HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: greg.grainger@rose.com (greg grainger)
Subject: Re: Simplified Englis
Organization: Rose Media Inc, Toronto, Ontario.
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 17:10:21 GMT
X-Gated-By: Usenet <==> RoseMail Gateway (v1.70)


Date Entered: 01-01-93 12:05
On Dec 31, tylee@leety.austin.ibm.com (Ty Lee) wrote:

TY>In the Chinese world, there has been a movement to promote the idea
TY>of simplifying the strokes in writing the Chinese characters. Some
TY>argues that this will save time in coding the language into computer.

TY>Is there any similar movement going that will simplify the English
TY>language?

TY>Do you think it is a worth try to simplify the English by removing
TY>the definite and/or indefinite articles from the written English?
TY>If we examine the text in this article, we will find as many as 13
TY>occurences of the definite articles, the, are used. If I removed them,
TY>the meaning of the text would not be distorted severly.

Doubleplusungood.

                                                Cheers,
                                                Greg.

Greg Grainger
Toronto, Ontario.
greg.grainger@rose.com
11:23:13 am, Fri 01-01-1993.
---
   OLX 2.2   A bird in the bush can't make a mess in your hand.
   RM 2.00 : RoseNet<=>Usenet Gateway : Rose Media 416-733-2285
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: 'Professor' in Canada - what does it mean?
Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 01:36:52 GMT

In article <1hng36INNbfm@shelley.u.washington.edu> kaygee@hardy.u.washington.edu (Kevin Giansante) writes:
:>I think the equivalent in America is a personal chair.
:
:On this side of the Atlantic, Graham, a personal chair is more often
:known by the title "recliner" or, more formally, "Strat-o-lounger".
:We don't call them professors much.

Oh yes - add "chaise lounge" to that list of hated solecisms 'up with which
people always come' ;-)

(Who was it who was gleaning that list?  How's it coming on?  Remember
to post it when you're done...)

G
From: ai118@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Rich Zidonis)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Correct Usage
Date: 31 Dec 1992 20:25:35 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: ai118@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Rich Zidonis)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc10.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, madhusudanan@akocoa.enet.dec.com (MADHUSUDANAN) says:

>
>My friend and I had an argument over the correctness of the following expression
>   "I'll press your bell or XXX's bell"
>
>The above expression occurred in a conversation over the telephone between two
>persons. "Bell" actually means the doorbell and "XXX" means another person who
>lives in the same apartment building.
>
>Madhu
>

It's fine with me.  You are using a figure of speech that I believe is
named syncope.  That is, the dropping of 'words' that finish the
meaning of the phrase.  Wearing a full set of clothes, your sentence
might read:

	I'll press [the button that activates] your [door]bell or
	XXX's [door]bell.

Did you communicate well?  That's my test.  If your intentions were
understood fully.  The phrase stands.

By pressing the bell, will we be buzzed in to a party?

-- 
RAZ     ai118@cleveland.freenet.edu
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: ens@ccu.umanitoba.ca ()
Subject: Re: 'Professor' in Canada - what does it mean?
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 09:41:36 GMT

(Graham Toal) writes:
>(Seth "the Lesser") writes:
>:(Graham Toal) writes:

>:>Could anyone who understands what a Brit means by 'Professor' and who
>:>knows why we sometimes have misunderstandings about visiting US academics,
>:>please tell me what 'professor' means in Canada?

>:Yes, and could someone please tell those of us who don't understand this
>:difference (who, in fact, weren't aware of it) just what it is? What *is* a
>:British "professor"?

>I think the equivalent in America is a personal chair.

Or endowed chair. But the correspondence is not entirely accurate because
most universities do not have endowed chairs (or few of them) and so
it is nothing to aspire to; professor is as high as it gets.

>Professor over here is the highest academic accolade - not just your
>run of the mill PhD.  

Same here. Informally, it also includes some lower academic accolades,
but certainly not your run of the mill PhD.

>Professors are sometimes also Head of Department,
>though it isn't a one-to-one correspondence.  A Professor here will
>certainly be one of the leading people in any field, and has a high
>chance of being someone with an international reputation. 

