(Without Week 8 posting requirements, due to mid-terms week).
SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF SNOW
This was a handout in class. I will post it on the blog.
This is an example to conceptualize ideas of 'soft constructionism' in Hannigan's article: the 'reality' of 'snow' exists, though the way we talk about those environmental realities matters for how we socially relate to it.
The same snow, socially constructed differently:
1. For many people of the world 'snow' is just snow.
2. However, for the Innuit, a single term 'snow' is meaningless. They have about 31 words for snow. And the lists I found are constructed differently as well.
3. In terms of environmental problems in he past, we were cultures without much social construction of that reality. We were like that culture "that didn't have a word for snow." Some cultures are like that: traditional words for ice or snow didn't exist among Amazonian indigenous tribes. Some cultures don't have a wide variety of color terms either.
Like the five theoretical themes of the course, they are ADDITIVE to each other.
As we move through them, they build on each other instead of are substituted. The focus on social constructionism is like that: it is required in Beck's risk society ideas and ecological modernization ideas, though since the social constructionism of that is innately problematic (as argued in the Mythen article) we will look into that further about what has been learned about cycles of social construction and public awareness of environmental problems and just how environmental problem/reality is socially constructed to make it real as others argue for its nonexistence ("hard constructionism"). However, soft and hard constructionism are both social construction arguments.
Without further ado, THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF SNOW:
SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF SNOW
From: noblei@hursley.ibm.com
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Inuit words for snow
Date: 29 Jun 1995 12:03:18 GMT
In <804329548.8959snx@mundens.equinox.gen.nz>, frankie@mundens.equinox.gen.nz (Frank Pitt) writes:
>In article <3snsk9$aoe@ari.net> arvon@ari.net writes:
>>I withdraw the Inuit remark. But can someone tell me if it's a myth,
>>lie, story or rumor that they have 300 words for snow?
>It's a rumour. Inuit have _four_ words for snow, skiers have more.
No idea as to the accuracy of its content, but I got sent the following a month or two back: "Subject: Snow; Here are the 31 words for snow in the Inuit language (I don't speak Inuit, so please don't ask me how they are pronounced) as printed by today's Denver Post:
Aniugavinirq: very hard, compressed and frozen snow
Apijaq: snow covered by bad weather
Apigiannagaut: first snow of Autumn
Apimajug: snow-covered
Apisimajug: snow-covered, but not snowed in
Apujjag: snowed-in
Aput: snow
Aputiqarniq: snowfall on ground
Aqillutaq: new snow
Auviq: snow block
Katakaqtanaq: hardcrust snow that gives way underfoot
Kavisilaq: snow roughened by frost
Kiniqtaq: compact, damp snow
Mannguq: melting snow
Masak: wet, falling snow
Matsaaq: half-melted snow
Mauja: soft, deep snow footsteps sink in
Natiruvaaq: drifting snow
Pirsirlug: blowing snow
Pukajaak: sugary snow
Putak: crystalline, breaks into grains
Qaggitaq: snow ditch to trap caribou
Qaliriiktaq: snow layer of poor quality for an igloo
Qaniktaq: new snow on ground
Qannialaaq: light, falling snow
Qiasuqqaq: thawed snow that refroze with an icy surface
Qimugjuk: snow drift
Qiqumaaq: snow with a frozen surface after spring thaw
Qirsuqaktuq: light snow
Qukaarnartuq: crusted snow
Sitilluqaq: hard snow
31!
And here they are:
Aluiqqaniq : Snowdrift on a steep hill, overhanging on top.
Aniuk : Snow for drinking water.
Aniuvak : Snow remaining in holes.
Aput : Snow on the ground (close to the generic Snow)
Aqilluqqaaq : Fresh and soggy snow
Auviq : snow brick, to build igloo
Ijaruvak : Melted snow, turned in ice crystals.
Isiriartaq : Falling snow, yellow or red.
Kanangniut : Snowdrift made by North-East wind.
Katakartanaq : Crusty snow, broken by steps.
Kavisilaq : snow hardened by rain or frost
Kinirtaq : wet and compact snow.
Masak : wet snow, saturated.
Matsaaq : snow in water
Maujaq : deep and soft snow, where it's difficult to walk.
Mingullaut : thin powder snow, enters by cracks and covers objects.
Mituk : small snow layer on the water of a fishing hole.
Munnguqtuq : compressed snow which began to soften in spring.
Natiruviaqtuq: snow blasts on the ground.
Niggiut : snowdrift with South-east wind
Niummak : hard waving snow staying on ice fields
Pingangnuit : snowdrift made by south-west wind
Piqsiq : snow lift by wind. Blizzard.
Pukak : dry snow crystals, like sugar powder
Qannialaaq : light falling snow
Qanniq : falling snow
Quiasuqaq : re-frozen snow surface, making crust.
Qiqiqralijarnatuq: snow when walked on.
Uangniut : snowdrift made by north-west wind.
Uluarnaq : round snowdrift
Uqaluraq : taper snowdrift
These are 31 words about snow, from the Inuit, Aivilik and Igloolik languages.
