Tears No More in Jannah!

1. Apa yang paling DEKAT dengan diri kita di dunia ?
2. Apa yang paling JAUH dari kita di dunia ?
3. Apa yang paling BESAR di dunia ?
4. Apa yang paling BERAT di dunia ?
5. Apa yang paling RINGAN di dunia ?
6. Apa yang paling TAJAM di dunia ?

Jawabannya:
————————————————————
Suatu hari, Imam Al Ghozali berkumpul dengan murid-muridnya. Lalu Imam Al
Ghozali bertanya….

Pertama,
“Apa yang paling dekat dengan diri kita di dunia ini?”.
Murid-muridnya menjawab : “orang tua, guru, kawan, dan sahabatnya”.
Imam Ghozali menjelaskan semua jawapan itu BENAR.
Tetapi yang paling dekat dengan kita adalah MATI.
Sebab itu sememangnya janji Allah SWT bahwa setiap yang bernyawa pasti akan
mati (Q.S. Ali Imran 185)

Kedua,
“Apa yang paling jauh dari diri kita di dunia ini?”.
Murid -muridnya menjawab : “negara Cina, bulan, matahari dan
bintang-bintang”.
Lalu Imam Ghozali menjelaskan bahawa semua jawaban yang mereka berikan itu
adalah BENAR.
Tapi yang paling benar adalah MASA LALU.
�Walau dengan apa cara sekalipun kita tidak dapat kembali ke masa lalu.
Oleh sebab itu kita harus menjaga hari ini dan hari-hari yang akan datang
dengan perbuatan yang sesuai dengan ajaran Agama.

Ketiga,
“Apa yang paling besar di dunia ini?”.
Murid-muridnya menjawab : “gunung, bumi dan matahari”.
Semua jawaban itu BENAR kata Imam Ghozali.
Tapi yang paling besar dari yang ada di dunia ini adalah NAFSU (Q.S.
Al-A’Raf 179).
Maka kita harus berhati-hati dengan nafsu kita, jangan sampai nafsu membawa
kita ke neraka.

Keempat,
“Apa yang paling berat di dunia ini?”.
Ada yang menjawab : “besi dan gajah”.
Semua jawaban adalah BENAR, kata Imam Ghozali, tapi yang paling berat adalah
MEMEGANG AMANAH (Q.S. Al-Ahzab 72).
Tumbuh-tumbuhan, binatang, gunung, dan malaikat semua tidak mampu ketika
Allah SWT meminta mereka untuk menjadi khalifah (pemimpin) di dunia ini.
Tetapi manusia dengan sombongnya menyanggupi permintaan Allah SWT, sehingga
banyak dari manusia masuk ke neraka karena ia tidak dapat memegang
amanahnya.

Kelima,
“Apa yang paling ringan di dunia ini?”
Ada� yang menjawab : “kapas, angin, debu dan daun-daunan”.
Semua itu BENAR kata Imam Ghozali, tapi yang paling ringan di dunia ini
adalah MENINGGALKAN SHOLAT.
Gara-gara pekerjaan, kita meninggalkan sholat; gara-gara bermesyuarat, kita
meninggalkan sholat.

Dan pertanyaan keenam adalah,
“Apakah yang paling tajam di dunia ini?”
Murid-muridnya menjawab dengan serentak : “pedang”.
BENAR, kata Imam Ghozali, tapi yang paling tajam adalah LIDAH MANUSIA.
Karena melalui lidah, ,manusia selalu menyakiti hati dan melukai perasaan
saudaranya sendiri.

Wassalamu’alaikum Wr. Wb.

Assalamualaikum wr.wb
saya pernah dengar ceramah dari Ulamai yordania pernah berceramah di masjid tanjung anom solo tentang 3 hal:
ini satu tamsil atau kisah seorang laki-laki yang ingin jadi raja tetapi harus menjawab 3 pertanyaan yang berat. jika dia berhasil maka dia jadi raja tapi kalo gagal menjawab dia akan dibunuh dengan dipenggal lehernya…
3 pertanyaan itu ialah:
1.apa yang haq dari smua perkara yg haq?
2.apa yg bathil dari smua perkara yg bathil?
3. apa yg paling berharga bagi seorang laki-laki?

untuk menjawab ini maka si laki-laki mengembara bertahun2 dari desa ke desa dari kota ke kota dari pulau ke pulau dari negara ke negara dari benua ke benua lain wisss..terlalu panjang neh…:)
akhirnya berjumpa dengan orang yang tahu dengan tepat jawabannya tapi ada satu syarat orang ini harus mau menghinakan diri dengan duduk di samping anjing dalam tempo yang lama…
akhirnya dijawab:
1.apa yang haq dari smua perkara yg haq?
jawabnya: MATI. kematian adalah perkara yang lebih pasti dari semua yang pasti di dunia ini. kematian lebih pasti dari terbitnya matahari dari timur..karena suatu saat jika kiamat tiba matahari akan terbit dari barat..

