"7. the category of gender"

The category of gender is formed by two
oppositions organized hierarchically. The first opposition is general and
opposes human, or person nouns,
distinguishing masculine and feminine gender (man – he, woman – she) and all the other, non-human,
non-person nouns, belonging to the neuter gender (tree, dog – it). The second
opposition is formed by the human nouns only: on the lower level of the
opposition the nouns of masculine gender and of feminine
gender are opposed.

Gender is a constant feature category: it is expressed not through
variable forms of words, but through nounal
classification; each noun belongs to only one of the three genders. In
addition, there is a group of nouns in English which can denote either a
female or a male in different contexts; these nouns can be substituted by
either ‘he’ or ‘she’, e.g.: president, professor, friend, etc. They constitute a separate
group of nouns – the common gender nouns. For
them the category of gender is a
variable feature category.

There are no formal marks to distinguish
the strong and the weak members in either of the gender oppositions. They can
be distinguished semantically: nouns of the neuter gender in the upper level
of the opposition is more abstract compared to masculine and feminine gender
nouns; they are the weak member of the opposition and are naturally used in
the position of neutralization. For example: The girl was a sweet little thing; “What is it over there: a man or just a tree?” On the lower level of
the opposition, masculine gender nouns are the weak member of the opposition
and can be used to denote all human beings irrespective of sex, e.g.: Man must change in the changing
world. When there is no contextual need to specify the sex of the
referent, common gender nouns are also neutrally substituted by the masculine
pronoun, e.g.: Every student
must do his best.
Besides
the cases of neutralization, the most obvious examples of oppositional
reduction in the category of gender are the cases when the weak member of the
opposition, nouns of neuter gender, are used as if they denote female or male
beings, when substituted by the pronouns ‘he’ or ‘she’.
In most cases such use is stylistically colored and is encountered in
emotionally loaded speech. It is known as the stylistic device of personification
and takes place either in some traditionally fixed contexts, e.g.: a vessel – she; or in high-flown
speech, e.g., Britain – she, the sea – she. In fairy-tales and poetic texts weak
creatures are referred to as she,
and strong or evil creature as he,
e.g.: Death is the only freedom I will know. I hear His
black wings beating about me! (Isles)

---

4.

"grammar structure"

Grammatical meanings of notional words are rendered by their grammatical forms. For example, the meaning of the plural in English is regularly rendered by the grammatical suffix –(e)s: cats, books, clashes. Grammatical meanings of individual grammatical forms are established as such in paradigmatic correlations: the plural correlates with the singular (cat – cats), the genitive case of the noun correlates with the common case (cat – cat’s), the definite article determination correlates with the indefinite article determination (a cat – the cat), etc.

The generalized meaning rendered by paradigmatically correlated grammatical forms is called “categorial”. Category is a logical notion denoting the reflection of the most general properties of phenomena. Categorial meanings in grammar are expressed by grammatical paradigms. For example, within the system of the English noun the generalized, categorial meaning of “number” is expressed grammatically through the paradigmatic correlation (or, opposition in a paradigm) of two members, of two grammatical forms, each with its own grammatical meaning: the singular (e.g., cat) and the plural (cats).
Thus, the definition of grammatical category is as follows: grammatical category is a system of expressing a generalized categorial meaning by means of
paradigmatic correlation of grammatical forms. In other words, it is a unity of a generalized grammatical meaning and the forms of its expression.Paradigmatic correlations, as shown above, are exposed by “oppositions” of grammatical forms - the members of a paradigm. Oppositions are analyzed linguistically with the help of a special method known as “oppositional analysis”. N. S. Trubetzkoy, a member of the Prague Linguistic Circle,
developed it at the turn of the 20^th century for the purposes of phonological research; later it became widely employed in the analysis of
grammatical categories. Opposition members are characterized by two types of features: common features and differential features.
Common features serve as the basis for uniting the grammatical forms within the same paradigm; in the example above, the two forms, cat and cats, are
paradigmatically united as forms of one and the same word, sharing the categorical grammatical meaning of number. Differential features serve to differentiate the members of an opposition; for example, the grammatical form of the plural, cats, has an inflection, or a grammatical suffix, which the form of the singular, cat, has not.

5.

