There are 25 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1.1. Re: Article Case Marking Without Personal Articles
From: Padraic Brown
1.2. Re: Article Case Marking Without Personal Articles
From: R A Brown
2.1. Onomastics and lost languages (was: Article Case Marking Without Per
From: Jörg Rhiemeier
3a. Chat: Stop SOPA?
From: Koppa Dasao
3b. Re: Chat: Stop SOPA?
From: MorphemeAddict
3c. Re: Chat: Stop SOPA?
From: Koppa Dasao
3d. Re: Chat: Stop SOPA?
From: Michael Everson
3e. Re: Chat: Stop SOPA?
From: David Peterson
3f. Re: Chat: Stop SOPA?
From: Cosman246
3g. Re: Chat: Stop SOPA?
From: Daniel Bowman
4a. Meta: Signatures...
From: Koppa Dasao
4b. Re: Meta: Signatures...
From: Henrik Theiling
4c. Re: Meta: Signatures...
From: Daniel Bowman
4d. Re: Meta: Signatures...
From: Cosman246
4e. Re: Meta: Signatures...
From: Ph. D.
4f. Re: Meta: Signatures...
From: Lee
4g. Re: Meta: Signatures...
From: Lee
4h. Re: Meta: Signatures...
From: Sai
5.1. Re: Articles
From: Douglas Koller
6a. OT: ZBB offline for now
From: Carsten Becker
6b. Re: OT: ZBB offline for now
From: David Peterson
6c. Re: OT: ZBB offline for now
From: And Rosta
7. Lonely Planet Guides
From: Sam Stutter
8a. OT: testing
From: Lee
8b. Re: OT: testing
From: George Corley
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1.1. Re: Article Case Marking Without Personal Articles
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 8:20 am ((PST))
--- On Wed, 1/18/12, R A Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> > But I'm not sure what you mean by "gulf" here? Christians
> > have a long tradition of naming children after saints and
> > biblical heroes. Hence, "Samuel" and "Delilah" and
> > "John". They're all absolutely meaningless in English
>
> And while some ancient Greek personal names are clearly
> meaningful, e.g. Philippos "horse-lover", other were
> simply
> derived from names of deities, e.g. Demetrios, Dionysios,
> Arrtemisios etc. whose names were meaningless in Greek.
But my dear sir! You must admit to a certain advantage where the meanings
of Greek names are concerned! ;)
I think most people (non-Greeks, anyway) probably do not know what Greek
names mean any more than Hebrew or English names. I guess much would
depend on how well preserved the name is. "Taylor" and "Smith" are still
pretty transparent in English, for example.
> > -- but so are "Bertram", "William" and "Alfred". That
> is,
> > they all have meanings that can be discovered by study
> of
> > their etymologies, but on their surface, they have no
> > immediate meaning as words.
>
> Yep - we do know the etymologies of them; some of the
> ancient Greek deities, e.g. Zeus, had names of known IE
> origin, others did not, e.g. Artemis, and their
> etymologies are unknown.
Yep.
> > The thing about Christian names is that all the
> biblical
> > heroes have foreign names (Hebrew or Aramaic) and
> many
> > saints' names are also foreign (Latin, Greek,
> Semitic,
> > etc.)
>
> Yep - and among the ancient Romans, while some praenomina
> (given names) were clearly meaningful, e.g. Quīn(c)tus,
> Septimus, some were questionable. e.g. the the Mār- of
> Mārcus _may_ be related to that of Mārs (Mārtis,) other
> names were meaningless, e.g. Aulus, Gnaeues, Gaius.
Interesting that a name like Tertius should be better understood than the
much more common John! As for those names being meaningless -- I'm not
sure I'd accept that. Like our own modern "meaningless" names, I wonder
if there aren't a couple layers of earlier etymology that are now lost to
us. I'm sure that at some point in the distant past, those names had some
meaning.
> >> With Jesus, the case is, who did the speakers of
> the
> >> language get the word "Jesus" from and how did
> they
> >> pronounce it? Presumably the first missionaries
> or
> >> early Christians wouldn't have been too hot on
> >> linguistics?
> >
> > Possibly not --
>
> The point is that earliest Christian missionaries didn't
> need to be great linguists as their message spread
> throughout a part of the world where Koine Greek was the
> lingua franca.
Absolutely. And if Christianity had remained in the Mediterranean basin,
they never would have had to go beyond Koine and perhaps Latin in the
west. But sooner or later, you're going to wind up in lands where Koine is
nòt the lingua franca -- Armenia, Ethiopia, Persia, China. Christianity
got to all those places (among others) in relatively short order.
> But clearly when Christianity took root, as it did at a
> very
> early date, in Armenia, Egypt (Coptic speaking) and
> Ethiopia
> missionary work was done in the native language.
Yep!
> > but in their defense, Christian missionaries *have*
> been
> > historically interested in linguistics. To the point
> of
> > learning local languages in order to evangelise and
> to
> > the point of translating the Bible into numerous
> > languages.
>
> Certainly; and much of early European knowledge of Chinese
> was furnished by the Jesuit missionaries to that country,
> some of whom were clearly most interested in linguistics.
Yes.
> Ray
Padraic
Messages in this topic (29)
________________________________________________________________________
1.2. Re: Article Case Marking Without Personal Articles
Posted by: "R A Brown" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 8:34 am ((PST))
On 18/01/2012 16:20, Padraic Brown wrote:
> --- On Wed, 1/18/12, R A Brown wrote:
[snip]
>>
>> Yep - and among the ancient Romans, while some
>> praenomina (given names) were clearly meaningful, e.g.
>> Quīn(c)tus, Septimus, some were questionable. e.g. the
>> the Mār- of Mārcus _may_ be related to that of Mārs
>> (Mārtis,) other names were meaningless, e.g. Aulus,
>> Gnaeues, Gaius.