2.apa yg bathil dari smua perkara yg bathil?
jawabnya: DUNIA. berapa banyak orang mati saling bunuh gara2 rebutan warisan tanah, berapa banyak pemuda berkelahi saling tusuk belati karena rebutan gadis pujaan? berapa banyak calon bupati dan lurah stress karena gagal dalam persaingan kedudukan dalam pilkada..
semua karena dunia. tapi bukan berarti dunia selalu membahayakan hidup kita. the men behind the gun. dunia ditangan nabi sulaiman dan nabi daud dan di tangan sahabat abu bakar dan utsman bisa jadi asbab kebaikan yang besar. tapi kalo dunia di tangan Qorun dan firaun jadinya manusia terlaknat sampai hari kiamat…
3. apa yg paling berharga bagi seorang laki-laki?
yang paling berharga adalah MAKSUD HIDUPnya..
demi maksud hidup manusia rela mengorbankan segalanya. harta waktu energi bahkan harga diri di korbankan…termasuk si laki2 tadi yang rela duduk bersama anjing yang najis demi keinginan jadi raja…
apa maksud hidup kita ?RIDLO ALLAH..demi cari ridho Ilahi kita akan merelakan apa saja demi mendapat cintaNYA…
demikian saja. maaf saya tidak menyebut ayat2 karena saya orang awam jadi takut salah…CMIIW=please Correct Me if I’m wrong…

wassalamualaikum wr.wb.

Is it true that all of us, not just poets, speak in metaphors, whether we realize it or not? Is it perhaps even true that we live by metaphors? In Metaphors We Live By George Lakoff, a linguist, and Mark Johnson, a philosopher, suggest that metaphors not only make our thoughts more vivid and interesting but that they actually structure our perceptions and understanding. Thinking of marriage as a “contract agreement,” for example, leads to one set of expectations, while thinking of it as “team play,” “a negotiated settlement,” “Russian roulette,” “an indissoluble merger,” or “a religious sacrament” will carry different sets of expectations. When a government thinks of its enemies as “turkeys or “clowns” it does not take them as serious threats, but if the are “pawns” in the hands of the communists, they are taken seriously indeed. Metaphors We Live By has led many readers to a new recognition of how profoundly metaphors not only shape our view of life in the present but set up the expectations that determine what life well be for us in the future. (from introduction in The Conscious Reader)

“Metaphors We Live By” by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson

Our selection comprises chapters 1, 2, 3, and part of 4 of Metaphors We Live By (1980).

CONCEPTS WE LIVE BY

Metaphor is for most people device of the poetic imagination and the rhetorical flourish–a matter of extraordinary rather than ordinary language. Moreover, metaphor is typically viewed as characteristic of language alone, a matter of words rather than thought or action. For this reason, most people think they can get along perfectly well without metaphor. We have found,on the contrary, that metaphor is pervasive in everyday life, not just in language but in thought and action. Our ordinary conceptual system, in terms of which we both think and act, is fundamentally metaphorical in nature.

The concepts that govern our thought are not just matters of the intellect. They also govern our everyday functioning, down to the most mundane details. Our concepts structure what we perceive, how we get around in the world, and how we relate to other people. Our conceptual system thus plays a central role in defining our everyday realities. If we are right in suggesting that our conceptual system is largely metaphorical, then the way we thinks what we experience, and what we do every day is very much a matter of metaphor.

But our conceptual system is not something we are normally aware of. in most of the little things we do every day, we simply think and act more or less automatically along certain lines. Just what these lines are is by no means obvious. One way to find out is by looking at language. Since communication is based on the same conceptual system that we use in thinking and acting, language is an important source of evidence for what that system is like.

Primarily on the basis of linguistic evidence, we have found that most of our ordinary conceptual system is metaphorical in nature. And we have found a way to begin to identify in detail just what the metaphors are halt structure how we perceive, how we think, and what we do.

