Do Elephants Jump? (5 page)
Read Do Elephants Jump? Online
Authors: David Feldman
We were wondering if the etymology dates back to one Pépé le Pew’s debut on the silver screen. Perhaps the spray of a real skunk motivated the first exclamation of “P.U.,” but a trip to any dictionary will confirm that this expression of displeasure long predated animated cartoons. Somewhat to our surprise,
P.U.
is not an abbreviation and not an acronym.
In Latin, the word
puteo
means “to stink, be redolent, or smell bad.” The Indo-European word
pu
refers to rot or decay, and many other languages contain words referring to bad smells that start with the letters
pu.
The English interjection
phew
refers to “a vocal gesture expressing impatience, disgust, discomfort, or weariness” according to the
Oxford English Dictionary,
and variants abound (
pew, pho, pheut, phoo, phugh, peugh
, and
fogh,
dating back as far as the early seventeenth century).
What all these variations have in common, according to Jesse Sheidlower, the North American editor of the
Oxford English Dictionary,
whose “Word of the Day” column is a highlight of the
OED
’s Web site, is that all represent “something like the whistling sound you get by blowing a puff of air out of closed lips.” Sheidlower’s theory, as good as any we can come up with, is that “P.U.” is an emphatic form of saying “pew.”
Other words can be given emphasis in a similar way:
keerist!
for “Christ,” or
bee-yoo-ti-ful
for “beautiful,” are two examples. The difference with
P.U.
is that it has the advantage of sounding like two named English letters, which is why it’s spelled out that way, instead of something like
peeyew.
No one knows for sure when the disyllabic pronunciation of
P.U.
has been around. Sheidlower says the spelling “certainly existed by the 1950s, if not earlier,” and most agree that the United States can claim ownership of the short, if not sweet, expression.
| Submitted by Susan Sales of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Thanks also to Noelle Yamada of Honolulu, Hawaii; Camille A. Buckley of Elma, New York; Leslie Wingard of Jacksonville, Florida; and Bruce Greeley of Fall City, Washington. |
We talked to a bunch of elephant experts and none of them has ever seen an elephant jump. Most think it is physiologically impossible for a mature elephant to jump, although baby elephants have been known to do so, if provoked. Not only do mature elephants weigh too much to support landing on all fours, but their legs are designed for strength rather than leaping ability. Mark Grunwald, who has worked with elephants for more than a decade at the Philadelphia Zoo, notes that elephants’ bone structure makes it difficult for them to bend their legs sufficiently to derive enough force to propel the big lugs up.
Yet there are a few sightings of elephants jumping in the wild. Veterinarian Judy Provo found two books in her college library that illustrate the discrepancy. S. K. Ettingham’s
Elephant
lays out the conventional thinking: “…because of its great weight, an elephant cannot jump or even run in the accepted sense since it must keep one foot on the ground at all times.” But an account in J. H. Williams’s
Elephant Bill
describes a cow elephant jumping a deep ravine “like a chaser over a brook.”
Animals that are fast runners or possess great leaping ability have usually evolved these skills as a way of evading attackers. Elephants don’t have any natural predators, according to the San Diego Wild Animal Park’s manager of animals, Alan Rooscroft: “Only men kill elephants. The only other thing that could kill an elephant is a fourteen-ton tiger.”
Most of the experts agree with zoologist Richard Landesman of the University of Vermont, that there is little reason for an elephant to jump in its natural habitat. Indeed, Mike Zulak, an elephant curator at the San Diego Zoo, observes that pachyderms are rather awkward walkers, and can lose their balance easily, so they tend to be conservative in their movements.
But that doesn’t mean that elephants are pushovers. Why bother jumping when you can walk through or around just about everything in your natural habitat? In India, trenching has been the traditional way of trying to control movements of elephants. Veterinarian Myron Hinrichs, of Petaluma, California, notes that the traditional trench has to be at least two meters deep, two meters across at the top, and one and one-half meters across at the bottom to serve as a barrier for elephants:
That tells us that they can’t or won’t try to jump a distance of 6.5 feet. But these trenches have a high failure rate, for elephants can fill them in, especially in the rainy season, and then walk across the trough they have made. And larger bull elephants can go down through and up even a trench that size.