>
> Interesting that a name like Tertius should be better
> understood than the much more common John!
:-)
> As for those names being meaningless -- I'm not sure I'd
> accept that. Like our own modern "meaningless" names, I
> wonder if there aren't a couple layers of earlier
> etymology that are now lost to us. I'm sure that at some
> point in the distant past, those names had some meaning.
Yes, yes - I'm sure that originally the names did have a
meaning; what I meant is that they were meaningless in Latin
and hence to the Romans. They were just "names.' But at
some time in the dim and distant past, from whatever source
the names came into Latin, they would have had a meaning.
But like so many of our own personal names, the meanings
were long lost.
--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
There's none too old to learn.
[WELSH PROVERB]
Messages in this topic (29)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2.1. Onomastics and lost languages (was: Article Case Marking Without Per
Posted by: "Jörg Rhiemeier" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 9:26 am ((PST))
Hallo conlangers!
On Wednesday 18 January 2012 09:27:45 R A Brown wrote:
> On 17/01/2012 22:11, Padraic Brown wrote:
> > --- On Tue, 1/17/12, R A Brown wrote:
> [snip]
>
> >> The name is derived from Old English _Leodridan_<--
> >> leode (people) + rida- (ride) = place where people can
> >> ride through the river; and indeed it was a place where
> >> there was a ford across River Mole.
> >
> > I guess the ancients thought "Moleford" didn't have a
> > sufficiently dignified ring to it!
>
> But whether the river was called by any such name back then
> is a matter of controversy.
>
> The usual explanation is that "Mole" (a tributary of the
> Thames) is a back formation from Molesey, the name of a town
> on the Thames near where the Mole flows into the Thames.
> The name means "Mul's island" or "Mul's meadow" - and as for
> the proper name "Mul" that's anyone's guess ;)
>
> But some hold that the name is derived from Latin _mola_
> "mill" because of the watermills that once existed along it;
> others say it is named after the little borrowing critter,
> because some of the flow diverts under the North Downs at
> Box Hill through 'Swallow Holes', i.e. the river 'burrows
> underground' to reappear again.
>
> Personally I thing the latter two explanations are fanciful
> and the back-formation from Molesey the most likely - as
> does also Oxford English Dictionary of Place Names :)
What this and many other examples show is that you have to
work from the oldest known forms of the names, and cannot
trust the "obvious" meanings of them. But you must not
take recourse to languages that were never spoken in the
relevant area! This is something which some people tend
to forget, such as Theo Vennemann who sees "Vasconic"
(i.e., a hypothetical ancient language family of which
Basque is the last survivor) everywhere in central and
western Europe; many of his etymologies are bogus on the
Basque side, being based on ghost words or on words also
found in Romance languages where he reverses the generally
accepted direction of borrowing (i.e., these words are
Romance loanwords in Basque, not "Vasconic" loanwords in
Romance). And on the side of the names discussed, Vennemann
also makes some egregious mistakes, such as discarding the
oldest known forms in favour of younger forms which happen
to fit his hypothesis better, assuming that cities are usually
older than villages and thus more likely to bear "Vasconic"
names (in fact, cities are often *younger* than the
surrounding villages) or contriving "Vasconic" etymologies for
such (seemingly) transparent names as _Ebersberg_ or
_Bischofsheim_ (of course, such names may be products of
folk etymology).
The problem, of course, is that we do not know the original
meanings of the names. There are few exceptions, where a
particular element correlates with a salient feature of the
places named thus. An example are several central European
place names containing the element */hal/, all of which
denote (often former) salt production sites. This element
has hence been conjectured to mean 'salt' - but in which
language? Celtic has been proposed; but the shift of
initial */s/ to /h/ is attested only in Brythonic. Greek
has been seriously proposed, but it has never been spoken
in central Europe! Some scholars have given up and now
derive it from PIE *ḱel- 'slope' whose o-grade indeed gives
*hal- in Germanic (e.g., in German _Halde_ 'heap') - but
why then does it correlate so closely with salt production?
It seems that we have the word for 'salt' in an unknown
substratum language here, and the similarity to PIE *sh2al-
may indicate that the language in question was related to
Indo-European.
> >> Some Celtic names may, of course, themselves have been
> >> recast by folk etymology to give meaning to an earlier
> >> pre-IE name :)
> >
> > Enter Old Albic! ;)
>
> Exactly what I thought when I wrote that :)
Of course ;) But I am very aware that Old Albic is merely a
fictional portrait of what such a pre-IE language of Britain
may have looked like. We know almost nothing about the
languages spoken in pre-Celtic Britain. What we can guess is
that perhaps:
1. The languages had VSO word order.
2. The languages had phonologies conducive to the development
of initial consonant mutations.
3. The languages left traces not only in geographical names,
but also in the lexicon of the Insular Celtic languages.
4. The languages were related to other substratum languages on
the continent (on evidence of the British Isles taking part
in the "Old European Hydronymy").
5. The languages were more distantly related to Indo-European,
branching off from the latter before the rise of ablaut
(from seeming sound correspondences between "Old European"
river names and IE roots that have meanings which seem
reasonable for river names).
All of these points are, however, uncertain, with the uncertainty
increasing down the list. With Old Albic, I assume that all five
points are true; but in fact, all of them could be false!
When doing both research on prehistoric languages and invention
of fictional prehistoric languages, you must never forget which
hat you are wearing at the moment, and restrict the flow of
information from the former to the latter - otherwise you are
doing a crackpot job!
> [...]