Do you mean in _their_ field? If so, this is sufficiently vague as to
apply to most newly hired tenure-stream assistant professors in PhD
granting universities. Competition is stiff these days.

>Stephen
>Hawking is the sort of person we think of when we talk about a Professor.

There must be hundreds (thousands?) of professors in England. Are you
suggesting they are all in the same league as Hawking? (The ones I
know of aren't.)  Few professors, even in Europe, are known outside
their field; Hawking is known universally in cosmology and throughout
the public. Hardly representative.

>Hence why it grates so badly when some visiting American professor
>insists on using his title over here when we would title such a
>person a 'lecturer'.  

Is there really no rank between lecturer and professor? 

>It's forgivable once or twice if done through
>ignorance, but the reason I originally asked this question was because
>some Canadian twit insisted on putting Professor of English in his
>signature after it had been explained to him.  In the particular
>group where it happened, you'd have to be someone like Noam Chomsky
>to do that and get away with it...

It seems no sillier to use a pretentious title than to be so bothered
by it.

Werner

Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: K Street
Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 18:02:31 GMT

In article <C00Fx2.5LE@techbook.com> dant@techbook.com (Dan Tilque) writes:
:gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal) writes:
:>
:>Queer Street?
:
:I was trying for actual streets.  From what I can tell from
:dictionaries, there was no actual street named Queer that gave rise to
:this expression.

True - that was indeed the whole point of it.  It was the original
fake address (but done facetiously or humourously).

G
From: djohns@elm.circa.ufl.edu (David A. Johns)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Sexist language
Date: 25 Dec 92 13:23:36 GMT
Organization: University of Florida, Gainesville

In article <92355.112019HERSCH@auvm.american.edu> HERSCH@auvm.american.edu writes:
# Published references, please, showing some feminists proposing to
# replace the *word* "history" with the *word* "herstory".

Cheap debating ploy, Mr. Browne.  Truth is not born (or borne) on the
pages of academic journals.

I too have heard a *few* women object to "history", singing "hymns",
etc.  It never occurred to me that they represent feminists as a
group, but neither did it occur to me that they didn't exist despite
the evidence of my senses.  Every movement has its lunatic groupies.

David Johns
From: sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: K Street
Date: 29 Dec 92 19:37:04 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <C00Fx2.5LE@techbook.com> dant@techbook.com (Dan Tilque) writes:
>gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal) writes:
>>
>>Queer Street?
>
>I was trying for actual streets.  From what I can tell from
>dictionaries, there was no actual street named Queer that gave rise to
>this expression.  That's also why Main Street was not on my list--while
>there are many Main Streets, no one in particular is the source of the
>expression refering to "materialistic self-complacent provincialism" (to
>quote an M-W dictionary).
>
>---

Weellll, I shouldn't do this but I don't care.  In this area,
Castro Street is metonymous for "area with lots of gay residents".
Herb Caen noted that Market Street is straight until it gets to
Castro Street - and so it is (but only geographically).  :-)

I suppose "Market St" is like "Main St" and "High St" in having a 
meaning to many people without there being a specific original
street.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: A letter to Mandar
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 05:41:10 GMT


Mandar,

I have been following this "English English" thread of yours from day one,
and even now I am quite amazed at the new levels of absurdity that you
have reached in your argumentation.

Roger will be pleased to know that as a result of this whole thing I
think even I, and I consider myself a linguistic conservative, have
softened my position a bit.  Mandar has spent this past month inventing
nonexistent standards.  His concept of a standard is a language spoken
by no one.  The Queen doesn't speak it.  The BBC doesn't speak it.
The majority of English speakers don't speak it.  Even Mandar doesn't
speak it.  It is a murky, shadowy nothingness that exists only in
Mandar's mind for the good of no one.

Mandar, why is it that you cling to a set of standards that doesn't
exist?  You have not shown one supportable argument that substantiates
your claim.  The BBC has forsaken you.  The Britons on this newsgroup
have forsaken you.  You stand alone in your absurd beliefs.

Your whole position is so patently infantile, so foreign to reality,
that to anyone with a friendly attitude toward language, it is painful
to realize that you will never rise above this view of life.  It is
even more pathetic to understand that you cannot see that your
position is not tenable, and that you nevertheless try to defend it
through a series of pitiful rearguard actions.