"sentence sequences"

Sentences are unified by a certain topic and are organized in speech according to a communicative purpose in a particular communicative situation. The linguistic description of the text is as follows: it is a speech sequence of lingual units interconnected semantically (topically) and syntactically (structurally); in other words, it is a coherent stretch of speech, characterized by semantic and
syntactic unity. Topical (semantic) unity and semantico-syntactic cohesion are the basic differential features (categories) of the text. On the basis of the communicative direction of their component sentences, sentence sequences in speech are divided into monologue sequences and dialogue sequences. In a
monologue, sentences are directed from one interlocutor (participant of communication) to another. In a dialogue, the sentences are directed from one interlocutor to another in turn, to meet one another. Cumulation in sentence sequences may be of two types: prospective (cataphoric) cumulation and retrospective (anaphoric) cumulation. Prospective or cataphoric cumulation presupposes the use of connective elements which relate the sentence in which they are used, to the sentence which follows. Retrospective or anaphoric cumulation presupposes the use of connective elements relating the sentence in which they are used to the one that precedes it. According to the connective means used, cumulation is divided into two types: conjunctive and correlative. Conjunctive cumulation is achieved by
functional or semi-functional conjunction-like words and word combinations. Conjunctive cumulation is always retrospective (anaphoric).
Correlative cumulation is achieved by a pair of elements, one of which, the “succeedent”, refers to the other, the “antecedent”.
Correlative cumulation may be either prospective or retrospective. Correlative cumulation can be divided into substitutional connection and representative connection. Substitutional correlation is based on the use of various substitutes. Representative cumulation is achieved by elements which are
semantically connected without the factor of replacement. Semantic unity and syntactic cohesion are supported by communicative unity of sentences, or theme-rheme arrangement (organization) of the cumuleme. There are two basic types of theme-rheme arrangement of sentences in textual sequences: linear
(progressive) connection and parallel connection of sentences. With linear connection of sentences, the rheme of the leading sentence becomes the theme of the sequential sentence, forming what is known as a theme-rheme chain.

"6. structure of the word

There are two basic types of means with the help of which grammatical forms are built: synthetical and analytical. Synthetical (synthetic) grammatical forms are built by means of the morphemic composition of the word. This includes the morphemic means, which were described in the previous unit: outer inflexion with the help of adding grammatical suffixes to the stems of the words, e.g.: cat - cats; inner inflexion, or vowel interchange inside the root,
e.g.: goose - geese; and suppletivity, when different roots are combined within the same paradigm, e.g.: go – went. Analytical grammatical forms are
built by the combination of the notional word with auxiliary words, e.g.: come - have come. Analytical forms consist of two words which together express one grammatical meaning; in other words, they are grammatically idiomatic: the meaning of the grammatical form is not immediately dependent on the
meanings of its parts. Analytical grammatical forms are intermediary between words and word-combinations. Some analytical forms are closer to a word,
because the two parts are inseparable in their grammatical idiomatism; for example, the forms of the perfect aspect: come
- have come. The components of some other analytical forms are more independent semantically, and they are less idiomatic grammatically; for
example, the degrees of comparison: beautiful - more beautiful – most beautiful. Such combinations of an auxiliary component and a basic component are treated by some linguists as free word-combinations, but as they are correlative members of grammatical paradigms and express some specific grammatical meaning, they should be recognized as analytical grammatical forms too. Some lexical means regularly involved in the expression of common grammatical meanings can also be regarded as marginal cases of suppletivity or specific analytical forms, e.g.: the use of quantifiers with uncountable nouns or repetition groups – a bit of joy, the last two items of news, thousands and thousands, etc.

Analytical grammatical forms are prevalent in English; modern English is an analytical type of language.

---

"1.План выражения и план содержания."

Expression Plane a linguistic term used in glossematics and by linguists of various schools to refer to an

organized body of material means that represent linguistic messages. It is opposed to the content plane, which refers to the “world of thought” embodied in language, that is, the organized realm of everything that can be a subject of linguistic communciation. In each plane, glossematics distinguishes between form and substance, dividing language into four spheres, or strata: form of expression, substance of exprеssion, form of content, and substance of content. The form of both planes differs in every language and does not depend on the substance in which the form is manifested. The substance of each plane is defined through the concepts of form (the network of relationships between the elements of a given plane) and material (a certain mass of sounds, other elements, and ideas that is amorphous, and unsegmented but segmentable); the substance is treated as material that has been segmented by form.