To give some idea of what it could mean for a concept to be metaphorical and for such a concept to structure an everyday activity, let us start with the concept ARGUMENT and the conceptual metaphor ARGUMENT IS WAR. This metaphor is reflected in our everyday language by a wide variety of expressions:

ARGUMENT IS WAR

Your claims are indefensible.

He attacked every weak point in my argument.

His criticisms were right on target.

I demolished his argument.

I’ve never won an argument with him.

you disagree? Okay, shoot!

If you use that strategy, he’ll wipe you out.

He shot down all of my arguments.

It is important to see that we don’t just talk about arguments in terms of

It is important to see that we don’t just talk about arguments in terms of war. We can actually win or lose arguments. We see the person we are arguing with as an opponent. We attack his positions and we defend our own. We gain and lose ground. We plan and use strategies. If we find a position indefensible, we can abandon it and take a new line of attack. Many of the things we do in arguing are partially structured by the concept of war. Though there is no physical battle, there is a verbal battle, and the structure of an argument–attack, defense, counter-attack, etc.—reflects this. It is in this sense that the ARGUMENT IS WAR metaphor is one that we live by in this culture; its structures the actions we perform in arguing. Try to imagine a culture where arguments are not viewed in terms of war, where no one wins or loses, where there is no sense of attacking or defending, gaining or losing ground. Imagine a culture where an argument is viewed as a dance, the participants are seen as performers, and the goal is to perform in a balanced and aesthetically pleasing way. In such a culture, people would view arguments differently, experience them differently, carry them out differently, and talk about them differently. But we would probably not view them as arguing at all: they would simply be doing something different. It would seem strange even to call what they were doing “arguing.” In perhaps the most neutral way of describing this difference between their culture and ours would be to say that we have a discourse form structured in terms of battle and they have one structured in terms of dance. This is an example of what it means for a metaphorical concept, namely, ARGUMENT IS WAR, to structure (at least in part) what we do and how we understand what we are doing when we argue. The essence of metaphor is understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another.. It is not that arguments are a subspecies of war. Arguments and wars are different kinds of things–verbal discourse and armed conflict–and the actions performed are different kinds of actions. But ARGUMENT is partially structured, understood, performed, and talked about in terms of WAR. The concept is metaphorically structured, the activity is metaphorically structured, and, consequently, the language is metaphorically structured.

Moreover, this is the ordinary way of having an argument and talking about one. The normal way for us to talk about attacking a position is to use the words “attack a position.” Our conventional ways of talking about arguments presuppose a metaphor we are hardly ever conscious of. The metaphors not merely in the words we use–it is in our very concept of an argument. The language of argument is not poetic, fanciful, or rhetorical; it is literal. We talk about arguments that way because we conceive of them that way–and we act according to the way we conceive of things.
most complete writing about lakoffian metaphor : Click here!!!
http://theliterarylink.com/metaphors.html

Baca entri selengkapnya »

Scam adalah berita elektronik dalam Internet yang membohongi dan bersifat menipu, sehingga pengirimnya akan mendapat manfaat dan keuntungan tertentu. Contoh scam yang sering kita jumpai adalah surat berantai dan pengumuman lotre. Dalam hal ini akibat dari berita scam ini bagi penerimanya akan lebih serius, jika dibandingkan dengan spam.

Dalam bahasa Inggris, scam diartikan juga sebagai confidence trick or confidence game, sehingga pada awalnya penerima berita merasa yakin dan tidak mencurigai bahwa hal ini merupakan bentuk penipuan.

Spam atau junk mail adalah penyalahgunaan dalam pengiriman berita elektronik untuk menampilkan berita iklan dan keperluan lainnya yang mengakibatkan ketidaknyamanan bagi para pengguna web. Bentuk berita spam yang umum dikenal meliputi: spam pos-el, spam pesan instan, spam Usenet newsgroup, spam mesin pencari informasi web (web search engine spam), spam blog, spam berita pada telepon genggam, spam forum Internet, dan lain lain.

Spam ini biasanya datang bertubi-tubi tanpa diminta dan sering kali tidak dikehendaki oleh penerimanya. Beberapa contoh lain dari spam ini bisa berupa pos-el berisi iklan, surat masa singkat (SMS) pada telepon genggam, berita yang masuk dalam suatu forum kelompok warta berisi promosi barang yang tidak terkait dengan kegiatan kelompok warta tersebut, spamdexing yang menguasai suatu mesin pencari (search engine) untuk mencari popularitas bagi suatu URL tertentu, ataupun bisa berupa berita yang tak berguna dan masuk dalam suatu blog, buku tamu situs web, dan lain-lain.

