French president Sarkozy announced a scheme to promote learning English. Sarkozy has trouble with his native tongue and has a limited command of English. His scheme revolves around preschoolers and computers. It won’t work: French students tread water in language classes for years, never progressing towards measurable competence; and French language teaching adores abstraction and hidebound rules.

Le Monde accompanied its report of the presidential scheme with testimony from its readers and bloggers. Their comments are eye-opening. Where and how do French people learn English? Not in the classroom, in class; but at home, while watching “South Park” or “Friends,” reading Harry Potter, or listening to popular music.

On languages, Sarkozy turns out to be more a follower than a leader. What is really happening, today, in French society is more impressive than politicians’ vague hopes for the future. The photo above was taken at a Relay newsstand in a Paris train station. The display window promotes four titles. Remarkably, the books are available in French translation, and also in English. A close look will reveal two lessons: the English-language books are physically smaller than the French translations; and the English-language books are significantly cheaper than the French translations.

couverture du magazine Ikea Family Live (hiver 2010)

“Et si vous fixiez vos propres règles?”

Voici la question posée en couverture de Ikea Family Live magazine, publication du magasin suédois éponyme destinée surtout aux consommateurs parents de jeunes enfants en quête d’”idées et inspiration pour la maison”.

Il s’agit d’une question ouverte, un brin provocante tout en gardant le ton bon enfant du magazine et du magasin.

C’est aussi une réponse à l’affirmation de la RATP à bord des bus parisiens : “Si chacun fait ses propres règles, tout se dérègle.”

Il s’agit, pour la RATP, d’un énoncé fermé, vaguement ménaçant, qui n’admet pas de discussion. Bizarrement, c’est aussi un mécanisme à disculper la RATP de dysfonctionnements : l’origine de dérèglements se trouverait auprès des usagers, intempestivement innovateurs.

What could this possibly mean?

Parisian property owners could increase the number of floors in their building. This was not accomplished by subdividing existing floors, but by adding new ones, constructed on the roof.

I don’t know whether this is still possible today, but for a few years it seems to have been a fad.

The most impressive example I’ve seen in Paris is a building on the rue de Rivoli.

Yesterday’s news brought me the remarkable story of Adam Wheeler, a student at Harvard College. Wheeler is accused today of gaining entry to Harvard by falsely claiming a superb record at the Phillips Academy prep school and study at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. These and other alleged falsifications came to light when Wheeler sought Harvard’s support when applying for prestigious post-graduate Rhodes and Fulbright scholarships.

Here is the first remarkable point of the Wheeler report: Wheeler has been studying at Harvard since 2007, until at least 2009. His conduct as a student does not seem to have drawn much attention at the élite college, although there may have been charges of academic dishonesty. Wheeler apparently wanted to go on to law school, because he was active in the Harvard College Law Society.

Harvard today is very, very angry with Wheeler, against whom many criminal complaints have been made (to which Wheeler has answered: not guilty). I have to wonder: is Harvard angry because its admissions process apparently does not select for an ability to perform at Harvard? This is fine. Maybe Harvard selects for students it thinks can best perform (or develop) at Harvard. Maybe Harvard selects for what it thinks will be the best possible class.

Harvard wasn’t the only party that Wheeler allegedly crashed. Wheeler applied for (but was not offered) an internship at The New Republic, which  posted the résumé Wheeler submitted for that position.

Here is the second remarkable point of the Wheeler report: Wheeler’s apparent falsifications are so brazen that his résumé challenges belief. Wheeler’s résumé is so over-the-top that I doubt any reader would believe it, or seriously consider Wheeler.

What was this young man thinking when he claimed:

• language proficiency in: French, Old English, Old Persian, and Classical Armenian;
• sole authorship of two academic books;
• co-authorship of four additional academic books?

Has any undergraduate –even at Harvard– ever shown competency in these four languages? How many Harvard undergraduates have written academic books? Of those, how many have written more than one?

The stated grades (perfect), academic honors, and distinguished service could be true, but the compilation of them all strains credibility. For me, the clincher is Wheeler’s claim to have “formed a faculty committee to solicit input from Harvard faculty and students, as well as from external experts, on how best to integrate graduate training in arts-practice into the existing curricular structure of the university”. No matter how stellar the student, why would the university have entrusted an undergraduate student with such a task? It makes no sense, other than as a smoke-and-mirrors stunt.

Would you interview Wheeler for a job? Would you offer him one?

This story discusses an unfortunate case involving a Harvard student, books (non-academic books for young people), and dishonesty. There’s an interesting postscript here: the protagonist is alive and well and thriving, in law school. Dishonesty does not always lead to dishonor.

Diesel’s campaign has a tagline: Be stupid.

In France, the slogans are written in English, translated into French word-for-word in small print.

In French, I’m confident that the slogan doesn’t work; French people don’t want to be stupid. And as an American, I can’t think of a positive connotation to “stupid”.