>
> On 17/01/2012 23:18, [email protected] wrote:
> > R A Brown wrote:
> >> Yep. The problem in the US is compounded further by
> >> the mere multiplication of source languages -- English
> >> names, French, Spanish, a whole host of Native names,
> >> Dutch names, probably some Russian and German ones
> >> too. (And, at least I believe, Nativ"names" "It's a
> >> Bloody River You Stupid White Git" or "Don't These
> >> Metal Men Have Mountains Where They Come From?")
>
> No - I never wrote that!!
>
> But I have no doubt it's true - the same sort of thing
> applies in many other parts of the world. When i was at
> school i the 1950s there was lake in Africa called 'Nyasa'
> and a country called 'Nyasaland' - both are known as Malawi
> now. I recall being told that 'nyasa' simply meant "lake" in
> the local language and wasn't a name at all, just a common noun.
>
> Much the same had on in this island centuries ago; we now
> have at least two rivers called 'Avon' which is only an
> Anglicization of Welsh _afon_ "river".
A famous example of a misunderstanding is _Yucatán_, which is
said to come from an expression of 'I don't understand' in an
indigenous language (which a Spanish explorer got as a reply
when asking a native, in Spanish, for the name of the country).
I don't know, though, whether this story is true.
--
... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/index.html
"Bêsel asa Êm, a Êm atha cvanthal a cvanth atha Êmel." - SiM 1:1
Messages in this topic (29)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Chat: Stop SOPA?
Posted by: "Koppa Dasao" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 12:23 pm ((PST))
Today Internet stands against its greatest threat since its inception.
Internet was designed by US military scientists to be impervious to
nuclear attacks by being able to restructure itself in an instant.
Internet was design as a tool for keeping vital defense communication
open even after a nuclear attack on US soil would have knocked out
every other type of communication. It was military in conception,
military in application and military in usage. It was NEVER intended
as a tool of free speech. But as the scientists at Los Alamos learned
when their "gadget" was used to wipe out Hiroshima and Nagasaki, what
scientists make are rarely used for it's intended purpose.
At first the scientist involved in developing atomic weaponry join to
force Adolf Hitler into submission, either by showing him that his
enemies got there first, or if necessary, by nuking Berlin. Then they
got bitten by the scientifically bug. "How the Hell do you break the
unbreakable, the atom, in such a way that it would release the power
of a burning Sun on the surface of Earth"?
The question now is, "how do you keep free speech available if the
official Internet returns to military, or at least military-like,
control?"
SOPA threatens the Net by removing, by force, IP-adresses belonging to
sites disliked by the Beings of Power, from the more or less
centralized lists of known Internet sites (DNS). Sites that more often
than not promotes free speech. Sites that communicates propaganda
against the Beings of Power. Sites that makes intellectual properties
available to the masses, sites that often strengthen the marked for
licensed products. The proponents of SOPA claims that these unguided,
uncontrolled, all these free sites threatens the economy. Perhaps
they're right. But then newspapers threatens the economy. Same goes
for TV, in an even greater amount than newspapers and Internet. TV
offers intellectual properties to everyone for only the connection fee
and the cost of a TV-set. You don't pay for what you get, just as on
the Internet. And there are more people watching TV than there are
people using Internet.
As opponents to SOPA gladly will tell you, when a site's IP-address is
removed from the lists (the DNS), your access to the site is removed.
The site may still be operational, but you just cannot access it
anymore. The opponents regard this loss of contact as a method to
control information on the Internet, and they may be right in some
ways, but the truth is IT ONLY HIDES INFORMATION FROM THOSE WHO FOLLOW
THE OFFICIAL RULEBOOK. However, you are NOT YET required to follow the
official ICANN rulebook, at least not in most countries connected to
the Internet.
ICANN's Internet, the "official" Internet isn't the only "Internet"
out there, however. Internet isn't! There do not exist an Internet out
there, there never has and there NEVER will. Internet is a collections
of smaller and larger interconnected networks of computers, that may
or may not speak the same language. ICANN's Internet may be the most
popular, the largest of the interconnected networks out there in
Cyberspace, but it's not the only one. Other Internets out there are
AlterNIC, New.net, Open Root Server Network, OpenNIC, Tor (The Onion
Router) and Freenet. While Tor and Freenet are underground networks
running through the other Internets, the former nets are Internets
operating side by side with ICANN's. However, due to ICANN's
popularity, all but OpenNIC are defunct. (If you got OpenNIC the
address http://grep.geek/ will make sense, if you're on ICANN you'll
get nothing.)
To the proponents of SOPA, only ICANN's Internet exists, so SOPA won't
remove addresses from OpenNIC, Tor or Freenet. If SOPA goes through, a
lot of Internet users will lose some parts of their "Internet", but
those with knowledge will teach them to access sites outside ICANN's
Internet. Parts of Internet may become unavailable for a short while,
but, as with how a nuclear attack may brake up Internet for a while,
it will mend itself. That's what it's designed to do!
SOPA won't kill Internet!
Koppa Dasao
___
2012 - In the west: The year of the dictators; in the Muslim world:
The year of democracy.
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
3b. Re: Chat: Stop SOPA?
Posted by: "MorphemeAddict" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 12:31 pm ((PST))
I think you missed the whole point of the opposition to SOPA/PIPA.
stevo
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Koppa Dasao <[email protected]> wrote:
> Today Internet stands against its greatest threat since its inception.
> Internet was designed by US military scientists to be impervious to
> nuclear attacks by being able to restructure itself in an instant.
> Internet was design as a tool for keeping vital defense communication
> open even after a nuclear attack on US soil would have knocked out
> every other type of communication. It was military in conception,
> military in application and military in usage. It was NEVER intended
> as a tool of free speech. But as the scientists at Los Alamos learned
> when their "gadget" was used to wipe out Hiroshima and Nagasaki, what
> scientists make are rarely used for it's intended purpose.