Spam dikirimkan oleh pembuat iklan dengan biaya operasi yang sangat rendah, karena spam ini tidak memerlukan senarai (mailing list) untuk mencapai para pelanggan-pelanggan yang diinginkan. Sebagai akibatnya banyak pihak yang dirugikan. Selain pengguna Internet itu sendiri, ISP (Penyelenggara Jasa Internet atau Internet Service Provider), dan masyarakat umum juga merasa tidak nyaman. Karena biasanya sangat mengganggu dan kadang-kadang membohongi, berita spam termasuk dalam kegiatan melanggar hukum dan merupakan perbuatan pidana yang bisa ditindak melalui undang-undang Internet.
sumber: smkn-4-malang.ning.com

George P. Lakoff (pronounced /ˈleɪkɒf/, born May 24, 1941) is an American cognitive linguist and professor of linguistics at the University of California, Berkeley, where he has taught since 1972. Although some of his research involves questions traditionally pursued by linguists, such as the conditions under which a certain linguistic construction is grammatically viable, he is most famous for his ideas about the centrality of metaphor to human thinking, political behavior and society. He is particularly famous for his concept of the “embodied mind“, which he has written about in relation to mathematics. In recent years he has applied his work to the realm of politics, exploring this in his books. He was the founder of the now defunct progressive think tank the Rockridge Institute.^[1][2]

Reappraisal of metaphor

Lakoff began his career as a student and later a teacher of the theory of transformational grammar developed by Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor Noam Chomsky. In the late 1960s, however, he joined with others to promote generative semantics as an alternative to Chomsky’s generative syntax. In an interview he stated:

During that period, I was attempting to unify Chomsky’s transformational grammar with formal logic. I had helped work out a lot of the early details of Chomsky’s theory of grammar. Noam claimed then — and still does, so far as I can tell — that syntax is independent of meaning, context, background knowledge, memory, cognitive processing, communicative intent, and every aspect of the body…In working through the details of his early theory, I found quite a few cases where semantics, context, and other such factors entered into rules governing the syntactic occurrences of phrases and morphemes. I came up with the beginnings of an alternative theory in 1963 and, along with wonderful collaborators like Haj Ross and Jim McCawley, developed it through the sixties.^[3]

Lakoff’s claim that Chomsky claims independence between syntax and semantics has been rejected by Chomsky and he has given examples from within his work where he talks about the relationship between his semantics and syntax. Chomsky goes further and claims that Lakoff has “virtually no comprehension of the work he is discussing” (the work in question being Chomsky’s) ^[4]. His differences with Chomsky contributed to fierce, acrimonious debates among linguists that have come to be known as the “linguistics wars“.

Lakoff’s original thesis on conceptual metaphor was expressed in his book with Mark Johnson entitled Metaphors We Live By in 1980.

Metaphor has been seen within the Western scientific tradition as purely a linguistic construction. The essential thrust of Lakoff’s work has been the argument that metaphors are primarily a conceptual construction, and indeed are central to the development of thought. He says, “Our ordinary conceptual system, in terms of which we both think and act, is fundamentally metaphorical in nature.” Non-metaphorical thought is for Lakoff only possible when we talk about purely physical reality. For Lakoff the greater the level of abstraction the more layers of metaphor are required to express it. People do not notice these metaphors for various reasons. One reason is that some metaphors become ‘dead’ and we no longer recognize their origin. Another reason is that we just don’t “see” what is “going on”.

For instance, in intellectual debate the underlying metaphor is usually that argument is war (later revised as “argument is struggle”):

• He won the argument.
• Your claims are indefensible.
• He shot down all my arguments.
• His criticisms were right on target.
• If you use that strategy, he’ll wipe you out.

For Lakoff, the development of thought has been the process of developing better metaphors. The application of one domain of knowledge to another domain of knowledge offers new perceptions and understandings.

