alt.usage.english http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english?hl=en
alt.usage.english@googlegroups.com Today's topics: * Hot dogs and onions - 1 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/475fb750586c9e76?hl=en * Egg cups - 6 messages, 3 authors http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/b8f6a685018199ee?hl=en * James: to hold on by - 1 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/f4e499a6a10fdf11?hl=en * The New York Times - 1 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/ea67a522eab4f2a6?hl=en * M$ dominance (Was:Re: Hyphens again) - 2 messages, 2 authors http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/15a9ff1a22f7feee?hl=en * James: for two days more - 1 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/98edd83cf1a2a473?hl=en * a usage of 'to hear' - 2 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/65e1715196d9b221?hl=en * James: she should like to see him not - 1 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/24329ca0e9d241ac?hl=en * Reading the book after watching the film - 1 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/365f3aa12f441f18?hl=en * James: provide for your marriage - 1 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/3988035984a4f95c?hl=en * "Gotten" in NZEng? - 3 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/e7d4cca23f99e484?hl=en * i wish i can do... - 1 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/3a1a6ab7742a512e?hl=en * Tailgating - 1 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/991f3e4866805238?hl=en * Synecdoche [WAS: Mark Twain on Henry James] - 1 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/143d181531969235?hl=en * singular they (Re: Textfyre Games) - 1 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/7e70f1085ac4e6c5?hl=en * People I have virtually met. - 1 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/e5e0239d2da8ef5e?hl=en * Wireless (cordless) keyboard/mice - 1 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/143656b7956fe26a?hl=en ============================================================================== TOPIC: Hot dogs and onions http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/475fb750586c9e76?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 5:49 am From: "Mike Lyle" Robert Bannister wrote: > Evan Kirshenbaum wrote: >> Peter Moylan <gro.naly...@retep> writes: >> >>> It can be made from beef mince, lamb mince, or pork mince (AmE >>> ground beef, ground lamb, ground hog), >> >> Uh, no. Ground pork. >> > > I thought that was a deliberate joke for the day. I suppose ground > pork makes it clear that pigs don't fly (apart from those blue > helicopters with searchlights). In South Carolina they make hamburgers out of ground squirrel. -- Mike. ============================================================================== TOPIC: Egg cups http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/b8f6a685018199ee?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 6 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 5:55 am From: "Mike Lyle" Peter Moylan wrote: [...] > > There's even more potential embarrassment involved in internet dating. > It's a slight shock to the system to come across someone you know. > It's a much greater shock to arrange to meet someone, and then > discover that you know them. Or, worse, that they recognise you and > you don't recognise them. I suppose it's apocryphal, but there's the couple who got divorced because they each discovered that the other was looking for a new partner. They found out, goes the tale, when the system offered them one another. -- Mike. == 2 of 6 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:01 am From: the Omrud Mike Lyle wrote: > Peter Moylan wrote: > [...] >> There's even more potential embarrassment involved in internet dating. >> It's a slight shock to the system to come across someone you know. >> It's a much greater shock to arrange to meet someone, and then >> discover that you know them. Or, worse, that they recognise you and >> you don't recognise them. > > I suppose it's apocryphal, but there's the couple who got divorced > because they each discovered that the other was looking for a new > partner. They found out, goes the tale, when the system offered them one > another. Oh, great, now I've got Piña Colada Song STS. -- David == 3 of 6 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:09 am From: Chuck Riggs On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 20:13:21 +0000, Amethyst Deceiver <n...@lindsayendell.org.uk> wrote: >On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:34:05 +0000, Chuck Riggs <chri...@eircom.net> >wrote: > >>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 19:56:08 +0000, Amethyst Deceiver >><n...