I can’t believe I’m leaving such a pedantic comment, but sometimes duty calls and you have to step up and defend a fellow Alabamian in matters of such importance as this. “In behalf of” isn’t—or probably better to say “wasn’t”, as no one observes this distinction anymore—a typo or incorrect or anything; it’s just a thing nobody says anymore. The idea is/was that “in behalf” means you’re acting for someone’s interest or benefit or the like, while “on behalf” was meant to convey acting as someone’s agent or representative or what have you. I’m honestly surprised you haven’t come across this a lot reading all those old papers tbh; I mostly just know about it from old novels and essays and such—and from being a bit of an obsessive about language and grammar, which of course is everyone’s favorite sort of person. I’m more fun than this in person though, I swear! My school (and many others’, I’m sure) did a field trip down to Helen Keller’s place when I was a kid though—pretty neat stuff. For some reason the thing I most remember is the well on the property; that might’ve been the first time I’d actually seen one in real life and not just on a TV screen, come to think of it.
Having grown up in England and having received what, until now, I had assumed was a reasonable education, I now realise that I’ve often used the term “on behalf of” when it should have been “in behalf of.” I thank you for your pedantry and for highlighting all the times I’ve made a complete arse of myself. I’m now going outside with the shotgun to do the decent thing.
My typically punctual reply here, lol. The problem is if you go around saying “in behalf of” these days a lot of people—including smart people like Maurer—will think you’re making a mistake! But maybe that isn’t the case in the UK (though I suspect it depends on how old your interlocutor is).
Thank you for another entertaining and informative post!
In the vein of the spirit of engaging discussions of the Treaty of Westphalia, allow me to offer a minor correction.
At the top of your reading of your 2022 post, you refer to an AP-NORC poll, and you say that NORC is the "National Opinion Resource Center". It is the National Opinion RESEARCH Center at the University of Chicago though they have now adopted just 'NORC at the University of Chicago'.
Not sure that drops you down to a C-, but I'm assuming you will appreciate the correct information (given your excellent role-modeling of criticizing your own "asserting without evidence" about what drives anti-immigration sentiment at the end of the segment).
Disclosure: my bride works at NORC at the University of Chicago.
When I was a dumbass kid I used to call corn norc because I couldn't speak properly, at least according to my mom. So as a dumbass adult I found this episode to be very entertaining and oddly nostalgic. Thanks Mr. Maurer.
I hope you caught the sarcasm in my comment. You are correct in thinking that nothing changed. Do we view the universe from our intention, or from the actual effect our intention has on the universe? It's just like if a tree fell...
Your subscriber pitch reminds me that a free (freeloader) reader gets to read some of your content completely (the whole post). After I read a few of yours I subscribed because I got a complete picture of your talent (good).
Cartons Hate Her and Infinite Scroll
(and I'm sure many others) do the thing where you get to read HALF a post and then see a message: subscribe to read the rest! I find this infuriating! How do I know the rest is good? And I've just wasted precious minutes reading with no payoff.
Word to the unwise: don't assume just because you scribbled a few words that they are so riveting it will force people to plunk down real money to see the completion of your thoughts.
Let me see the whole thought so I can decide to pay you for future thoughts.....
I can’t believe I’m leaving such a pedantic comment, but sometimes duty calls and you have to step up and defend a fellow Alabamian in matters of such importance as this. “In behalf of” isn’t—or probably better to say “wasn’t”, as no one observes this distinction anymore—a typo or incorrect or anything; it’s just a thing nobody says anymore. The idea is/was that “in behalf” means you’re acting for someone’s interest or benefit or the like, while “on behalf” was meant to convey acting as someone’s agent or representative or what have you. I’m honestly surprised you haven’t come across this a lot reading all those old papers tbh; I mostly just know about it from old novels and essays and such—and from being a bit of an obsessive about language and grammar, which of course is everyone’s favorite sort of person. I’m more fun than this in person though, I swear! My school (and many others’, I’m sure) did a field trip down to Helen Keller’s place when I was a kid though—pretty neat stuff. For some reason the thing I most remember is the well on the property; that might’ve been the first time I’d actually seen one in real life and not just on a TV screen, come to think of it.
Having grown up in England and having received what, until now, I had assumed was a reasonable education, I now realise that I’ve often used the term “on behalf of” when it should have been “in behalf of.” I thank you for your pedantry and for highlighting all the times I’ve made a complete arse of myself. I’m now going outside with the shotgun to do the decent thing.
My typically punctual reply here, lol. The problem is if you go around saying “in behalf of” these days a lot of people—including smart people like Maurer—will think you’re making a mistake! But maybe that isn’t the case in the UK (though I suspect it depends on how old your interlocutor is).
Thank you for another entertaining and informative post!
In the vein of the spirit of engaging discussions of the Treaty of Westphalia, allow me to offer a minor correction.
At the top of your reading of your 2022 post, you refer to an AP-NORC poll, and you say that NORC is the "National Opinion Resource Center". It is the National Opinion RESEARCH Center at the University of Chicago though they have now adopted just 'NORC at the University of Chicago'.
Not sure that drops you down to a C-, but I'm assuming you will appreciate the correct information (given your excellent role-modeling of criticizing your own "asserting without evidence" about what drives anti-immigration sentiment at the end of the segment).
Disclosure: my bride works at NORC at the University of Chicago.
As a jazz musician I can attest that "huge failure and lost a lot of money" is the definition of a jazz career.
When I was a dumbass kid I used to call corn norc because I couldn't speak properly, at least according to my mom. So as a dumbass adult I found this episode to be very entertaining and oddly nostalgic. Thanks Mr. Maurer.
If The Donald can scream "F**k you" at a Ford factory worker, I don't see the harm in screaming it at Helen Keller. Good on silent Cal if he did.
It's one of those philosophical questions. If you cuss out a blind deaf woman, and she can't perceive it, did you really cuss her out?
I hope you caught the sarcasm in my comment. You are correct in thinking that nothing changed. Do we view the universe from our intention, or from the actual effect our intention has on the universe? It's just like if a tree fell...
Your subscriber pitch reminds me that a free (freeloader) reader gets to read some of your content completely (the whole post). After I read a few of yours I subscribed because I got a complete picture of your talent (good).
Cartons Hate Her and Infinite Scroll
(and I'm sure many others) do the thing where you get to read HALF a post and then see a message: subscribe to read the rest! I find this infuriating! How do I know the rest is good? And I've just wasted precious minutes reading with no payoff.
Word to the unwise: don't assume just because you scribbled a few words that they are so riveting it will force people to plunk down real money to see the completion of your thoughts.
Let me see the whole thought so I can decide to pay you for future thoughts.....
Hey, Shaun Cassidy once recorded a punk rock album. He even mussed up his hair for the album cover picture. Helen Keller did backing vocals
(in sign language of course).
Your 3 part series on Immigration was logical, sane and quite impressive.
No wonder it never broke through in the national discourse.....