Why leap when you can trudge?
| Submitted by Jena Mori, of Los Angeles, California. |
When we received this Imponderable, we picked up a couple of shampoo bottles and noticed that the deep ends of the notches are aligned with the seams on the bottles. We therefore assumed that the notch was a way of reinforcing the seam, or an innocent by-product of affixing the seam.
Wrong! The little notch actually has a purpose. We feel a little less dumb about not knowing, since Dr. John F. Corbett, ex–vice president of scientific and technical affairs at Clairol, and now consultant to the company, didn’t know the answer himself. He thought the notches might be there to aid in releasing the bottle from the mold. But luckily, Corbett is curious, and shared the real deal with us:
The recessed notch or notches are there to allow orientation of the round bottle when it is being labeled by silk screening. By orienting the bottle, the print can be applied in such a way as to avoid the seam being within the label area.
Non-round bottles (oblong or oval cross sections) can be aligned by making use of the narrower front-to-back dimension as they pass along the labeling line. A bottle with a perfectly square cross section would need to have orientation notches.
There is no significance as to whether one or two notches are used. Incidentally, the seam results from the join between the two halves of the mold in which the bottle is formed.
| Submitted by George C. Lady IV of Hayward, California. |
Reader Raphael Klayman writes:
I’ve noticed that police (real ones as well as those who play them on TV) hold their flashlights the way one might hold a knife to stab someone in the chest. We civilians tend to hold our flashlights from underneath, in a kind of semi-bowling or fishing rod grip. With both methods, you can shine the flashlight from floor to ceiling, but the police style feels a lot more awkward. Yet they must have their reasons. What are they?
Although few of the police officers we contacted have ever received formal training in flashlight “gripology,” the overhand style was the favored position for two main reasons. The most often cited rationale was alluded to in our reader’s letter: The overhand grip allows the officer to use the flashlight as a weapon. One Tennessee officer wrote us:
The way we hold a flashlight gives you a tactical advantage against the person that you are encountering in case of a use-of-force situation. Your arm is already in a raised or almost a defensive position against an attack, not to mention you have something in your hand that can strike a pressure point.
With just the quick flick of a wrist, an officer might be able to stop an unruly perpetrator; if the flashlight were held straight in front, the hand would have to be drawn back first.
The second reason for the “police grip” is that perhaps its most common use is to survey the occupants and contents of motor vehicles. In conventional cars, the officer is above the level of the driver and the car, and it is simply more comfortable to beam the flashlight downward in the overhand grip. As one cop put it:
When I am walking up to the car, I don’t think I ever make eye contact for more than a few seconds at a time. I’m looking through the car, at hands, containers, etc. You cannot see those things well by holding the flashlight at waist level.
What about when an officer is searching a darkened house? We finally found one officer who preferred the underhand grip for this purpose, with his arm out in front of him, “like I would when I’m holding a gun.” But most officers sided with this viewpoint:
I never extend my arms out unless I intend on shooting someone. If I’m moving through a house with my arms extended and a burglar is around the corner, and he sees my arms and flashlight, there is a pretty good darn chance he might grab me. If your arms are already extended out, they are bound to get tired. There is no strength in those arms if they are extended; the closer the hands and arms are to the body, the stronger they are going to be.
Once firearms are added to the mix, flashlight position can become a matter of life and death. An Arizona police officer wrote:
We are trained to hold our flashlights in a specific way when firing our weapons. I was taught many years ago to always place your flashlight in your “weak hand” so that you would be able to pull your weapon quickly if needed. The reason that we hold them in a “stabbing” type manner is that they are easier to bring up to the firing position if needed. By holding the flashlight in a “stabbing” position by the switch, the officer is able to bring the flashlight up toward the target, and it allows the officer to use the back of his or her strong hand against the back of his or her weak hand in order to support the proper alignment in case of need to fire the weapon.
Many police departments use lightweight Maglite flashlights, and many companies that manufacture firearms for law enforcement agencies provide mounts for putting the Maglites directly on the weapon, as one officer explained:
I have a tactical flashlight attached to the Mag tube of my Mossberg that comes in handy for investigating suspicious noises around the barn and workshop at night. The light also makes a good aiming guide, because the shot is centered on the circle of light.
And with the light source attached to the firearm, all those nasty decisions about how to grip the flashlight are moot.
| Submitted by Raphael Klayman of Brooklyn, New York. |
If you read most newspapers for more than a few minutes, your hands feel dirty. So why do windows look squeaky clean when you rub the same newspaper against the glass? We asked experts in window cleaning, newspaper printing, and inks this very same question.