>
> At first the scientist involved in developing atomic weaponry join to
> force Adolf Hitler into submission, either by showing him that his
> enemies got there first, or if necessary, by nuking Berlin. Then they
> got bitten by the scientifically bug. "How the Hell do you break the
> unbreakable, the atom, in such a way that it would release the power
> of a burning Sun on the surface of Earth"?
> The question now is, "how do you keep free speech available if the
> official Internet returns to military, or at least military-like,
> control?"
>
> SOPA threatens the Net by removing, by force, IP-adresses belonging to
> sites disliked by the Beings of Power, from the more or less
> centralized lists of known Internet sites (DNS). Sites that more often
> than not promotes free speech. Sites that communicates propaganda
> against the Beings of Power. Sites that makes intellectual properties
> available to the masses, sites that often strengthen the marked for
> licensed products. The proponents of SOPA claims that these unguided,
> uncontrolled, all these free sites threatens the economy. Perhaps
> they're right. But then newspapers threatens the economy. Same goes
> for TV, in an even greater amount than newspapers and Internet. TV
> offers intellectual properties to everyone for only the connection fee
> and the cost of a TV-set. You don't pay for what you get, just as on
> the Internet. And there are more people watching TV than there are
> people using Internet.
>
> As opponents to SOPA gladly will tell you, when a site's IP-address is
> removed from the lists (the DNS), your access to the site is removed.
> The site may still be operational, but you just cannot access it
> anymore. The opponents regard this loss of contact as a method to
> control information on the Internet, and they may be right in some
> ways, but the truth is IT ONLY HIDES INFORMATION FROM THOSE WHO FOLLOW
> THE OFFICIAL RULEBOOK. However, you are NOT YET required to follow the
> official ICANN rulebook, at least not in most countries connected to
> the Internet.
>
> ICANN's Internet, the "official" Internet isn't the only "Internet"
> out there, however. Internet isn't! There do not exist an Internet out
> there, there never has and there NEVER will. Internet is a collections
> of smaller and larger interconnected networks of computers, that may
> or may not speak the same language. ICANN's Internet may be the most
> popular, the largest of the interconnected networks out there in
> Cyberspace, but it's not the only one. Other Internets out there are
> AlterNIC, New.net, Open Root Server Network, OpenNIC, Tor (The Onion
> Router) and Freenet. While Tor and Freenet are underground networks
> running through the other Internets, the former nets are Internets
> operating side by side with ICANN's. However, due to ICANN's
> popularity, all but OpenNIC are defunct. (If you got OpenNIC the
> address http://grep.geek/ will make sense, if you're on ICANN you'll
> get nothing.)
>
> To the proponents of SOPA, only ICANN's Internet exists, so SOPA won't
> remove addresses from OpenNIC, Tor or Freenet. If SOPA goes through, a
> lot of Internet users will lose some parts of their "Internet", but
> those with knowledge will teach them to access sites outside ICANN's
> Internet. Parts of Internet may become unavailable for a short while,
> but, as with how a nuclear attack may brake up Internet for a while,
> it will mend itself. That's what it's designed to do!
>
> SOPA won't kill Internet!
>
>
> Koppa Dasao
> ___
> 2012 - In the west: The year of the dictators; in the Muslim world:
> The year of democracy.
>
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
3c. Re: Chat: Stop SOPA?
Posted by: "Koppa Dasao" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 12:34 pm ((PST))
Then teach me, if you know better.
Koppa Dasao
___
2012 - In the west: The year of the dictators; in the Muslim world:
The year of democracy.
2012/1/18 MorphemeAddict <[email protected]>:
> I think you missed the whole point of the opposition to SOPA/PIPA.
>
> stevo
>
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Koppa Dasao <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Today Internet stands against its greatest threat since its inception.
>> Internet was designed by US military scientists to be impervious to
>> nuclear attacks by being able to restructure itself in an instant.
>> Internet was design as a tool for keeping vital defense communication
>> open even after a nuclear attack on US soil would have knocked out
>> every other type of communication. It was military in conception,
>> military in application and military in usage. It was NEVER intended
>> as a tool of free speech. But as the scientists at Los Alamos learned
>> when their "gadget" was used to wipe out Hiroshima and Nagasaki, what
>> scientists make are rarely used for it's intended purpose.
>>
>> At first the scientist involved in developing atomic weaponry join to
>> force Adolf Hitler into submission, either by showing him that his
>> enemies got there first, or if necessary, by nuking Berlin. Then they
>> got bitten by the scientifically bug. "How the Hell do you break the
>> unbreakable, the atom, in such a way that it would release the power
>> of a burning Sun on the surface of Earth"?
>> The question now is, "how do you keep free speech available if the
>> official Internet returns to military, or at least military-like,
>> control?"
>>
>> SOPA threatens the Net by removing, by force, IP-adresses belonging to
>> sites disliked by the Beings of Power, from the more or less
>> centralized lists of known Internet sites (DNS). Sites that more often
>> than not promotes free speech. Sites that communicates propaganda
>> against the Beings of Power. Sites that makes intellectual properties
>> available to the masses, sites that often strengthen the marked for
>> licensed products. The proponents of SOPA claims that these unguided,
>> uncontrolled, all these free sites threatens the economy. Perhaps
>> they're right. But then newspapers threatens the economy. Same goes
>> for TV, in an even greater amount than newspapers and Internet. TV
>> offers intellectual properties to everyone for only the connection fee
>> and the cost of a TV-set. You don't pay for what you get, just as on
>> the Internet. And there are more people watching TV than there are
>> people using Internet.
>>
>> As opponents to SOPA gladly will tell you, when a site's IP-address is
>> removed from the lists (the DNS), your access to the site is removed.