Lakoff’s theory has applications throughout all academic disciplines and much of human social interaction. Lakoff has explored some of the implications of the embodied mind thesis in a number of books, most written with coauthors.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Lakoff

Greg
For me, writing is like sledding down a wide, steep slope. You can carefully pick your launching point, but often you don’t know exactly where you’ll end up until you’re already halfway down. You have some freedom to adjust your trajectory as you careen down the hill, but abrupt changes in direction are ill-advised. It may take a few trudges back up the hill and a couple of head-over-heels tumbles, but if you’re persistent you can usually find a reasonably smooth route from top to
bottom.
Lee
For me, writing can be frightening, frenzied and alienating, like rafting solo down a slow stretch of the Amazon with a paper cut, a splintered paddle and a makeshift wooden rig at the height of piranha mating season. Other times, I write more confidently and calmly, feeling more connected to what I’m trying to do with my ideas. In these moments, it’s as though the paddle is intact, the boat is made of some invincible and impervious techno-plastic (or at least it isn’t made of sticks), and I have the help of five Olympic rowing hopefuls. More often than not, my writing is a mix of both: a little frenzy, a decent vessel, no mating piranhas, and two expert rowers (maybe the slower ones).
Ken

Writing is like swimming in the dark. Without direction in unknown waters it can be scary and frightening, but in a familiar setting it can be exciting and exhilarating. Take a deep breath and sink below, your thoughts are your only company. Burst through the surface and find your bearings. Seek out the beacons on the shore, the moon on the horizon; use your guideposts to find your way home. A quick sprint will leave you exhausted in short time. Merely drifting among the waves will lure you off track. Handful by handful, pull your way to the beach. Stop. Pause. Float. Relax. Swim again. Develop a plan. Let the sand between your toes signal your success. Crawl, step, and walk up the beach to the dunes. Look back at your fresh footsteps; exhale and smile.
Ellen

For me, writing is like running. Sometimes I run on the treadmill where the path is cushioned and I know exactly what I’m doing, how long I’m doing it, and where I’m going. It’s like being on autopilot. Other times, I run outside. Here, I meander, jumping over and around obstacles, losing track of the time, and almost always ending completely worn out. While running inside provides me with a sense of comfort and safety, there is definitely something to be said about taking that unexpected turn when you’re on the open road. With all the bumps and miscalculations that running outside involves, I may not end up where I expected, but I’m usually not far from home.
Heather

Writing is a powerful puzzle. Although the end result may seem linear, I don’t think that way. I think in pieces and patterns, and I write that way as well. I almost always do the edge pieces of a puzzle first; then I have my framework, a little something to gauge the relationships between other things in the puzzle. There may be a cloud that I can work on right off of the frame. Or maybe I will need to instead pick out the little red patch of poppies to work on, or that tree that’s a different color than all the rest, or the figure of a particular person. Maybe I’ll first pile all the, say, red pieces together, maybe not. Pieces get added to the puzzle itself as they are discovered, sometimes randomly as I encounter each piece–like cobbling thoughts together. And there are plenty of moments when the piece I’ve picked simply does not fit into that space like I was sure it would. At some point I may be left with just the sky section, for instance, and every piece kind of looks the same. Then I change tactic and sort by shape! As the picture begins to come into view, it begs me to make it a whole representation, a complete text, a clear point. And so it goes. Finally, that last piece goes in, and I just want to run my hands across the surface and stare at it for a while because I’ve managed to create a picture, maybe to get the picture across for others to see and understand.
Julie

For me, writing is like being in a long distance relationship. In the absence of the other person, I have lots of ideas about what that person is like and what I want to happen when we’re together. When we’re together, those ideas may be realized: this person is just how I imagined; our time together goes as I expected. It’s more likely that I discover my ideas don’t match reality and the person isn’t who I thought; our time together is different from what I expected it would be. In this case, I adjust my ideas. It used to be that revising was what I dreaded about writing and relationships; now, it’s the saving grace.
Bill

For me, writing is like canoeing down a river. I know what the destination is, even though I don’t know exactly where it is or what it looks like. The trick is in how to get there. At every tributary, shallows, and rapids I have to make choices and navigate my canoe to find the most direct route. Most of the time I try to forcibly direct my canoe and paddle harder to get to my destination quicker. Often, this leads to hidden snags or wrong turns. I find the process much simpler when I let the current take me.
Risa