The term “expression plane” is usually applied to the realm of sound phenomena, since the oral form of natural language is the chief object of study in linguistic analysis other than glossematics. Glossematic theory, on the other hand, stresses the equality of the phonetic, graphic (in written language), and other substances of expression in which the form of expression may be manifested. The thesis of the isomorphism of linguistic levels is basic to glossematics. At the same time, glossematics regards the levels as not entirely parallel to each other, since in both linguistic planes, along with signifiers and the signified, there exist elements that cannot be correlated in a monosemantic way with entities of the opposite plane. This is precisely what justifies the division of natural language into an expression plane and a content plane; for other semiotic systems, whose inventory does not include nonsign units, such a division is unnecessary.

The 2 planes are inseparably connected, so that no meaning can be realized without some material means of exprеssion. On the other hand the correspondence between the planes of content and expression is very complex. This complexity is clearly illustrated by the phenomena of polysemy, homonymy and synonymy.

In case of polysemy& homonymy two or more units of plane of contentcorrespond to one unit of plane of expression. In case of synonymy two or more plane of expression correlate to one plane of content.

Lingual units stand to one another in two fundamental types of relations: syntagmatic and paradigmatic. Syntagmatic relations are linear relations between units in a segmental sequence. Morphemes with in the words are connected syntagmatically.

Sintagma it’s a combination of 2 words. There are 4 main types of notional syntagmas:

• predicative (subject & predicate)
  
• objective (verb & it’s object)
  
• attributive (noun & it’s attribute)
  
• adverbial (modified notional words as a verb, adjective or adverb with it’s adverbial modifiers.

The other type of relations is called paradigmatic. They exist between elements of the system outside the strings where they co-occur.

"6 levels"

The segmental units of language form a hierarchy of levels. This hierarchy is of a kind that units of any higher level are analyzable into units of the immediately lower level. Thus, morphemes are decomposed into phonemes, words are decomposed into morphemes, phrases are decomposed into words, etc.
The lowest level of lingual segments is phonemic: it is formed by phonemes as the material elements of the higher -level segments. The phoneme has no meaning, its function is purely differential: it differentiates morphemes and words as material bodies. Since the phoneme has no meaning, it is not a sign.

Phonemes are combined into syllables. The syllable, a rhythmic segmental group of phonemes, is not a sign, either; it has a purely formal significance. Due to this fact, it could hardly stand to reason to recognise in language a separate syllabic level; rather, the syllables should be considered in the light of the intra-level combinability properties of phonemes.

Phonemes are represented by letters in writing. Since the letter has a representative status, it is a sign, though different in principle from the level-forming signs of language.
Units of all the higher levels of language are meaningful; they may be called "signemes" as opposed to phonemes (and letters as phoneme-representatives).
The level located above the phonemic one is the morphemic level. The morpheme is the elementary meaningful part of the word. It is built up by phonemes, so that the shortest morphemes include only one phoneme.

The morpheme expresses abstract, "significative" meanings which are used as constituents for the formation of more concrete, "nominative" meanings of words.
The third level in the segmental lingual hierarchy is the level of words, or lexemic level.
The word, as different from the morpheme, is a directly naming (nominative) unit of language: it names things and their relations. Since words are built up by morphemes, the shortest words consist of one explicit morpheme only.

The next higher level is the level of phrases (word-groups), or phrasemic level.
To level-forming phrase types belong combinations of two or more notional words. These combinations, like separate words, have a nominative function, but they represent the referent of nomination as a complicated phenomenon, be it a concrete thing, an action, a quality, or a whole situation. Cf., respectively: a picturesque village; to start with a jerk; extremely difficult; the unexpected arrival of the chief.

This kind of nomination can be called "polynomination", as different from "mononomination" effected by separate words.

Notional phrases may be of a stable type and of a free type. The stable phrases (phraseological units) form the phraseological part of the lexicon, and are studied by the phraseological division of lexicology. Free phrases are built up in the process of speech on the existing productive models, and are studied in the lower division of
syntax. The grammatical description of phrases is sometimes called "smaller syntax", in distinction to "larger syntax" studying the sentence and its textual connections.

