HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cwilson@gssec.bt.co.uk (Colin Wilson)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Accent and Dialect, the politics there
Date: 5 Nov 92 13:05:26 GMT
Organization: BT

In article <1d6amaINNbi2@grapevine.EBay.Sun.COM>, martin.baines@uk.sun.com (Martin Baines - Sun UK - SE Manager Cambridge) writes:
|> 
|> As linguistic assertion is one of the most common things to
|> happen in newly independent countries, I expect that if
|> Scotland ever did become independent the "Scottish Language"
|> would be promoted vigorously, until then I'll join Matthew
|> in his view that it's a pointless arguement.
|> 

If you believe that the debate over the status of Scots is pointless,
then that is probably - I would respectfully suggest - because you have
no personal stake in the issue. For some of us, however, things are
different.

I would like to be able to use my own language freely in public and
professional life. I would like to be able to read daily newspapers
printed in it. I would like to be able to see and hear a full variety
of radio and TV programming in it, as opposed to the present situation
in which the use of Scots is almost totally confined to comedy. If I
ever have children, I would like them to be educated to be articulate
and literate in their own language, and to know its literature - some
of which is internationally respected - instead of the process of
self-education that I am having to undergo in the limited time
available as an adult.

I don't want to, and don't see why I should have to, wait for a
political separation between Scotland and England for all this,
especially as there is no certainty that such a separation will ever
happen. That is why, for me and others, this is a debate that is far
from pointless.

On the other hand, it could be argued that any debate in this
particular forum is pointless, as it is unlikely to change anything.
Either way, if that is how you see it, then you are under no compulsion
to take part.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:15550 alt.folklore.urban:27972
From: mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban
Subject: Re: Anglican vs C of E
Date: 10 Nov 92 10:20:34 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London, UK.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban
>Which leads us too arguably the longest word in the english language.
>
>Antidisestablishmentarialism.
                         ^

Although part of the aim of encouraging this thread is to see
who can get to use this word first, it has to be a legitimate use,
not a self-referential one. Anyway, the "l" should be "n". So,
no you haven't won.

Matthew Huntbach
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: How to insult a Brit (yet again)
Date: 10 Nov 92 10:13:41 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London, UK.

From: pjd@unislc.uucp (Priscilla Davidson)
>A British woman living in the area wrote to take exception to a column
>that described British food as "swill." (I think that was the word.)
>She closed the letter with this:  "As we Brits would say, . . . ."
>                                         ^^^^^
>Do you think she's been living among the 'Merkuns too long?

I saw the word "Brit" used the other day in the headline of a
British tabloid newspaper (I hasten to say that I wsn't reading
the thing, just noticed it when someone else was reading it
next to me on the train). Like several other words, it's use is
probably encouraged by being short and easy to fit in tabloid
headlines.

Matthew Huntbach
From: jac54@cas.org
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Split soc.culture.british
Date: 12 Nov 92 11:47:01 GMT
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio

In article <1992Nov12.024913.11452@netcom.com> sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller) writes:
>In article <1992Nov11.205506.29648@rdg.dec.com> cockburn@edieng.enet.dec.com (Craig Cockburn) writes:
>>
>>The volume of messages in this group is getting very large - has
>>anyone considered splitting the group?
>>
>
>Which anyone do you think would be doing this considering?  You're
>in this group as much as anyone, have *you* seen signs of anyone
>considering "splitting" (how does one do this, one wonders) this
>group?
>
>Yours mitotically, or is that meiotically,
>sue
>

	Meiotically, this is a reduction division.


	Alec
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: rhaller@ns.uoregon.edu (Rich Haller)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: s.c.b FAQ (was: An astonishing Guy)
Date: 5 Nov 92 21:12:41 GMT
Article-I.D.: rhaller.rhaller-051192131050
Followup-To: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban
Distribution: world
Organization: University of Oregon
NNTP-Posting-Host: rhaller.cc.uoregon.edu

In article <Bx81st.1n0@unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU>,
streater@unixjr.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Tim Streater) wrote:

> lack of Bill 'O Rights, Constitution etc. Should be part of the s.c.b FAQ,

What s.c.b FAQ? Was I out selling the pound short when one was posted?

-Rich Haller
From: gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Rule Britannia
Date: 6 Nov 92 21:34:52 GMT
Reply-To: gdb15@cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK

In article <1992Nov6.131357.25739@rdg.dec.com> cockburn@edieng.enet.dec.com (Craig Cockburn) writes:
>
>Another simple question:
>	Did the Tories get an absolute majority of all the votes in the
>	last General Election?
>
>Simple answer: No. 
>
>Does this minority of votes cast for them give them a
>mandate to govern with an absolute majority in the house of commons?

