Let's Play: Counterfeit Monkey

It also makes me wonder to what extent people are defined by others’ perceptions of them. Like, she’s clearly suggesting that “bartender” is her name for linguistic purposes, right? But we know that using the letter-remover on us tries to modify “Alexandra” instead of “ourselves”.

So what determines whether someone is linguistically their name or their description? I’m assuming it’s not entirely consensus reality, because if it were, we’d be “tourist” or “stranger” instead of “Alexandra”—that’s how most people around here see us, since we haven’t given them our name. But propaganda might be an even more powerful force in Atlantis than elsewhere: if the Bureau gets everyone to perceive those demonstrators not as “protestors” but as “criminals”, will that actually shape reality to make them so?

4 Likes

That one is also on me. Back in 2016, I went to some lengths to make the letter remover and the anagramming gun treat the player as “Alexandra” rather than “ourselves.” I simply assumed that was the intended behaviour, and never consulted Emily about it.

The original source contains the line

The printed name of yourself is "Alexandra".

which seems to have no effect.

3 Likes

Honestly, given that the printed name of yourself is explicitly set, I imagine that was the originally-intended behavior! (Also, probably best to spoiler any tools that haven’t come up yet in the playthrough.)

But for example, those PROTESTORS can be depluralized to a single PROTESTOR. What makes them unified enough for that to work? Would anti-police tactics in Atlantis involve intentionally-not-unified action, so that there can’t be a single noun applied to everyone?

2 Likes

It would be mildly amusing if the letter tools saw the player as their current score ranking, such as “Petty Criminal,” as @DeusIrae suggested above.

3 Likes

It would, but we also know that “Alexandra” is in some sense the player character’s real name, in that it was synthesized from Alex + Andra, right?

1 Like

I’ve noticed this happening with doodle dogs. Labradoodles are a crossbreed of labradors and poodles (labrad + oodle). These are commonly shortened to just “doodles”. And so the crossbreed of golden retrievers and poodles gets called “goldendoodles”, having picked up an extra ‘d’ from rebracketing.

3 Likes

I’m also very curious about that diminutive affixer. An affix is something that’s stuck onto (that is, affixed to) a word to change its meaning. If it comes before the word, it’s a prefix, if it comes after, it’s a suffix, if it comes inside the word, it’s an infix, and if it goes on both sides, it’s a circumfix. So the diminutive affixer attaches diminutive affixes like “-ette” to things.

But English doesn’t really do diminutive affixes very much. When we use them, they’re usually borrowed from French, which does it a lot more—and I suspect most people don’t think of “signet” as a diminutive of “sign” nowadays.

Does that make it easier to use a diminutive affixer in English compared to, say, Spanish, where you can stick an -ito or -ita on most things? Or is it harder, since the consensus doesn’t really think of that relationship between “sign” and “signet”? And can the affixer make other miscellaneous changes to ensure it’s a real word, like turning a Spanish mosca (“fly”, a feminine noun) into a mosquito (literally “tiny fly”, a masculine noun)?

For that matter, a lot of languages have affixes that are mutually exclusive. Something can be singular, or it can be plural, but not both. Or it can be masculine, or it can be feminine, or it can be neuter, but not more than one at a time. We’ve seen ways to add affixes (the diminutive affixer) and to remove them (the depluralizing cannon), but not ways to swap one for another; is that just because English doesn’t really do that much, or is it a fundamental limit of the technology?

I’m going to guess the former—it’s because English doesn’t do that very much, and this is Anglophone Atlantis—because swapping an affix isn’t that much more unpredictable than inserting or removing one, and predictability seems to be the key here. Perhaps pluralizing is so much harder than depluralizing because “lemon” is very clearly defined, but nobody agrees on how many “lemons” should be?

Looking at the linked section of the source code, it’s actually more complicated than that—if you wave a Y-remover at yourselves, Alex comments that we already count as “ourselves”. Which suggests that you can in fact change how linguistic tools affect you by focusing on particular nouns or pronouns or descriptions! I imagine it’s much easier to do it on yourself than on anything or anyone else, which is why the bartender doesn’t have to worry, even if her name is something like “Rose”—she just focuses on her job or on a pronoun rather than on her name.

8 Likes

Yeah, I’ve been thinking about this too - because of course the first thing I’m going to do when we finally find Brock is wave a b-remover at him to facilitate extraction. Buddy, you are a spy messing with an island full of authoritarian word-wizards, what the fuck are you doing running around with a name like that?

6 Likes

Alternately, better keep checking every rock you see through the monocle, in case the Bureau thought of that first!

1 Like

Oh, speaking of affixes, here’s a fun example from Swahili.

Depending on dialect, Swahili has somewhere around 18 “genders” for nouns, though they’re usually called “noun classes” to avoid confusion with sociological male-or-female gender. (Even though linguistics had the term “gender” first before the sociologists got hold of it!) Since there are so many, they’re usually numbered instead of named.

  1. personal names and family members
  2. humans
  3. groups of humans
  4. things that are long in exactly one dimension
  5. groups of long things
  6. large (in multiple dimensions) things, round things, halves of natural pairs
  7. groups of large/round things, natural pairs of things, substances
  8. artifacts created by humans
  9. groups of artifacts
  10. animals and loanwords
  11. groups of animals, loanwords, and outlined things
  12. things defined by their outline
  13. small things (merged with 7 in many dialects)
  14. groups of small things (merged with 8 in many dialects)
  15. abstracts (merged with 11 in many dialects)
  16. actions
  17. things you are touching
  18. things you are in the vicinity of
  19. things you are inside of

Changing the class of a noun can change its meaning: nyumba “house” is in class 9, but putting it into class 12 (or 7) gives chumba “room”, class 5 gives jumba “mansion”, and class 18 gives nyumbani “the house, where I am” (or more idiomatically “at home”). Similarly Mwingereza (class 1: people) “English person”, Kiingereza (class 7: artifacts) “English language”, Uingereza (class 14: abstracts) “England”. And you can do the same for the plural classes, and so on!

If we went to Kenya with an affixer that can change noun classes, we could presumably make things larger or smaller using classes 5 and 12—but could we also teleport around by using classes 16 through 18?

11 Likes

Or, for one more example of fun morphology (I’ll stop after this): the Kiowa language (spoken in Oklahoma in the United States) doesn’t mark whether nouns are singular or plural. Rather, it marks whether nouns are not in the quantity you’d expect. Horses you normally expect in small quantities, so “one horse” and “two horses” are not marked, but “three horses” or “many horses” is. Bones you expect to find in large quantities, so “many bones” is not marked, but “one bone” is. And eyes you expect to find in pairs, so “two eyes” is not marked, but “one eye” and “three eyes” are.

This is known as an “inverse number system” and mostly only appears in the endangered Kiowa-Tanoan language family. So if you gave the Kiowa tribe a depluralizer (I just think they deserve it), they could probably use it to remove the -gau marker and force nouns into the most expected quantities, whether that’s singular, plural, or dual!

13 Likes

On a more CM-related note, doesn’t it feel a bit odd that the homonym paddle is in the upscale bar, and the mirror-spinner is at the beach? Originally that spinner was an avante-garde sculpture in the Fleur d’Or—along with a turntable that would turn a PEA into an APE or an ARC into a CAR—and the puzzle there involved distracting the staff so you could use them to make the things you needed.

But this ended up feeling kind of lame, because by the time you reach the Fleur d’Or, you’ve gotten used to much more versatile and dramatic tools. So it was just removed from the game.

This was changed for the sake of an easter egg (turning a LEER into a REEL and playing it on the movie projector, which was originally done with the anagramming gun in the Bureau, but it seemed wrong to have the projector not be in the cinema), which required the spinner to be accessible somewhere. So it was put earlier in the game, where it would feel interesting instead of disappointing, and a DOG/GOD was put on it, as a demonstration. It’s a four-foot conical pillar to (along with the DOG/GOD) reference Apollo Agyieus (who, side note, might have been a Hittite god originally[1]!)…

…and now it’s a massively overcomplicated red herring except for this one easter egg. So it was turned into a puzzle, and the dog was hidden somewhere else so it wouldn’t be trivial. And then the farmer was brought back to supply a YAM—he’d originally been selling CHARD, but that was modified so you could get a CAR before getting the money from the hostel. And now:

This is all a lot of bother just for the sake of adding an achievement/easter egg that most players probably won’t notice. In each case, though, I felt as though the result of the design fix was a richer, more interesting setting with more playful manipulation available.

The turntable is fully implemented, but commented out, because all the letter-manipulation tools were supposed to be either cool or useful (or both), and this one wasn’t deemed to be either—not enough so to justify its existence in the game.


  1. There’s evidence, but it’s not conclusive. Similar cones were found under the gate of Hattusa, but the name “Apuluna” mentioned in Wikipedia was a misreading of the inscription. But we do see the name “Appaliona” in a treaty with Wilusa/Troy, and Apollo was the patron of Troy in the Iliad, which is suggestive! ↩︎

7 Likes

By the way, if anyone wants to check out the source code of the turntable, it’s here:

https://github.com/i7/counterfeit-monkey/blob/b2b6fc39c84a58ba96b4123d6d8e1efd8b376cd7/Counterfeit%20Monkey.materials/Extensions/Counterfeit%20Monkey/Tools.i7x#L1061-L1123

1 Like

Chapter VI – Higher Earning

Apologies for letting the thread lie fallow for a bit; I’ve just gone on sabbatical from my job, and the last two weeks were rather hectic as I wrapped up everything that needed doing for the next two months. On the plus side, today’s update is a meaty one, and the remainder should come out pretty expeditiously given that I don’t have frivolous distractions like “making a living” to worry about!

Last time on the thread, we’d learned that our compatriot Brock had gone to view a technology demonstration at the Bureau before he failed to make the rendezvous; with more gumption than sense, we’re going in there to recover his body rescue him. That will require an invitation to the demo, which we know Alex’s advisor, Professor Waterstone, has in his possession (since he’s a word-studies mucky-muck at the university). Fortunately, we’re just down the street from the college quarter of Anglophone Atlantis, hanging out in the high-concept lounge of the Fleur d’Or hotel. Before I head out, I remember I never got around to turning the jigsaw puzzle we found into something more exciting:

>show jigsaw

“What do you make of this?” we ask, showing off the jigsaw.