>> The site may still be operational, but you just cannot access it
>> anymore. The opponents regard this loss of contact as a method to
>> control information on the Internet, and they may be right in some
>> ways, but the truth is IT ONLY HIDES INFORMATION FROM THOSE WHO FOLLOW
>> THE OFFICIAL RULEBOOK. However, you are NOT YET required to follow the
>> official ICANN rulebook, at least not in most countries connected to
>> the Internet.
>>
>> ICANN's Internet, the "official" Internet isn't the only "Internet"
>> out there, however. Internet isn't! There do not exist an Internet out
>> there, there never has and there NEVER will. Internet is a collections
>> of smaller and larger interconnected networks of computers, that may
>> or may not speak the same language. ICANN's Internet may be the most
>> popular, the largest of the interconnected networks out there in
>> Cyberspace, but it's not the only one. Other Internets out there are
>> AlterNIC, New.net, Open Root Server Network, OpenNIC, Tor (The Onion
>> Router) and Freenet. While Tor and Freenet are underground networks
>> running through the other Internets, the former nets are Internets
>> operating side by side with ICANN's. However, due to ICANN's
>> popularity, all but OpenNIC are defunct. (If you got OpenNIC the
>> address http://grep.geek/ will make sense, if you're on ICANN you'll
>> get nothing.)
>>
>> To the proponents of SOPA, only ICANN's Internet exists, so SOPA won't
>> remove addresses from OpenNIC, Tor or Freenet. If SOPA goes through, a
>> lot of Internet users will lose some parts of their "Internet", but
>> those with knowledge will teach them to access sites outside ICANN's
>> Internet. Parts of Internet may become unavailable for a short while,
>> but, as with how a nuclear attack may brake up Internet for a while,
>> it will mend itself. That's what it's designed to do!
>>
>> SOPA won't kill Internet!
>>
>>
>> Koppa Dasao
>> ___
>> 2012 - In the west: The year of the dictators; in the Muslim world:
>> The year of democracy.
>>
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
3d. Re: Chat: Stop SOPA?
Posted by: "Michael Everson" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 12:42 pm ((PST))
On 18 Jan 2012, at 20:34, Koppa Dasao wrote:
> Then teach me, if you know better.
Please don't. This is way off topic.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
3e. Re: Chat: Stop SOPA?
Posted by: "David Peterson" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 12:50 pm ((PST))
On Jan 18, 2012, at 12:42 PM, Michael Everson wrote:
> On 18 Jan 2012, at 20:34, Koppa Dasao wrote:
>
>> Then teach me, if you know better.
>
> Please don't. This is way off topic.
I have to agree. The whole point for having a no cross/no crown policy is so
that we don't get into arguments about religion or politics. I understand that
this whole issue has portent for the internet as a whole, and that this is an
internet-based forum, but the reason the Conlang list has existed as long as it
has without too many major incidents is because we specifically avoid topics
like this.
David Peterson
LCS President
[email protected]
www.conlang.org
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
3f. Re: Chat: Stop SOPA?
Posted by: "Cosman246" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 12:54 pm ((PST))
The "Internet was designed to stop a nuclear attack" thing was a myth
propagated by a RAND corporation memo. It was designed to facilitate
research
-Cosman246
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
3g. Re: Chat: Stop SOPA?
Posted by: "Daniel Bowman" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 3:15 pm ((PST))
Though I have strong opinions on this subject, I have to add my voice to
the consensus and ask that we refrain from discussing SOPA on the CONLANG
list. This thread clearly falls in the No Cross-No Crown policy of this
list
2012/1/18 Koppa Dasao <[email protected]>
> Today Internet stands against its greatest threat since its inception.
> Internet was designed by US military scientists to be impervious to
> nuclear attacks by being able to restructure itself in an instant.
> Internet was design as a tool for keeping vital defense communication
> open even after a nuclear attack on US soil would have knocked out
> every other type of communication. It was military in conception,
> military in application and military in usage. It was NEVER intended
> as a tool of free speech. But as the scientists at Los Alamos learned
> when their "gadget" was used to wipe out Hiroshima and Nagasaki, what
> scientists make are rarely used for it's intended purpose.
>
> At first the scientist involved in developing atomic weaponry join to
> force Adolf Hitler into submission, either by showing him that his
> enemies got there first, or if necessary, by nuking Berlin. Then they
> got bitten by the scientifically bug. "How the Hell do you break the
> unbreakable, the atom, in such a way that it would release the power
> of a burning Sun on the surface of Earth"?
> The question now is, "how do you keep free speech available if the
> official Internet returns to military, or at least military-like,
> control?"
>
> SOPA threatens the Net by removing, by force, IP-adresses belonging to
> sites disliked by the Beings of Power, from the more or less
> centralized lists of known Internet sites (DNS). Sites that more often
> than not promotes free speech. Sites that communicates propaganda
> against the Beings of Power. Sites that makes intellectual properties
> available to the masses, sites that often strengthen the marked for
> licensed products. The proponents of SOPA claims that these unguided,
> uncontrolled, all these free sites threatens the economy. Perhaps
> they're right. But then newspapers threatens the economy. Same goes
> for TV, in an even greater amount than newspapers and Internet. TV
> offers intellectual properties to everyone for only the connection fee
> and the cost of a TV-set. You don't pay for what you get, just as on
> the Internet. And there are more people watching TV than there are
> people using Internet.
>
> As opponents to SOPA gladly will tell you, when a site's IP-address is
> removed from the lists (the DNS), your access to the site is removed.
> The site may still be operational, but you just cannot access it
> anymore. The opponents regard this loss of contact as a method to
> control information on the Internet, and they may be right in some
> ways, but the truth is IT ONLY HIDES INFORMATION FROM THOSE WHO FOLLOW
> THE OFFICIAL RULEBOOK. However, you are NOT YET required to follow the
> official ICANN rulebook, at least not in most countries connected to
> the Internet.