@lindsayendell.org.uk> wrote: > >>>Is your argument that you can't say something is imported from North >>>America or posted to Europe because "North America" or "Europe" aren't >>>stated on the goods? >> >>I'm saying the appearance of the name of the appropriate continent in >>an address is irrelevant, whereas the name of the country can be >>essential. It is not always essential, since something addressed to >>Philadelphia, North America, will probably get to Philadelphia, PA, >>U.S.A., but something addressed to Smallville, North America might >>well go to some dead letter office. > >But the only person to have raised the issue of what is /written on >parcels/ is you. James and I weren't talking about parcels or >addresses. > >>>If so, common usage would disagree with you. >> >>If that is what you are claiming, Ms Deceiver, show me where Europe or >>North America is listed as part of a person's or a company's address, >>with the name of the appropriate country unlisted. > >I'm writing about imports and exports but you seem to be fixated on >addresses. Ho-hum, this is really getting boring. With a final gasp I'll mention that you're fixated on what you perceive as my fixation. My examples of postal addresses were meant to simplify the discussion, that's all. -- Regards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE == 4 of 6 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:15 am From: Chuck Riggs On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 08:14:05 +0800, Robert Bannister <robb...@bigpond.com> wrote: >John Varela wrote: >> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 01:05:15 UTC, Robert Bannister >> <robb...@bigpond.com> wrote: >> >>> Which is why it can be so embarrassing when you meet someone, whom you >>> really only know by sight, out of context. It's OK if you remember to >>> ask where you know them from straight away, but it's all too easy to >>> slip into conversation and part without ever figuring out exactly who it >>> was you talking to. >> >> The worst thing is when someone greets you by name and you haven't >> the foggiest who they are. >> > >That's the one that traps you: because they know your name, you're too >embarrassed to ask theirs (thinking wistfully that it will come to you, >but it rarely does). When only greeting each other, as opposed to conversing, their names often come to me thirty seconds after it is too late. -- Regards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE == 5 of 6 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:25 am From: Chuck Riggs On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 08:17:51 +0800, Robert Bannister <robb...@bigpond.com> wrote: >Chuck Riggs wrote: >> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:02:11 +0800, Robert Bannister >> <robb...@bigpond.com> wrote: >> >>> Chuck Riggs wrote: >>>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:41:34 GMT, the Omrud >>>> <usenet.om...@gexpungemail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Chuck Riggs wrote: >>>>>> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:56:54 +0000, Amethyst Deceiver >>>>>> <n...@lindsayendell.org.uk> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 14:44:06 +0000, Chuck Riggs <chri...@eircom.net> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 11:01:19 GMT, the Omrud >>>>>>>> <usenet.om...@gexpungemail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Amethyst Deceiver wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 22:57:16 GMT, the Omrud >>>>>>>>>> <usenet.om...@gexpungemail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The mention of Jesse reminds me that the defunct High Street chain >>>>>>>>>>>> Woolworths has been reincarnated on the Information >>>>>>>>>>>> SuperHighStreet: >>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.woolworths.co.uk/ >>>>>>>>>>> Yes, they send me invitations to free Saturday morning cinema >>>>>>>>>>> screenings. But the group must include a child, and I don't know >>>>>>>>>>> any, >>>>>>>>>>> at least not within 50 miles. >>>>>>>>>> *waves* >>>>>>>>> Ah, yes, indeed. I know him, but I doubt that he knows me. >>>>>>>> You don't really know him, then, do you? >>>>>>> The Omrud knows YoungBloke pretty well. >>>>>> Then it follows, if logic hasn't totally failed you again, that not >>>>>> only does YB know him, but that "I know him, but I doubt that he knows >>>>>> me" made little sense. I alluded to that, yesterday. >>>>> I really don't want to get into this, but to explain: >>>>> >>>>> I have met YoungBloke, but only in the presence of other adults (in one >>>>> case a large number of other adults). Considering his age (about six >>>>> now, I think), I doubt that he would remember me at all. Even if I had >>>>> met him recently, which I haven't, I doubt that he would be able to >>>>> distinguish me from a mass