She shrugs good-naturedly, hits the jigsaw with the paddle, and grins at us. We look down at what we’re holding: It’s a portable power saw with the ability to slice right through wood or plastic. Dewalt cordless, if you’re interested, with a massive battery.

Yeah, we can get in some trouble with that.

We also plink out some songs on the piano in the lobby as we depart:

>play piano

We pick out a church hymn you heard a lot in your youth.

We pick out my mother’s favourite Atlantean folk tune.

We pick out some vaguely remembered commercial jingles from your childhood.

(I still have the Britishising googles on).

Fun enough, but we probably shouldn’t quit our day job. South down Long Street takes us to:

Palm Square

Now this is my part of town: Palm Square is the beginning of the university district. To the southeast, through the iron gate, is the university campus proper; and that unobtrusive little doorway directly south of us leads into the Babel Café.

I live in the apartment complex that runs along the west side of the square ? in fact, my apartment door is immediately to the southwest.

“Babel” sounds like a faintly-subversive name here on Atlantis, so it fits the bohemian local character, I think.

>x apartment

I know it’s a bit shabby, but you know what graduate stipends are like. Or maybe you don’t. My parents help with the rent, but it’s still nothing spectacular.

>x gate

The campus as a whole is walled and gated because of the amount of linguistic research that happens inside. This is a very lightweight form of security, more symbolic than anything, with much more significant protections on the really powerful materials.

I have the student ring that opens this back in my apartment. I just wasn’t expecting to need to go in there ever again.

Well, that last is an interesting data point re Alex’s expectations for … whatever we’re doing with him. We could get through this gate six different ways, I’m sure, but might as well get that ring if only to see what his digs are like. I misread the map, though, and instead of going through the front door to the southwest, I type W:

That way lies the bathroom window of my apartment. Though in fact, if you have a mind to break in, it’s the easiest way: it’s not hard to force the window.

>x window

It is one of those windows that slides sideways open. The latch is broken, so it can’t actually be secured.

What are the odds that we’re gonna break in?

>sw

If we want to go into my apartment, we’re going to have to climb in my window. Here, let me just streamline this process for us.

I appreciate how nobody involved is treating this as any kind of a barrier.

The window slides open with a hideous protesting shriek.

“Halt! You! Young person!”

It’s my neighbour, Mrs Parsnip, leaning out from her apartment above us. Mrs Parsnip and I don’t interact except about once a month when she comes around to ask for my spare change for bus fare or the laundry.

“Clear off or I’ll call the police!” she shouts.

There’s another input prompt, but regardless of what I type Alex takes over:

…No, don’t worry, I’ll handle this.

I step us back and stare up at her. “I’m a friend of Alex,” I say. “He called and asked me to stop by because he thought he left the stove on. Said he climbs in the window all the time when he gets locked out.”

“That’s true,” she says. “Shouldn’t be allowed out by himself. Okay, go ahead.”

In a mutter she adds, “Not like he has anything worth stealing anyway.” She vanishes from view.

The window is uncomfortably high and it takes a little scramble to get in, but soon we are inside.

Apartment Bathroom

An antique nightstand of my mother’s, which does not actually fit anywhere near my bed, is jammed into one corner of the bathroom. On the nightstand are a key and a ring.

The bathroom window gives some weak sunlight.

We could climb back out the window, or we could go south into the rest of my apartment.

>x nightstand

It is wobbly, scratched, and chipped, which is the state in which my mother likes her antiques.

On the nightstand are a key and a ring.

>x key

It’s made of an extremely ordinary blank.

The key unlocks the apartment door.

>x ring

A gold-toned ring that from a distance would look like a signet. In fact the face of it is figured with the symbol of the university, an owl biting the letter A in its beak. Embedded in this face is the tiny RFID tag that opens generic university security.

It is the perfect combination of technical paranoia and old-fashioned pretentiousness, and one is assigned to every new student with great pomp on the day of orientation.

The ring unlocks the sturdy iron gate to the university.

At first glance, the setup here is a little confusing – who on God’s green earth puts their keys in the bathroom? – but actually I think it all makes sense. Alex didn’t want to just leave his front door unlocked, but also didn’t want to bring his key with him when he went to join with Andra, because beyond not expecting to return, he didn’t want to carry anything that could unnecessarily be tracked back to his old identity. But instead of doing the obvious thing – leaving, locking the door from the outside, and ditching the key – he was sufficiently conscientious/used to popping in through the bathroom window that he decided to exit that way too, leaving his keys on the table on his way out.

Anyway, we grab the ring and key so we can make it out the regular way; Mrs. Parsnip would surely get suspicious if she saw us leaving the same way we arrived.

First, though:

>remove n from ring

We reset the device to n. There is a smell of anise, and the ring turns into a rig. A whole collection of lighting units on poles and stands.

The rig is currently switched off.

The rig is too heavy to carry, and we almost drop it, but I manage to set the poles down mostly stably and, for a wonder, without breaking anything.

…that could be handy in specific circumstances, I suppose, but let’s slap some gel on so we can use the ring for its intended purpose. Then we close the window behind us (“I feel obscurely better now”, says Alex, though of course we can’t lock it) and head south in to the main body of the flat:

My Apartment

I should point out my copy of The Problem of Adjectives. I should have taken it back to the library – I meant to take it back to the library – but there just wasn’t time. The last couple of hours before I came to meet you were frantic. The way I figured it, my parents or someone will come looking for me and they’ll take it back for me. I think.

I’d apologise for the mess, but should we really be here? I’m reconciled to leaving all my things behind, you know. You made me promise that I didn’t mind.

Alex being fixated on an overdue library book feels extremely in character. That’s in interesting title, though:

>x problem

It’s not my book; it belongs to the department, as we can see from the fact that it’s stamped LANGUAGE STUDIES DEPARTMENT : SEMINAR ROOM inside.

I got it out because it provides a general overview of adjectival “adherence” – that is, how and when an adjective is so much part of the name of something that it can be affected by tools like your N-remover, and when it is purely incidental.

I see I may be losing you. Shall I put this in layman’s terms? >>

My poor sweet Alex, don’t you know us better by now?

>no

Okay, then.

In general, strongly-adhering adjectives produce problems by preventing conversions that might otherwise be possible; conversely, it is difficult to make objects with particular characteristics because those characteristics are described by weakly-adhering adjectives.

The point is: it is possible to use linguistic tools to create water. It is not reliably possible, at least in American English, to use those tools to create potable water, because “potable” is a weakly-adhering adjective describing a statistically uncommon trait. This means that linguistic reification is helpless to solve water supply problems, even in third-world regions using a high-efficacy language. For that matter even when a word has a strongly-adhering adjective, the interference of that adjective usually just makes the object impossible to reify at all.

What we need, therefore, is a language with nouns that uniquely specify substances’ desirable traits: “potable” or “pure” water should be named something distinct from adulterated forms of H2O, and so on.

Have I bored you enough yet? >>

GIVE US MORE!

Scientific jargon does, of course, exist to specify objects uniquely, but there are two problems. One is that most chemical and biological terminology is used by such a small subset of the population that it has near-zero linguistic efficacy: creating a substance by formula requires an amount of energy roughly on par with pointing a w-remover at Aberystwyth. This is not a realistic solution to resource problems.

The second difficulty is that even with well-known exceptions such as “H2O”, the formula is not usually not a linguistic subset of the formula of another widely available and well-known substance.

Hence the need for a new language with nouns designed based on careful scientific research into the primary needs and resources of living in a given region. This language could then be systematically taught to everyone dwelling in that area, causing permanent economic uplift.

“Systematically taught” is a bit of a problem, since it would take massive funding and effort to make the language known widely enough to gain linguistic efficacy. And there would be significant issues in not totally crowding out indigenous languages and thus destroying an existing culture.

But I have high hopes, assuming I can ever get out of this repressive little burg and make my case to one or more of the major world relief organisations.

This was a bit of an infodump, I suppose, but a super interesting one, as it lays out some fun extrapolations of the metaphysics while confirming what’s on the flash drive and how it relates to Alex’s motivation to get out of dodge. Funnily enough, we anticipated some of this in the thread’s earlier discussion of conlags, and the necessity of promoting them so people wind up actually speaking them. Alex’s plan is a bit naive and idealistic, it’s true – but there are worse things to be.

Now that our attention has been drawn to the book, we get a more complete location description when we look:

My Apartment

My futon is on the floor in the opposite corner. On top is The Problem of Adjectives.

It’s an efficiency: note the kitchen area, with all the usual appliances, in one corner. My mother attempted to provide a microwave, rice cooker, toaster, waffle iron, and julienne-fry-maker, but I pointed out that these objects would triple-populate the two square feet of available counter space.

On the counter are Journal of Third-World Economics and Studies in Primary Language Acquisition.

We grab the book on general principles:

>take adjectives

We take The Problem of Adjectives. Might as well return it to the department seminar room, as long as we’re going that way.

>x journal

This is just Volume 16, but I subscribed annually for a while. My whole plan is useless unless there’s a well-designed language that actually takes account of economic reality in the target region. When I’ve moved somewhere outside Atlantis it will be easier to conduct that part of the research.

>x studies

This is a little outside my field, but I have been trying to work out the feasibility of my plans, from the perspective of language teaching.

We grab these too – maybe we’ll eventually need some studs?

>x kitchen

I have a sink, stove, refrigerator, cabinets, a countertop: the usual.

The appliances are minimally implemented, of course – the kitchen is the bane of many an IF author, and there’s no upside for the player of prompting to fuss with a bunch of dials and doors that don’t do much of anything – but there is a fun discovery in the fridge:

>x yoghurt

It is the gooseberry fool flavor, left over from a six-pack. I always eat the strawberry and peach first.

Okay, I feel guilty about leaving this to go bad, but I was in a rush ? I did get rid of most of the rest of my food over the last couple of days, but I just never had time to eat this. And it seemed wrong to throw it out. Sue me.

First, “gooseberry fool”? Atlantis’s orthography may be American, but seems like the cuisine remained British. Second, speaking of, I thought it would be funny to yoink the h out of “yoghurt” to see if that would change it to a more normal flavor, but:

>remove h from yoghurt

We reset the device to h. The letter-remover finds no h in the yoghurt.

I forgot, the goggles are just cosmetic!

(At this point I take them off, to avoid any future confusion).

