These studies were centrally concerned with classifying various shades of English influence from caiques to direct borrowings in line with Betz's taxonomy of loan influences. Furthermore, these studies investigated patterns of orthographical and morphological integration of English loans in German and outlined some of the reasons why English elements turned into popular additions to the German language. In a way, these studies defined the field for the next three decades of anglicism research, which was characterized by a great number of investigations expounding on the use of English terms in different regional varieties of German (cf., among others, Bus, 1980; Roller, 1978; Lehnert, 1990; K. Viereck, 1986), in the field of technical languages (cf. Allenbacher, 1999; Schmitt, 1985), and by focussing on specific features of integration (e.g., gender assignment, cf. Carstensen, 1980; Gregor, 1983). In line with the widespread perception that the influence of English is constantly increasing in German, a number of scholars tried to test this hypothesis by quantifying the number of anglicisms. Most notably, Yang (1990) provides a diachronic cross section of occurrences in the German newsmagazine Der Spiegel for the years 1950, 1960, 1970, and 1980.

Throughout this period, he notes a slight but steady increase from an average of 2.93 anglicisms per Spiegel-page in 1950 to 4.94 anglicisms in 1980 (1990:35-36). A similarly small increase in the number of anglicisms per page in other German press publications is reported in Lee (1996:30), who counts 4.47 in 1988 and in 1992 as a token of the increase of anglicisms in the GDR from shortly before to after the fall of the regime. Schelper (1995) determines the number of anglicisms from a random sample of Austrian, German, and Swiss newspapers from 1949 to 1989. She observes yearly fluctuation in her data that is, however, still indicative of a general rise. As one of the highest rates of increase, her sample of the Austrian newspaper Die Presse shows 123 anglicisms in 1949 and 210 in 1989 (this count also includes potential caiques as anglicisms).

My student's death powerfully opened the questions of sexuality and personal identity to me. Why was a young man who (insofar as he made any identification) identified as a heterosexual perceived as gay? How was sexual identity written onto and read off my student's body? Following James's death, I came to feel the vital importance of education about sexuality and sexual identity for all students. This is not to say that I stopped believing in the importance of creating opportunities for my queer and questioning students to read and write texts with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender characters and themes. It's just that I began to believe that the other side of the coin was just as—and perhaps even more—important: to question the apparently settled category of "straight" heterosexuality and to see how what queer theorists called "heteronormativity" (how certain norms and assumptions lead to a "compulsory heterosexuality") shapes the way we understand gender and sexual identities. Some of the work of the English classroom, I came to believe, should be about exposing and analyzing how we read and write our sexual identities in textual and embodied worlds and how we can both confound and be confounded in our expectations of Cheap Merrell Shoes male or female, straight or gay behavior.

One elegant way out of the dilemma is to distinguish between language-internal and -external criteria, so one could claim that, for the historical reasons outlined, StHE is an Inner Circle variety, whereas it differs from the other varieties on linguistic and sociolinguistic grounds. Such an approach is of particular appeal since it allows us to make a distinction between American and British English on the one hand and a number of smaller varieties such as Bahamian English, Bajan or Pitcairnese on the other hand (for which one might make similar cases in point as well). This seems like a most promising explanation, since it allows for considerable variation within the circles and calls for a more comprehensive analysis, viewing diversification of English around the world not only as a socio-historical but also as a linguistic process. I would argue that LKVEs, exemplified by StHE, challenge existing models and ask us to revise them, since they fit for some reasons and at the same time stand apart for others. We need to differentiate language external and internal components of diversification in English around the world, be more fine-grained in our analysis and make it very clear whether or not we base our judgments on structural considerations or on historical and social ones, which, at the end of the day, may lead to different results.

In this sense, the study of English around the world - and its taxonomic implications - may benefit considerably from the analysis of varieties we know little about: they encourage us to rethink principles that have been applied in the past while forcing us at the same time to assess their significance for the classification of English in the future. One treasure I had come across during my preparation for this unit was a surprisingly accessible book entitled The Undead and Philosophy: Chicken Soup for the Soulless (Greene and Mohammad), a collection of essays on philosophical issues raised through consideration of our cultural myths of the living dead. The essay "Should Vampires Be Held Accountable for Their Bloodthirsty Behavior?" (Draeger) explores the question of whether the undead had the right to exist, as their behavior was not rooted in evil so much as it was rooted in a basic need to survive.

This essay extended a discussion, begun while reading 7 Am Legend and continued through Night of the Living Dead, about how adopting a different perspective can change how one views situations that might otherwise seem cut and dry. Thomas Sabo Pendant Here at the end of the undead unit, students were required to empathize with zombies and vampires, at least long enough to determine if these undead creatures warranted the right to exist. What followed was a spirited debate concerning the rights of the undead. Students quickly moved past the fantasy elements of the argument and delved into a serious debate about the rights of minority viewpoints.

It should be noted that never did anyone, me included, suggest that those needing to feed off the blood or brains of others had a right to do so. Nor was there ever the suggestion of equivalency between this hypothetical discussion of rights and the real struggle for rights among those suffering from legitimate injustice. Rather, my students showed a ready ability to see through the conceit of the argument and recognize a larger truth: no matter how foreign the beliefs of others, foreignness do not by itself warrant bigotry and dismissal.