Above the phrasemic level lies the level of sentences, or "proposemic" level.
The peculiar character of the sentence ("proposeme" as a signemic unit of language consists in the fact that, naming a certain situation, or situational event, it expresses predication, i.e. shows the relation of the denoted event to reality. Namely. it shows whether this event is real or unreal, desirable or obligatory, stated as a truth or asked about, etc. In this sense, as different from the word and the phrase, the sentence is a predicative unit.
The sentence is produced by the speaker in the process of speech as a concrete, situationally bound utterance. At the same time it enters the system of language by its syntactic pattern which, as all the other lingual unit-types, has both syntagmatic and paradigmatic characteristics.

But the sentence is not the highest unit of language in the hierarchy of levels. Above the proposemic level there is still another one, namely, the level of sentence-groups, "supra-sentential constructions". For the sake of unified terminology, this level can be called "supraproposemic".

The supra-sentential construction is a combination of separate sentences forming a textual unity. Such combinations are subject to regular lingual patterning making them into syntactic elements. The syntactic process by which sentences are connected into textual unities is analysed under the heading of "cumulation". Cumulation, the same as formation of composite sentences, can be both syndetic and asyndetic.

We have surveyed six levels of language, each identified by its own functional type of segmental units. If now we carefully observe the functional status of the level-forming segments, we can distinguish between them more self-sufficient and less self-sufficient types, the latter being defined only in relation to the functions of other level units. Indeed, the phonemic, lexemic and proposemic levels are most strictly and exhaustively identified from the functional point of view: the function of the phoneme is differential, the function of the word is nominative, the function of the sentence is predicative. As different from these, morphemes are identified only as significative components of words, phrases present poly-nominative combinations of words, and supra-sentential constructions mark the transition from the sentence to the text.Furthermore, bearing in mind that the phonemic level forms the subfoundation of language, i.e. the non-meaningful matter of meaningful expressive means, the two notions of grammatical description shall be pointed out as central even within the framework of the structural hierarchy of language: these are, first, the notion of the word and, second, the notion of the sentence. The first is analysed by morphology, which is the grammatical teaching of the word; the second is analysed by syntax, which is the grammatical teaching of the sentence.

"morpheme"

