HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: object@ibmpcug.co.uk (Ken Tough)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english,connect.audit
Subject: Re: What is a GAROTTE?
Date: 7 Sep 92 17:06:38 GMT
Organization: The IBM PC User Group, UK.
X-Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author
	alone and may not represent the views of the IBM PC User Group.

In article <1992Sep07.094229.8276@raet-sh.UUCP> 
richard@raet-sh.UUCP (Richard van Denzel) writes:
>
>Is there someone who knows what kind of weapon a GAROTTE is?
>
>Please e-mail me directly, because I am not a subscriber to this newsgroup.
>
>Richard.


A favourite of the mafia, a garotte is a piece of strong cord (preferably
a piece of piano wire), with some sort of handle or grip on each end.

You simply wrap the cord or wire around the victim's neck (from behind)
and pull the ends.  Quick and easy, although the victim tends to
empty his/her bowels all over your feet.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: andrew@venus.resntl.bhp.com.au
Subject: Re: "less" vs "fewer"
Organization: BHP Research, Newcastle Laboratories
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 23:39:53 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.052006.28453@csi.uottawa.ca>, misrael@csi.uottawa.ca (Mark Israel) writes:
> In article <1992Sep8.134021.27477@Princeton.EDU>, roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig) writes:
> 
>>> I think it's valuable to distinguish "less intelligent people" from
>>> "fewer intelligent people".  "More intelligent people" is ambiguous.
>>
>> Really?  Even in a sentence?
> 
>    Sure!  If someone says "We need more intelligent people in the 
> government", I don't know whether or not he's satisfied with the 
> intelligence of anyone currently in the government.
> 
But that is exactly the point Roger was making. The context of "in the
government" makes it clear you are seeking people who are more intelligent.;-)

Andrew
From: "eliot gelwan" <eliot.gelwan@channel1.com>
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: what is a garotte?
Date: 12 Sep 92 12:16:30 EST
Reply-To: "eliot gelwan" <eliot.gelwan@channel1.com>
Distribution: alt
Organization: Channel 1 Communications

KT|In article <1992Sep07.094229.8276#raet-sh.UUCP>
KT|richard@raet-sh.UUCP (Richard van Denzel) writes:
KT|>
KT|>Is there someone who knows what kind of weapon a GAROTTE is?

Is there someone who knows what kind of weapon a dictionary is?
                   |
...eliot          -*-                  RIME: ->CHANNEL [R/O okay]
                   |               Internet: eliot.gelwan@channel1.com

---
EZ 1.39 #178 [in Brookline MA  8:50 am, Saturday 09/12/92]
--
Channel 1 (R)   Cambridge, MA
From: hermit@cats.UCSC.EDU (William R. Ward)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Improper spelling
Date: 9 Sep 92 10:53:20 GMT
	<25472@castle.ed.ac.uk>
Organization: Computing and Telecommunications Services, UCSC
NNTP-Posting-Host: am.ucsc.edu
In-reply-to: cam@castle.ed.ac.uk's message of 3 Sep 92 10:27:06 GMT

In article <25472@castle.ed.ac.uk> cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm) writes:
|In article <1992Sep2.225412.9559@hplabsz.hpl.hp.com> evan@hpl.hp.com (Evan Kirshenbaum) writes:
|>"draft" is already the usual spelling of the British "draught".

|In the UK the distinction is drawn between "draft" as in version and
|"draught" as in liquid measure or small breeze. Using "draft" for the
|lot seems just a foolish confusion leading to ambiguity.

Well, that's how we do things over on this side of the pond... The
spelling "draught" is *never* seen in America, and when it is seen
people sometimes pronounce it to rhyme with "not," not knowing what to
do with that "aught" business.

But then, the word is (I believe) used a lot less.  As a measure of
liquid, the word is only used to refer to the depth of a boat's keel;
for most other measuring-of-liquids, "depth" would be used.  For a
small breeze, the word is "draft"; same for version--but again, it's
not used that often.  When you write an essay you have "first draft,"
"second draft," etc., and formal documents might use the word to refer
to versions.  However, I believe "version" and "revision" are used
more often in situations where you might use "draft."
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: loren@bluemoon.rn.com (Loren Sims)
Subject: hedgehogs vs. porcupines
Organization: Blue Moon BBS ((614) 868-998[024])
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 04:09:31 EDT

lawe@enea.se (Lars Westin) writes:
>
>Do hedgehogs even exist in some part of USA, outside of zoological 
>gardens?
  