>
> ICANN's Internet, the "official" Internet isn't the only "Internet"
> out there, however. Internet isn't! There do not exist an Internet out
> there, there never has and there NEVER will. Internet is a collections
> of smaller and larger interconnected networks of computers, that may
> or may not speak the same language. ICANN's Internet may be the most
> popular, the largest of the interconnected networks out there in
> Cyberspace, but it's not the only one. Other Internets out there are
> AlterNIC, New.net, Open Root Server Network, OpenNIC, Tor (The Onion
> Router) and Freenet. While Tor and Freenet are underground networks
> running through the other Internets, the former nets are Internets
> operating side by side with ICANN's. However, due to ICANN's
> popularity, all but OpenNIC are defunct. (If you got OpenNIC the
> address http://grep.geek/ will make sense, if you're on ICANN you'll
> get nothing.)
>
> To the proponents of SOPA, only ICANN's Internet exists, so SOPA won't
> remove addresses from OpenNIC, Tor or Freenet. If SOPA goes through, a
> lot of Internet users will lose some parts of their "Internet", but
> those with knowledge will teach them to access sites outside ICANN's
> Internet. Parts of Internet may become unavailable for a short while,
> but, as with how a nuclear attack may brake up Internet for a while,
> it will mend itself. That's what it's designed to do!
>
> SOPA won't kill Internet!
>
>
> Koppa Dasao
> ___
> 2012 - In the west: The year of the dictators; in the Muslim world:
> The year of democracy.
>
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. Meta: Signatures...
Posted by: "Koppa Dasao" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 1:36 pm ((PST))
This may be my last post as some people wants to kill me off for my
changing signatures. If that happens, I just want to say in public
that it only proves my current signature.
Koppa Dasao
___
2012 - In the west: The year of the dictators; in the Muslim world:
The year of democracy.
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
4b. Re: Meta: Signatures...
Posted by: "Henrik Theiling" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 1:48 pm ((PST))
Hello Conlang-L!
Koppa Dasao wrote:
>This may be my last post as some people wants to kill me off for my
>changing signatures. If that happens, I just want to say in public
>that it only proves my current signature.
'Some people' -- that must be me. I asked Koppa to change his signature
because it violates 'no cross no crown', but got quite definite replies that
changing would be out of the question.
I put Koppa to NOPOST because he posted to the list with the unchanged
signature.
Best regards,
Henrik
(Your Benevolent Dictator)
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
4c. Re: Meta: Signatures...
Posted by: "Daniel Bowman" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 7:44 pm ((PST))
Henrik,
I certainly understand your decision. However, I just want to make clear
that, while Koppa's signature is certainly violating NCNC, his lengthy post
on SOPA was what raised a red flag for me. It is one thing to have a
political signature that goes out with all emails; it is another to
directly post to the list with a political statement.
Does this make sense to the community? Or do we find that political (or
religious) signatures edge too close to NCNC? Where should we draw the
line?
Regards,
Danny
2012/1/18 Henrik Theiling <[email protected]>
> Hello Conlang-L!
>
> Koppa Dasao wrote:
> >This may be my last post as some people wants to kill me off for my
> >changing signatures. If that happens, I just want to say in public
> >that it only proves my current signature.
>
> 'Some people' -- that must be me. I asked Koppa to change his signature
> because it violates 'no cross no crown', but got quite definite replies
> that
> changing would be out of the question.
>
> I put Koppa to NOPOST because he posted to the list with the unchanged
> signature.
>
> Best regards,
> Henrik
> (Your Benevolent Dictator)
>
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
4d. Re: Meta: Signatures...
Posted by: "Cosman246" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 7:53 pm ((PST))
Would a signature promoting a joke religion (Church of Emacs, Kibology,
etc.) be allowed?
-Cosman246
"Blacker than a moonless night
Hotter and more bitter than Hell itself...
That is coffee."
— Godot, Phoenix Wright Ace Attorney: Trials and Tribulations.
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 19:44, Daniel Bowman <[email protected]>wrote:
> Henrik,
>
> I certainly understand your decision. However, I just want to make clear
> that, while Koppa's signature is certainly violating NCNC, his lengthy post
> on SOPA was what raised a red flag for me. It is one thing to have a
> political signature that goes out with all emails; it is another to
> directly post to the list with a political statement.
>
> Does this make sense to the community? Or do we find that political (or
> religious) signatures edge too close to NCNC? Where should we draw the
> line?
>
> Regards,
>
> Danny
>
> 2012/1/18 Henrik Theiling <[email protected]>
>
> > Hello Conlang-L!
> >
> > Koppa Dasao wrote:
> > >This may be my last post as some people wants to kill me off for my
> > >changing signatures. If that happens, I just want to say in public
> > >that it only proves my current signature.
> >
> > 'Some people' -- that must be me. I asked Koppa to change his signature
> > because it violates 'no cross no crown', but got quite definite replies
> > that
> > changing would be out of the question.
> >
> > I put Koppa to NOPOST because he posted to the list with the unchanged
> > signature.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Henrik
> > (Your Benevolent Dictator)
> >
>
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
4e. Re: Meta: Signatures...
Posted by: "Ph. D." [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 8:22 pm ((PST))
I don't mind political/religious/atheist signatures
on a member's postings, as long as we don't get
into a discussion of the viewpoints expressed.
The SOPA posting definitely violated NCNC.
--Ph. D.
Daniel Bowman wrote:
> Henrik,
>
> I certainly understand your decision. However, I just want to make clear
> that, while Koppa's signature is certainly violating NCNC, his lengthy post
> on SOPA was what raised a red flag for me. It is one thing to have a
> political signature that goes out with all emails; it is another to
> directly post to the list with a political statement.