Poking around at the futon, we get prompted with another memory of “how it started with Brock” – I think this is the second one we’ve encountered with this exact title, so I guess they’re part of a sequence?

Café, Marseilles

Brock was scowling into his drink. “I don’t know, Andra. Are you going to flip on me again if we try to be together? I’m not blaming you for your parents, and… honestly, I’m surprised how much you’ve been able to assemble yourself into someone new. But jeezus.”

“What happened to your thing about how everyone goes through life hurting everyone else a little bit, like radiation?” you asked. “But mostly people heal, and it’s worth it?”

“Yeah, that’s true,” he said. “But you still don’t go into the reactor core with no suit, if you see what I mean.”

You tilted your head. “You weathered it pretty well when you and Annalisa split up.”

He swirled the melted ice in the bottom of his glass. “Is this what you’re fishing for?” he said. “For me to tell you you’re special, you’re different, I care about you more and therefore it would ruin everything if we ever broke up?”

You didn’t answer.

“It would ruin everything,” he says. “Because you’re on my crew. But as to the girlfriend thing, I have no idea. We don’t know each other that way.”

Then we’re back in the present.

…yeah, dating a member of your crew does seem like a risky issue when you put it like that, but based on her behavior it seems like Andra really does care for Brock quite a lot.

I’m also now wondering whether, based on her name, Annalisa was also a gestalt being, and therefore whether Brock has a synthesis-fetish (come on, you don’t date someone named “Andra” in this world without part of you wondering what might happen if you meet the right Alex…)

Anyway I spend a lot of time messing with the futon, but turns out it’s not the convertible kind. Nothing more to do here, so we depart:

>ne

We’re about to, when the door to the street opens and my mother walks into the room. She shuts it behind her and puts away her key before she notices us. Then she stands very still. For about a quarter second she considers calling the police, but I can see that worry passing away again as she takes in our clothing, age, and general demeanor.

“Hi there,” she says, coming forward to take our hand. “I’m Mrs. Rosehip. Alex Rosehip’s mother. You must be a friend of his?”

We want to say we’re his girlfriend.

Oh good lord, this is awful timing, and this idea (is it more Andra’s or Alex’s?) is supremely embarrassing, but at least it feels like we should be able to bluff our way out of this.

>x mom

She is a tall woman with short brown hair expertly cut, and a tailored suit.

She has in addition a certain air which is very rare on this island: the air of seeming not to care whether anyone is watching her, or whether she is exhibiting the proper respect for authority.

>greet mom

We already have the attention of my mother.

She gives the refrigerator door a little push and it swings closed.

Mother just stands there with an arched eyebrow. Any minute now I’m going to blurt something out through sheer force of habit.

(I think the tidying is a little idle-behavior function displaying at a slightly odd moment, but cleaning up your college kid’s apartment without really thinking about it is a plausible bit of character business, I think!)

>say we’re his girlfriend

“Yes – sort of. We’ve been… I mean, we’ve been on a few dates.” That’s you, and I have to say you don’t sound as keen on dating ourself as you might.

She raises her eyebrows. “I see. How secretive of him not to bring you around. And where is Alex now? I need to speak with him. He’s been hard to reach lately.”

I know you think it’s a bit sketchy that my mother just walks into my apartment when I’m not around, but I swear to you she’s never done that before. She must be more worried about something than she’s letting on.

We could claim to have seen him this morning or say we don’t know.

Huh, that’s a tricky one – better not to get ourselves in trouble weaving over-elaborate lies, I think:

>say we don’t know

“I don’t know,” we say.

“A communicative couple, then,” she says dryly. My mother has never been very nice to girlfriends she considered stupid.

Mother appears to be meditating about the sink tap.

“How well do you know him?” Mother asks. She immediately catches herself, and adds: “I’m not inquiring into the details of your relationship. But I am concerned about him. He has seemed very unhappy recently about his work. Has he said anything to you about that? Wanting to leave the program, or change careers, or… anything?”

I didn’t think she’d noticed.

We want to reassure Mother or suggest the truth.

Another freighted choice, but again, sticking to the truth makes it less likely we’ll get caught out (and is probably ultimately kinder to her, to boot).

>suggest the truth

“I think he feels that there are things linguistic studies could accomplish if we were less hampered by local laws and corporate interests,” we say. “Big improvements to quality of life for the poor, for instance.”

She looks at us keenly. “Did he say what he intended to do about that?”

I’m inclined to say we wouldn’t do anything dangerous.

>we wouldn’t do anything dangerous

“I’m sure he wouldn’t do anything dangerous,” we lie. “After all, his ideas wouldn’t be useful to anyone if he were arrested.”

“No, of course!” But I think she knows we’re lying about something, even if she is not sure what that something is.

Mother spaces out a bit, contemplating our backpack.

“Well,” Mother says. “I had better go. If you do see Alex, tell him to call me, please. It isn’t an emergency, but you can tell him there’s a bit of Bureau business I’d like to discuss with him.”

We nod, and suddenly it is borne in on me that this may be the last I see of my mother in a lifetime: and I’m trying to memorize the exact cut of her hair and the way her expensive Italian heels tap on the floor, and meanwhile she is going out completely indifferent to the moment. I could have stood for our previous meeting to be the last one – we had dinner and she hugged me goodbye then. This makes it all much much worse.

And you, you’re nattering at me in our head, asking what she meant about the Bureau. It might be, I guess, that they’ve been watching me and that she got wind of it. That would be likely. But if so it doesn’t matter, not any more.

She’s not even visible through the window any longer.

…I’m more on Andra’s side of the worrisome vs. wistful view of how this encounter ended (did she see something poking out of our backpack?) but it appears there’s no immediate danger, so best to try to get that invitation quickly.

But not before a quick pit-stop at the café after we exit and re-lock the door:

Babel Café

Through many changes of management, this institution has fed the denizens of the university and ignored their semi-sedition.

A clerk in a white apron stands behind the long glass case. In the long glass case are a pocket-bread, a wrap, and a honey pastry triangle.

The tables are square wooden things painted dark blue (not the vibrant blue of the Bureau, but something closer to midnight), and the upper surfaces are découpaged with antique travel postcards.

A blue plaque is mounted on the wall.

The clerk grins at us in a welcoming way.

You know, we haven’t eaten all day, so this might be a reasonable detour. Let’s take in the decor:

>x tables

The surfaces depict, fragmented, such exotic locations as Giza, Beijing, and Sioux City, Iowa. There is even an advertisement for the 1893 Chicago World’s Fair.

The exoticism of these destinations lies more in their spelling than their sights, I think. The second bit is probably an 1893: A World’s Fair Mystery reference (need to play that one day too…)

>x plaque

On this site in 1969 the theoretical groundwork for Q-insertion was laid by James Elias and Milford Higgate using five drinking straws and a bowl of oatmeal.

Ah, so the theory of insertion goes back reasonably far, but we’re only now getting into the prototype stage. Seems a plausible pace for progress.

Let’s check out the grub:

>x bread

It’s round, flat bread suitable for eating with dips.

>x wrap

It’s a construction of flat bread wrapped around rice, chickpeas, and sauce.

>x triangle

Despite its enforced linguistic transformation, it still looks delicious: fine layers of crisp filo with nuts and honey between.

That last description gives the game away – this is a pita, falafel wrap (I think?), and baklava, flattened and Englishized in a confusing way (thus “filo” rather than “phyllo” too). Turns out there are real down-sides to impoverishing your language’s vocabulary by forbidding import-words!

Let’s get them all:

>x clerk

A smooth-faced young man. He has the cheery demeanor of one earning substantial overtime pay.

He doesn’t have any dialogue topics that I can find (ASKing him about a food item just has you buy it), but he does engage in a little bit of chit-chat: “enjoy” upon handing over the baklava, “nice day for a picnic, isn’t it?” for the wrap, and “you’ve just about cleared us out!” when I take the bread too.

My linguistic tools can’t do much with the bread (it’s got “pocket-” superglued on, of course), the triangle (if I ever get a double-remove, it could make a tangle?), or the wrap (“rap” is too abstract to reify, of course), but we might as well hang on to them instead of eating them, for … reasons.

Let’s get to campus:

>se

We unlock the sturdy iron gate.

We open the sturdy iron gate.

University Oval

This is the center of the university, a broad grassy oval shaded with sycamore trees and surrounded by buildings in brick or white stone.

An activist is standing in our way, gripping a sign that says “TOXI WASTE AWARENESS!”.

Immediately south of here is the building where I spend most of my time, Samuel Johnson Hall.

“Do you have a minute to help save the environment?” the activist asks brightly.

I’d like to say no or say yes.

I actually laughed out loud here – I used to work for an advocacy organization that ran street canvasses, and that greeting is word-for-word one we would use. I’m guessing most academics are pretty familiar with this kind of thing, though!

Anyway, we’re in a rush, but it’s always nice to at least acknowledge the humanity of the folks doing this work (so long as it’s a reasonable cause):

>yes

“Sure: why not?” we say.

“Wonderful!” she beams.

She sets down the sign in order to free her hands for more expressive argument. “Listen, we’re trying to gain financial support to make a major advertising campaign pushing the concept of toxi waste throughout the anglophone world. If you know anything about linguistic efficacy, I’m sure you can imagine the implications.”

I can, in fact, imagine the implications, probably a little better than she would like.

We want to encourage the activist to elaborate on the implications.

Oh no, Alex is getting ready to be a bit of a ponce, isn’t he?

>encourage the activist

“Oh?” we say neutrally. This is all it takes.

“Toxi waste would be, in concept, a completely harmless, safe, and neutral substance that would have no detrimental impact on the surrounding environment. By raising awareness of toxi waste throughout the Anglophone world, we would put the collective consciousness to work for the environment! It would then be possible for volunteer workers to convert large stocks of dangerous toxic waste into the safe, neutral toxi waste using minimal energy.”

We want to ask how consciousness will be raised or ask how the campaign will address problems of visualization.

>ask about visualization

“Studies have shown that linguistic efficacy is drastically harder to achieve when the body of speakers does not have a consensus about how to visualize the object in question,” we point out, settling into our element. I’ve had so many undergraduates with ideas just like this one, all eager to tell me how they’re going to change the world. I suppose I have exactly the same problem, only on a grander scale.

