Yes, all of the librarians made time to do much needed weeding in the reference collection. You, of course, did the most pissing and moaning about this - whingeing on, ad nauseam, about all of your personal problems and scheduling conflicts. Said issues, challenges and other matters irrelevant to your professional duties were also the reason that you could not actually be there when the rest of us made decisions (some provisional, some not) about which items to withdraw.
Of course, instead of making a note of which of these decisions you wanted to question, challenge or discuss and bringing this to a civilized professional forum, you took this personally, stewed about it for over 24 hours, and then decided to confront me - as though I somehow bore sole responsibility for the decisions that you didn't agree with.
And - did you have this confrontations in a private space, where we could have a frank and animated discussion? No, of course not. True to form, you used your typical passive-aggressive tactics to try to create an emotional distraction - to upend the chessboard, so to speak.
And then, perhaps temporarily addled by hormonal imbalance, or some other psycho-chemical pathology (or perhaps by design, who can tell?), you somehow determined that an opportune time to have a confrontation would be in my instruction classroom, as students were still filing out, and a faculty member was standing there looking on.
Did you think that by screaming at me and creating a scene that I would - what - apologize and ask forgiveness? Did you think that you could create a situation that would send me scurrying to the director insisting that I and all the other librarians were complete morons and that, now, under your brilliant guidance, we saw the error of our ways and begged to retract our decisions? WHAT KIND OF FUCKING IDIOT DO YOU TAKE ME FOR
More to the point - for how long do you actually believe that you can continue to behave in this way before it catches up with you? Certainly, the director is beginning to weary of your continual whining. That's obvious, even to the casual observer.
I actually haven't yet decided how I'm going to proceed in this matter. Clearly, this needs to be documented. Indeed, I'd even be within my rights to file a formal complaint to HR for harassment - "creating a hostile working environment," etc. Suffice it to say, I am holding all the best cards here. Revenge, as they say, is a dish best served cold.











current mood: geeky
But I have to say, I feel pretty sorry for poor old Sapir*. I have a sense the strong Sapir-Whorf hypothesis has turned him into a perpetual motion machine, spinning forever in his grave.
Because the strong version, that eternal straw-man, is completely, unfixably silly. You can't think of things you don't have words for? RLY? However did you learn what the words meant in the first place, since you couldn't think of the thingy until you knew the word? According to the straw man, my nephew can put objects together and demonstrate pretty sophisticated spatial reasoning about them without being able to think of them. Because he's not talking yet, and doesn't recognize all the words.
It's as mystical as Chomsky's language module wot didn't evolve.
Pity Whorf didn't have a prelinguistic nephew, I guess. Or, shall we say, the linguistic sophistication Sapir did. His writing is actively brain-hurty, the way sensible observations and total WTF run together in gleeful abandon.
Now, the weak Sapir-Whorf hypothesis (where "weak" means "not ridiculous") makes a lot of sense, is useful to writers, and has at this point a great deal of empirical evidence backing it up. But it's called "weak", and that's just not sexy :) So y'can't even talk about it without starting with "No, really, I don't think unnamed eskimos have a bajillion-gajillion words that all mean the exact same thing as the English word snow, and no, really, I don't think English-speaking people who happen to ski do, either, but I do suspect both groups distinguish between powder and slush."
Fact is, you can inclue a lot about a culture, and make it resonate, by thinking about how kinship terms in a fantasy setting's language are structured (whether or not you make up funny words for 'em), or whether the speakers use relative directional terms (left, right) or only absolute ones (North, south; or more likely something like uphill, downhill, depending on setting), or which color terms are basic, or whether the language specifies whether movement crosses a boundary, or or or.
It'd be so nice to be able to talk about that without starting for the words for snow or the fact that the Hopi did, actually, understand the concept of time.
---
* Not to mention Mary Haas, I think(?) it was, who's never mentioned at all.
---