>
> Does this make sense to the community? Or do we find that political (or
> religious) signatures edge too close to NCNC? Where should we draw the
> line?
>
> Regards,
>
> Danny
>
> 2012/1/18 Henrik Theiling<[email protected]>
>
>> Hello Conlang-L!
>>
>> Koppa Dasao wrote:
>>> This may be my last post as some people wants to kill me off for my
>>> changing signatures. If that happens, I just want to say in public
>>> that it only proves my current signature.
>> 'Some people' -- that must be me. I asked Koppa to change his signature
>> because it violates 'no cross no crown', but got quite definite replies
>> that
>> changing would be out of the question.
>>
>> I put Koppa to NOPOST because he posted to the list with the unchanged
>> signature.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Henrik
>> (Your Benevolent Dictator)
>>
>
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
4f. Re: Meta: Signatures...
Posted by: "Lee" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 8:30 pm ((PST))
Seems like as good a time as any to break in the replacement mailbox...
SOPA/PIPA, I agree too NCNC at this time.
Signatures get sticky. Is the list going to demand English translation of all
dogs written in a conlang to ensure they adhere to NCNC? It may be better to
limit them to name, rank, and URL.
Lee
________________________________
From: Daniel Bowman
Sent: 1/18/2012 9:45 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Meta: Signatures...
Henrik,
I certainly understand your decision. However, I just want to make clear
that, while Koppa's signature is certainly violating NCNC, his lengthy post
on SOPA was what raised a red flag for me. It is one thing to have a
political signature that goes out with all emails; it is another to
directly post to the list with a political statement.
Does this make sense to the community? Or do we find that political (or
religious) signatures edge too close to NCNC? Where should we draw the
line?
Regards,
Danny
2012/1/18 Henrik Theiling <[email protected]>
> Hello Conlang-L!
>
> Koppa Dasao wrote:
> >This may be my last post as some people wants to kill me off for my
> >changing signatures. If that happens, I just want to say in public
> >that it only proves my current signature.
>
> 'Some people' -- that must be me. I asked Koppa to change his signature
> because it violates 'no cross no crown', but got quite definite replies
> that
> changing would be out of the question.
>
> I put Koppa to NOPOST because he posted to the list with the unchanged
> signature.
>
> Best regards,
> Henrik
> (Your Benevolent Dictator)
>
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
4g. Re: Meta: Signatures...
Posted by: "Lee" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 8:36 pm ((PST))
And I see there is a problem with reply-to rewriting. Oy, not my night.
________________________________
From: Lee
Sent: 1/18/2012 10:23 PM
To: Lee
Subject: RE: Meta: Signatures...
Translations of dogs? Thank you, autocorrect...
Is the list going to demand English translation of all SIGNATURES written in a
conlang to ensure they adhere to NCNC?
________________________________
From: Lee
Sent: 1/18/2012 10:20 PM
To: Constructed Languages List
Subject: RE: Meta: Signatures...
Seems like as good a time as any to break in the replacement mailbox...
SOPA/PIPA, I agree too NCNC at this time.
Signatures get sticky. Is the list going to demand English translation of all
dogs written in a conlang to ensure they adhere to NCNC? It may be better to
limit them to name, rank, and URL.
Lee
________________________________
From: Daniel Bowman
Sent: 1/18/2012 9:45 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Meta: Signatures...
Henrik,
I certainly understand your decision. However, I just want to make clear
that, while Koppa's signature is certainly violating NCNC, his lengthy post
on SOPA was what raised a red flag for me. It is one thing to have a
political signature that goes out with all emails; it is another to
directly post to the list with a political statement.
Does this make sense to the community? Or do we find that political (or
religious) signatures edge too close to NCNC? Where should we draw the
line?
Regards,
Danny
2012/1/18 Henrik Theiling <[email protected]>
> Hello Conlang-L!
>
> Koppa Dasao wrote:
> >This may be my last post as some people wants to kill me off for my
> >changing signatures. If that happens, I just want to say in public
> >that it only proves my current signature.
>
> 'Some people' -- that must be me. I asked Koppa to change his signature
> because it violates 'no cross no crown', but got quite definite replies
> that
> changing would be out of the question.
>
> I put Koppa to NOPOST because he posted to the list with the unchanged
> signature.
>
> Best regards,
> Henrik
> (Your Benevolent Dictator)
>
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
4h. Re: Meta: Signatures...
Posted by: "Sai" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 9:59 pm ((PST))
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 22:52, Cosman246 <[email protected]> wrote:
> Would a signature promoting a joke religion (Church of Emacs, Kibology,
> etc.) be allowed?
What about those promoting actual religions? There's at least one list
member I can think of offhand who always signs with a Christian
blessing.
I'm an atheist (and occasional anti-theist, with regard to certain
established churches), but even so I find it fairly innocuous. IMHO
(not speaking in any way for LCS, just me) the standard should be that
*primary topics* mustn't be NCNC, but *incidental things* can be. E.g.
what I just did, signatures, subjects of translation, etc. The point
of NCNC to me is to avoid specifically *discussing* flamey issues, not
to make mere passing mention of them verboten.
- Sai
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5.1. Re: Articles
Posted by: "Douglas Koller" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 1:57 pm ((PST))
> Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2012 18:27:41 -0500
> From: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Articles
> To: [email protected]
> On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Roman Rausch <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >using articles for definiteness / etc isn't, of course, the only way to go
> > Yeah, the statement 'Russian has no articles' has always struck me as not
> > really fair without explaining that it may use word order instead:
> > VS = indefinite: _so stola upal karandash_ 'from table fell pencil' = 'A
> > pencil fell from the table'
> > SV = definite: _karandash upal so stola_ 'pencil fell from table' = 'THE
> > pencil fell from the table'
> > Despite a BA in Russian, this was never mentioned in any of my course
> work. I still find it a little unsettling. Can anyone recommend a text that
> covers this?