of other largely irrelevant adults he's been >>>>> exposed to. But I, at my advanced age, remember him clearly. >>>> We don't know which faces he can distinguish from others, but I'm sure >>>> the boy would have no trouble with the concept some members seem to be >>>> struggling with, if A knows B then B knows A, the simple focus of this >>>> discussion, AFAIK. >>> I'm not sure I follow this: are you seriously suggesting that if A knows >>> B, then B must know A? >> >> If knows means knows, not simply recognizes, then yes. > >There are many different levels of knowing, and the most common one of B >not knowing A has been pointed out by several people already: it is the >teacher-student, boss-employee, sergeant-platoon situation - all the >underlings are very familiar with every quirk and nuance of the person >above them, but he/she, in some situations, might not even remember >their name. Freshman classes in chemistry or English can be large and impersonal, but what sort of platoon sergeant doesn't know the names of his men and what sort of boss doesn't know the names of the people directly in his or her charge? -- Regards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE == 6 of 6 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:28 am From: Chuck Riggs On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:23:16 +0000, Amethyst Deceiver <n...@lindsayendell.org.uk> wrote: >On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:05:13 +0000, Chuck Riggs <chri...@eircom.net> >wrote: > >>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 19:39:57 +0000, Amethyst Deceiver >><n...@lindsayendell.org.uk> wrote: > >>>Logic has not failed me. It may have failed you. I know a lot of >>>people. They don't all know me. I know my boss's children, I know what >>>they're studying, what they like doing, how old they are, but only one >>>of them knows me. "Knowing" isn't reciprocal. >> >>If you are saying that children can't know adults, at least on the >>purely friendship level most children are capable of, I have to >>disagree with you. > >No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that "A knows B" does not >imply "B knows A". Now you're going in circles, returning to your original statement. Can we move along a little faster? -- Regards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE ============================================================================== TOPIC: James: to hold on by http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/f4e499a6a10fdf11?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:24 am From: "Bohgosity BumaskiL" I suspect "stay near". "Marius Hancu" <marius.ha...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:20f0c05b-189f-4b18-95e8-42bb934aa...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com... Hello: "to hold on by" is that to use as a reliable reference? --- [Strether talks with little Bilham about Sarah Pocock checking up on himself and setting up a confrontation] "Well then," his friend replied, "there you are; I give you my impression for what it's worth. Mrs. Pocock has SEEN, and that's to- night how she sits there. If you were to have a glimpse of her face you'd understand me. She has made up her mind—to the sound of expensive music." Strether took it freely in. "Ah then I shall have news of her." "I don't want to frighten you, but I think that likely. However," little Bilham continued, "if I'm of the least use to you to hold on by —!" Henry James, The Ambassadors, p. 283 http://www.gutenberg.org/files/432/432-h/432-h.htm ----- -- Thanks. Marius Hancu ============================================================================== TOPIC: The New York Times http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/ea67a522eab4f2a6?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:29 am From: Cheryl Garrett Wollman wrote: > In article <sa6dnanslpzsyzpwnz2dnuvz_scdn...@vex.net>, > Mark Brader <m...@vex.net> wrote: >> (I get the Toronto Star delivered, but the Saturday and Sunday papers >> actually show the title as the "Saturday Star" and the "Sunday >> Star".) > > Does the Star follow the Canadian tradition of delivering all the > preprints and other once-a-week sections in the Saturday paper, rather > than the Sunday? That always seemed odd when I was visiting Canada. > (But I was mostly visiting Quebec, since I lived in Vermont, and I > know Quebec still has more restrictive Sunday-trading laws than many > if not all of the other provinces.) > > -GAWollman > Our local paper - I forget which conglomerat it currently belongs to - used to have all that stuff in the Saturday paper back when there were papers everyday. They've eliminated the Sunday one entirely fairly recently, but it always was the thinnest paper of the week. I never though it had anything to do with