My comment seems to have gotten her a little lost, though, so I add, “People need to have some image to attach to the term you’re inventing for them. Otherwise, it will be much harder to achieve functional awareness levels.”

“Oh! Yes, I left that part out,” she says. “Our ad campaign will include extensive imagery of what we envision toxi waste to look like – that is, a clear, odorless liquid.”

I’d like to ask how consciousness will be raised, ask whether this liquid will be water, or ask whether this liquid will also be flavorless.

>ask about water

“Is the role of toxi waste by any chance going to be played by, say, filtered water?” we ask.

Her eyebrows crinkle together. “Yes – well, maybe,” she says. “Why?”

We want to warn the activist about term-reassignment.

>warn

“Because,” we say, “if you show people pictures of what is obviously water, they will continue thinking of it as water – not as toxi waste, or whatever you want them to call it. Studies have shown that people’s word concepts are very persistent in that way – and anyway there are a variety of reasons why even if you could do it, it would be very bad to overwrite the linguistic efficacy of ‘water’.”

She purses her lips. “You’re in Language Studies, aren’t you?” she asks. “I was warned about people from your department. You can be very negative.”

I’d like to point out that being from Language Studies does not make us wrong.

>point out

“Negative or not, it is true,” we say. “If you try to teach people a new word for an existing substance, you have to fight with their preconceptions about how to categorize that substance. If, on the other hand, you try to make them think of a new and as-yet-non-existent substance, you have less control over what happens when it reifies – the result might not be quite what you wanted.”

“All right,” she says belligerently. “How would you do it?”

At this precise moment I feel myself fall for this girl. She’s still naive and earnest and probably too young for me, but there is something about the determination and assertion and the spirit of I-dare-you-to-think-of-one-better that makes me want to drag her off to a coffee shop and enlighten her for four or five hours.

But I bet you wouldn’t like to play gooseberry to that expedition.

We could explain about our plans.

…so what Alex is really looking for in a romantic partner is “someone you can lecture”? He’d been growing on me through this sequence, but oof, buddy, you gotta do some work on yourself before you get out there.

>explain

“To do this really right,” I say, under our breath so that no one will overhear us, “you have to think even bigger than you have been. Forget English. Forget Mandarin Chinese. Forget Spanish, Hindi, Russian, Arabic. You have to make a new language to resolve these difficulties, and you have to teach it on an epic scale.”

She has been leaning in, breathlessly, to listen to this explanation, but now she backs up and looks at us like we’ve sprouted a second head, which, all things considered, would not be all that unnatural.

“That would take forever!” she exclaims. (I had calculated maybe fifty or a hundred years to the first significant successes, but I suppose that is not unlike forever if you’re sufficiently short-sighted.) “And you’d need a huge amount of money!”

I sigh. “All the same,” we say, a little sadly. “It would work better than what you’re proposing here. I’m sorry. I wish I thought it would work.”

She watches us with interest. “The next few months are critical to our operation,” the activist says. “We need to be able to blitz multiple countries simultaneously with an intense and outrageous advertising campaign that will garner further media coverage from news sources and provoke discussion on the internet and in the workplace. But in order to do that, we need the funding to place high profile advertisements in a variety of places. That’s why donations from people like yourself are going to be so very necessary.”

We could donate.

>donate

Oh, you’re not seriously going to – oh, god, you are. You know, this is never going to work. There are sound scientific reasons why – oh FINE.

We hand over some of your money – I guess I should console myself that it is yours – to the girl.

“Thanks!” she says brightly. Tucking the bill into her pocket, she gives a little skip and heads off across the oval to accost some other innocent.

You just enriched some random television network, you understand. That money won’t do a lick of good to anyone else.

Alex isn’t wrong that paid-media strategies are almost always expensive and ineffective for advocacy campaigns, but like most academics he’s too hung up on getting the policy right, when what’s most important is building the organizing infrastructure – getting attention and funding folks to do the work of engaging more people is how you win. Hopefully some of what we just donated will go to that stuff, rather than just media consultants.

Er, where were we?

>University Oval

This is the center of the university, a broad grassy oval shaded with sycamore trees and surrounded by buildings in brick or white stone.

Immediately south of here is the building where I spend most of my time, Samuel Johnson Hall.

A sign lies on the grass, abandoned by its owner.

>x sign

The sign is bright yellow and says “TOXI WASTE AWARENESS!”

I’d love to be able to turn this into a sin, or if we get a diminutive affixer we could pull that same trick the cop did, so we’ll grab it even though we’ve got no immediate use for it.

>x hall

When it was built in the '30s, the whole purpose was to prove to the rest of the faculty the tremendous value of the new field of language studies (as opposed to language engineering, a field long valued for its ability to produce tools and, more importantly, weapons).

Consequently, Samuel Johnson Hall was built to impress: a blind windowless front of white stone rising grandly from the pavement; an oppressive portico that makes entering figures look tiny.

Samuel Johnson was an 18th-century man of letters who in this day and age is perhaps most famous as the first person to be famous for being famous – inasmuch as he’s best known because of the bon-mot-stuffed biography written about him by his junior colleague, Boswell. But presumably the Altantean builders wanted to celebrate the achievement of his Dictionary, which he compiled by himself and which from my understanding was the authoritative reference for the English language until the OED came along over a century later.

>x trees

They’re handsome old trees – the same white-trunked hybrids that line the avenues of Provence, I’m told, growing several stories tall and creating a tolerable shade even on very hot days.

>x buildings

Of the original 1757 foundation of the University, little now remains, and the oldest building on campus is the administration building, a Georgian creation of white steps and columns, ca. 1780. That’s further east, though, and the buildings here around the Oval are mostly from the enormous expansion of the university in 1911-1940, when the publication of the New Orthodox Orthography caused a rapid expansion in language-related disciplines.

Some fun world-building here, and I have some fun trying the nonfunctional exits – from which I learn that there’s a business school to the north, and the path we’re on continues east as Sycamore Walk – but the only place we can go is south.

[continued]

6 Likes

[Chapter VI, continued]

Samuel Johnson Hall

This is the main building for Language Studies. This is not to be confused with Language Engineering, which is the department that handles devices for the manipulation of language-objects; it is also not to be confused with Linguistics, English Literature, or Comparative Literature, all of which have their own buildings and faculties. Language Studies applies itself to questions of linguistic efficacy chiefly at a social and anthropological level.

That’s to say that we study how the ability to change things based on their names affects daily life and society.

The department office, with several professorial offices leading off of it, is to the southeast. To the southwest is the seminar room, where many of the upper-level courses occur, and which also contains the department library; downstairs is the basement, where the graduate students and junior instructors are kept.

On the wall hangs a framed photograph of Professor Waterstone, with the words SHAPLY CHAIR in big letters underneath.

(Oh, my kingdom for an e-inserter!)

>x photo

The Shaply Chair is not named after the famous suffragette Phyllida Shaply, but after her considerably less famous or interesting descendant Lawrence Shaply, who was well-placed within Dental Consonants Ltd. when it started up and subsequently had buckets of money with which to endow university chairs.

Nonetheless, this position is a point of considerable pride for Professor Waterstone, and gets him many invitations to speak both here and abroad, which he takes terribly seriously. (More to the point, the government permits him to attend.)

This may explain the particularly expansive grin on Waterstone’s face in this image. Usually his pleasure is expressed more moderately.

This looks like it’s going to be a whole sub-area, with multiple different locations, which makes sense given that it’s the last major portion of the map (presumably there’s a lot more of the Bureau we haven’t seen yet, though). I guess we could start by returning the book we borrowed?

>sw

We lack a key that fits the seminar door.

Guess not.

Maybe before jumping straight to the Professor, we should venture to the dungeons where grad students and adjuncts are kept?

>d

Samuel Johnson Basement

Dank and malodorous: there are no windows down here, and the drainage is terrible.

The stairs up are here; the lecture room at the east. Immediately south is the Graduate Student Office, and southwest is Professor Brown’s office. The most interesting of all is the small door west, trying to look inconspicuous, but locked with a keycard lock: it’s where the department stores its most dangerous licensed equipment.

A large open carton stands against the wall right between Brown’s lab door and the interesting door. “Recycling,” reads the sign over the carton. “Place your lab-created items here for processing.” There is a banana in the large carton.

Ooh, that looked door is enticing – let’s keep our eyes out for a keycard!

Wonder what’s in the bin?

>x carton

In the large carton is a banana.

>x banana

Just beginning to get brown and spotty.

I think there’s only one reason this would be here, and sure enough, when we put on the monocle:

There is a dismissive blatt from the monocle, and transposed over the banana is a faint, unappetizing image of a bandana.

There’s not much we can do with this – I try making the banana a “baaa”, reasoning that at least in the language of sheep, that could be just about anything, but unsurprisingly that goes nowhere.

>sw

Brown’s Lab
Professor Brown, the Reification of Abstracts researcher, is hunched over his work table. Brown is only barely a professor at all – actually, his working title is Senior Lecturer, and he holds a yearly contract which the University has the option to renew at whim. This prevents him going elsewhere while ensuring that he never has a fully-funded lab of his own. All the electrical equipment down here is tinker-toys compared to the stuff he really wants; in fact, half of it he built himself with components he bought with his own money.

I know all this because Brown cornered me in the hallway one afternoon and talked to me for twenty minutes straight about the pressures of academic job-hunting in the current political climate. I tried to get him to stop, but he’s like a wind-up toy.

“Don’t touch anything, please,” he says, without looking up.

I’d like to ask what he is doing.

Some elements of Counterfeit Monkey might be fantasy, but its depiction of the academic job market seems spot-on. But ooh, the inability of our X-remover to perform abstract reification is something we’ve been bumping up against seemingly forever – does this stuff help Brown accomplish it?

>x equipment

A series of metal boxes with digital readouts and wires that lead in and out.

Brown uses this stuff to measure the amount of energy it requires to reify abstract concepts such as “talk”. He has a theory, apparently, that by measuring the minute variations of input energy required to create these items, he can establish baseline indications about how much certain words are used by English-speakers worldwide; ten, fifty, or a hundred years from now, this data will allow researchers to determine whether these same words have become more or less popular relative to other words.

It’s a little weird. Abstract reifications are one of the absolute coolest things in language studies, but Brown has managed to pick the very most boring research project to perform on them, and one which moreover is guaranteed to prevent him having any results worth publishing any time in the next two decades.