(Julian Bentham, Adelaide Research Center)
http://www.elements.nb.ca/kids/snow/snoword.htm
Next winter, perhaps you would find it fun to photograph each of these kinds of snow? ^^
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
1. SONG, Jee- Hyun
2. TACO BELL taking a step into sustainability
3. I think this is an example of 'Ecological Modernization' since it shows how a corporation follows the state's encouragement to be more 'green'. Taco Bell is a pioneer of the national campaign, 'Water-use it wisely'.
-----------------------------------
4. Taco Bell recently announced their plans to install new “Grill-To-Order” cooking machines in all of their locations. The company is making this step to not only reduce water and energy usage, but also improve cost efficiency. Each installation is estimated to save $5,900 a year in electricity cost per store. System-wide Taco Bell expects to save more than $17 million a year.
Taco Bell has released figures that their new system will save around 300 million gallons of water per year (the equivalent of supplying every household in Atlanta with water for a day) and roughly 200 million kWh of electricity (enough energy to power every household in New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington, DC and Dallas for one day). The new equipment will also save more than 1.2 million therms of gas each year.
The system is already operating in more than more than 3,000 restaurants—or about half of all Taco Bell locations—the company plans to have all of its 5,600 restaurants using the Grill-to-Order cooking method by 2010. Water — Use it Wisely, a national campaign aimed at educating individuals on the importance of water conservation, has endorsed Taco Bell as a pioneer that other quick service restaurants should follow.
I applaud Taco Bell for taking steps to maintain their commitment to sustainability and corporate responsibility. As companies embrace efficient and effective decisions for their operations, the more will follow. Hopefully Taco Bell will continue on its steps towards sustainable operations by rethinking many of their choices (maybe add some more vegetarian and organic options).
The fast food industry has always been about quick, efficient, food production. But, what can they do in their next steps? I'd like to hear others' thoughts on what fast food restaurants can and should do to green their operations. Choosing green suppliers, or eliminating to-go bags are some ideas.
-----
http://www.enn.com/business/article/35712
1. Keonhwa Sung
2. Going Nowhere Fast: Top Rivers Face Mounting Threats
3. Due to our misuse of the environment, everything has been changed. This case is one of those. When we usually learned about rivers, we remembered where rivers are, why they are important, and so on. However, many people do not recognize that rivers are destroying because of our faults.
-----------------------------------
4. Rivers on every continent are drying out, threatening severe water shortages, according to a new WWF report.
The report, World's Top Rivers at Risk, released ahead of World Water Day (22 March), lists the top ten rivers that are fast dying as a result of climate change, pollution and dams.
“All the rivers in the report symbolize the current freshwater crisis, which we have been signalling for years," says WWF Global Freshwater Programme Director Jamie Pittock.
"Poor planning and inadequate protection of natural areas mean we can no longer assume that water will flow forever. Like the climate change crisis, which now has the attention of business and government, we want leaders to take notice of the emergency facing freshwater now not later.”
Five of the ten rivers listed in the report are in Asia alone. They are the Yangtze, Mekong, Salween, Ganges and Indus. Europe’s Danube, the Americas’ La Plata and Rio Grande/Rio Bravo, Africa’s Nile-Lake Victoria and Australia’s Murray-Darling also make the list.
Dams along the Danube River — one of the longest flowing rivers in Europe — have already destroyed 80 per cent of the river basin’s wetlands and floodplains. Even without warmer temperatures threatening to melt Himalayan glaciers, the Indus River faces scarcity due to over-extraction for agriculture. Fish populations, the main source of protein and overall life support systems for hundreds of thousands of communities worldwide, are also being threatened.
The report calls on governments to better protect river flows and water allocations in order to safeguard habitats and people’s livelihoods.
“Conservation of rivers and wetlands must be seen as part and parcel of national security, health and economic success,” Pittock adds. “Emphasis must be given to exploring ways of using water for crops and products that do not use more water than necessary.”
In addition, cooperative agreements for managing shared resources, such as the UN Watercourses Convention, must be ratified and given the resources to make them work, says WWF.
“The freshwater crisis is bigger than the ten rivers listed in this report but it mirrors the extent to which unabated development is jeopardizing nature’s ability to meet our growing demands,” says Pittock. “We must change our mindset now or pay the price in the not so distant future.”
------------------------------------ http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/03/070320201948.htm
1. Nuri Na
2. 'Sustainable' bio-plastic can damage the environment
3. It seems like that "new technology" has lots environmental problems. I think that we should rethink about the concept of "sustainability".
-----------------------------------
4. The worldwide effort by supermarkets and industry to replace conventional oil-based plastic with eco-friendly "bioplastics" made from plants is causing environmental problems and consumer confusion, according to a Guardian study.
The substitutes can increase emissions of greenhouse gases on landfill sites, some need high temperatures to decompose and others cannot be recycled in Britain.
Many of the bioplastics are also contributing to the global food crisis by taking over large areas of land previously used to grow crops for human consumption.
The market for bioplastics, which are made from maize, sugarcane, wheat and other crops, is growing by 20-30% a year.
The industry, which uses words such as "sustainable", "biodegradeable", "compostable" and "recyclable" to describe its products, says bioplastics make carbon savings of 30-80% compared with conventional oil-based plastics and can extend the shelf-life of food.