No, you're asking the wrong question.  We all know it *does*, because
that's how the British electoral system works.  The question is
whether it *should*.

--
Guy Barry, University of Cambridge | Phone: +44 (0)223 334757 
Computer Laboratory                | Fax: +44 (0)223 334678
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street  | JANET: Guy.Barry@uk.ac.cam.cl 
Cambridge CB2 3QG, England, UK     | Internet: Guy.Barry@cl.cam.ac.uk
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Health Care (was Re: Salaries+cost of living in UK)
From: ace@kryton.UUCP (Catherine Beckstead)
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 92 10:19:03 PST
Organization: Paradox Alley F&SF BBS 805-492-8789

smckinty@sunicnc.France.Sun.COM (Steve McKinty - Sun ICNC) writes:

> In article <1992Nov2.120440.26775@cas.org>, jac54@cas.org () writes:
> > 	Our insurance runs $600 a month.  Our employer, in this case
> > 	it's the Lady Wife's (Civil Service), picks up 90% of this.
> > 	This is only because the civil service is a large enough body
> > 	to negotiate good plans.
> 
> $600 a month?  Ouch. I assume you're in the US, what does treatment
> cost, say per day in an average private hospital?

The average stay in a private hospital, at least here in California, is
about 1000 dollars a day.  That doesn't include your doctor's fee, any
surgury you might have had, or a pharmacy bill.  Now, the usual insurance
plan will cover about 80% of that minus some sort of deductable.  The higher
the premiums you pay the lower your deductable.  If you have an HMO, Health
Maintence Organization, usually the best kind of insurance you can get, it 
will probably cover a bit more.  Now, to give you an idea of the problems
that we are facing in insurance costs in the United States, my parents are
retired, but not yet of the age to recieve MediCare, they must be 62 for that
my mother is only 60.  So they must insure themselves, they pay over 500
dollars a month to get a plan with a 5000 dollar deductable, and pays only
80% after the deductable is met.  So if they need to visit the doctor they
must pay for it all themselves, the insurence is only if something catostropic
happens.  This high cost is due to their age, and the fact that they must
pay for individual plans, because they are not connected with an employeer
that has a group plan.  Many other older people are in the same boat,
however they may not have the savings to live on to pay 500 dollars a month
so they have no insurence whatsoever.  I used to pay 400 dollars a month for
an HMO, because my husband's company only paid his premium, and not mine or
my son's.  My husband nigotiated that the company pay for all of us instead 
of recieving a raise.  So count us among the lucky ones.  This is why
health care in the United States does need reform, and does need to be
nationalized, too many people fall through the cracks of our health care
system.   I'm sorry if I've been long winded on the problems of American
health care, and I'm sure this has nothing to do with culture.british, and
yes I got a little carried away.  I suppose follow-ups should go to
soc.culture.usa.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Catherine Beckstead                    ace@kryton.uucp
"Do you want to argue with a can of deodorant that registers
NINE on the Richter scale?"        --Ace, in "Dragonfire"
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:15459 alt.folklore.urban:27823
From: nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban
Subject: Re: Anglican vs C of E
Date: 9 Nov 92 16:49:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.BxGK23.1qv.1
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
Originator: nickh@VOILA.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU

In article <BxG4MK.B1r@cck.coventry.ac.uk> cmh004@cck.coventry.ac.uk (Dave) writes:

   [...] I think there is a Anglican church in USA and most other
   ex-colonies of the British Empire.

The Episcopal Church in the USA is a part of the Anglican Communion.

Nick Haines nickh@cmu.edu
From: A.Grant@ucs.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Viloence in british military schools (Help for anthro. study)
Date: 9 Nov 92 17:48:07 GMT
Organization: University of Cambridge

In article <1992Nov9.143029.17635@pixel.kodak.com> dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com (Dave Jones) writes:
>Private schools run along military lines, in imitation of the real
>Academies, (with some of the inmates presumably being groomed for said
>Academies) are an unusual feature of the US landscape.  To the best of
>my knowledge they have no official sanction, nor do they necessarily boast
>arsenals of the sort depicted in the movie 'Taps'.

Is there anything to prevent parents sending their kids to schools run
along Survivalist or Ku Klux Klan lines?  I know that these groups run
summer camps etc., but can they be the sole source of a child's education?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: pjd@unislc.uucp (Priscilla Davidson)
Subject: Re: How to insult a Brit (yet again)
Organization: Unisys Corporation SLC
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 16:44:42 GMT

The Salt Lake Tribune (Utah, USA) had an interesting letter in the
November 9 edition.