To my knowledge, no.  We have ground hogs (large, slow-moving burrowing
rodents, not unlike a porcupine, but without the spines, or "quills"),
but no hedgehogs.
  I am likewise unfamiliar with porcupines ever being referred to as 
'hedgehogs,'  though it is possible that people may confuse the two
simply on the basis of the spines.
                                                              -Loren

 This is from
     loren@bluemoon.rn.com
who doesn't have his (or her) own obnoxious signature yet
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: prener@watson.ibm.com (Dan Prener)
Subject: Re: Adverb placement
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 06:21:28 GMT
Distribution: usa
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center, Hawthorne, New York

In article <1992Sep12.204416.20498@sunb10.cs.uiuc.edu> pjl@sparc6.cs.uiuc.edu (Paul Lucas) writes:

>	It there a preferred (more formal) placement for adverbs?

>		A ball is arbitrarily selected.
>		A ball is selected arbitrarily.

In general there is no simple rule for the placement of adverbs.  Fowler
devotes almost five pages to the subject.

In the case above, your first choice is correct.  Fowler says

    "By *compound verb* is meant a verb made up of an auxiliary (or more than
     one) & an infinitive (without *to*) or participle.  When an adverb is to
     be used with such a verb, its normal place is between the auxiliary (or
     sometimes the first auxiliary if there are two or more) & the rest."

 
--
                                   Dan Prener (prener@watson.ibm.com)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: mikulska@crux.Princeton.EDU (Margaret Mikulska)
Subject: Re: Improper spelling
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 17:19:17 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.225412.9559@hplabsz.hpl.hp.com> evan@hpl.hp.com (Evan Kirshenbaum) writes:
>In article <92246.155543IO11412@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> <IO11412@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> writes:
>>Why do so many people (especially native speakers of English) spell
>>incorrectly the following forms:
>
>>its      for      it's
>
>is due to the fact that spelling one of them with an apostrophe and
>the other without was a really *stupid* (and, I believe, reasonably
>recent) idea, and people forget which one is supposed to take it.
>(They know that "one of those words that seems to need an apostrophe
>arbitrarily doesn't take it--I wonder if this is the one".)


Maybe it's recent, but I don't see anything stupid in this idea.

First, it's consistent: 
	he's/she's/it's
and even
	his/hers/its	(well, I'm cheating here a bit, I know)	

Second, as opposed to many words which are often misspelled (in
particular, the ie/ei words), it's trivially easy to figure out the
spelling of "its" vs. "it's": expand the contraction and see if the
sentence still makes sense.  There is nothing to forget which is which,
as long as the writer knows what s/he is writing.  If there is any
stupidity here, it's in the minds of people who write without thinking.

(I'm pretty sure that a _small_ percentage of such misspellings are 
actually typos, though.)


Margaret
mikulska@astro.princeton.edu
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: loren@bluemoon.rn.com (Loren Sims)
Subject: what's a fag?
Organization: Blue Moon BBS ((614) 868-998[024])
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 04:21:26 EDT

Gee, I'd always heard that a 'fag' was a small piece of wood used as 
kindling to start a fire, and that the common American slang usage comes
from the custom of using homosexuals *as* kindling to "make the fire hot
enough" for a witch-burning.
                                                                  -Loren

 This is from
     loren@bluemoon.rn.com
who doesn't have his (or her) own obnoxious signature yet
From: baril@bnr.ca
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: garfinkeling
Date: 11 Sep 92 22:33:27 GMT
Reply-To: baril@bnr.ca
Distribution: world
Organization: Bell-Northern Research

I am Usenet neophyte and I think I've just found my favo(u)rite 'rec'
newsgroup!  Gender neutral pronouns, will vs would, have went... I must _of_
:-) died and gone to heaven!

I've used the word 'garfink(e)ling' for years to describe various rhetorical
tactics used to evade difficult questions, especially those which attempt to
avoid a specific answer by moving the discussion to a more general theoretical
level.  For example, the question "Do you love me?"  might be answered, "What
is love?" [Sound familiar?]

I've yet to find it in any dictionary.  Any suggestions?

David Baril             "Expect the worst and you won't be disappointed"
baril@bnr.ca
Ottawa                    It's not their fault!                               
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: pjl@sparc6.cs.uiuc.edu (Paul Lucas)
Subject: Adverb placement
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 20:44:16 GMT

	It there a preferred (more formal) placement for adverbs?

