HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar Mukund Mirashi)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: English English versus *American* English
Date: 30 Jul 92 04:53:04 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA

In article <1992Jul29.235645.2899@convex.com> tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen) writes:
>From the keyboard of mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar Mukund Mirashi)
>comes more drivel:
>
>(It is unbelievably offensive to have your native language berailed by 
>a foreigner whose first language is something else.)
>
>:Not if it was done by the native speakers of the language....the British.
>
>Which ones?  Again, I refer you to the Welsh, whom perhaps you have 
>never visited.  And while you're at it, go track down everyone born
>speaking something other than RP and excoriate them, too.  And have
>a nice day.

Sorry about that....I mean English specifically when I say British. 

>
>
>My, but this boy is hopelessly confused.  There's a reason we say "apple"
>with an "ae" sound instead of an "ah" -- because that's how the English
>spoke when they came here.  We still speak that language -- as native
>speakers.
>
>

               Ha ha ha...that's a laugh...you pick up ONE word and
claim that you are native speakers, just because the English and the
Americans pronounce it the same way?? Heh heh heh....bless my soul!
I too pronounce it the same way, because the English who came to my
country pronounced it the same way too! But I repeat, neither me nor
you are native speakers of the language.....simply poor facsmisiles.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Re: "This" weekend vs. "Next" weekend
Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 15:10:25 GMT

In article <1992Jul25.114012.22220@news.acns.nwu.edu> bayla@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Bayla Singer) writes:
>Losing the distinction between "this" weekend (the one immediately
>following the date of the speech) and "next" weekend (the weekend *after*
>next) is confusing -- I too come from the Noetheast US, and am used to the
>distinction.  In other parts of the US, roadsigns have confused/misdirected
>me, since I'm never sure whether "Route X next right turn" means the exit
>I'm approaching, or the one following it.  

I'm a native New Yorker, and I too will say "this weekend" for the
weekend coming up, and "next weekend" to the weekend AFTER.  However,
my usage is a little different.  On Monday morning, for instance, I would
use "this weekend" to refer to the weekend that had just taken place,
and would specify the approaching weekend with "this coming weekend."
However, by tuesday or wednesday, "this weekend" means the coming weekend,
and "next weekend" means the one after.

As for days of the week, if I'm talking about a day in the week that
hasn't happened yet, such as talking about Wednesday on Monday, it'll
always be "this Wednesday" for that week, and "next Wednesday" for
the following.  However, on Thursday and Friday, "next Wednesday"
would still probably refer to the approaching Wednesday, and I wouldn't
use "this wednesday."

However this seems endemic only to days of the week.  When I'm turning
off a highway that says "Next Right," it'll be the very next right.
2 rights away would always be "second right."


--
Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ.     "This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings 
gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu       to be seriously considered as a means of 
N2GPZ in ham radio circles        communication. The device is inherently of
72355,1226 on CI$                 no value to us." -Western Union memo, 1877
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar Mukund Mirashi)
Subject: Re: English English versus *American* English
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 20:21:34 GMT

baron@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Dennis Baron) writes:

>English in India is as different from English in England as American
>English is.  Any claim to the contrary, even from one who may be
>England-returned, is wrong.  Braj Kachru has written extensively
>on the nature of South Asian English.  Indian English differs in
>phonology, syntax, vocabulary, and idiom from the other World
>Englishes, is neither more nor less correct than its peers, and
>is both extensively used and influential locally and internationally.

>The Indian community in the US adapts to American English in the
>second generation as quickly as any other immigrant group has done.
>The same, btw, is true for Pakistanis and Nigerians, not to mention
>Australians, New Zealanders, and Canadians.  