Sunday trading laws, which have in any case loosened up considerably. Flyer-circulation has varied - I think they used to go out on a Saturday, but moved earlier in the week, have moved to (I think) Thursday and has now been separated entirely from the newspaper, being given out in a plastic biodegadable bag in order to be more environmentally sensitive. This change isn't going very well, because they've been neglecting to get all the flyers to people who want them while delivering them to people who've been refusing them for years for environmental reasons. -- Cheryl ============================================================================== TOPIC: M$ dominance (Was:Re: Hyphens again) http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/15a9ff1a22f7feee?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 2 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:29 am From: "James Silverton" Mike wrote on Thu, 26 Nov 2009 13:43:16 -0000: > Roland Hutchinson wrote: >> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 18:42:26 -0500, James Silverton wrote: >> >>> Nick wrote on Wed, 25 Nov 2009 21:01:46 +0000: > [...] >>> >>>> I just asked my favourite programming language to output >>>> the character corresponding to 160. All the world isn't >>>> Microsoft. Let along Microsoft's strange extended >>>> character sets: which /aren't/ ascii. >>> >>> However, at the moment, damnit, it is! 300 million users of >>> Word. >> >> Not even 5% of humanity. Very far indeed from "all the >> world". > Preseemably Msoft's star will eventually decline. But I don't quite > see what will probably bring it about. Has anybody > thought about how it will happen? Admitting all possibilities of Microsoft's decline, I wonder what fraction 300 million is of current *users of word processors*? After all, Apple runs MS Word too. I really used to like Word Perfect and not just the program but the attitude of the company when it was based in Provo. I guess WP became complacent and fell too far behind to catch up. MS is complacent too but there doesn't seem anyone else making a word processor with all their features. -- James Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not == 2 of 2 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:37 am From: Cheryl James Silverton wrote: > Mike wrote on Thu, 26 Nov 2009 13:43:16 -0000: > >> Roland Hutchinson wrote: >>> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 18:42:26 -0500, James Silverton wrote: >>> >>>> Nick wrote on Wed, 25 Nov 2009 21:01:46 +0000: >> [...] >>>> >>>>> I just asked my favourite programming language to output >>>>> the character corresponding to 160. All the world isn't >>>>> Microsoft. Let along Microsoft's strange extended >>>>> character sets: which /aren't/ ascii. >>>> >>>> However, at the moment, damnit, it is! 300 million users of >>>> Word. >>> >>> Not even 5% of humanity. Very far indeed from "all the >>> world". > >> Preseemably Msoft's star will eventually decline. But I don't quite >> see what will probably bring it about. Has anybody >> thought about how it will happen? > > Admitting all possibilities of Microsoft's decline, I wonder what > fraction 300 million is of current *users of word processors*? After > all, Apple runs MS Word too. I really used to like Word Perfect and not > just the program but the attitude of the company when it was based in > Provo. I guess WP became complacent and fell too far behind to catch up. > MS is complacent too but there doesn't seem anyone else making a word > processor with all their features. > > I used to be a great WP fan, but it seemed to me that it was becoming more and more like Word, including doing things that made WP worse - I seem to recall an extremely annoying revamp of the WP equation editor. Then I took a job in a place that insisted on MS Office, and eventually switched to Open Office at home when my WP got too antiquated and my latest computer a bit better, so I haven't kept up with WP developments since then. I still sometimes miss reveal codes. Proper reveal codes, not what Word sort of does and calls reveal codes. -- Cheryl ============================================================================== TOPIC: James: for two days more http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/98edd83cf1a2a473?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:04 am From: Marius Hancu On Nov 26, 6:14 am, "CDB" <bellema...