		A ball is arbitrarily selected.
		A ball is selected arbitrarily.

	Thanks in advance.
-- 
	- Paul J. Lucas				University of Illinois	
	  AT&T Bell Laboratories		at Urbana-Champaign
	  Naperville, IL			pjl@cs.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: dian@arpeggio.gg.caltech.edu (Dian  De Sha)
Subject: Re: "less" vs "fewer"
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Distribution: all
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 20:34:40 GMT

In <1992Sep10.052006.28453@csi.uottawa.ca> misrael@csi.uottawa.ca (Mark Israel) writes:

>In article <1992Sep8.134021.27477@Princeton.EDU>, roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig) writes:

>>> I think it's valuable to distinguish "less intelligent people" from
>>> "fewer intelligent people".  "More intelligent people" is ambiguous.
>>
>> Really?  Even in a sentence?

>   Sure!  If someone says "We need more intelligent people in the 
>government", I don't know whether or not he's satisfied with the 
>intelligence of anyone currently in the government.

That's where the handy hyphen plays its part:

"More intelligent people" is ambiguous, but "more-intelligent people" is not.
____
Dian
From: crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: No smegma please, we're American
Date: 8 Sep 92 20:20:51 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

Re: "fag" and "faggot":

During a visit to London a few years ago, my friends took me to the
supermarket.  I was perusing the frozen foods when I came upon a TV-
dinner-size box with the words "Three frozen faggots in gravy" on it.
It took me a while to calm down.  


-- 
Lauren Crawford  //  crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu

I believe we are on the irreversible trend toward more freedom and
democracy -- but that could change.   -- J. Danforth Quayle  
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: andrew@venus.resntl.bhp.com.au
Subject: Re: Literafisms
Organization: BHP Research, Newcastle Laboratories
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 05:16:29 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.171127.15004@nmsu.edu>, sabbott@nmsu.edu (SDA) writes:
> 
> ok, here they are.  I consider the ones from literature to be true
> literafisms (yahoo, quixotic) and the ones myth or folk tales to be
> mythofisms.  Some of these are neither, hermetic is from a real
> person, Hermes Trimes____.
> 
[list deleted]
> 		            
I no longer have the original post defining the scope of this term so pardon
me if I have cast the net a little wide but here is a handful more *from the
first three letters of the alphabet*...

abigail, archibald, bacchanalian, Benjamin, Caliban, Chadband, Cimmerian,
Cincinnatus, Corydon, cupidity...

Having seen Pantagruel referred to I can't resist adding Rabelaisian.

Andrew
From: aroshwald@guvax.georgetown.edu
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Improper spellingscreen
Date: 8 Sep 92 02:42:28 -0400
Distribution: world
Organization: Georgetown University

In article <10611@scott.ed.ac.uk>, iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski) writes:
> In article <1992Sep3.030319.23129@dsuvax.dsu.edu> rolfe@dsuvax.dsu.edu (Tim Rolfe) writes:
>>In <1992Sep2.225412.9559@hplabsz.hpl.hp.com> evan@hpl.hp.com (Evan Kirshenbaum) writes:
>>>In article <92246.155543IO11412@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> <IO11412@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> writes:
>>>>Why do so many people (especially native speakers of English) spell
>>>>incorrectly the following forms:
>>
>>>>wierd    for      weird
>>
>>>is probably due to people having internalized the rule "'I' before 'E'
>>>except after 'C' [unless sounded like 'ay' as in 'neighbor' and 'weigh']".
>>
>>That's easy --- just remember that weird is . . . weird.
> 
> It is not weird.  It would be if it were the only exception from the
> weird `"i" before "e" except after "c"' rule.  But, apart from
> "weird", there is "(a)theism"/"(a)theist", "deity", "foreign", "their"
> (which many people can't distinguish from "there" anyway), all of
> which I have seen misspelt with "ie" more than once.  (See alt.atheism
> for many examples of this.)  Not what I would call a reasonable rule.

Yes, but 'weird' is the only one of these words in which the vowel
combination in question is pronounced as a single long E. Of course,
originally, this might not have been the case -- the E and the I in
weird might have been pronounced distinctly (as in 'atheist'), and
perhaps that is why it defies conventional orthographical wisdom. 
> 
> It is also weird that people insist on using "weird" in writing, even
> though they can't spell it.  They should substitute "strange", or
> "odd", or something that is easier to get right.
> 
Presumably they fail to realize that they are misspelling it.