This pretty much sums up everything you need to know about the guy.

…yeah, I’m with Alex; in theory this is kinda interesting, but the amount of power you’d need too plug into this project seems way out of whack with the modest results.

>x brown

He’s going bald on top – prematurely, because I think he’s only 28 or so – so, to compensate, he’s grown a goofy little goatee.

Oof, that is not a dignified way to come to terms with male androgenetic alopecia.

>ask what he is doing

“What are you up to there?” we ask. Asking Brown questions when he’s working is a bit of a crap-shoot, I tell you now.

He wiggles his nose back and forth. I knew him for three months before I figured out what the wiggle is: it is his hands-free way of working his spectacles back up his nose when they start to slide down.

Without looking at us, he says, “I’m getting ready to do a new calibration run on ‘love’.”

This is a favorite of his, because you can get it so easily from a glove, so the materials are inexpensive.

I’d like to ask what love looks like or ask how Professor Brown makes abstracts.

I know we’re meant to find Brown off-putting and pathetic, but I am actually impressed by that nose-wiggling trick and wish I knew how to pull it off. Is that a thing people can just do?

>ask how he makes abstracts

“What equipment do you use to make your abstracts?” we ask.

“It’s an ordinary letter-remover with a few adjustments,” Brown says. “The department’s computer can lift some of the legal overrides on standard letter tools. The job would be easier if I had access to higher-powered machinery, but…”

I’d like to ask what love looks like or ask whether he can fix the letter-remover.

I am now doing the kind of dance that my five-year-old nephew does when he needs to go pee but is so excited playing that he doesn’t want to stop.

>ask whether he can fix the letter-remover

“Could you fix my letter-remover to make abstract objects as well?”

“It’s not difficult, you just – oh, stay here, I’m not supposed to bring students into the rectification room.”

He takes the letter-remover and steps out into the hallway. I can hear him using his keycard on the door, going into the little room west of the hallway, doing something there. (Don’t bother thinking we’re going to cosh him and take the keycard. I’m sure there’s a better way, and I don’t cosh people.)

He comes back in a minute.

“There,” he says. “Should be abstract-enabled now.”

We could ask what he thinks of the letter-remover or thank Professor Brown.

[Your score has gone up by three points and is now forty-eight.]

>thank him

“That’s wonderful ? thank you!”

“Yes well,” he says. “Don’t show it to anyone. Technically you shouldn’t have that.”

We could ask what he thinks of the letter-remover.

Don’t listen to the haters – Professor Brown is officially the coolest NPC in the game.

>ask what he thinks

“Is there anything else that could be done to upgrade my letter-remover?” we ask naively.

“Nothing I can help you with, I’m afraid,” he says. “There are some safety overrides that could be programmed out, allowing you to make living creatures, but that’s…” He does his spasmodic shrug. “One of those things where I think the laws have a point. It’s dangerous and possibly even cruel.”

We could ask why reifying living creatures is cruel.

>ask why

“Why would it be cruel to make a living creature?” you ask.

“We don’t know whether such creations have awareness and sensation like other creatures,” he says. “If they do, it is horrible to bring them into existence only to send them out again.”

Yeah, what kind of monster would you have to be to, say, create a whole human being just to change your car’s oil and then leave them hanging about on a street corner, with no home and no place to go, burbling out their limited inventory of stock-phrases to anyone who will listen, bereft of real cognition or individuality and doomed to return to a pile of stinking garbage when someone finally gets around to slapping some restoration gel on them?

[crickets]

When we look around again, we’re told “Professor Brown, the Reification of Abstracts researcher, is hunched over his work table. He is wearing steel-rimmed spectacles and a worn leather jacket.” Let’s check out his kit:

>x spectacles

They have tiny oval lenses, tinted green.

Brown seems to be simultaneously cultivating the image of rebel (age 17) and absent-minded professor (age 65).

>x jacket

A moderately cool sort of bomber-jacket look, except that the elbows have given out and the cuffs are unraveling.

Alex is just jealous.

Anyway, we have an exciting new toy! It’s hard to decide where to start since there are so many abstracts we’ve been blocked from creating, but I’ll go with one of @Draconis’s ideas:

>remove b from ball

We reset the device to b. We pick up the ball.

There is a hum of ferocious effort from the letter-remover as it strains to create “all”. At first it seems likely that it will just break down, but it gets through the aa (a spontaneous flow of lava); skips all creatures of the aard- variety thanks to its restraints on living animal-creation; and goes on to the abaca (a large hemp-yielding plant).

Unfortunately, it’s done a bit too zealous a job with the aa, and before it gets to whatever comes after abaca, the lava is flowing in our direction.

That is, that’s what would have happened if we had done something so foolish. Shall we suppose we didn’t?

Ha! This reminds me of the time I thought I’d broken my first game because, while I was testing it, I typed TREE into a disambiguation prompt and the IDE promptly barfed out a complete list of every object in the game world (this was the first time I posted on the forum about a bug, so I just about died when Zarf himself explained what was going on).

I can’t resist wasting time with a few more transformations:

>remove c from pic

We reset the device to c. There is a mad-scientist cackle, and the pic turns into pi. For something so simple, it is astonishingly beautiful: a perfect circle in translucent silver, absolute and unflawed.

>remove i from pastis

We reset the device to i. There is a flash of psychedelic colors, and the pastis turns into some pasts. It looks from the side like a shard of glass, but seen straight on, it captures previous events. At the moment it is replaying us discussing why reifying living creatures is cruel.

We could ask what he thinks about the pasts.

Oh, interesting, that triggers a new discussion topic!

We demonstrate the pasts.

“Yes,” says Brown, interested. “This is good, very nice example of how an object can be affected by the creator and local environment. It appears to be a record of your own behavior alone, but with the right laboratory conditions it ought to be possible to produce a past abstract referring to someone else, or to a place.”

Okay, Atlantean field archeology sounds super fun.

We still can’t get the as, though – would need a razor – but this opens up one more transformation:

>remove s from pasts

We reset the device to s. With a distinct whiff of cool butter, the pasts turn into a pat. Considering everything it could have been, we are lucky with this pat: it is only a pat of butter.

I now check my score to see which letters I’ve yet to successfully remove, the list currently being g, j, k, q, v, or z. Z and J will have to wait on being able to create animals, I think (despite Brown’s protestations, I am 100% making that upgrade now that I know the equipment to do so is right next door), but I can still make some progress:

>remove g from sign

We reset the device to g. With a distinct whiff of sulfur, the sign turns into a sin. An abstract representation of willfully clueless meddling. Not a sin known to Dante, perhaps; but modern democracies have their own forms of wrong-doing.

That’s not as much fun as I was expecting, but we can cross off the g regardless.

We’re done in Brown’s lab, and the restricted-equipment door is of course locked, but there’s still that lecture room east of the stairwell:

Lecture Hall (at the podium)

The main lecture hall used for large survey courses in language studies offered to undergraduates. I sat through courses here when I was an undergraduate myself, and have now delivered a few lectures as a teaching assistant.

The room extends south, full of hard wooden seats. Abandoned on one near the back is a coat.

A poster at the front of the room announces a conference on cultural reactions to linguistic change. It is being held in Nice the day after tomorrow, with Professor Waterstone as keynote speaker, on the topic of “homonym shame”. Somehow I had forgotten about the date of this: I’ve been too much worried about our escape.

…speaking of homonyms, we’d better hope nobody ever attempts to thwack that city with a paddle.

>x coat

It’s been abandoned here for a while, since this isn’t the time of year when people wear coats. It’s brown cloth, only thick enough to keep out rain or a mild chill, and it’s rubbed shiny at the elbows. No wonder the owner didn’t miss it much.

We take it, which moves us into the seating area (I guess it’s implemented as an enterable container?)

Lecture Hall (among the seats)
Many are the fine hours I have spent here dozing; and many are the students of mine who have done the same. The circle of life becomes complete.

The room extends north, full of hard wooden seats. Abandoned on one near the back is a coat.

Someone has taped to the wall a course advertisement for next quarter, inviting interested undergraduates to enroll in Interlingua 101. Probably Professor Higgate’s work.

We take the coat.

>x ad

In large type:

Interlingua 101: Learn a Language You Already Know.

In smaller type beneath: Interlingua se basa a parolas international, preponderentemente de origine latin, que ha supervivite a nostre dies, e que existe in italiano, espaniol/portugese, francese e anglese (linguas de referentia) plus germano e russo como reserva. Le grammatica del interlingua es un rationalisate synthese del grammaticas de referentia.

And then as a final tagline: INTERLINGUA IS THE MODERN LATIN.

…I’m not sure if that’s actually Esperanto, or a made-up polyglot tongue, but it’s impressively readable! It sure seems like the authorities would frown on the creation and promulgation of a universal tongue other than English, but I suppose scholars can get away with things others can’t.

When I mess around with the ad (I thought it’d be funny to create an “a”), I found it’s tied to its modifiers, making it a “course advertisement”, but this creates new frontiers for comedy:

>remove o from ad

We reset the device to o. There is a flash of yellow light, and the course advertisement turns into a curse advertisement. It’s an ad of the kind you sometimes find in the back of underground newspapers, offering to take off the rude-object restrictions off a letter-remover, “for private home use only.”

For no real reason, I also turn the coat into an oat:

>remove c from coat

We reset the device to c. There is a distinct spearmint flavor, and the coat turns into an oat. A single dry cut oat.

With a last look at the seats (“Ingeniously uncomfortable”) I head back to the front of the room to check out the conference poster:

>x poster

t’s the usual sort of thing: the conference title set in Papyrus font; a stock daguerreotype of a portly woman holding a letter-remover the size of a policeman’s cosh; inset pictures of the major speakers, with pride of place for Waterstone himself.

…is that how academic conferences are usually advertised? Huh.

One last door down here in the basement:

>s

Graduate Student Office

A small windowless room divided into cubicles for individual graduate students.

A tiny refrigerator stores lunches (sometimes) and looted leftovers from department receptions (when available). On top of the fridge there is a coffee-maker.

My cubicle is the one with the swivel-chair, towards the back of the room by the water cooler. I cleared everything subversive out of there ages ago, and now I do most of my work at home in the apartment. It’s safer that way.

We can see a sticky on the swivel-chair. I half recognize the handwriting, but I’m having trouble placing it. One of the other grad students, but I’m not sure which.