I. The morphological structure of a word. Morphemes. Types of Morphemes. Allomorphs.
There are two levels of approach to the study of word- structure: the level of morphemic analysis and the level of derivational or word-formation
analysis. Word is the principal and basic unit of the language system, the largest on the morphologic and the smallest on the syntactic plane of linguistic analysis.
It has been universally acknowledged that a great many words have a composite nature and are made up of morphemes, the basic units on the morphemic level, which are defined as the smallest indivisible two-facet language units. The term morpheme is derived from Greek morphe “form ”+ -eme. The Greek suffix -eme has been adopted by linguistic to denote the smallest unit or the minimum distinctive feature.
The morpheme is the smallest meaningful unit of form. A form in these cases a recurring discrete unit of speech. Morphemes occur in speech only as constituent parts of words, not independently, although a word may consist of single morpheme. Even a cursory examination of the morphemic structure of English words reveals that they are composed of morphemes of different types: root-morphemes and affixational morphemes. Words that consist of a root and an affix are called derived words or derivatives and are produced by the process of word building known as affixation (or derivation).
The root-morpheme is the lexical nucleus of the word; it has a very general and abstract lexical meaning common to a set of semantically related words constituting one word-cluster, e.g. (to) teach, teacher, teaching. Besides the lexical meaning root-morphemes possess all other types of meaning proper to morphemes except the part-of-speech meaning which is not found in roots.
Affixational morphemes include inflectional affixes or inflections and derivational affixes. Inflections carry only grammatical meaning and are thus relevant only for the formation of word-forms. Derivational affixes are relevant for building various types of words. They are lexically always dependent on the root which they modify. They possess the same types of meaning as found in roots, but unlike root-morphemes most of them have the part-of-speech meaning which makes them structurally the important part of the word as they condition the lexico-grammatical class the word belongs to. Due to this component of their meaning the derivational affixes are classified into affixes building different parts of speech: nouns, verbs, adjectives or adverbs.
Roots and derivational affixes are generally easily distinguished and the difference between them is clearly felt as, e.g., in the words helpless, handy, blackness, Londoner, refill, etc.: the root-morphemes help-, hand-, black-, London-, fill-, are understood as the lexical centers of the words, and -less, -y, -ness, -er, re-are felt as morphemes dependent on these roots. Distinction is also made of free and bound morphemes.
Free morphemes coincide with word-forms of independently functioning words. It is obvious that free morphemes can be found only among roots, so the
morpheme boy- in the word boy is a free morpheme; in the word undesirable there is only one free morpheme desire-; the word pen-holder has two free morphemes pen- and hold-. It follows that bound morphemes are those that do not coincide with separate word- forms, consequently all derivational morphemes, such as -ness, -able, -er are bound. Root-morphemes may be both free and bound. The morphemes theor- in the words theory, theoretical, or horr- in the words horror, horrible, horrify; Angl- in Anglo-Saxon; Afr- in Afro-Asian are all bound roots as there are no identical word-forms. It should also be noted that morphemes may have different phonemic shapes. In the word-cluster please, pleasing, pleasure, pleasant the phonemic shapes of the word stand in complementary distribution or in alternation with each other. All the representations of the given morpheme, that manifest alternation are called allomorphs/or morphemic variants/ of that morpheme.
The combining form allo- from Greek allos “other” is used in linguistic terminology to denote elements of a group whose members together consistute a structural unit of the language (allophones, allomorphs). Thus, for example, -ion/ -tion/ -sion/ -ation are the positional variants of the same suffix, they do not differ in meaning or function but show a slight difference in sound form depending on the final phoneme of the preceding stem. They are considered as variants of one and the same morpheme and called its allomorphs.
Allomorph is defined as a positional variant of a morpheme occurring in a specific environment and so characterized by complementary description. Complementary distribution is said to take place, when two linguistic variants cannot appear in the same environment. Different morphemes are characterized by contrastive distribution, i.e. if they occur in the same environment they signal different meanings. The suffixes -able and -ed, for instance, are different morphemes, not allomorphs, because adjectives in -able mean “ capable of beings”.
Allomorphs will also occur among prefixes. Their form then depends on the initials of the stem with which they will assimilate.
Two or more sound forms of a stem existing under conditions of complementary distribution may also be regarded as allomorphs, as, for instance, in long a: length n.
II. Structural types of words.
The morphological analysis of word- structure on the morphemic level aims at splitting the word into its constituent morphemes - the basic units at this level of analysis - and at determining their number and types. The four types (root words, derived words, compound, shortenings) represent the main structural types of Modern English words, and conversion, derivation and composition the most productive ways of word building.
According to the number of morphemes words can be classified into monomorphic and polymorphic. Monomorphic or root-words consist of only one root-morpheme, e.g. small, dog, make, give, etc. All polymorphic word fall into two subgroups: derived words and compound words - according to the number of root-morphemes they have. Derived words are composed of one root-morpheme and one or more derivational morphemes, e.g. acceptable, outdo, disagreeable,
etc. Compound words are those which contain at least two root-morphemes, the number of derivational morphemes being insignificant. There can be both root- and derivational morphemes in compounds as in pen-holder, light-mindedness, or only root-morphemes as in lamp-shade, eye-ball, etc.
These structural types are not of equal importance. The clue to the correct understanding of their comparative value lies in a careful consideration of: 1)the importance of each type in the existing wordstock, and 2) their frequency value in actual speech. Frequency is by far the most important factor. According to the available word counts made in different parts of speech, we find that derived words numerically constitute the largest class of words in the existing wordstock; derived nouns comprise approximately 67% of the total number, adjectives about 86%, whereas compound nouns make about 15% and adjectives about 4%. Root words come to 18% in nouns, i.e. a trifle more than the number of compound words; adjectives root words come to approximately 12%.
But we cannot fail to perceive that root-words occupy a predominant place. In English, according to the recent frequency counts, about 60% of the total number of nouns and 62% of the total number of adjectives in current use are root-words. Of the total number of adjectives and nouns, derived words comprise about 38% and 37% respectively while compound words comprise an insignificant 2% in nouns and 0.2% in adjectives. Thus it is the root-words that constitute the foundation and the backbone of the vocabulary and that are of paramount importance in speech. It should also be mentioned that root words are characterized by a high degree of collocability and a complex variety of meanings in contrast with words of other structural types whose semantic structures are much poorer. Root- words also serve as parent forms for all types of derived and compound words.