> And I once saw "who's" (for "whose") on a plate.  Yes, it had been
> produced that way.  Sigh.
> 
Hooz plate was that?
> -- 
>  `If ye hiv ears oan yer heid - then use them tae lissen.' (The Glasgow Gospel)
> Ivan A Derzhanski   (iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk;  iad@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu)
> * Centre for Cognitive Science,  2 Buccleuch Place,  Edinburgh EH8 9LW,  UK
> * Cowan House, Pollock Halls, 18 Holyrood Park Road, Edinburgh EH16 5BD, UK
From: jerry@incc.com (Jerry Rocteur)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Less versus Fewer (supermarkets)
Summary: float in Australia
Date: 11 Sep 92 16:02:49 GMT
Organization: InCC.com Perwez Belgium

In article <1992Sep3.172021.8641@vax.oxford.ac.uk>, wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
> In article <HERMIT.92Sep2044530@am.ucsc.edu>, hermit@am.ucsc.edu (William R. Ward) writes:
> > |How about when you go to the check-out and hand the check-out
> > |operator (avoiding use of sexist pronouns) a 10 thingummy note.
> > |They reply "Have you got any less?", well they do around here,
> > |as none of the supermarkets seem to know what float is!
> > 
> > Neither do I; is "float" a Britishism for some concept with which I am
> > familiar?
> > 
> A "float" is that useful selection of coins which the till starts each day full
> of, so that the first customers can be given the correct change, and ought to
> be kept full of, so that the pound coins and 50p pieces don't run out 
> mid-morning and everyone gets a handful of 10s and 20s instead.

Float is also used in Australia, but I am sure that those who have not
worked where they are used would not know the meaning!
-- 
 __^__                                                              __^__
( ___ )------------------------------------------------------------( ___ )
 | / | Jerry Rocteur                       Email: jerry@InCC.COM    | \ |
 | / |             Independent Computer Consultants                 | \ |
 | / |--------------------------------------------------------------| \ |
 | / | This week's quote:                                           | \ |
 |___|           I think; therefore, I am confused.......           |___|
(_____)------------------------------------------------------------(_____)
   ^                                                                  ^
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Subject: Looking for PD English dictionary... 
Distribution: world
Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 22:12:11 +0000


In article <5734@mccuts.uts.mcc.ac.uk> zzassgl@uts.mcc.ac.uk writes:
>I'm looking for a PD dictionary which includes definitions and the other
>information you would normally find in a desk dictionary.  An Archie search
>using obvious keywords hasn't turned up anything. Has anyone any pointers I
>could followup?

src.doc.ic.ac.uk:dicts/DICT.Z I think, from memory.
From: murphyg@Software.Mitel.COM (Gary Murphy)
Newsgroups: alt.mindcontrol
Subject: Re: The best form of mind control
Date: 9 Sep 92 13:38:30 GMT
Followup-To: alt.mindcontrol
Organization: Applications Software II, MITEL Corporation, Kanata, Ontario,
	Canada
In-reply-to: j1moody@darwin.cc.nd.edu's message of 9 Sep 92 05:09:22 GMT

In article <j1moody-090992000903@lafmacconsultant.lafortune.lab.nd.edu> j1moody@darwin.cc.nd.edu (Humpty Dumpty) writes:

   Setting an example.

You got me!  I read every word!

--
Gary Lawrence Murphy - Gary.Murphy@software.mitel.COM - (613) 592-2122 x3709
     Unity is plural --- at minimum, two. - R. Buckminster Fuller
Newsgroups: alt.mindcontrol
From: txdv1@isuvax.iastate.edu (Angela KAY Rolling)
Subject: re: test
Reply-To: txdv1@isuvax.iastate.edu
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 22:52:15 GMT

test? what test? they both must of worked some what i was able to ignore
them.

ELF-KIN
Newsgroups: alt.mindcontrol
From: bdisney@cwis.unomaha.edu (Bridget Anne Disney)
Subject: Re: Reliable Self-Hypnosis Techniques
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 03:25:13 GMT

There are some good books that I've read that might help. One is "How to
Meditate" by Lawrence LeShan, which gives several tecniques for meditation.
Another book is "Tranquility Through Prayer". Many of us have been 
hypnotized while reciting rote prayers (especially Catholics.) When I am
especially tense or anxious, prayers work for me (15 minutes or so of the
same one). Of course, it works best because I been practicing unknowingly
for most of my life.