@sympatico.ca> wrote: > > My reading of the beginning is that the Pococks have _again_ > > rescheduled their leaving Paris, deciding to be around for two more > > days. Is that OK? > > If so.the use of "again" is puzzling. Have you seen anything that > suggests they had gone away and then returned for a short while? > > > --- > > There they were yet again, accordingly, for two days more; when > > Strether, on being, at Mrs. Pocock's hotel, ushered into that lady's > > salon, found himself at first assuming a mistake on the part of the > > servant who had introduced him and retired. I know what you mean, but no. They seem to have come to Paris and stayed around until leaving for Alps at the end of their stay. My reading is they've repeatedly postponed their leaving Paris. Thanks. Marius Hancu ============================================================================== TOPIC: a usage of 'to hear' http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/65e1715196d9b221?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 2 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:34 am From: contrex On 26 Nov, 01:17, "Palia" <pa...@nulle.com> wrote: > I do not > understand really the "which" that seems to precede the sentences of > Preserved Killick. Again I ask, is this regional or a style of the era? I believe it is a style of the era. It is not, as far I know, used now here in England. == 2 of 2 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 5:49 am From: contrex On 26 Nov, 01:17, "Palia" <pa...@nulle.com> wrote: > Thankyou contrex. I am reading the third in the serial (Mauritius Command) > and I find them most stimulating. The style seems appropriate, from my small > knowledge of English. I have familiarity with Jane Austen and some Dickens > and the tenor sounds to be similar (but much more exciting!) I do not > understand really the "which" that seems to precede the sentences of > Preserved Killick. Again I ask, is this regional or a style of the era? > > Thankyou. I have wondered about this myself. I believe it is a style of the era. ============================================================================== TOPIC: James: she should like to see him not http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/24329ca0e9d241ac?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:15 am From: Marius Hancu On Nov 26, 6:17 am, "CDB" <bellema...@sympatico.ca> wrote: > > "she should like to see him not" > > is a light threat, isn't it? > > I would say it's a defiant dismissal of the possibility. Indirect > speech for what she's thinking: "I'd like to see him not treat me > handsomely!" The idiom is most often found with "try", in response to > a threat -- "Really? I'd like to see you try." I suppose, in a > sense, that it can be seen as a counter-threat. > > The idea is either that she would enjoy punishing him for it (your > threat) or that such an outcome would be so unlikely as to be an > interesting sight. OK. Thanks. Marius Hancu ============================================================================== TOPIC: Reading the book after watching the film http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/365f3aa12f441f18?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:44 am From: Chuck Riggs On 25 Nov 2009 18:09:30 GMT, "John Varela" <oldla...@verizon.net> wrote: >On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:54:30 UTC, Chuck Riggs <chri...@eircom.net> >wrote: > >> On 24 Nov 2009 20:45:50 GMT, "John Varela" <oldla...@verizon.net> >> wrote: >> >> >On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:51:11 UTC, Hatunen <hatu...@cox.net> wrote: >> > >> >> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:41:46 +0000, Chuck Riggs >> >> <chri...@eircom.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> >The liberated Southern belle of our day doesn't have to go through >> >> >what Scarlet did. >> >> >As for your callous "tinker's dam" comment, the old South was, in many >> >> >ways, a glorious age that was doomed as soon as the South seceded from >> >> >the Union. >> >> >> >> A glorious age if you were a slaveholding southern planter or a >> >> cotton or slave dealer. >> >> >> >> >Perhaps it was doomed anyway, for it was built on an almost >> >> >endless supply of cheap slave labour to bring in the cotton crop, an >> >> >inhuman practice on many farms. >> >> >> >> Or, in some areas, the tobacco crop. >> > >> >Sugar cane was the man-killer, especially in the West Indies. >> >> I'm sure it was, but tobacco was the bigger cash crop, especially in >> Virginia, wasn't it? > >Certainly that was true early on. I don't think there ever was much >cotton-growing in Virginia, nor tobacco grown south of North >Carolina. That surely has to do with climate. When I think about substantial tobacco farms, Roanoke and Raleigh come to mind for some reason. I've seen it growing, which is an impressive sight, but I don't remember exactly where. >We have a neighbor who is originally from Mississippi. A couple of >summers ago he grew a few cotton plants near his front door. Nobody >knew what they were. I understand there is typically very little cotton on each plant. Highly labour-intensive at picking time, for that reason. -- Regards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE ============================================================================== TOPIC: James: provide for your marriage http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/3988035984a4f95c?