>x sticky

Please be careful. The blue hats are watching you.

Groan – Alex was definitely not being as smooth as he thought he was. Having this lying around is itself kind of incriminating, so let’s dispose of the evidence:

>remove y from sticky

We reset the device to y. With a distinct whiff of sap, the sticky turns into a stick. It is about two feet long. It’s stripped of its leaves and fairly sturdy.

(I try to see if I can do a further transformation to a tick, but it interprets that as a prohibited insect, rather than a licitly-abstract unit of time – I was hoping to get my k-removal badge by winding up with a tic).

The fridge is unexceptional, but when we open it:

We open the tiny refrigerator, revealing some cream and a silver platter.

Oooh, fancy.

>x cream

Kept around to go with the coffee. It doesn’t seem to have gone off yet, which is a wonder.

This was fun to make the first time, might as well do it again:

>remove c from cream

We reset the device to c. There is a pink cloud, and the cream turns into a ream. One ream, which is to say 500 sheets, of generic printer or copier paper. The sheets are an attractive milky color.

>x platter

Evidently the platter is left over from a department function, and no one has bothered with doing the dishes.

On the silver platter are a crumpled cocktail napkin and a shrimp tail.

Someone left it in the fridge with that stuff on it? Gross!

>x napkin

It’s trash. Why it wound up being archived in the refrigerator is anyone’s guess.

Yes, it is.

>x tail

There’s no meat left; just the remains of one shrimp tail with the flesh bitten off.

Ugh. Grad students really are feral.

(We’re not too proud to grab this all, though – just in case!)

>x maker

It’s the cheapest possible variety, donated by one of the older students, and it is constantly overflowing and needing to be taken away to be cleaned of loose grounds. But it does work, more or less, most of the time.

The coffee-maker is currently switched off.

>turn it on

We don’t have time to go brewing ourselves a pot, but I can set your mind at rest on one point anyway: it generally comes out horrible.

We can stop by the Babel if we need a caffeine recharge before hitting the Bureau, I suppose.

>x chair

It is grey with small white dots on the fabric.

I bought the swivel-chair with my own money, because sitting on the plastic bucket seat supplied by the department made my legs sticky in the summer.

I try to sit on it and swivel around yelling “wheee!”, but alas, can’t figure out the syntax.

…I think that’s about what we can do down here, at least for now, so it’s time to head upstairs and visit Professor Waterstone to see about that invitation.

[continued later tonight]

3 Likes

I’ve done it since I was a kid. I kinda thought it was a common thing to do? I wouldn’t have described it as “back and forth” though: more hitching it up a little at a time. Definitely depends on the nosepieces being properly adjusted. Hmm. So maybe it depends on nose shape too? Dunno.

1 Like

I am doing this right now and it’s just working the glasses down my nose, not up - maybe my nose is steeper than average or something?

1 Like

Ha. Ha. Hahahaha. Yeah. [pain]

Well, we’re aiming to get off the island, right? I imagine if he publishes his research he’ll immediately become persona non grata an unwelcome person back home in Atlantis.

To be fair, you did ask. And more than that, you asked a grad student about the focus of his current research, which he’s not legally allowed to discuss with anyone except you.

I think this one’s on you.

HA! I’d never thought of that before.

Hm, I wonder if Atlantis has authoritarian tendencies?

If you want to make this awkward moment even more awkward, try KISS ME once Alex’s mom is away to learn Alex’s feelings about Andra.

I reflexively tried SORRY after this and got a default response, but I suppose adding a system for conversation between Alex and Andra is just asking for combinatorial explosion.

I’m impressed it’s allowed to be a café instead of a cafe!

I’m very curious if a honey pastry triangle tastes different from a baklava. I’m imagining it tastes like how a native Atlantean would make it, rather than how it’s made in Greece/Turkey, which ends up homogenizing everything as it ends up using the same flavors, techniques, seasonings, and so on.

(Though, “filo” isn’t wrong—there are different rules for anglicizing Ancient Greek and Modern Greek, and “filo” is the Modern rendering of φύλλο. My first Greek teacher went alternately by Orestis (Modern) and Orestes (Ancient), because the former is used on passports and such, but if you’re teaching introductory Ancient Greek classes, why would you not reference one of the most famous tragedies?)

What about the monocle and the gel?

Oh, shoot, I know there’s a name for this—time to dig out my notes!

Okay, here we go. When people are learning a language, there’s an issue called the “gavagai problem”. Imagine you’re out interviewing some native speakers of a new undocumented language that you don’t speak. One of them points to a rabbit and says “gavagai!”. Does this mean:

  • “Rabbit!”
  • “Animal!”
  • “Food!”
  • “Look!”
  • “Grab it!”
  • “Gavagai (the name of my pet rabbit)!”

Or something else entirely? When a child is learning their first language, they run into this problem with every single word, and they have no way to ask and confirm it. But experiments show that there are various constraints they use to nail down the possibility space, like assuming that names attach to nouns rather than to verbs.

Three famous ones are:

  • The whole-object assumption: a new word is the name of a thing, not of a part of a thing, or a property of a thing, or a behavior of a thing
  • The mutual exclusivity assumption: a new word is the name of a thing that doesn’t already have a different name
  • The taxonomic assumption: a new word is the name of a category of thing, not a specific instance of that category

And it seems like this applies to adults too, if we’re not given any extra information to work with! So the default assumption is that “gavagai” would mean “rabbit”—unless you’ve learned a different word for “rabbit” already, in which case it probably means something different.

So if you want to teach people a new word and have it catch on, you should keep these assumptions in mind.

You call it a date, I call it a captive audience of one for my lectures on linguistic theory!

Sadly, I think the use-mention distinction would keep an E-inserter from being useful here. These are the words SHAPLY CHAIR, but the actual Shaply Chair is somewhere else entirely.

Could you homonym the key into, like, a broad concept of a key that works for whatever you want it to, like the CODEX > CODE trick?

T_T

Wait, but pi should only be half a circle! A full circle is tau instead!

Oh, that would be fascinating. Obra Dinn-style archaeological expedition, looking at the most interesting event of each location and piecing them together?

Fortunately, I doubt a children’s toy has enough juice in its batteries for that!

No, it’s real Interlingua! After Zamenhof started the whole idea of “auxlangs” (auxiliary languages, conlangs meant to make international communication easier) dozens of people tried to do it better than him. None ever got the popularity of Esperanto, but Interlingua probably takes second place.

Sadly yes. Graphic design is not always a skill associated with linguists.

2 Likes

This is one of my favorite lines.

This is not the only gooseberry-flavored dessert in the game. As demonstrated in later narration you encountered, to “play gooseberry” basically means to third-wheel, so I suspect the gooseberry flavor is wordplay, referencing the combined protagonists.

I’ll have to quote you on this one.

Another comment from the source code:

[In an earlier version of the game, there’s an NPC hanging around the department who no longer appears: a grad student with a long-running crush on Alex, which he’s never quite reciprocated. He’s not that into her, and anyway, he keeps figuring he’s going to leave the island and doesn’t want to get into a relationship.

That element didn’t tie into any puzzles and so felt kind of purposeless and unbalanced (and even from a story perspective, she had no special reason to be in the department on a holiday, and Alexandra had no reason to be talking to her when there’s this important getting away to do).

So I cut the character, leaving only this covert element, a message of solidarity and warning that she’s left behind.]

2 Likes

[Chapter VI, continued]

Up, then southeast:

Language Studies Department Office

This big, slightly drab area holds such useful objects as the mailboxes and the secretary’s computer. On ordinary days the secretary would be in as well, presiding over affairs. The offices of individual professors lie north and west.

The department printer also sits on the u-shaped desk.

This corner office was won in a battle of wills with several other departments during the most recent rebuilding drive. Professor Waterstone is fond of reminding the others that he was the one to obtain this favorable position whenever there is a disagreement about procedure.

Waterstone is definitely coming across as a knife-fighter in the subtle art of academic politics (there’s an old saw about them being so vicious precisely because the stakes are so low, but hey, when there’s a corner office up for grabs a guy’s got to do what a guy’s got to do).

>x mailboxes

There are slots for all the professors and graduate students. Undergraduates, of course, are too insignificant to be assigned mailboxes, and are not allowed to have mail delivered to the department.

>search mailboxes

No need: it will be the usual assortment of advertisements from academic presses, copies of the campus newspaper (which are never interesting and always get discarded), memos from the dean with no informational content whatsoever, and so on.

>x computer

One of many beige boxes hooked into the university’s main system.

The secretary’s computer is currently switched off.

>turn on computer

The secretary’s computer chimes cheerfully.

A box on the screen invites us to type a password to proceed.

Don’t think we want to mess with that – we’ve got no clue of the right password, no immediate reason to hack in, and a disinclination to brick the thing with unsuccessful login attempts. What else?

>x printer

The networked printer handles output for all the computers in the department. The indicator lights glow red to indicate that the paper-drawer is empty.

The printer is currently switched on.

The paper drawer is closed.

There is nothing on the output tray.

…this is a suspiciously-deeply-implemented mechanism; I’m worried that we’re going to have a fix-the-printer puzzle.

>x drawer

The paper-drawer slides neatly in (or out) of the body of the printer, and is deep enough to hold a multi-inch stack of fresh paper. A small catch secures it from being carelessly opened.

>open it

We pull up on the little catch and draw the drawer out. It’s empty.

Well, we just made that ream from the cream, might as well do a small good deed (perhaps it’ll ingratiate us with Himself).

>put paper in printer

The ream fits exactly into the depth of the drawer. We adjust the plastic clamps that hold pages in place until everything is snug.

Seems like that’s about all we can do with it for now.

>x desk

Formidable in size, but even that is not enough to support all of the things that the secretarial staff need to keep track of.

On the u-shaped desk is a printer.

Hmm, I wonder…

>remove u from desk

We reset the device to u. It’s not going to make a nothing-shaped desk. What would that even be? Shapeless?

Oh, I thought it would be a “- shaped desk” – like, turn it from a u to a regular rectangular one. Guess the spacing wasn’t cooperating.

There are professors’ offices north and west, so let’s see if Waterstone’s is the latter:

>w

Higgate’s office

Higgate got about 30% finished with a stylish decorating scheme and then got distracted, leaving everything in a unsettled state. A few of her books are arranged on a very nice rosewood bookshelf, which looks Asian and is ornamented with small figurines; all the rest of her library is stacked higgledy-piggledy in plastic cartons.