A British woman living in the area wrote to take exception to a column
that described British food as "swill." (I think that was the word.)
She closed the letter with this:  "As we Brits would say, . . . ."
                                         ^^^^^
Do you think she's been living among the 'Merkuns too long?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: arevalo@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Subject: Anyone interested??
Reply-To: arevalo@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Organization: Brandeis University
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 09:53:31 GMT

Hello,

	My girlfriend and I are going to England (London) next
week. I'd like to know if anyone is interested in showing us
around. Clubs, Pubs, and anything else that's worth seeing
or being at. We'd like to meet people (males or females).

About us....

Me - Male, 25 yrs old, Latin American
Her- 23 yrs old, American
We like to do just about anything. But we are on a tight budget
so it can't be really expensive....

Bill
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: riordanm@cs.tcd.ie (Mark Riordan)
Subject: Re: Religion & Morality (was Re: Can the Prime Minster be Catholic?)
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin (Computer Science)
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 09:38:51 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.140440.21793@sei.cmu.edu> firth@sei.cmu.edu (Robert Firth) writes:
>In article <1992Nov11.094033.13734@osf.org> sp@osf.org (Simon Patience) writes:
>
>>France currently allows no interference of religion in either government
>>or education. I don't see the fabric of society collapsing around me here.
>>Basically you are talking complete crap.
>
>Is this the same France that Edmund Burke wrote about?  The one that
>enthroned the 'Goddess of Reason' as her supreme deity?  The one that
>spawned the Terror and the Committee of Public Safety?  The same
>France that gave us the Directorate, the Consulate, the Empire, and
>twenty years of war, at the end of which she was drafting fifteen
>year old boys to face the guns?
>
>Nah, must be somewhere else entirely.

No I think it seems to be the same place but possibly a different
time.

MARK


-- 
--
| riordanm@cs.tcd.ie	Mark Riordan, MIPS Project		|
|			Computer Science Dept. Trinity College	|
| 			Dublin 2, Ireland			|
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,soc.culture.canada
From: godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov (LAURENCE GODFREY)
Subject: Re: In your school?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Organization: Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 23:42:00 GMT

In article <dhalliwe.721084988@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca>, userDHAL@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (David Halli writes...
>godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov (LAURENCE GODFREY) writes:
> 
>>I quit my job at NRC after a row with them.  You infer that it concerned the
>>quality of my work, but for the record it did not.  I was not SENT back from
>>Canaa - on the contrary I resigned from NRC immediately after they had
>>renewed my contract.  I wonder if that is clear enough for you.
> 
>   I understood quite clearly that you had quit at NRC. My only intention was
>to infer that I was quite glad you were gone from Canada. I apologise for
>any unintended offense.

Oh gee, I'm sorry if my presence in Canada upset you Dave.  It's much better
not to have people with views that differ from yours littering up the
country, right?

Laurence

> 
>>I don't accept your strange ideas about class at British universities.  What
>>you suggest does not happen at any of the universities I have been associated
>>with.
> 
>   I don't accept your strange ideas about Canada. What you suggest does 
>not happen at at any of the universities I have been associated with.
> 
> 
> 
>Dave Halliwell
>Department of Geography
>University of Alberta
>Edmonton, Alberta
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:15474 alt.folklore.urban:27850
From: A.Grant@ucs.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban
Subject: Re: Anglican vs C of E
Date: 9 Nov 92 18:43:48 GMT
Organization: University of Cambridge

In article <1992Nov9.172623.21884@athena.cs.uga.edu> wells@athena.cs.uga.edu (Scott Wells) writes:
>I don't believe this. In my book, any church whose hierarchs are
>Lords, and which recieves state money is the state church. Freedom and
>toleration are not the same thing, which is why Americans should be
>proud of (and defend) the non-extablishment clause of the First
>Amendment.

You are confusing government with parliament. In fact the Lords Spiritual
often oppose the government of the day on social policy. There is a good
argument for having _some_ religious representation in the government, and
unless you pick the single blandest, most neutral and moderate group, where
do you stop?  Earth Goddess worshippers?  David Icke?

As a whole, the C of E is pretty ecumenical - nobody seriously feels 
oppressed by its established status. Nobody, for example, is prevented from
leaving the country to engage in activities incompatible with C of E 
doctrine (unlike the situation in Ireland). There is no British legislation
that derives from specifically C of E doctrine, and very little that 
derives from Christian doctrine.

The churches in Britain, through social and charitable work, subsidise the 
government. Where do you get the idea that C of E priests are state 
employees?
  
>Religious freedom and the non-interference of government is a serious
>matter.