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:12 am From: Marius Hancu On Nov 26, 7:05 am, "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <m...@peterduncanson.net> wrote: > >"To provide for a marriage" > >does it imply here providing both: > >- the bride > >- the financial means? > > To me it is the financial means. > > OED: > > provide, v. > > III. To supply someone; to equip with the necessary resources. > 8. intr. > b. To supply the necessary resources for a thing to happen or exist. > > 1583 B. MELBANCKE Philotimus sig. P4v, Your father in his life time > did not meanely provide for your marriage. > > The father presumably set aside money to pay for the marriage. Yes, but in this case he's not the father of the bride and is making the go-between between the youths too ... so I thought it's perhaps both. > > > >----- > >[After finding that Chad isn't marriage material for the time being, > >Strether wants to arrange the marriage of Bilham with Mamie] > > >"Oh precisely! But he needn't marry at all—I'm at any rate not obliged > >to provide for it. Whereas in your case I rather feel that I AM." > > >Little Bilham was amused. "Obliged to provide for my marrying?" > > >"Yes—after all I've done to you!" > > >The young man weighed it. "Have you done as much as that?" > > >"Well," said Strether, thus challenged, "of course I must remember > >what you've also done to ME. We may perhaps call it square. But all > >the same," he went on, "I wish awfully you'd marry Mamie Pocock > >yourself." Thanks. Marius Hancu ============================================================================== TOPIC: "Gotten" in NZEng? http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/e7d4cca23f99e484?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 3 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:40 am From: "Bohgosity BumaskiL" I had a British English teacher for two or three years. He identified "Got" as the main one that is a problem -- said it was not a word. There is Jean Chretien's famously awkward "It is getting [to be] a joke". If it were typical English to use "becoming" in place of three words, then a word that can also serve as a synonym for "received" would not be a problem in print, too. Bottom line is that if you can avoid it in print (outside of quotations, of course), then do so. _______ Barium: What you do if CPR fails. == 2 of 3 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:47 am From: "Bohgosity BumaskiL" "Robert Bannister" <robb...@bigpond.com> wrote in message news:7n629nf3jdn6...@mid.individual.net... > Peter Moylan wrote: >> Eric Walker wrote: >>> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 12:50:51 +1030, annily wrote: >>> >>> [...] >>> >>>> I'm still resisting. I've never liked "gotten". >>> >>> In AmEng there is something of a distinction between "got" and >>> "gotten", with the latter usually signifying the result of a process: >>> >>> >>> I've gotten two tickets for tonight's show. [I have reached this >>> state.] >>> >>> I've got two tickets for tonight's show. [I am in this state. >> >> This second example - saying "I've got" to mean "I have" - caused my >> school teachers to tell us "Never say 'got'". I know this only through >> hindsight, because the reason was never explained to us. For a long time >> I thought there was a blanket ban on the verb "get". >> > > There was (in my school in England). We weren't allowed to write "It was > getting dark". "Darkness was gathering" is another way. "My space was gaining darkness" is more literal. == 3 of 3 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:57 am From: "Bohgosity BumaskiL" "James Hogg" <jas.h...@goutmail.com> wrote in message news:heleob$gc...@news.eternal-september.org... > John Holmes wrote: >> Peter Moylan wrote: >>> HVS wrote: >>>> Just returned from visiting family in NZ, and saw a few AUE-worthy >>>> things over there. One of them was the use of "gotten" in a weekend >>>> profile piece, purportedly written by a New >>>> Zealand TV sports announcer in her early 40 -- a (roller) speed-skater >>>> who, from the text, was clearly born, raised, and has lived her life in >>>> NZ. >>>> >>>> My NZ-born wife certainly didn't grow up using "gotten", so has it been >>>> naturalised in NZ? (I can find it in numerous NZ sources, but can't >>>> tell where the writers come from.) >>> >>> I can't answer for NZ, but I can testify that "gotten" is now common in >>> Australia, despite being a mark of illiteracy in my youth. I blame it on >>> the fact that 70% of our newspapers are