> stevo _Introductory Russian Grammar_ by Galina Stilman et al., Xerox College
> Publishing, Lexington, MA, 1972 (ISBN 0-536-00738-1) touches on it, but I
> wouldn't say it *covers* it. Frankly, I don't find this all *that*
> unsettling. While the article is mandatory in English, if you inverted the
> word order to "From the table there fell a pencil.", it would also lock in
> the indefiniteness. "From the table there fell the pencil." sounds patently
> wonky in my idiolect. Kou
Messages in this topic (191)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
6a. OT: ZBB offline for now
Posted by: "Carsten Becker" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 2:33 pm ((PST))
Read about why the ZBB is completely down now here it's not because of
protesting SOPA:
<http://aveneca.com/cbb/viewtopic.php?p=76277#p76277>
This forum posting on the CBB quotes Zompist's statement on the issue from
his blog and also contains a statement in reply by one of the ZBB's mods,
Salmoneus. It looks like there was some miscommunication going on, among
others, unfortunate as it is, which lead to a good deal of anger and
confusion in the past two days. Salmoneus thought that it might be good to
put up a notice on CONLANG-L as well, as people are maybe more likely to
find this message than the thread/posting on the CBB.
Cheers
Carsten/Guitarplayer
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
6b. Re: OT: ZBB offline for now
Posted by: "David Peterson" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 2:59 pm ((PST))
As a significant community portal, the LCS can (and has been able to at any
time) offer Mark zbb.conlang.org for the ZBB forum. Since spinnwebe.com was
using DreamHost, the backend would be exactly the same as it was for the most
recent incarnation of the ZBB, the only difference being that Mark Rosenfelder
himself would be the admin. As it's a community service site, the
hosting/domain would be free, and the space (both storage and bandwidth) would
be unlimited. If he's interested, I can set it up today.
David Peterson
LCS President
[email protected]
www.conlang.org
On Jan 18, 2012, at 2:32 PM, Carsten Becker wrote:
> Read about why the ZBB is completely down now here � it's not because of
> protesting SOPA:
>
> <http://aveneca.com/cbb/viewtopic.php?p=76277#p76277>
>
> This forum posting on the CBB quotes Zompist's statement on the issue from
> his blog and also contains a statement in reply by one of the ZBB's mods,
> Salmoneus. It looks like there was some miscommunication going on, among
> others, unfortunate as it is, which lead to a good deal of anger and
> confusion in the past two days. Salmoneus thought that it might be good to
> put up a notice on CONLANG-L as well, as people are maybe more likely to
> find this message than the thread/posting on the CBB.
>
> Cheers
> Carsten/Guitarplayer
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
6c. Re: OT: ZBB offline for now
Posted by: "And Rosta" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 3:14 pm ((PST))
If this came to pass, it would be a delightful irony.
On Jan 18, 2012 10:59 PM, "David Peterson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> As a significant community portal, the LCS can (and has been able to at
> any time) offer Mark zbb.conlang.org for the ZBB forum. Since
> spinnwebe.com was using DreamHost, the backend would be exactly the same
> as it was for the most recent incarnation of the ZBB, the only difference
> being that Mark Rosenfelder himself would be the admin. As it's a community
> service site, the hosting/domain would be free, and the space (both storage
> and bandwidth) would be unlimited. If he's interested, I can set it up
> today.
>
> David Peterson
> LCS President
> [email protected]
> www.conlang.org
>
> On Jan 18, 2012, at 2:32 PM, Carsten Becker wrote:
>
> > Read about why the ZBB is completely down now here � it's not because of
> > protesting SOPA:
> >
> > <http://aveneca.com/cbb/viewtopic.php?p=76277#p76277>
> >
> > This forum posting on the CBB quotes Zompist's statement on the issue
> from
> > his blog and also contains a statement in reply by one of the ZBB's mods,
> > Salmoneus. It looks like there was some miscommunication going on, among
> > others, unfortunate as it is, which lead to a good deal of anger and
> > confusion in the past two days. Salmoneus thought that it might be good
> to
> > put up a notice on CONLANG-L as well, as people are maybe more likely to
> > find this message than the thread/posting on the CBB.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Carsten/Guitarplayer
>
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
7. Lonely Planet Guides
Posted by: "Sam Stutter" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 3:26 pm ((PST))
Just been skimming through Lonely Planet guides on Amazon. 2 things spring to
mind:
1) does anyone know what gets covered in the "Language" section? I've only
managed to scrape a couple of pages from the Cuba edition. Which makes for a
good basic level Conlang test: can it state "I have altitude sickness" and "how
long can I park here?". I'm thinking of using this as a basis for a short and
friendly phrase book.
2) more importantly, the books have a good test of conculture: the 25
definitive experiences they list at the start of each edition. I've been using
this as a springboard to flesh out my concultures. I can't remember if this is
OT or not, but I'll ask anyway and wait for the Stasi. Or alternatively, I'll
ask and let it disappear :)
For those of you with developed concultures, would you be able to compile a
list of the top 25 things a tourist should experience while visiting?
Try and tie it back to conlanging if you do answer :)
Sam Stutter
[email protected]
"No e na il cu barri"
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
8a. OT: testing
Posted by: "Lee" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 8:50 pm ((PST))
1...2...3....4...
Lee
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
8b. Re: OT: testing
Posted by: "George Corley" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 18, 2012 9:14 pm ((PST))
Um, I think it worked.
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
> 1...2...3....4...
>
> Lee
Messages in this topic (2)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
