I have updates for several posts that don't require a full post on their own and will be missed by many if I now append them to the original posts. So I will share them together here in a single post.
1. After a photo of a fan and hanging clothes in the post "College Dormitories in China: Central South University of Forestry and Technology in Changsha" I wrote:
2. I have already made four updates in the post "The New York Times and Google Searches for 'New York Times' Blocked in China". Go to the post to read them. The gist was that James Griffiths in the Shanghaiist hypothesized The New York Times was not really blocked in China and the site was merely experiencing difficulties due to heavy traffic. I explained why that made little sense. In response Griffiths retracted his traffic problems theory and later in response to another post he also retracted his skepticism that The Times was blocked in China.
But I have yet another update now. I recently retested and The Times remains blocked, at least at my location in Changsha, Hunan province. Also, a search on Google for "New York Times" still leads to no results and only a connection reset error page (the exact wording depends on the browser used). And as before, no such blocking occurs on either Baidu or Bing and both provide results including links to The Times website.
3. Finally, in the post "A Stationary Child in Motion" I shared a photo of a young girl running on a treadmill. I passed by the same treadmill today, but it was being used very differently by a young boy.
At least he's still getting some exercise.
1. After a photo of a fan and hanging clothes in the post "College Dormitories in China: Central South University of Forestry and Technology in Changsha" I wrote:
If you are now fretting over me sharing a photo of the young women's underwear, don't take your panties off.If that struck you as a peculiar choice of words, I would agree. After recently rereading the post I realized I had messed up a potentially timely use of words. I am not sure why fretting over the photo would have caused anyone to take their panties off. That sentence in the post has been edited to what was intended:
If you are now fretting over me sharing a photo of the young women's underwear, don't get your panties in a bunch.I apologize for any misunderstanding due to my mangling of an idiom.
2. I have already made four updates in the post "The New York Times and Google Searches for 'New York Times' Blocked in China". Go to the post to read them. The gist was that James Griffiths in the Shanghaiist hypothesized The New York Times was not really blocked in China and the site was merely experiencing difficulties due to heavy traffic. I explained why that made little sense. In response Griffiths retracted his traffic problems theory and later in response to another post he also retracted his skepticism that The Times was blocked in China.
But I have yet another update now. I recently retested and The Times remains blocked, at least at my location in Changsha, Hunan province. Also, a search on Google for "New York Times" still leads to no results and only a connection reset error page (the exact wording depends on the browser used). And as before, no such blocking occurs on either Baidu or Bing and both provide results including links to The Times website.
3. Finally, in the post "A Stationary Child in Motion" I shared a photo of a young girl running on a treadmill. I passed by the same treadmill today, but it was being used very differently by a young boy.
At least he's still getting some exercise.
Speech error!
ReplyDeleteWell, writing error, but yes. I did realize at the time I didn't intend the literal meaning. I just messed up on applying its idiomatic meaning. I was actually pondering how it may be best described in terms of language processing. It's not phonological or orthographic, but I think semantic works. Or how about an idiomatic error?
Delete