Professor Higgate is sitting at an oval table, on which are spread an ugly yellow book, a sugar bowl, a teapot, and a romance novel in some heavily accented language. Higgate is the second reader on my dissertation committee, and a conlang expert – that is, Constructed Languages. It was a seminar with her that really got me thinking about utopian linguistics, and she’s been very supportive, though cautious.

She looks up when we come in. “.i xu do se bangu la lojban.” Higgate asks. She’s asking whether we speak Lojban. For the present, I think it will raise fewer questions if we say no.

Not Waterstone, but this hitherto-unsuspected Higgate seems friendly enough. If we’re not trying to draw attention to ourselves here, though, saying “no” is a bad idea since it’d indicate we actually did understand the qustion.

>no

“I’m afraid I don’t understand,” we say, smiling faintly.

Her face falls. “Ah! I was hoping you’d be here for Conversational Lojban Tea.” The room is conspicuously lacking other Lojban conversationalists.

I’d like to ask how Professor Higgate is doing.

Good thing Andra is a bit smoother at this sort of thing.

>ask how she is doing

“How are you?” we ask.

Forgive me these irrelevant questions, but I haven’t seen Professor Higgate for a few days, and she’s one of my favorite people in the department. I worry about her a little.

She looks taken aback, as though trying to figure out whether she knows us. Then she shrugs this off and decides to proceed as though she does.

“Oh, you know,” she says. “It’s that time of year when the energy’s run out and the students have to be prodded with an electric rod to get them to do any work. And then I’ve got this book I’ve got to write, and Professor Waterstone keeps talking about how next year he would like to take a break from being Director of Graduate Studies…”

We could ask what would be so bad about directing graduate studies.

>ask what would be so bad

“What would be so bad about being director of graduate studies?” I ask, a little surprised. I always thought she liked graduate students.

“Nothing, nothing! It’s just that I have this book I should be writing, and Professor Waterstone has done the job for so many years that he’s–”

She pulls up short, apparently remembering that she doesn’t, actually, know us at all. “He’s very experienced, and I am not sure he would enjoy watching someone else do it differently,” she concludes tactfully. “Our personal styles are not very similar.”

There’s a brief pause.

“I’d offer you some cucumber sandwiches,” Professor Higgate says. “But I’m afraid I ate them all.”

We could ask whether she might let us into the language studies seminar room, ask how we might return a book, or ask which conlangs she knows.

I next spend some 25 turns failing to ask her which conlags she knows, because, as I eventually learn, this game idiosyncratically spells it “conlangs”, when everyplace else I’ve ever seen the word it’s “conlags.”

Although wait, now that I think about it, “conlang” would make more sense, what with it being a contraction of “language”, wouldn’t it?

And yes, a quick Google reveals that for several decades at least my brain has just been willfully refusing to notice the second “n” in that word. This reminds me of how it was only in the last 50 pages of The Magic Mountain that I realized that the Italian scholar Settembretti was actually called Settembrini.

That glitch in the Matrix patched, we resume:

>ask about conlangs

“Which conlangs do you know, then?”

“Esperanto, Volapük, and Lojban, naturally,” she says. “Interlingua, a bit of Fukhian,” (she is careful to pronounce the h sound), “…Quenya, Klingon, Royeship, Toki Pona… and several others in which I am not fluent enough to speak, but know well enough for the purposes of study.”

My response would be to ask whether she might let us into the language studies seminar room or ask how we might return a book.

Per @Draconis’s comment about Interlingua, I’m guessing all of these are real? Quenya’s Tolkien of course, and Klingon’s Klingon, but I don’t recognize the others. Anyway, it’d probably be suspicious to be asked to be let into the seminar room without a reason, so let’s just say we want to return the book:

“I need to return this book to the department library,” we say, holding out The Problem of Adjectives.

“Oh! Yes, all right,” she says. “Did you like it? It’s a good overview of the subject, didn’t you think? I’m afraid the author once annoyed Professor Waterstone at a conference, or we might have had her around to speak at one of our colloquia…”

Higgate stands, patting herself down as though worried she has forgotten something.

“After you,” says Higgate. “I assume it’s safe to leave for a minute; if anyone is coming for Lojban Tea we’ll see them in the hall.” She walks past us through the office door.

We walk a little behind Higgate, who has a very long businesslike stride despite her heels.

She fiddles with her keys for a moment before finding the right one. “Here you go,” she says, pushing the door open.

Language Studies Seminar Room

They recently redid this room, and whoever picked the decorations had postmodern tastes.

Professor Higgate waits a little absent-mindedly nearby, looking over the bookshelf. On the bookshelf are History of the Standards Revolution and Lives of the Lexicographers.

A massive plexiglas case takes up one corner of the room. In the plexiglas case is a compact but high-powered late model synthesizer.

The big table at the center of the room is an irregular polygon, with one chair pushed up to the shortest side. I think the shape is intended to undermine traditional conceptions of academic hierarchy, but in practice it just means that whoever gets to seminar late has to sit with a table angle jabbing him in the stomach.

[Your score has gone up by three points and is now fifty-one.]

Those books are interesting, but that synthesizer is more interesting still – I wonder if we can fiddle with it? We shouldn’t break character while Higgate is here, but we can probably get away with some browsing and hope she gets bored or worried she’s missing the tea.

>x shelf

Built in and sturdily made.

On the bookshelf are History of the Standards Revolution and Lives of the Lexicographers.

>x history

It covers in minute detail the process by which the island standardized spelling and leveraged its linguistic power.

History of the Standards Revolution is one of those bog-standard texts that everyone in my field owns a copy of and uses as a doorstop. Very occasionally something still arises that I need to look up, but I just about memorized it in preparation for my comprehensive exams.

Ugh, pass.

>x lives

It is a substantial history of the major contributors to the art of dictionary-creation, and a useful guide to the specialist bibliography on each figure.

Sounds more interesting, though no more detail is immediately forthcoming. Can’t hurt to have more books to hand, though, and apparently this is a lending-library, so we yoink these. Wonder if Higgate is distracted yet?

>x case

Higgate may be a little unworldly, but there is no way she’d let us mess with the synthesizer without interference. We’ll have to hope she is willing to leave us in here.

Ah well – guess we’ll dawdle a little longer.

>x table

Crafted from some exotic wood with lots of interesting burl structure. There was a wealthy donor behind the construction of this room.

>x chair

It is an ordinary inexpensive variety of chair, made locally and found around the island in great numbers.

No more stalling:

>return book

We take a moment to find the proper place for the book.

The sound of discussion comes from down the hall: two voices speaking in Lojban, and then a male voice interrupting. “Do you have a license for this conversation?” it asks.

“Excuse me,” Higgate says. “I’d better go see to that.”

She waves and heads back northeast.

[Your score has gone up by two points and is now fifty-three.]

Oh, lucky for the Professor that she has someone to speak Lojban to, and lucky us that we’ve escaped her supervision! Now, what have we here?

>x case

The case is made of very thick protective plastic on a metal frame. It is thoroughly locked shut; I don’t think we’ll have any luck with normal forms of approach. However, plexiglas is a cuttable substance with the right tools, and then there are the screws at the back.

>x synthesizer

In the plexiglas case is a synthesizer.

It is designed to accept two items and then be turned on. It is shiny and white, and looks a little like a bathtub for very short people.

In the synthesizer is a crossword.

It was a full-sized, human version of this that made us what we are now, so the object makes both of us feel a little skittish and self-conscious.

Oh, exciting – seems like it’s plugged in and working if it’s got a crossword all glommed together.

Anyway, we can cut plexiglass:

>cut case

(with the jigsaw)
We switch the jigsaw on.

It’s not a silent process, but it’s not as loud as I had feared, either. The jigsaw cuts straight through the plexiglas, freeing it from its attachment to the locking mechanism.

There is a continuous angry whine from the jigsaw.

Sorted.

>x crossword

It looks like it’s been snipped out of Chard-Farmer’s Weekly, but it hasn’t been filled in at all.

There is a dismissive blatt from the monocle, and transposed over the crossword is a faint, greenish image of a cross and a word.

Aha, as expected!

>solve it

My mother is good at these, but I’ve never had much luck with them myself.

We have more important things to do, I suppose – one of which is to test a theory:

>put gel on crossword

We dip out a pea-sized quantity of gel and rub it gently onto the crossword. With an audible SPLORT, the crossword becomes a word and a cross.

So that’s confirmation that we really shouldn’t try to put a big chunk of gel on ourselves.

What’s the good word?

>x word

At the moment, the word is “I”, floating about in elegant Didot lettering.

There is a dismissive blatt from the monocle, and transposed over the word is a faint, greenish image of a sword.

That’s a fairly elemental word to choose, so I guess I approve. Unsurprising that it started as a sword, since this feels like a reified abstract.

>x cross

It’s handsome, made of metal, the sort of thing that might adorn a church altar; I don’t have the expertise to say whether it’s especially valuable.

I have some ideas on what we might be able to make with this thing, but let’s talk to Waterstone before doing anything else that might get us kicked out. On the way we check on Higgate:

>w

We open the door to find two students, a boy and a girl, sitting at Higgate’s table. The boy is sipping tea and the girl is paging madly through the Lojban book. “Oh,” says Higgate. “You found what you needed, I hope? I’m afraid I am busy now.”

So I duck us back out and close the door.

All’s well with them.

>n

Waterstone’s Office

A very finicky, neatly arranged room, in which one never feels quite at home.

Professor Waterstone is sitting here. Waterstone is my dissertation advisor. (He insists on the “o” spelling.) He’s an expert in the history of linguistic and orthographical power, but he’s politically kind of reactionary. “Don’t meddle” is pretty much his motto. He and Professor Higgate don’t always get along that well.

We can see an invitation on a desk. It’s from Dental Consonants Limited. Their design of stationery is unmistakable.

In front of Professor Waterstone is a small laptop.

He looks up at us gravely. “I don’t believe we’ve met,” he says. “Can I help you?”

We want to make up some excuse, ask whether he met the activists, or ask why he is working on Serial Comma Day.