Writing is like catching a creature. You work out techniques to make your attempts more successful, but the pursuit and capture are different every time. Finding your creature-your idea, your argument-is usually the most difficult part. They’re small-they could be nearly anywhere. You’re daydreaming at the Daily Grind when you spot a perky green lizard sunning on the bricks. You weren’t expecting her, but it’s exciting to see her so you put down your latte and get to work. For the capture itself, sometimes you’re sneaky – quiet and patient, creeping along. Other times the writing’s a mad dash – the frog has noticed you and it’s starting to move, so you have to get moving too. It’s a messy splash through the water-a little less graceful than you might like-but it gets your heartbeat going, and shows you what you’re capable of. Often you find more success when you enlist help: someone to show you possible escape routes and help you close them off, someone to follow the crab with a flashlight while you chase it along the beach at night. And really, it’s not so bad sharing the glory with others when you’re holding up a crustacean in triumph.
Marko
Writing is very much like working out. Generally, working out is all about a process which has no definitive goal in sight; improvements are always possible and innovation is a necessity. We cannot make progress without being constantly aware of what the body is doing and we have to continually challenge ourselves to make further progress. One exercise cannot work the entire body; we have to be simultaneously responsive to one muscle and the body that is supporting it. There are days when it seems that all our efforts are for naught, and those days when we feel we could support the world on our shoulders. Working out, like writing, is a lesson in perceiving both the particular and the general at once and it is a process that leaves few indifferent.
Bond

For me, writing is like a game of musical chairs. At the beginning, it can be a little confusing; there’s a lot of organizing and moving things around and setting up the record player. So too in my writing process; there’s a good deal of freewriting, jotting lists on papers, getting my research together, and organizing my study just so. Slowly things start to settle. Words, like the players walking in a circle, start to flow in a nice rhythm. As the game goes along, though, things become rather frantic. I start strategizing and moving around even more than before. I am worried that there’s not going to be a chair for me at the end. So too in writing—I worry that I am not going to finish the paper. The other players in musical chairs become like the ideas swirling in my head and I have to find them a seat too lest they disappear. At the end of the game of musical chairs, there’s just one person remaining. So too in writing. It might have started as a collaborative process, but at the end of the day, it’s just my computer and me in the middle of the night.
Meg

For me, writing is like telling a secret. All writing is intensely personal and revealing. It can be anxiety producing-like playing truth or dare at a sleepover as child wondering what mysteries the game would pry out of you. Yet writing is also like telling your best friend your deepest fears and having her assuage them. Like sharing secrets, the pressure involved in producing writing can be intense and the rewards are often surprising.
Mike

Writing is like a coffee mug: warm, comfortable, and useful, but never able to hold enough. But writing is also like skiing on aquatic mammals: very difficult to do on porpoise, although Webster’s defines porpoises, like purposes, as very gregarious. Then again, writing is also like looking for sunsets: setting up camp and building a small fire somewhere in the Sangre de Christo mountains, cooking up ideas between dawns, and never walking quite far enough to see them all, or see the best one, but surprised by another one every day
sumberipun; www.unc.edu

Mark Alvaro
Secondary Education Masters/Mathematics and Spanish Major
Bridgeport, WV
“Writing is like waking up early. I might not want to do it, but it’s always rewarding in the end.”

Hayley Burdett
English Major
Philadelphia, PA
“Writing is like building the Great Wall of China; it takes a long time, but the effort and result make it one of the wonders of the world.”

Emma Byrne
Secondary Education Masters/English Major
Shepherdstown, WV
“Writing is like a pair of scissors. It can be used to create or cut a part.”

Bryan Coyle
Writing Center GSA/Professional Writing and Editing
Kearneysville, WV
“Writing is like building a snow fort – we rejoice as it becomes sturdy and complex, and their is no limit to its scope.”

Godwin Erekaife
Chemical Engineering Major
Morgantown, WV
“Writing is like putting together a thousand-piece puzzle: you might have a general picture, but have no idea where to start.”

Anastasia Gevas
Biochemistry Major
Erie, PA
“Writing is like a rollercoaster. It usually starts slow, but it eventually speeds up and becomes more exciting and adventurous throughout the ride.”

Caitlyn Johnstone
Psychology and English Major
Newark, DE
“Writing is like being without one of your senses; you communicate without inflection and body language; you adapt to heighten the others and share yourself without viewing, raised eyebrows through word choice.”

Amanda King
Psychology Major
Morgantown, WV
“Writing is like a mirror. No matter how many times you are told that you look great, one glance and you can see all your flaws.”

Ben Myers
Writing Center GSA/English Literature
Kalamazoo, MI
“Writing is like fixing an old car – there are countless moments of pride, but there is always more work to be done.”

