The Random Text Says: ""
But I Wanted To Update First!
October 21th, 2001 - 8:00 a.m.I'm Currently Avoiding:
I'm updating out of antipathy and a desire to procrastinate more than anything else. Go me. I wonder if I'll update before Chad does? I've got about 10 minutes maybe. Well, we'll see. No, Chad doesn't get a link this time. Why? Because I'm too lazy to do it. So. I made a meager attempt to study for things and sort of not-procrastinate tonight. It failed miserably however, and all I managed to accomplish was supper (if you can call it that when it's the only meal you eat all day and it's at 2:30ish in the morning) cooked and eaten, dishes done, television watched, and fingernails painted a rather strange shade entitled "gingersnap" according to the little sticker on the top. More about the film watched after yesterday and today,
October 20 is ..... National Brandied Fruit Day (umm..ick?)
October 21 is ..... Babbling Day (Oh, good. Not like I don't do this practically every day as it is. Now I've got an excuse.)
impervious (adj. im-PER-vee-us)
1 a : not allowing entrance or passage : impenetrable
b : not capable of being damaged or harmed
2 : not capable of being affected or disturbed
The English language is far from impervious, and of course, a great many Latinate terms have entered it throughout its history. Impervious is one of the many that broke through in the 17th century. It comes from the Latin impervius, and it has many relatives in English. Impervius adds the prefix im- to pervius, which means passable or penetrable (and is the source of the relatively uncommon English word pervious). Pervius itself comes from two smaller Latin forms: per-, meaning through, and via, meaning way. Among the many per- derivatives are persevere, pervade and percolate. From via, we have trivial, deviate, and many others.
innocuous (adj. ih-NAH-kyuh-wus)
1 : producing no injury : harmless
2 : not likely to give offense or to arouse strong feelings or hostility : inoffensive, insipid
Innocuous has harmful roots -- it comes to us from the Latin adjective innocuus, which was formed by combining the negative prefix in- with a form of the verb nocere, meaning to harm, hurt. In addition, nocere gave us the truly harmful words noxious, nocent, and even nocuous. Innocent is from nocere as well, although like innocuous, it has the in- prefix negating the hurtful possibilities. Innocuous first appeared in print in 1598 with the clearly Latin-derived meaning harmless or causing no injury (as in an innocuous gas). The second sense is a metaphorical extension of the idea of injury, used to indicate that someone or something does not cause hurt feelings, or even strong feelings (an innocuous book, innocuous issues).
jitney (n. JIT-nee)
: a small bus that serves a regular route on a flexible schedule
Jitneys weren't worth a dime -- just a nickel. In the early 1900s, jitney was slang for "nickel," but it wasn't long before the term was applied to a new mode of public transportation that only cost a nickel. When they were introduced in American cities at the beginning of the century, vehicular jitneys could be any automobiles that carried passengers over a set route for a cheap fare, but eventually the term was applied specifically to small buses that charged a nickel for a ride.
Yesterday was my mother's birthday. I thought I'd mention it, even though she doesn't know this exists and doesn't have the address. Happy Birthday Mom, pointless though that may be.
So. What did I see? I saw some stupid movie from the mid-80's about idiot detectives lost in Italy. And then, after that was over, Gladiator was on, so I watched that too. Except for the fact that it was rather inaccurate (not quite as bad as A Knight's Tale, where the peasants were rocking to Queen, but bad enough), it was okay as a movie. If they ever make a sequel to it though (and let's face it, what *doesn't* get a sequel these days?), that'll just ruin the whole thing for me. Gladiator just isn't a movie one can really make a sequel out of. For crying out loud, they killed the hero at the end! Killing off the hero generally doesn't make for good sequel material. I can't think of any films where they managed to kill off the hero in the original, and then the sequel was just as good...or even 3/4 as good. They didn't even really manage to do that in The Crow 2, and that movie had more potential for a sequel than most where they kill off the hero. I don't know, can you think of any? Write it on my messageboard, goodness knows that thing could use some new messages.
Oh yeah...and I didn't beat Chad. Poor me.
Damnit. Frigging Chad had to go and update early. How dare he! And did he break his 12 hour rule by doing that? Nobody knows...the trouble I've seen. Nobody knows my flogging golf clothes fetish that I use to attract the spawn of Satan to do my bidding. Ha. I really need to stop doing this blank space thing.
Feeling lucky? Choose an Entry At RANDOM! Yes. Random. Randomosity is cool...come on, you know you want to... Well, if you don't subscribe to peer pressure, then just go Back or Forward with the Dragons below:
And I like it that way.