Concern centres on corn-based packaging made with polylactic acid (Pla). Made from GM crops, it looks identical to conventional polyethylene terephthalate (Pet) plastic and is produced by US company NatureWorks. The company is jointly owned by Cargill, the world's second largest biofuel producer, and Teijin, one of the world's largest plastic manufacturers.
Pla is used by some of the biggest supermarkets and food companies, including Wal-Mart, McDonald's and Del Monte. It is used by Marks & Spencer to package organic foods, salads, snacks, desserts, and fruit and vegetables.
It is also used to bottle Belu mineral water, which is endorsed by environmentalists because the brand's owners invest all profits in water projects in poor countries. Wal-Mart has said it plans to use 114m Pla containers over the course of a year.
While Pla is said to offer more disposal options, the Guardian has found that it will barely break down on landfill sites, and can only be composted in the handful of anaerobic digesters which exist in Britain, but which do not take any packaging. In addition, if Pla is sent to UK recycling works in large quantities, it can contaminate the waste stream, reportedly making other recycled plastics unsaleable.
Last year Innocent drinks stopped using Pla because commercial composting was "not yet a mainstream option" in the UK.
Anson, one of Britain's largest suppliers of plastic food packaging, switched back to conventional plastic after testing Pla
in sandwich packs. Sainsbury's has decided not to use it, saying Pla is made with GM corn. "No local authority is collecting compostable packaging at the moment. Composters do not want it," a spokesman said.
Britain's supermarkets compete to claim the greatest commitment to the environment with plant-based products. The bioplastics industry expects rising oil prices to help it compete with conventional plastics, with Europe using about 50,000 tonnes of bioplastics a year.
Concern is mounting because the new generation of biodegradable plastics ends up on landfill sites, where they degrade without oxygen, releasing methane, a greenhouse gas 23 times more powerful than carbon dioxide. This week the US national oceanic and atmospheric administration reported a sharp increase in global methane emissions last year.
"It is just not possible to capture all the methane from landfill sites," said Michael Warhurt, resources campaigner at Friends of the Earth. "A significant percentage leaks to the atmosphere."
"Just because it's biodegradable does not mean it's good. If it goes to landfill it breaks down to methane. Only a percentage is captured," said Peter Skelton of Wrap, the UK government-funded Waste and Resources Action Programme. "In theory bioplastics are good. But in practice there are lots of barriers."
Recycling companies said they would have to invest in expensive new equipment to extract bioplastic from waste for recycling. "If we could identify them the only option would be to landfill them," said one recycler who asked to remain anonymous. "They are not wanted by UK recycling companies or local authorities who refuse to handle them. Councils are saying they do not want plastics near food collection. If these biodegradable [products] get into the recycling stream they contaminate it.
"It will get worse because the government is encouraging more recycling. There will be much more bioplastic around."
Problems arise because some bioplastics are "home" compostable and recyclable. "It's so confusing that a Pla bottle looks exactly the same as a standard Pet bottle," Skelton said. "The consumer is not a polymer expert. Not nearly enough consideration has gone into what they are meant to do with them. Everything is just put in the recycling bin."
Yesterday NatureWorks accepted that its products would not fully break down on landfill sites. "The recycling industry in the UK has not caught up with other countries" said Snehal Desai, chief marketing officer for NatureWorks. "We need alternatives to oil. UK industry should not resist change. We should be designing for the future and not the past. In central Europe, Taiwan and elsewhere, NatureWorks polymer is widely accepted as a compostable material."
Other users said it was too soon to judge the new technology. "It's very early days," said Reed Paget, managing director of Belu. "The UK packaging industry does not want competition. It's shortsighted and is blocking eco-innovation." Belu collects its bottles and now sends them to mainland Europe.
"People think that biodegradable is good and non-biodegradable is bad. That's all they see," said Chris Goodall, environmental analyst and author of How to Live a Low-carbon Lifestyle. "I have been trying to compost bags that are billed as 'biodegradable' and 'home compostable' but I have completely failed. They rely on the compost heap really heating up but we still find the residues."
Bioplastics compete for land with biofuels and food crops. About 200,000 tonnes of bioplastics were produced last year, requiring 250,000-350,000 tonnes of crops. The industry is forecast to need several million acres of farmland within four years.
There is also concern over the growing use by supermarkets of "oxy-degradable" plastic bags, billed as sustainable. They are made of conventional oil-based plastic, with an additive that enables the plastic to break down. The companies promoting it claim it reduces litter and causes no methane or harmful residues. They are used by Wal-Mart, Pizza Hut and KFC in the US, and Tesco and the Co-op in the UK for "degradable" plastic carrier bags.
Some environmentalists say the terminology confuses the public. "The consumer is baffled," a Wrap briefing paper said. "It considers these products degradable but ... they will not degrade effectively in [the closed environment of] a landfill site."
A spokesman for Symphony Plastics disputed that. "Oxy-bioplastic can be re-used and recycled, but will degrade and disappear in a short timescale", he said.
-----
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/apr/26/waste.pollution
Post a Comment