It's Not Fair...

I was reading over at The Amazing Shrinking Mom's website today, and she hit on something I've been whining about now for weeks. Namely, the less you weigh the less you need to eat. That is just not fair ... but that is the way it works. I've recently lost a good chunk of weight and, as it turned out, the more weight I lost the less food I needed. So now that I'm on the maintenance plan I get about the same amount of food to maintain my weight as I previously got to lose the weight. On the bright side of things (uh-huh), in the event of worldwide famine I will not need as much food to survive as others. Ok, back to reality now.

According to my doctor, I shouldn't weigh more than 120 pounds. I currently weigh about 5 pounds less than that (more or less, depending on the time of month). I'm allowed about 1100 calories a day in order to maintain that weight. That. Isn't. Very. Much. Food. Can you hear the desperation here??? So a new plan of action is needed.

I will re-discover exercise and weight training. Building up some muscle mass has never seemed like so much fun. Ok, so not really fun so much as I will really really like the pay-off. Yes, I will work out so I can have a few more calories a day. I'm not a big eater, but I do like food and enjoy events that revolve around food. Anyone for a wine and cheese tasting? How about some dark chocolate? Yum-o.

So, wish me luck. I'm not an extremely disciplined person, but I'm learning that there is often a pay-off. I managed to lose the weight so I know I can muster up enough self-discipline for a little exercise -- right after I watch a few episodes on the Food Network.

Have you been "plutoed"?

I've been thinking about words lately. How we use them, how sometimes they just seem inadequate to express what we wish to express, and the creation and evolution of words.

I'm in the middle of reading The Professor and the Madman, which tells the story of the making of the Oxford English Dictionary (OED). What has intrigued me most, so far, is the history and development of dictionaries. I'd never really thought about it until reading The Professor and the Madman, but Shakespeare and other early writers couldn't just "look it up" when unsure of a word's meaning or proper/current usage.

Early dictionaries were not terribly comprehensive and were meant only to be a record of current word meanings and correct usage. Rule books of language. Then came Samuel Johnson's dictionary followed about 100 years later by the enormous 70 year project we call the OED. Both of these dictionaries took on a far greater task than merely defining a narrow selection of words and providing proper usage. I can still remember discovering that the OED was a history of words and their meanings and usage. The OED captures, to the best of our knowledge, the origin of all English words and then provides a series of quotes showing usage over time. The word "dictionary" became much richer on the day I discovered the OED. No longer did I view that reference type as simply a rule book.

So how does all of this relate to Pluto? And what is "plutoed"? Evidently Pluto has become a verb when I wasn't looking. Seeing the word "Pluto," many of us will think of the "planet-formerly-called-Pluto." Some of us might think of the Roman god Pluto. Still others might think of a famous cartoon character who goes by that name. Nouns all. But the history of the word Pluto has just been expanded. One can now be "plutoed." OED, take note ... pluto is evolving.

According to a news article I read today, "[t]o 'pluto' is 'to demote or devalue someone or something,' much like what happened to the former planet last year when the General Assembly of the International Astronomical Union decided Pluto didn't meet its definition of a planet." Not only has the word Pluto expanded in meaning and usage, but "plutoed" was chosen 2006's Word of the Year by the American Dialect Society at its annual meeting Friday, January 5th. Quite an honor for such a young word.

The Inadequacy of Words

Today I was reminded that there are times when words are inadequate. When "being there" is much more important than anything you could possibly say. My heart breaks for a family friend who has suffered a tragedy of the kind you read about in the newspaper. I am just now learning of this event that took place months ago and have sent my condolences. They seem so little and meaningless. There are no words that can describe the heartache I feel for him and his family, yet because of distance and the passage of time I have sent words.

The pen may be mightier than the sword, but the words that flow from a pen can't hold a candle to a simple hug and the knowledge that someone cries with you in your grief.

I cry with you friend.