>Dennis (Denesh) Baron

Could you please give me a more detailed reference on the book written
by Braj Kachru (first time I am hearing about him..) and by any others
on "Indian" English specifically? It is once again wrong to classify
Indian English under South Asian English. Some of the nuances found in
other countries may not be found in India.
      Anyway, I am in perfect agreement with you, as far as the 
pronounciation goes. But the written English that is taught in India is
according to standard English English. We use "English" English grammar
and spellings (the syntax is NOT different, phonology, vocabulary and
idioms may differ, yes). My point was that the original spellings
of words should not be distorted, as they have been in America. I have
observed this only in the US (although by now, some other countries must
have followed the contorted US spellings as well).
     The English spoken and written by the English is the standard for
the language, and all other varieties of the language spoken and
written worldwide should be judged according to this standard.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: eepjm@wombat.newcastle.edu.au (Peter Moylan)
Subject: Re: right time
Organization: University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 00:10:26 GMT

In article <glen.712359608@cs.wisc.edu>, glen@slate.cs.wisc.edu (Glen Ecklund) writes:

> Also note that in the U.S. we always use a colon, e.g. "6:45", never "6.45".
> I understand that both are used Down Under.  Is that right?
> The period makes it look decimal to me.

To be honest, I have trouble remembering.  I almost used a colon in my
earlier posting, then changed it because something in the back of my
mind said "no, the colon is an Australian convention, the Americans
won't understand it".  That shows how confused I was/am.

On reflection, I think the "6.45" form used to be standard in Australia,
but that we have since been influenced by the colons on all those
digital clocks based on imported chips.

(My digital watch also shows the date back to front.  It drives me crazy.)

Peter.            10:08 16 on TH the 7th day of the 30th month.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: tysoj@solb1.essex.ac.uk (Tyson J R)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: English English versus *American* English
Date: 30 Jul 92 19:25:46 GMT
Reply-To: tysoj@essex.ac.uk (Tyson J R)
Organization: University of Essex, Colchester, UK

In article <1992Jul29.234545.2230@convex.com> tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen) writes:
>Mandar Mukund Mirashi writes all kinds of overrighteous drivel unfounded
>in anything resembling sound linguistic theory.  Come on, guys, lay off.
>It's not fair to engage unarmed opponents in a battle of wits.

Well...when has anything that has been lacking in a sound basis in
linguistic theory been out of place in alt.usage.english.  All I
saw happen was another prescriptivist came along, with the novelty that
he was an Indian born English speaker who particularly objected to
American innovations in spelling etc.  His argument was perhaps just
below par even for the normative nonsense that passes through
this group daily.  Jim Scobbie is the only person who took the
trouble to argue against the absurd prescriptivism, everybody
else, every person jack of you turned on the flame throwers in
a way that frankly would make the least paranoid person suspect
that you don't hold all men equally capable of norm setting in matters
linguistic.

Grow up the lot of you.

Jim Tyson
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: dks@athena.mit.edu (dks)
Subject: Re: "This" weekend vs. "Next" weekend
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 11:37:24 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.084512.26146@fys.ruu.nl> johnston@fys.ruu.nl (Helen Johnston) writes:
>In article <1992Jul27.141850.1@wombat.newcastle.edu.au>, eepjm@wombat.newcastle.edu.au 
>  (Peter Moylan) writes:
>
>|> 
>|> Usually I try to avoid the ambiguity by using phrases like:
>|>      this coming Saturday (the very next Saturday to arrive)
>|>      Saturday week        (about a week and a half from now)
>|> Is the construct "Saturday week" used outside Australia?
>
>No - I quickly discovered I had to stop using that one, as it caused far
>too many furrowed brows. Pity, because it's a useful construction!


"Saturday week" is alive and well in my neck o' the woods.


Dhanesh

Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar Mukund Mirashi)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: English English versus *American* English
Date: 30 Jul 92 03:21:41 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA

In article <84773@netnews.upenn.edu> crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford) writes:
>In article <1992Jul29.200521.23765@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar Mukund Mirashi) writes:
>> All you Amercians out there....do not spoil the
>>English language (in other words, lay off! Keep away!, etc.)
>
>O.K.  Let's all speak French now.
>
>
>
    You have already given the Brits a hard time......could you spare
the French? (btw, does anyone reading this post know is similar differences
in spelling exist for words common to Canadian French and French French?)

{:-)
From: ai118@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Rich Zidonis)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: What to use instead of "pun intended"?
Date: 30 Jul 92 20:01:12 GMT
Reply-To: ai118@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Rich Zidonis)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)


In a previous article, jhawk@panix.com (John Hawkinson) says:

>That was a totally cool trip to Antartica, dude! (pun intended)
>[so the example stinks :-(]
>
>Anyway, I've noticed that occassionally I too will do this; subsequent
>reflection, however, indicates that such usage is a tad
>awkward/undesirable/something-to-avoid. Therefore, anybody have
>anything better they'd care to suggest?
>
How about "fun intended."  Is not funning and punning what you had in
mind?