---

В ночь перед экзаменом, вливая в себя четвёртую кружку чая с корицей, сидела я перед монитором. Вы думаете, учила? Ни фига! В днную минуту мне кажется, что нет ничего важней, чем скинуть чтыре песни на телефон. Меня терзают смутные сомнения, что с утра я об этом пожалею...

---

Скомканы сомнения в точке одиночества.

---

В последнее время мне не просто не хочется ничего делать. Я ищу как можно больше возможностей, оправданий и причин на то, чтоюы забить. Забить на трудности, препятствия, работу, самоанализ... Не знаю, как назвать это кроме как возросшим раздолбайством... Но я так подозреваю, что просто устала от этого безумного года. Хочется чего-то определённого, а его всё нет и нет. Надо бы поискать.

---

Сегодня всем балаганским театром радостно ругались про сценку о сове... Интересно, что из этого всего выйдет... Почему мне кажется, что полный сюр?

---

Весна, горы, гитара и костёр... Ну почему это так сводит с ума? Кажется, теперь я маму полностью понимаю, когда она рассказывает, что чм ближе к теплу, тем невыносимей. Я лушаю музыку прошлой весны. и воспоминания давят на меня. Хочется на миг протянуть руку в бывшее.

---

Разбирать Блока по скайпу... Нет, моя жизнь - сплошной очаровательный маразм!
И слушают же люди... Говорят, интересно О.о

---

Silly Wizard и пустой дом... Зачаровывает.

---

Это требует моего внимания!!

08.04.2012 в 14:55

Пишет  Sharlotta-Elburn:

08.04.2012 в 13:58

Пишет  Апрельская Верба:

Астрофинансирование

woelfhen.livejournal.com/293295.html

---

Недосказанное.

Я не умею говорить. Не умею и не очень люблю. Гораздо лучше мне удаются действия. Но иногда хочется говорить без остановки.
О том, что каждый вечер перед тем как лечь спать я непременно слушаю оду и ту же песню, словно разговаривая с её сполнителем, словно она живая. Голос... Так мало, но голос - непременно он. В песне ведь тоже живут его чувства, желания, надежды... Осна звучит, и мне чуть легче.
Каждый раз мне хочется сказать о том, что в минуты, когда я перестаю верить в себя, я спасаюсь его верой в меня. Что пока он верит в меня, а я верю, что он меня любит, я могу с лёгкостью убедить себя, что у меня всё получится, и как бы ни было плохо сейчас, это просто она маенькая доля секунды в вечности, предназначенной мне... В счастливой вечности, если мы вместе. Когда мы вместе.
И что видя в книге фразу о счастливой любви, я бережно кладу её в маленький кармашек лилового платья и когда никто не видит, достаю, как ребёнок достаёт очень ценный фантик, и любуюсь отблесками солнца на блестящей поверхности. Она красивая и переливается, и там разные красивые узоры... Что ещё нужно маленькому любопытному существу, которое любит солнце во всех его проявлениях, пусть даже на фантиках?
А ещё - когда я делаю очередное безумное нечто, он словно рядом стоит и наблюдает. И когда я хочу об этом рассказать, у меня воникает ощущение, что он всё уже знает наперёд. И как я безгранично верю в очередную байку, где сплошные нестыковки, и что я в жизни бы в такое не поверила, а ему - верю. И как мне здорово смеяться над собственной доверчивостью, и ничуть не обидно. Потому что это здорово - когда кто-то может то, что остальным недоступно. И что я готова в головой окунаться в нелюбимые дела, которые не доставляют мне радости, потому что они внезапноиграют новыми, привлекательными красками.
А ещё мне хочется говорить о том, что с ним я ощущаю, как битое становится целым, рваное - зашитым, а кривое - ровным. Потому что он улыбается или смеётся, и тогда я чувствую, как мир становится лучше, чище и красивее. Банальность, наверное... Но каждая банальность прекращает быть таковой, когдао обретает для нас свой собственный смысл. И зачастую оказывается, что невозможно сказать лучше. Пусть кто-то фыркает и говорит, что уж он-то всегда найдёт и слова свои, и выражения - я вижу в этом для себя немного смысла.
Вот только когда я смотрю в усталые глаза, все слова куда-то пропадают. Остется взгляд и улыбка, и что-то бессмыссленно-нежное, разливающееся в воздухе.
И сердце в страхе замирает, когда эта гармония разбивается о холод или какую-нибудь страшную шутку. И я не чувствую себя живой, пока на любимых губах вновь не возникла улыбка.
Вот почему я молчу. Всё равно всё будет сказано не так - с заиканиями и смущением... Не умею я говорить. Не умею и боюсь. Такая уродилась.