From Diesel promotional materials, being “stupid” has something to do with living intensely and without care. It has nothing to do with being unintelligent or slow or dim-witted.

Musical group The Black Eyed Peas sang “let’s get stupid” on their hit “Let’s Get Retarded” from the album Elephunk; the song was subsequently re-released with the title “Let’s Get It Started“. I understood “stupid” in this case to suggest being inebriated or high, but maybe I’m reading too much into the lyrics. Perhaps this song matches the meaning sought by Diesel.

Maybe Diesel wants to appropriate “stupid” by using it ironically, much like people of color (among themselves) use the word “Negro”, or homosexuals use “gay” or “queer”.

Kokoszka didn't want to go through with the 10:00 am meeting last Tuesday. So she didn't. She instead jumped out the fourth-floor conference room window. (She survived the fall, and her life is not in danger today.)

We tend to ask too much of meetings but accomplish too little with them. Why not frame them by written documents: specific agendas and prompt summaries? Why not announce news in a memo, then hold the meeting to discuss implementation (but not to debate the news)?

Marketing guru Seth Godin offered some great ideas to get more out of meetings. My favorite: remove the chairs from the conference room.

The contribution, by the executive counsel for the Rhode Island state insurance authorities, bemoaned the lack of clarity in health insurance policies.

The problem is quintessentially American: in the United States, private insurers offer 200 million Americans with private health insurance a patchwork of policies, with variable benefits. The policy determines whether or not it covers an affliction, condition, or procedure.

The author played up readability and comprehension tests to support his argument that policies were incomprehensible. I understand the point but disagree with the tactics. Arguing that a text is “too complicated” makes the insured look simpleminded and the policy-drafters smart. It also points to “dumbing down” as a possible remedy.

I take another view. Insurance policies often are drafted so that they fail to communicate and can’t be understood, by anybody. They perpetuate ambiguity. This makes some sense because the insurer can make a case-by-case determination and, as the case may be, argue its position in court (even if the judge follows a cannon of contract interpretation that resolves ambiguity in favor of the insured).

Ultimately most drafting problems stem from laziness: reusing old text, making piecemeal changes, having no incentive to draft clearly.

Here’s a brief review to keep the names straight:

Jean Monnet (1888-1979) was a European statesman. His name is written with two “n”s.

Claude Monet (1840-1926) was a French impressionist painter. Take care not to confuse Monet with Manet (1832-1883), a contemporaneous French painter. Monet’s subjects are generally outdoors and clothed: Impression, soleil levant, the Rouen cathedral, and water lilies at Giverny; Manet’s subjects are often indoors and may be unclothed:  Le déjeuner sur l’herbe, l’Olympia, and Le bar aux Folies-Bergère.

Robert Schuman (1886-1963) was a European statesman and French prime minister. His name is written with one “n”.

Robert Schumann (1810-1856) was a German romantic composer. His name is written with two “n”s. Schuman and Schumann have the same first name, which make their case trickier than the Monnet/Monet quandary. And Schumann is sometimes confused with Franz Schubert (1797-1828), an Austrian composer. As an illustration of this confusion, the stamp pictured here features Schumann’s likeness but a score by Schubert.

• to adopt is to start, to take over, to follow
  • Parliament adopted the amendment
  • Banks adopted new risk-management policies
• to adapt is to change, to modify, to adjust
  • When circumstances change, regulations must adapt
  • Supply arrangements had to adapt to just-in-time practices

The two expressions can be used in conjunction, even in the same sentence:

• In order to adapt to increasing insolvencies, banks adopted more loan-review procedures

The noun forms differ:

• An adoption usually refers to the assumption of parental responsibilities by someone other than the birth mother or father
• An adaptation is a reworking or rewriting, for example an abridged or translated version of a book

Finally, a person or organization is adept when he, she, or it is skillful.

• The trade association adeptly adopted new guidelines to adapt to the new rules on sharing sales and pricing information

When used as a verb, affect means "to change", and effect means "to make" or "to cause":

• The desert heat affected the athlete's endurance.
• The airplane effected a 180° turn before landing at the airport.

Sometimes usages are close:

• The new legislation affected the price of fuel.
• The new legislation effected a durable drop in fuel prices.

In the first case, the legislation was an influence, among others. In the second case, the legislation caused the change.

I received an e-mail alert last week from the New York Times, reporting that former vice-presidential candidate and Alaska governor Sarah Palin was resigning, "citing a desire to affect change outside of government". Minutes later, the online edition of the newspaper corrected the error and reported on Palin's desire to "effect positive change outside of government".

When used as a noun, effect means "a consequence", and affect (used rarely, usually in psychology) means "an emotion":

• cause and effect
• the patient showed no affect

Another noun form, affectation, means "putting on airs" or "acting in an artificial way":

• an affectation of cleverness

When used as an adjective, effective means "to work":

• medication must be proven safe and effective before it is offered to the public

A few other usages:

• laws take effect or become effective on an effective date
• personal effects are private belongings
• special effects are used in movies to create an illusion