The fact that many Americans do not consider the Constitution an adequate 
safeguard against religious intolerance is one reason why they have 
just rejected the Republican Party.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: achin@math.tamu.edu (Andrew Chin)
Subject: Ethnic Chinese groups
Originator: achin@math
Organization: Dept of Mathematics, Texas A&M University
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 01:06:14 GMT


Are there any organizations in the UK for the British-born,
ethnically-Chinese community?  I'm not talking about the
Chinatown organizations in London and Manchester, although
I suppose they could supply some pointers--I'm looking for
more established generations of British Chinese.

Thanks for any help.
.
-- 
Andrew Chin    Dept. of Math.    Texas A&M U.    College Station, TX 77843
achin@math.tamu.edu   Probably not TAMU's exact opinions.   (409) 845-0261
                * Fighting racism is not a special interest *
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines)
Subject: Re: Private Uni's
Originator: nickh@VOILA.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
	<1992Nov6.103222.3273@dcs.qmw.ac.uk> <27812@castle.ed.ac.uk>
	<CC.92Nov6141908@arran.dcs.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 20:03:47 GMT

Chris Cooke writes:

   M P Taylor writes:

      Matthew Huntbach writes:

      >Oxford and Cambridge. In fact these two are not very typical of
      >the rest, they have a lot of peculiarities due to being the
      >only ones founded centuries ago.
      >
      Oxford and Cambridge are NOT the *only* ones founded centuries ago.

      Durham, Bath, Bristol to name but 3 English ones. As for other British
      then how about St Andrews, Glasgow and Edinburgh?

   The University of Edinburgh is 409 years old, and (I seem to remember that)
   it's the youngest of the four old Scottish Universities of St. Andrews,
   Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Glasgow.

Which still makes them all substantially younger than either Oxford
or (even) Cambridge.

Nick
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban
From: tds@hoserve.att.com (Tony DeSimone)
Subject: Re: An astonishing Guy
Reply-To: tds@hoserve.att.com (Tony DeSimone)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 01:15:50 GMT
	<1dad6jINNl0c@fido.asd.sgi.com> <1992Nov5.203543.5140@igor.tamri.com>

>>>>> On Thu, 5 Nov 92 20:35:43 GMT, donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin) said:

Don> In article <1dad6jINNl0c@fido.asd.sgi.com> livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com
Don> (Jon Livesey) writes:
>
>Very few Americnas know that chunks of their own Bill of Rights
>is inspired by, and in some cases quoted from, the English Bill.
>
>Notable exceptions are the gun nuts, who know that it refers to
>a right to bear arms, but who quote it incorrectly, since they 
>miss out the bit about "subject to law".

Don> 1. What constitutes a "gun nut".
Don> 2. Maybe the English version says "subject to law" but the American
Don>    Bill of Rights does not.

No, it doesn't say ``subject to law,'' but what could have been meant
by the phrase ``A well-regulated militia?''
From: gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Accent and Dialect, the politics there
Date: 6 Nov 92 16:11:42 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

You Britons' strife over language is mirrored in the U.S. and Canada
too.  Everyone wants to preserve their mother tongue.  But what about 
the other aspiration that's been around  since the tower of Babel 
of one day becoming free from the bonds of language differences?  
Not long ago world or at least regional unity through a common language 
was an ideal of much liberal thinking.  

But nowadays everyone wants to return to their tribal roots.  Sure, 
each language has its own unique genius and its contribution to make 
to human culture.  So did Attic Greek.  Granted the importance of 
keeping each living language alive, the existence in the world of 
several culture-spanning languages should be acknowledged for the 
opportunity it provides for the non-racial dimension of humanity.  
Besides English those languages include High German, Spanish, Russian, 
and Mandarin Chinese, to name a few.  The history of their universality
is written in blood and strife, but the universality is a fact now.

Of course there is French.  But the Canadians, who when they speak English
can hardly be discerned from middle Americans, except when they try to
shedule something, are tearing themselves apart with their linguistic
strife. In the U.S. we have a conflict between two of the major universal 
languages, and it is also tearing us apart.  Our politicians, especially 
in California, have spoken in their wisdom to make bi-lingualism mandatory
for Spanish speaking children, and in the process they have ruined many 
lives by locking them out from the chance to master the English language.

This isn't exactly your problem, I suppose, but it reflects the same kind
of tug-of-war between ethnic and global human consciousness.  Things were
better in the late Roman empire.  By the time of Christ most of the peoples
of the Mediterranean part of it had allowed their native tongues to be 
displaced by a common language: Greek.

Gerry Palo

"Yes, I know we haven't used it for years"
73237.2006@compuserve.com
gerrypalo@aol.com