@музыка: Fleur

---

Догнал!

Вот что мне пришло от  Lyona_L:
Суть флэшмоба: Выбираете жертву из ПЧ (5 штук) и заставляете его:

1) Постить фотографию любимого мужчины - актера, певца, политика, шоумена и проч.
2) Постить фотографию мужчины, которого он(а) не переносит.
3) Фотографию кумира детства.
4) Открыть любой поисковик и запостить первую попавшуюся фотографию любого мужчины.
5) Запостить фотографию по заказу. Заказ такой: самый симпатичный на ваш взгляд мужик, выпавший в поисковике, если набрать "в полном расцвете сил".

Соответственно:
1. Да, банально до безумия, но...

Он!

2. Фи.

Мерзость.

3. Детство в обнимку с историями про шпионов...)

Раньше я видела его чуть другим...)

4. Не знаю, что меня в нём зацепило, но...

Портрет

5. По пятому пункту меня слегка помиловали... Итак, в моём представлении восременный мужчина - это

вот.

Здесь я брала представления, а не предпочтения, ибо ни одно лицо меня толком не вдохновило... Сложно это х)

Моб оставляю в самонаведении)

---

---

Подрядилась учить египттянина русскому в скайпе... Ох, как же с ним сложно! Он тааак отвратительно по-английски говорит. Зато он очень мил=)
Алфавит мы прошли, и, кажется, он устал. Хотя не признаётся. Смешной человек. Мы с нним к каждой букве слова записали и пррочли, но в одиночку он отказывается их читать пока, говорит, готовиться надо. Не хочет по-хорошему - пожалуйста, мне-то что х)
С алфавитом было трудновато. Посмотрим, что дальше будет. Надо с ним выйчит про зайчика, котороый вышел погулять. И скачать поособие для иностранцев.

---

Зарегистрировалась на Фейсбуке и общаюсь с афроамериканцем, говорящим по-французски...
Он меня понимает!!! И он знает слово лол. И пишет его с много л. Это так забавно!

---

Хочу к морю. Хотя бы к Азовскому.

---

Радостная новость состоит в том, что мне написал мой египтянин. Оказывается, я скучала - неожиданно.
Хорошая новость - меня разрисовали хной. Пойду разыскивать водолазки - эта штука лучше будет при домашне-романтическом и иже с ним применении, чем в инсте и при учениках!
Плохие новости тоже есть, но я принял решение - забить! Главное сейчас - это собраться и диплом дописать, и гори оно огнём.
Hallelujah.
З. Ы. Гооворят, чтобы приманить удачу, нужно что-то поменять. Пойду менять аватарку...
З. З. Ы. До слёз скучаю по горам.... Аааа! Отправьте меня бандеролькой в гималаи. Иначе я за себя не отвечаю!

---

Патрик, всегда Патрик!