-- 
rich

Internet: ai118@cleveland.freenet.edu
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: Tom Christiansen <tchrist@convex.COM>
Subject: Re: English English versus *American* English
Originator: tchrist@convex.convex.com
Reply-To: tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen)
Organization: CONVEX Realtime Development, Colorado Springs, CO
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 00:01:27 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

From the keyboard of mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar Mukund Mirashi):
:      Exactly the point which was trying to drive home....no single
:individual has the authority to change the language. The spelling 
:can be changed only if a majority of it's native speakers (I mean
:the English, here) concur. 

I think you mean "its", not "it's", but since you're disadvantage, 
I won't hold it too much against you.

Funny that the Scots and Irish aren't native speakers of English.

:You chaps seem to have wreaked a war on
:the language, which is most shameful! Why deface such a beautiful 
:language?

Shame shame shame again.  Did you bring any autoflagellation devices
with you, MMM?

--tom
-- 
"GUIs normally make it simple to accomplish simple actions and impossible
to accomplish complex actions."   --Doug Gwyn  (22/Jun/91 in comp.unix.wizards)

     Tom Christiansen           tchrist@convex.com      convex!tchrist
From: wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: "French" spacing (was: How many spaces after a period?)
Date: 26 Jul 92 11:41:04 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAXcluster

In article <1992Jul24.204525.29247@news.eng.convex.com>, tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen) writes:
> From the keyboard of eepjm@wombat.newcastle.edu.au (Peter Moylan):
> :One which has always amused me is "filet americain": American fillet.
> 
> What's a fillet?  We only use it at the filling stations, where
> you can request that they fillet up. :-)

A fillet is a piece of fish (a fillet of cod) or of beef (a fillet steak) which
has had the bones removed. 

> Really, it's a filet around here, and pronounced like ballet and beret:
> with the accent on the *last syllable* instead of the barbaric first, 
> and without a final t, the way God and Gaul meant them to be.  :-)

But not the way England and St George intended: with a strong emphasis on the
*fill*, and a good healthy splashy "t" on the end.
-- 

Stephen Wilcox             |   Remember what happened to the dinosaurs!
wilcox@maths.oxford.ac.uk  |    I did---and look what happened to me.
From: dand@buscard.fidonet.org (Dan Davidson)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: the "right" time     
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 20:17:35 EDT
X-Maildoor: WaflineMail 1.00r

 -=> Quoting Dr.savory to All <=-

 >I don't know if there's some tradition in the U.K. about people giving
 >others the _wrong_ time, but I remember being thrown for a loop by 
 >someone asking me for the time and also wanting to know if it was right.
 
 >Perhaps the timepieces in the U.S. are just that much more accurate that
 >we can omit the "right" when we ask others if they "have the time."  
 
 Dr> "Do you have the time?" was regarded by  the  London  (UK)  police  in
 Dr> the forties  and  fifties  as  "soliciting".  Thus anyone asking it
 Dr> could ;) be charged for prostitution, and indeed were!  So to avoid 
 Dr> ambiguity,  double entendre and others of that ilk, the adjective
 Dr> "right" was inserted.

What ever happened to, "What time is it?", or, "Can you tell me the time?"?
Or, "Welches Uhr?", avoiding the whole huhu.

                                                        -- Dan --


... RAM DISK is NOT an installation procedure!
--- Blue Wave/QWK v2.10
                                     
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: mcoffin@IASTATE.EDU (Marie Coffin)
Subject: Re: English English versus *American* English
Reply-To: mcoffin@IASTATE.EDU (Marie Coffin)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 01:42:57 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.234925.2439@convex.com>, tchrist@convex.COM (Tom
Christiansen) writes:
>                            [...deleted...]
> Come on, guys, just READ that sentence, and put him in your killfile.
> He's either pulling our chains, or is both clueless and arrogant.
> 
>                            [...deleted...]
>      Tom Christiansen           tchrist@convex.com      convex!tchrist

Of course he's pulling our chains (although that doesn't preclude his being
clueless and arrogant).  Don't encourage the child.

