, novelist or critic writing today is that we refuse to allow words their liberty. We pin them down to one meaning, their useful meaning, the meaning which makes us catch the train, the meaning which makes us pass the examination…