Отчёт этот будет не совсем о празднике... Скорей, о том, что его окружало. Ибо самого праздника я по большей части не увидела. Но об этом позже.
И утро субботы началось совершенно прекрасно. Вывалившись из дома на два часа раньше, чем нужно, я отправилась на поиски счастья и рюкзака. Ни того, ни другого не нашла, а посему отправилась к ученице, немножко усталая и грустная. Ребёнок был совершенно не настроен работать. Кое-как настроив мелкую на конструктив, я провела урок и радостно осознала, что трудовой день окончен. Но! Времени до электрички оставалось мноооого (мне так казалось), а делать было нечего. Нет, конечно, у меня был выход - приехать на час раньше на вокзал, но кто ж так делает, когда есть ещё магазины рюкзаков в этом мире? И я отправилась в Открытый мир. Это было чудом! Я нашла там почти то, что искала. Забив на то, что этот рюкзак больше предыдущего, я цапнула его и осознала, что опаздываю на электричку. Банзай! И бегом на маршрутку. Однако сработала моя специальная логика, и вместо маршутки я прыгнула в отъезжающий автобус. В принципе маршрутка всё время болталась на полкорпуса впереди, а потому я не сильно расстроилась. К тому же, успела я всё же вовремя.
Возле касс меня ждали товарищи модульщики и Димка. Купив билет, я чуть не запуталась в новой пропускной системе, но всё же мне удалось через неё пройти.
Люблю я электрички... Там хорошо. И краситься не в пример удобней, чем в маршрутке. И едет она по разнокрасивым местам. А доехали мы и правда быстро.
Что я могу сказать про Таганрог? Да ничего. Я толком не успела его расмотреть. Мы спешили... Зря, кстати - концерт задержали на 40 минут, а за это время я успела зашнуроваться, переодеться, покраситься, перекусить... Долгожданное начало я пропустила, как и не менее долгожданное продолжение. А всё потому, что сначала я думала, что в зал места нет, а потом поняла, что оно есть, но лучше оставаться в коридоре, если я хочу принять хоть немного более активное участие в празднике. Слышно было плохо, видно не было, так что когда меня хватали и тащили, я просто не понимала иногда, чего от меня хотят. В результате... Ох, было весело и стыдно! А когда я вернулась в коридор в очередной раз, мне внезапно стало не хватать воздуха. Голова кружилась, и окружающий мир потерялся. Как я оттанцевала то, что должна была, не помню вообще. Помню лишь, где налажала. По ощущениям - серьёзно лишь один раз. Жду с трепетом видео.
Хотя, пожалуй, вру - кое-что из того, что Таганрожские ирландцы танцевали-пели я видела или хотя бы слышала. Молодцы всё же! Жлко, что я остаться не смогла. Хотелось бы....
А затем мы оставили ирландцам одного из наших, а сами ушли. Ехали назад на электричке. Кажется, это тольо меня устраивало) Там же я более-менее отошла и начала получать удовольствие от жизни. Заодно проснулся голод. Потом почти сразу бухнулся спать, но просыпался же! В это время товарищ пытался показать мне меня на фотках. Все кроме одной удостоились однообразного комментария: "Ты круто фоторграфируешь, но я получилась ужасно!"
Еда, сон, воскресное утро... Посмотрела начало ходячих мертвецов. Странные ощущения. Отправилась к ученику, который живёт на 3 этажа выше Димки. Ребёнок всё же очень обстоятельный. И серьёзный, старательный... Как бы только его старательность в нужное русло направить! Эх... Зато весело!)

---

Раз уж начала...

Подцеплено от  KeySi:
1. Выкладываете список 10 любимых книг/фильмов/аниме/сериалов/видеоигр/групп (и т.п.), по которым фанатеете/фанатели когда-либо.
2. Пусть ваши ПЧ попытаются отгадать вашего любимого героя в каждом пункте.
3. Когда кто-нибудь угадывает, перечеркиваете пункт, рядом указываете правильный ответ и ник угадавшего. Оффтопом помечается полуугаданный пункт. В скобочках возле фендома - количество любимых героев!

1. Цикл Панкеевой (2) Мафей угадан by  Castles and Dreams ))
2. "Песнь льда и Пламени, Дж. Мартин (1) - Арья Старк. Угадал  Castles and Dreams .
3. Kimi ga nozomi eien (Одинокие сердца) (1)
4. "Волшебник Земноморья", Урсула Ле Гуин (1)
5. "Хроники Этерны", В. Камша (2) - Робер Эпинэ угадан, остался один! Угадала  Рыжее пламя
6. "Анастасия" (2) - Дмитрий и Барток.  Рыжее пламя же!
7. "Деревянный Меч", Э. Раткевич (3)
8. "Ведьма", О. Громыко (1)
9. "Унесённые Призраками" (1)
10. "Не покидай" (2) - Господа странствующие артисты - Марта и Жак. Угадала  Танцующая мышь!

запись создана: 08.03.2012 в 00:11