You can also take courses and seminars like the Silva Mind Control method,
but it really isn't necessary.    -Hope this helps. -Bridget
Newsgroups: alt.mindcontrol
From: j1moody@darwin.cc.nd.edu (Humpty Dumpty)
Subject: The best form of mind control
Followup-To: alt.mindcontrol
Organization: The Wall
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 05:09:22 GMT

Setting an example.
From: mcouch@amiganet.chi.il.us (Marc Couch)
Newsgroups: alt.autos.antique
Subject: Need Help!
Date: 9 Sep 92 09:47:34 GMT
Organization: Amiga Network Information Systems

I own a 58 Chevy Fleetside pickup truck..

I have heard of ONE PIECE fiberglass front ends available for my truck.. and I
NEED ONE MOST URGENTLY.... anyone out there know where I can order one from?

PLEASE mail me back if you can lend me some help in the right direction..

Marc Couch
Newsgroups: alt.autos.antique
From: wlsmith@valve.heart.rri.uwo.ca (Wayne Smith)
Subject: Re: data aquisition
Organization: The John P. Robarts Research Institute, London, Ontario
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 21:39:48 GMT
Keywords: 12-bit aquisition boards

In article <gans.716240453@ee.ualberta.ca> gans@ee.ualberta.ca (Kevin Gans) writes:
>Wish to finda source for 12-bit data aq. brd. w/12-bit res.;
>ADC (and less importantly DAC); one channel in (one ch. out if DAC)
>;approx. 100 kHz sampling rate for the ADC.
>				       Thank- you for your help

Would that be like the '66 Ford version (multiplexed in 3 groups of 4),
or the '57 Chrysler (straight -12)?
From: wlsmith@valve.heart.rri.uwo.ca (Wayne Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.autos.antique
Subject: Re: Junking Old Cars
Date: 15 Sep 92 23:46:00 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: The John P. Robarts Research Institute, London, Ontario

In article <1992Sep15.164556.3583@newsgate.sps.mot.com> mark@wdcwdc.sps.mot.com (Mark Shaw) writes:
>|> It seems that California will, or is considering, letting power plants
>|> buy old cars, and by junking these cars, the power plants can then
>|> exceed polution standards by an amount equal to what the old cars 
>|> would have emmited.
>
>
>Simply put,those old cars we know and love are the dirtiest emitters out
>there.  
>same pollution levels from cars.   These old cars are a problem.   And the sooner we
>realize that fact and stop reacting to someone calling "our babies ugly" will we get
>on with the real issue --- how do we limit the damage to our restoration hobby/industry
>and still effect an improvement in air quality?
>
>I would suggest that anyone interested in the topic should contact the:
>
> Restoration Industry Legislative Coalition
> 10400 Roberts Road
> Palos Hills, IL 60465
> (FAX) 708-598-4888
> Info  800-CARS-166
>
>They are trying to gather data on the industry and hobbyist impact and to propose
>alternative approaches to the problem to our government.
>
>Let's face it people:  80-90% of the population could care less if every old heap was
>taken from the road.  They see no use for them and they are becoming more and more aware
>of the environmental impact they represent.   If we want to preserve this part of
>history for ourselves, we need to act responsibly about it.   We cannot save every
>hunk of metal out there! 
>
>Besides, think about it, if you were the only person with a 1960 Chevy BelAir and
>they scraped all the others produced -- it would be worth a fortune!
>(Well, OK, maybe a 1960 Chevy BelAir was a bad example?  :-)

Some of us have 80 column screens, and editing the above is a real pain,
so I'll leave most of it intact.

It does the people of Cal. no good to take functional old cars off the road
just so their power plants can pollute and exceed federal/state standards.

Old cars will and have been leaving the road, and they don't need to go
just for the sake of the "power brokers".

Have you ever considered the polution/emmision due to the production of
a new car?  (The GM study above is self serving; it's their way to tell
the politicos to let up on new car emmissions).

The root problem is that WE HAVE TOO MANY PEOPLE!!!
If there were fewer of us, we could live like pigs, but not exceeding
the level that the environment could handle.

The reason for getting these cars off the road *may* be justified in
california, but the (above) way that they're going to do it is bogus.