This seems to be what we’re looking for:

>x invitation

It is a white card, like a wedding invitation, with swirly script lettering. “You are invited,” it says, “to a demonstration of a new T-inserter not available to the general public – Serial Comma Day – Bureau of Orthography.”

Smaller, meaner sans-serif lettering across the bottom adds: “Bring this card for admission.”

Can we just…?

>take invitation

We reach out our hand. He watches us the way a bird of prey might watch the twitching of a small garden snake. Our hand retracts. We do not take the invitation.

No, of course not.

>ask why he doesn’t go to the demonstration

“I’m surprised you’re not at this demonstration,” we say, gesturing towards the invitation on his desk. “It looks interesting.”

“Does it?” he asks wearily. “It sounds like a dead bore to me. Unfortunately, I can be neither at the demonstration nor at home at the moment. I have this blasted presentation to finish, and my wife is having the carpets shampooed – on a holiday! – and won’t let me work in my own study.”

We all have our crosses to bear. Maybe we can rattle him by reminding him of the radicalism of youth?

>ask whether he met

“Did you run into those activists outside?”

“Sadly, it is our misfortune constantly to encounter people with no concept of what language manipulation can and cannot do,” Waterstone says. He really seems to be in a bad mood today, even for him: maybe a fight with the wife, or a nasty letter from the dean.

There’s a brief pause. “Look, I really must work on this,” says Waterstone, chasing us to the door. “Perhaps someone else in the department can answer a few of your questions. I believe I saw Professor Higgate earlier, and Professor Brown is usually in his lab downstairs. I’m sure he’s not working on anything too urgent. Goodbye!”

The office door closes with measured firmness behind us.

Through the window in Waterstone’s door, we can see him turning the lock. When he catches us watching he gives a tight, unfriendly smile and goes back to his desk.

A moment later the printer whirs thoughtfully.

That could have gone better – I doubt we could have talked the invitation out of him in the mood he’s in, though. For lack of anything better to do, I suppose we can see what’s up with the printer now:

>x printer

The networked printer handles output for all the computers in the department. The indicator lights glow amber for standby mode. An additional light indicates that some document is in the queue to print and is waiting for the printer to be ready.

Oh right, we never closed the paper tray:

>close printer

The paper-drawer slides back into place with a click.

The printer whirs as though clearing its throat, and then begins to spit pages rapidly into the output tray.

>x output

In molded plastic, it is an integral part of the printer body. Currently there is a draft document on the tray, waiting for the owner to come collect.

On the output tray is a draft document.

>x draft

It’s fifteen pages double-spaced, and appears to be the draft of a talk Professor Waterstone is preparing to give at a convention. I immediately notice, however, that several portions of the speech are marked with angry triple asterisks – Waterstone’s way of marking up parts of text that need serious revision.

The talk concerns “homonym shame”: the anxiety felt in the Victorian era, and still manifested at times in modern culture, about objects that shared the same name as (and therefore theoretically might be converted into) something rude. Methods of disguising the legs of pianos and crotches of trees occupy a good portion of Waterstone’s exposition, and there is a page-long aside on methods of making sure that donkeys are known by that name and not by the alternative.

To judge, however, from the angry asterisking, Waterstone is still looking for at least one more example of an object susceptible to double-entendre that has been successfully rendered innocent by some linguistic modification.

Umm, I would not have guessed that Waterstone’s research interests included what are basically dirty puns! Anyway, this may give us something to go on – if we find another example for Waterstone, maybe his spirits will lift and be well-disposed to grant a favor?

I’m not immediately coming up with any options, though. There was that course/curse advertisement in the basement, but that’s not a homonym transformation, and as I recall the ad was hardly portable (the door is in fact locked, so we can’t go back into the office to tell him our ideas – presumably we’ll need to take the example to him). Still, that’s the only idea I’ve got, so I head downstairs to see if I can mess around with it, at which point I pass by the locked door to the restricted-equipment area and am reminded it opens with a keycard. Hmm, we’ve got the key to Alex’s apartment in our inventory, and we’ve already made a card…

I run back upstairs to carry out step one of the plan:

>put key in synthesizer

Voices from the hallway. I freeze. For a moment we hear them all too sharply: “You check downstairs, I’ll ask the professors.” It’s a conversation of security guards, or police, or Bureau Officers. Someone is being looked for.

Then it’s over. We put the key into the synthesizer.

Eek! That’s not good, especially since our easiest way to make a card is to start with chard – and our chard is currently parked outside campus, past where those guards seem to have come from. Still, they probably don’t know what we look like so maybe we can just go about our business and slip past them?

In fact we can, and in a few turns we turn the car back into a card – it’s not the Chariot this time, though:

We reset the device to h. The chard gives way to the card. This time it’s Temperance. An official-looking man is operating a gigantic synthesizer. Out of its bottom fall a flood of oxymoronic figures: a dwarf elephant, a giant mouse, a bittersweet cake…

Hmm, not sure I’d associate this card with paradox, but I suppose it’s a valid reading of temperance as equivocation.

Anyway, back to the seminar room – we insert it in the tub and activate:

>turn on synthesizer

The synthesizer hums like a microwave oven for 43 seconds, then pings. Inside there is a keycard.

An electronic pass card with a powerful-looking stripe down the back side.

[Your score has gone up by one point and is now fifty-four.]

Boom! Our score goes up another 3 points when we pick it up, too. Illegal X-remover modifications, here we come:

>w

We unlock the small door with a swipe of the keycard.

We open the small door.

Before we go through the door to the Rectification Room, it occurs to us that Professor Brown is just next door, and that he is likely to be able to hear if we do anything in there. Possibly some kind of masking noise is in order.

That’s fair – honestly, we got lucky nobody noticed us sawing through the plexiglass case, and now we know the law is onto us, better to take precautions.

Let’s see, if we had a homonym paddle to hand we could turn our (rubber) band into a (music) band, but we don’t so we don’t. Might be worth checking inventory to see what’s on offer:

We are equipped with the following essentials: a backpack, a flash drive, your H-remover (upgraded to handle abstracts), a monocle, some Origin Paste, a pan (really the smuggled plans in disguise), a roll, and a tub of restoration gel.

We are also carrying some ale, an arm, some asparagus, a ball, a banana, a band, a pair of Britishizing goggles, a clock, a cross, a crumpled cocktail napkin, a funnel, a god, Guidebook to Anglophone Atlantis, a heel, History of the Standards Revolution, a honey pastry triangle, a jigsaw, a jotter, Journal of Third-World Economics, a keycard (which opens the small door), a leaflet, a letter, a lime, Lives of the Lexicographers, a map of Slangovia, a May, some members, a mug, an oat, some oil, a pat, a pea, pi, a pocket-bread, a poppy, a rash, a ring (which opens the sturdy iron gate), a shopping bag, a shred, a shrimp tail, a shuttle, a sill, a silver platter, a sin, a sop, a stick, Studies in Primary Language Acquisition, a stuffed octopus, some toes, a watch, a wig, a word, a wrap, and some yogurt.

Of that collection, the asparagus, the clock, the flash drive, the funnel, the heel, the jotter, the leaflet, the letter, the lime, the May, the members, the mug, the Origin Paste, the pea, the roll, the stuffed octopus, the toes, the tub of restoration gel, and the watch are packed away in the backpack, which is gaping wide open so everyone can see what’s inside.

The ball is in the shopping bag.

We are wearing the ring (which opens the sturdy iron gate), the monocle, the wig, and the backpack.

Phew, that’s a lot of possibilities! Unsurprisingly, I get distracted thinking of abstract transformations I haven’t yet tried:

>remove m from lime

We reset the device to m. We get the lime.

There is a flash of canary light, and the lime turns into a lie. It changes from moment to moment. Currently it reads:
Andra misses her parents.

Hm. Awkward item, isn’t it? Make a nice conversation piece for the home. Set it on the mantelpiece and watch it gossip about your guests.

Oof yeah, definitely some apple-of-discord type possibilities here. But it’s not audible lying, so no help to our present situation.

I realize I haven’t turned the coat into a cot yet, so I restore it from its oaten confines and give that a shot on general principles:

>remove a from coat

We reset the device to a. There is a flash of psychedelic colors, and the coat turns into a cot. A portable bed, made up for sleeping.

The cot is too awkward for us to carry, and falls onto the floor.

You have a fleeting thought of how it started with Brock.

Oh, I see – each time we examine a bed, we get the next link in this memory-chain:

>remember how it started

Brock’s Stateroom

Brock had tied your wrists to the headboard and your left ankle to the corner of the bed. He had a thesaurus open and was writing, with a paintbrush, across your stomach.

“Floozy?” he asked.

You giggled, so he painted the word above your navel, smiling, giving the Y a big flourishing curlicue.

“Let’s see, what else. Fornicator?”

You drew in your breath sharply. Remembering an angry lesson read from the lectern.

“Okay,” he said. “Not that one, yet,” and licked away the F he’d begun to paint.

Then we’re back in the present.

Hot.

Enough faffing about – I remember that the pea was once a pearl, which presents some options:

>remove r from pearl

We reset the device to r. There is a smell of anise, and the pearl turns into a peal. It is the embodiment of a peal of bells: no weight or size, but the impression of bronze, early Gothic spires in a spare English countryside, and clangor.

When you pay attention, the peal really is nearly deafening.

Ah, that should do the trick!

>drop peal

I’ll just leave that in the carton; less likely to be disturbed there.

We set the peal in the carton, where it ought to provide a helpful distraction for the time being.

Clang, clang! goes the peal.

You know, now that I’ve got this set up it feels like it’s likely to draw more attention to this vicinity rather than less, but in for a penny:

>w

Rectification Room

This is where equipment is brought for a tune-up, or to have its legal limits reinstalled (or, on rare occasions, removed). Access to these abilities is tightly controlled by the Bureau.

The reclamation machine stands near the door, ready to improve forbidden objects for the use of registered departmental users. It’s very ordinary looking, a simple machine with leads able to attach to various linguistic equipment, and to read and rewrite the programming.

>x machine

You put a piece of linguistic equipment into the reclamation machine and the machine reprograms it. Attached to the machine is a computer which manages its behavior. Currently the machine is closed: I assume we use the computer to open it for service.

>x computer

The reclamation computer is currently switched off.

>turn on computer

The reclamation computer chimes cheerfully.

A box on the screen invites us to type a password to proceed.

Oh, of course.

[continued]

2 Likes