Marie Pellegrino
English Major
Macungie, PA
“Writing is like filming a movie—there will always be deleted scenes.”

Amy Purpura
Political Science Major
Wheeling, WV
“Writing is like any good horror film, filled with unexpected traps that appear deadly, but eventually, you find the door to safety.”

Nathalie Singh-Corcoran, Ph.D.
Writing Center Coordinator
Tuscon, Arizona
“Writing is like cheesecake, rich and delicious, but it’s hard to finish a whole piece.”

Madison Shaner
Psychology Major
Moundsville, WV
“Writing is like a busy day when I have too many things to do. I feel a sense of accomplishment at the end of the day just like when I complete a paper.”

Torrie Squires
Nursing Major
Morgantown, WV
“Writing is like shredding down a mountain. Sometimes you eat it, but once you get back up and make it to the end, there is no better feeling about what you have accomplished.”

John Thrasher
English Major
Cumberland, MD
“Writing is the paparazzi: sometimes you feel bombarded, but in the end, it’s all good.”

Bahasa Gaul, Bahasa [an]“>prokem merupakan bahasa pergaulan. Bahasa ini kadang merupakan bahasa sandi, yang dipahamu oleh kalangan tertentu. Bahasa ini konon dimulai dari golongan preman. Bahasa gaul adalah dialek nonformal baik berupa slang atau prokem yang digunakan oleh kalangan tertentu, bersifat sementara, hanya berupa variasi bahasa, penggunaannya meliputi: kosakata, ungkapan, singkatan, intonasi, pelafalan, pola, konteks serta distribusi.

Bahasa gaul pada umumnya digunakan sebagai sarana komunikasi di antara remaja sekelompoknya selama kurun tertentu. Hal ini dikarenakan, remaja memiliki bahasa tersendiri dalam mengungkapkan ekspresi diri. Sarana komunikasi diperlukan oleh kalangan remaja untuk menyampaikan hal-hal yang dianggap tertutup bagi kelompok usia lain atau agar pihak lain tidak dapat mengetahui apa yang sedang dibicarakannya. Masa remaja memiliki karakteristik antara lain petualangan, pengelompokan, dan kenakalan. Ciri ini tercermin juga dalam bahasa mereka. Keinginan untuk membuat kelompok eksklusif menyebabkan mereka menciptakan bahasa rahasia (Sumarsana dan Partana, 2002:150).

Bahasa akan selalu berkembang sesuai dengan latar belakang sosial budaya pemakainya, baik berdasarkan kondisi sosiologis maupun kondisi psikologis dari penggunanya. Oleh karena itu, dikenal ada variasi atau ragam bahasa pedagang, ragam bahasa pejabat/politikus, ragam bahasa anak-anak, termasuk ragam bahasa gaul. Hal tersebut merupakan perilaku kebahasaan dan bersifat universal. Bahasa akan terus berkembang dan memiliki aneka ragam atau variasi.

Kosakata bahasa prokem di Indonesia diambil dari kosakata bahasa yang hidup di lingkungan kelompok remaja tertentu. Pembentukan kata dan maknanya sangat beragam dan bergantung pada kreativitas pemakainya. Bahasa prokem berfungsi sebagai ekspresi rasa kebersamaan para pemakainya. Selain itu, dengan menggunakan bahasa prokem, mereka ingin menyatakan diri sebagai anggota kelompok masyarakat yang berbeda dari kelompok masyarakat yang lain.

Kehadiran bahasa prokem itu dapat dianggap wajar karena sesuai dengan tuntutan perkembangan nurani anak usia remaja. Masa hidupnya terbatas sesuai dengan perkembangan usia remaja. Selain itu, pemakainnya pun terbatas pula di kalangan remaja kelompok usia tertentu dan bersifat tidak resmi. Jika berada di luar lingkungan kelompoknya, bahasa yang digunakannya beralih ke bahasa lain yang berlaku secara umum di lingkungan masyarakat tempat mereka berada. Jadi, kehadirannya di dalam pertumbuhan bahasa Indonesia ataupun bahasa daerah tidak perlu dirisaukan karena bahasa itu masing-masing akan tumbuh dan berkembang sendiri sesuai dengan fungsi dan keperluannya masing-masing.

Contoh bokap, nyokap, pren
http://kamusgaul.com/taxonomy_vtn/kamus_lengkap_bahasa_gaul