One potential allure would have to be price. Newsprint, the kind of paper used for newspaper printing, is probably the cheapest paper manufactured — and discarded newspaper the cheapest of all. Still, we couldn’t find a single professional cleaner who uses newspapers on the job, although several could see why newspapers could be effective in a pinch. Jim Grady, of Tri-State Window Cleaning in Wappinger Falls, New York, writes:
I don’t use newspaper to clean windows. I use squeegees. When I was a child, my father did tell me that newspapers were an effective way to clean windows, probably because it was free, or cheaper than paper towels. But as the good book says, when I became a man I put away my childish ways and I haven’t put a piece of newspaper on glass in twenty-five years.
The first quality that is prized in a drying agent is absorbency, and in this regard, newspaper hits the jackpot. Theodore Lustig, at the West Virginia University School of Journalism, told us:
Newsprint is extremely porous [larger spaces between fibers] and is uncoated [no waxes or fillers]. Therefore, it pretty much acts like a sponge, making it useful in whatever tasks require sopping up moisture. This may account for its ability to clean windows.
Another proponent of the absorbency theory is Jim Patton, process manager at Smurfit Newsprint, in Pomona, California, who adds that newsprint’s lack of water repellency is another reason for its success in cleaning windows:
Newsprint is pretty darn absorbent. Most papers have a sizing applied to them to give them water repellency. Newspapers have a minimum of repellency. At a different newspaper manufacturer I worked for, they used newsprint in the men’s room for drying your hands.
Of course, the lack of sizing in newsprint isn’t to aid in window cleaning — it’s to please newspaper publishers. Bob Cate, director of manufacturing services at newsprint producer Bowater, Inc., agrees that the lack of sizing in newsprint is key to its efficacy in cleaning windows, and explains how:
You want any ink to soak into the paper, as opposed to standing out on the surface, but you don’t want it to soak in so fast that it comes out on the other side. This is why newspaper is absorbent — so that the ink can soak in and not sit on top of the paper when it’s applied.
But it gets better! Newspapers not only are cheap and absorbent, but they give the cleaned, dry windows a shine, according to Brent Weingard, of Expert Window Cleaner (and evidently a part-time comedian):
Being a New York window cleaner, I have found the
Daily News
to be the popular favorite, especially on Midtown store-fronts. In the East Village, the
Village Voice
. My upscale residential clients, however, are more comfortable if I arrive with the
New York Times
or the
Wall Street Journal
in hand.
Seriously, to my knowledge, newspaper is generally never used by professional window cleaners. It’s really more of a “home remedy” cleaning tool that actually works surprisingly well. It doesn’t have lint, is very absorbent, and gives the glass a shiny finish.
My theory of what causes that shiny finish is evidenced by looking at your hands after handling newspapers: it’s ink! I believe it is a film of ink that is left on the glass surface that gives windows this colorful reflective finish.
So what are the downsides of professionals using newspapers to clean windows? They are few, but they are prohibitive. The first, enunciated by Richard Fabry, publisher of
American Window Cleaner
magazine, is the killer:
Sure, newspaper gets the glass clean, but it is s-l-o-w. Get a professional squeegee and it’ll go much faster. Window cleaning should be quick ’n’ easy.
Another problem: What do you do with the newspapers when you are finished with them? Gary Mauer, of Window Cleaning Network in Oconomowoc, Wisconsin, a town with more
o
’s in its name than window cleaners, writes:
Because we clean so many windows, it’s simply not practical to use and dispose of bundles of newspaper. For that reason alone, you’ll be hard pressed to find a professional window cleaner who uses newspaper.
Next time you clean your own windows, you might want to give newspapers a try instead of paper towels. The pros tended to look askance at paper towels — they dry the glass surface well enough, but leave lint — cloth diapers or tight-knit towels or rags are a better bet. With newer inks, often vegetable-rather than petroleum-based, newspapers tend to streak less than in the past (and for that matter, stain your hands much less when you read them). In years past, amateurs who used newspaper to clean windows tended to dirty white frames around the windows, streaking them with ink.
| Submitted by B. Craig Sanders of Piscataway, New Jersey. Thanks also to John A. Beton of Chicago, Illinois; Jason Hsu, via the Internet; and Michael Gerstmann, via the Internet. |