Marie Coffin
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com (Mark Slagle)
Subject: Re: I'm in a comma.
Reply-To: slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com
In-reply-to: lannert@uni-duesseldorf.de's message of Wed, 22 Jul 1992 14:19:02 GMT
Organization: Lockheed Missiles and Space Co., Sunnyvale, Ca.
	<1992Jul8.002155.29216@news.eng.convex.com>
	<lannert.25.711814742@uni-duesseldorf.de>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 02:15:07 GMT

In article <lannert.25.711814742@uni-duesseldorf.de>, lannert@uni-duesseldorf.de (Detlef Lannert) writes:

> Of course the learner (of German) is given an obvious ;-) reason for
> that rule: It avoids ambiguities! Example:

> I will have a minestrone, my favourite dish, and a pint of lager.

> According to the German rule, "my favourite dish" is attributive to the
> minestrone (otherwise there would be *no* "," before the "and"), and 
> thus I'll order just two things. 

> According to the "comma=yes"-rule, which seems to be preferred by English
> grammar books (and by Tom), my favourite dish might be something else
> (pizza perhaps), and thus the soup is only a starter.

> So how would you avoid this ambiguity? Or isn't it one at all?

"I will have a minestrone, which is my favorite dish, and
 a pint of lager."

But it's hard to transfer between English and German
rules for disambiguity.  The customary word order in
the two languages is so different that it disables 
the intuitive sense of what seems right.  Would the
clause in question be in that place in the German
version of the statement?
--
----
Mark E. Slagle                                 PO Box 61059
slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com                       Sunnyvale, CA   94088
408-756-0895                                   USA
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: Tom Christiansen <tchrist@convex.COM>
Subject: Re: English English versus *American* English
Originator: tchrist@convex.convex.com
Reply-To: tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen)
Organization: CONVEX Realtime Development, Colorado Springs, CO
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 16:28:36 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

From the keyboard of mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar Mukund Mirashi):
:        The sharp differences between written and spoken English make
:it quite unique.... 

Just how unique is it, O Seer?

--tom
-- 
"GUIs normally make it simple to accomplish simple actions and impossible
to accomplish complex actions."   --Doug Gwyn  (22/Jun/91 in comp.unix.wizards)

     Tom Christiansen           tchrist@convex.com      convex!tchrist
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: scobbie@Csli.Stanford.EDU (Jim Scobbie)
Subject: Re: I'm so gay
Organization: Stanford University CSLI
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 17:31:14 GMT

In <Jul.31.10.22.09.1992.16913@math.rutgers.edu> bwalsh@math.rutgers.edu (Bertram Walsh) writes:

>>> Is the original meaning of "gay" lost forever?

>[...]  So there's no hope: e.g., the 1934 Fred Astaire
>movie "Gay Divorcee'", whose title was itself bowdlerized from the
>then-excessively-risque' "Gay Divorce," is doomed to a life of
>perpetual smirk (for reasons its makers may even have contemplated:
>Rawson, following the OED [I believe], traces the current meaning of
>'gay' back to 1889 verbally and to 1935 in print).

Well, "gay" may have changed its meaning permanently, but "fairy" has
in consequence lost most of its connotations of homosexuality I think.
D'you think "gay" will be more permanent because it is adjectival
and non-pejorative?

MMM: Mandy, is it "fairy", "faery" or "faerie"?

Jim

nb: Gaye Byrne (not sure on spelling) is *the* chat show host in Eire.
(He's been on the air longer than that Johnny Carson guy.)
-- 
James M. Scobbie: Dept of Linguistics, Stanford University, CA 94305-2150, USA
                  scobbie@csli.stanford.edu
From: karplus@cse.ucsc.edu (Kevin Karplus)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: "French" spacing (was: How many spaces after a period?)
Date: 22 Jul 1992 20:52:13 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz; Committee for Open Access Computing
Reply-To: karplus@ce.ucsc.edu (Kevin Karplus)
NNTP-Posting-Host: ararat.ucsc.edu

Although "french" is often used in English to refer to things that are
risque or otherwise unEnglish, the term \frenchspacing in TeX was
intended quite literally to refer to a difference in style between
French typographers and American ones.  It might have been better to
give it a more descriptive name (like \uniformspacing), but Knuth
chose the word and the meaning has been frozen.