owned >>> by an American. >>> >>> "Blame" is perhaps the wrong word. I've gotten used to using it myself. >> >> I think "gotten" has been around at some level for a long time in AusE >> despite the efforts of teachers. I can remember hearing it from >> quite old people who must have been born ca 1900. It seems to be a >> distinct minority who say it and nobody else uses it at all. Perhaps >> a family thing, and I thought it maight be families from Irish >> stock, but maybe not. Maybe it came over during the gold rush. >> >> In the SETIS database I see it used back to the 1840s, and later from >> writers such as Rolf Bodrewood and Henry Handel Richardson. See if this >> link works: >> >> http://tinyurl.com/yk5wl85 points to: >> http://setis.library.usyd.edu.au/pubotbin/ot2www-ozlit?specfile=%2Fusr%2Fot%2Fwww%2Fozlit%2Fozlitbin%2Fozlit.o2w&query=gotten&docs=TEXT&auth=&title=&begin_year=&end_year=&sample=1-100&grouping=match >> > > The link works. Good site. > > The opposition to "gotten" is interesting. It's hardly fair to condemn > it as illiterate when every literate American uses it. What arguments do > opponents use? I have never used it and never will, and it wasn't a > problem in my school days when American films hadn't begun to exert any > great influence on our language. The teacher was busy enough correcting > other analogous en-less past participles, telling us we couldn't say "he > has hid", "she has forgot", "it has froze". I think it has to do with centrality of substitutes. A ban on "got" is similar to banning "set", which has about thirty meanings, or particular meanings of "set". The problem is that "got" is replacing core language; filling in for about three choices of verb that are better, because they are not idiom. ============================================================================== TOPIC: i wish i can do... http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/3a1a6ab7742a512e?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:46 am From: "Richard Chambers" "chance" asked > What do yo mkae of 'I wish I can do...' repeated in the citation as > follows? > > http://www.ammado.com/company/ammado-asia-pacific/videos/2272 > This appears to be Asian-Pacific English for "I would like to be able to ...". Richard Chambers Leeds UK. ============================================================================== TOPIC: Tailgating http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/991f3e4866805238?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:51 am From: Chuck Riggs On 25 Nov 2009 18:28:11 GMT, "John Varela" <oldla...@verizon.net> wrote: >On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 15:02:41 UTC, Chuck Riggs <chri...@eircom.net> >wrote: > >> On 24 Nov 2009 20:45:56 GMT, "John Varela" <oldla...@verizon.net> >> wrote: >> >> >On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:33:00 UTC, Chuck Riggs <chri...@eircom.net> >> >wrote: >> >> How about those Redskins? >> > >> >Dallas beat 'em again. Yay! Next week, Philadelphia, then New >> >Orleans (10-0). >> >> "How about those Redskins?" was a rhetorical question said with some >> excitement in the late sixties, as best I can recall, that expressed >> amazement over how well the team was playing compared to earlier years >> when their record was dismal. > >As it is this year: 3 and 7, just entering the tough part of their >schedule. For this season only, would it be wise to switch my allegiance to the Patriots? When I left the D.C. area I became a Patriots fan, once I was settled in Maine. -- Regards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE ============================================================================== TOPIC: Synecdoche [WAS: Mark Twain on Henry James] http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/143d181531969235?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:52 am From: "Richard Chambers" James Hogg wrote > Skitt wrote: > >> When I see the word "synedoche", I still mentally pronounce it as >> "'sinnek 'doushe". I've never actually said the word. > > I felt the need to write a verse to serve as a pmneumonic:* > > When composing works of music, to begin with you select a key; > That applies whether you live in Lisdoonvarna or Schenectady. > You don't have to kill the patient to perform an appendectomy: > When you take a "pars pro toto" you are using a synecdoche. > > *a means to assist respiration and memory simultaneously That's no good. You haven't told us how to pronounce "pmneumonic". Richard Chambers Leeds UK. ============================================================================== TOPIC: singular they (Re: Textfyre Games) http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/7e70f1085ac4e6c5?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:53 am From: "Peter T. Daniels" On Nov 26, 7:51 am, "Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle...@removethisyahoo.co.uk> wrote: > Peter T. Daniels wrote: > > On Nov 24, 2:31 pm, "Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle...@removethisyahoo.co.uk> > > wrote: > [...] > >> Of course I'm open to evidence to the contrary. > > > I'm still waiting for an example of "some Latin infinitives" that > > "_can_ be split." > > My apologies: I presumed you knew Latin. There are infinitives > consisting of separate words. For example, the future infinitive of > _amo_ is made up of its future participle and the present infinitive of > _sum_: thus, _amaturus esse_. So it's a sort of "courtesy label" to call the phrase "an infinitive." > Latin word order is notoriously flexible, especially in verse, so there > would, it seems, have been no difficulty in "splitting" one of these. Except, it seems, for Latin-speakers. > But, frustratingly, I can't think of an example from literature. Thank you. > (Interestingly, the Latin verb for _to be_ itself actually has one of > these two-word future infinitives and an older one-word form. I don't > know when or even whether the other verbs lost single-word future > infinitives.) ============================================================================== TOPIC: People I have virtually met. http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/e5e0239d2da8ef5e?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 6:55 am From: Chuck Riggs On 25 Nov 2009 17:49:56 GMT, "John Varela" <oldla...@verizon.net> wrote: >On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 02:24:30 UTC, Peter Moylan <gro.naly...@retep> >wrote: > >> >> >> Some time ago I was reading an article that said that some plant species >> could go extinct because of this sort of thing. The pollinating insects >> have to turn up at the right time, and so on. This "seasons arriving >> early" change, which I think is happening all around the world, could >> cause the relevant species to get out of synchronism. >> >> Hmm, I've just realised that I don't recall seeing a coral flame tree >> flowering this year. That's not normally something one would miss noticing. > >And it must be spring in Virginia because I just brought in a >blossom from a confused rhododendron. Beautiful blossoms, aren't they? Rhododendron and azalea bushes were all around my house in Kensington, Maryland. -- Regards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE ============================================================================== TOPIC: Wireless (cordless) keyboard/mice http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/143656b7956fe26a?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Thurs, Nov 26 2009 7:14 am From: Steve Hayes On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 23:31:59 +1100, Peter Moylan <gro.naly...@retep> wrote: >At present the dominant idea seems to be "We can't figure out how to >design anything, so how about _you_ work out what to do with the extra >mouse buttons and all that unnecessary extra crap on your keyboard." I've often wondered which idiot decided to put the function keys on top of the keyboard and then called it "enhanced". It was ergonomically crippled, and slowed down things like word processing significantly. Nowadays, of course, things are slowed down by the operating system as much as by anything else, so it doesn't matter. Some programs ran faster on an 8 Mhz machine (8088 8-bit processor) than they do on a 32 or 64 bit one with speeds over a Gigaherz. There's a story that the QWERTY keyboard was designed to slow down typists so the keys wouldn't jam. And I wonder if it was for a similar reason that they put the function keys on top -- to slow down typists to cope with an ever-slower operating system running on ever-faster processors. -- Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk ============================================================================== You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "alt.usage.english" group. To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english?hl=en To unsubscribe from this group, send email to alt.usage.english+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com To change the way you get mail from this group, visit: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/subscribe?hl=en To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to ab...@googlegroups.com ============================================================================== Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "socialistas idiotas, maniqueístas, nilistas, ortodoxos e retardados." group. To post to this group, send email to sociali...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to socialismo+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/socialismo?hl=en.