Followups about "french" as an adjective should continue to
alt.usage.english, but the spacing discussion has pretty much
exhausted its appeal here (try comp.fonts if you wish to discuss
typography).

Kevin Karplus
From: ahanysz@spam.ua.oz (Alexander Hanysz)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: For instance/for example
Summary: What's the difference?
Date: 31 Jul 92 01:56:45 GMT
Organization: Department of Pure Mathematics, University of Adelaide.

In article <1992Jul28.212544.9065@uts.uni-c.dk> clauct@uts.uni-c.dk (Claus Tondering) writes:
>I am not a native speaker of English. I have been trying with the
>help of various dictionaries to find out what the difference between
>"for instance" and "for example" is, all to no avail.

I am a native speaker of English, and I don't know of any difference
between the meanings of these two phrases.  Can anybody else help us
here?

								Alex.
From: wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: How are You People?
Date: 21 Jul 92 09:21:06 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAXcluster

In article <1992Jul18.140044.10994@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>, bf455@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Bonita Kale) writes:
> Brilliant!  And here's a little piece of anecdotal evidence to support that
> interpretation.  I picked up on this thread, having forgotten what it was
> about. 
> 
> In the Episcopal Book of Common Prayer, the ritual calls for general
> confession of sins, followed by absolution by the priest.  The form is for
> the priest to say, "...God...forgive you all your sins..." If a lay
> person's doing the service s/he is supposed to say "...forgive us..." Our
> priest, however, uses "us" all the time.  To my mind, that's a good
> decision.  "You" has a decidedly condescending tone in many different
> contexts: "I don't know what you women/kids/black people/gays/christians
> want!"
> 
But to be fair to the priests who follow the rubric(?k) there is a good reason
for this. According to Anglican theology (and I suspect the theology of any
church which still has the three orders of ordained ministers) it is only
priests who can pronounce God's absolution. So to avoid congregations thinking
their sins have been absolved when in fact they haven't, a lay person or a
deacon can only use "we", asking God to absolve us, rather than the priest's
"you", telling us that our sins are absolved.

I make no comment as to the value of this theological distinction!

> 
> Bonita Kale
-- 

Stephen Wilcox             |   Remember what happened to the dinosaurs!
wilcox@maths.oxford.ac.uk  |    I did---and look what happened to me.
From: dand@buscard.fidonet.org (Dan Davidson)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: anymore unique       
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 20:17:51 EDT
X-Maildoor: WaflineMail 1.00r

 -=> Quoting Marie Coffin to All <=-
 MC> This disagreement is not between those who expect language to be
 MC> logical and those who don't.  It is between those who accept a
 MC> particular definition of a particular word and those who don't. 
 MC> Therefore, discussions about rigor, flabbiness, and logical systems are
 MC> beside the point.   
 MC> Marie Coffin

Any language is, almost by definition, a logic system.  I hope we can
all accept the legitimacy of "more logical" and "less logical.

                                                 -- Dan --


... THINK! or thwim.
--- Blue Wave/QWK v2.10
From: glen@slate.cs.wisc.edu (Glen Ecklund)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: right time
Date: 28 Jul 92 21:40:08 GMT
Organization: U of Wisconsin CS Dept

eepjm@wombat.newcastle.edu.au (Peter Moylan) writes:

>In article <1992Jul24.110112.7781@vax.oxford.ac.uk>, wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:

>With one exception.  I have a lot of trouble remembering whether
>"a quarter of seven" means 6.45 or 7.15.  (My first reaction, of
>course, would be to think of 1.75)

>Peter.

I would never imagine that "a quarter of seven" could mean "a quarter after
seven".
Also note that in the U.S. we always use a colon, e.g. "6:45", never "6.45".
I understand that both are used Down Under.  Is that right?
The period makes it look decimal to me.
-- 
Every child shall be treated with complete respect.

Glen Ecklund             glen@cs.wisc.edu          (608) 262-5084
Department of Computer Sciences        1210 W. Dayton St.
University of Wisconsin, Madison       Madison, Wis. 53706  U.S.A.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english