Your arguments are nonsensical.  You assume your conclusions, you make
statements that you fail to support in any substantive way.  You
change your own definitions of terminology from one line to the next.
In short, you do not know what you are talking about.  You have no
facts.  You have no science.  You have no knowledge with which to
carry on a discussion about language.

Mandar, I hope you enjoy it inside that pathetic closed mind of yours.
You will find yourself hindered in life at every turn as a result of
your blatant stupidity and idiotic arguments.  

I for one have had quite enough of the fecal material that oozes out
of your mouth and nose with each posting.  You needn't respond,
as I won't be reading anything further that you care to spew.

I think I speak for all serious readers of this group when I say that
your malformed and patently preposterous opinions are not welcome here.
We all would appreciate it if you would crawl back into whatever hole
you came out of.  I'm quite convinced that you can find other activities
to occupy your time, such as looking at yourself in the mirror.


--
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: slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Seth "the Lesser")
Subject: Re: 'Professor' in Canada - what does it mean?
Organization: Generic American College Kids (G.A.C.K.)
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 09:38:39 GMT
Reply-To: slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Seth "the Lesser")
X-Posted-From: cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal) writes:
>
>Could anyone who understands what a Brit means by 'Professor' and who
>knows why we sometimes have misunderstandings about visiting US academics,
>please tell me what 'professor' means in Canada?

Yes, and could someone please tell those of us who don't understand this
difference (who, in fact, weren't aware of it) just what it is? What *is* a
British "professor"?

Seth L. Blumberg          \ Warning: This posting has been determined to cause
slb22@columbia.edu (play)   \ cancer in laboratory animals.  Please make sure
sethb@ctr.columbia.edu (work) \ that no white mice are allowed to read it.  
    > No one I know shares my opinions, least of all Columbia University. <
From: wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: chaps
Date: 30 Dec 92 13:17:56 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620

[`Chaps' as gender-non-specific]

I heard a very odd use of the gender-non-specific `chaps' on Christmas morning
on Radio 4. To replace the usual heavyweight Today programme they had a
listeners' selection of favourite radio moments. To fill out time there was a
phone-in competition, which one of the presenters plugged by saying:

`Our chaps are manning the phones, or should I say personning the phones.'

Odd!
-- 

Stephen Wilcox             |   For Sale: Posts in British Government. Suit
wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk    |   outgoing American. Highest bids accepted.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: Xmas in Beijing
Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 03:41:37 GMT

In article <20200.2b383abb@ul.ie> mckeonj@ul.ie writes:
:Just for fun at Xmas time, a definition:
:A native English speaker is one who cannot, or will not,
:pronounce the guttural H.
:He will use all kinds of substitutes, writing and saying
:X CH J KH GH and so on.
:Ask "why?". The answer is interesting, and serves also to
:explain why 13 is unlucky. 
:I will post more if required.

I haven't heard this one, but let me take a wild stab at it...
it's something to do with
1) how many people were at the last supper
2) the pronunciation of the greek version of Jesus Christos
3) God's being an Englishman  ?

G
PS I'm a native English speaker and can pronounce \guttural H perfectly.
(And do, frequently.  Though in fact the sound you're probably thinking
of strictly isn't a guttural, unless pronounced by a drunken Gleswegian)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: Standards
Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 02:13:53 GMT

In article <12223@kesson.ed.ac.uk> iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski) writes:
:It may very well be the same thing.  I've heard Mrs Elizabeth Windsor
:on the radio, and she certainly sounds as though she has been trained
:to speak the Queen's English.

Trained is the appropriate word.  The Queen's accent sounds like
lower-middle-class modified by cheap elocution lessons.  Prince Philip
on the other hand has a most singularly marked RP accent - I'd be surprised
if there were more than 20 people in the world who share his particular
dialect.

He speaks English amazingly well for a Greek, don't you think?

G
Date: Wednesday, 23 Dec 1992 19:45:17 EST
From: <CLINDSAY@vma.cc.nd.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: An apology

I have a question unrelated to this subject line.
In the sentence, "She felt someone tug her coat" what justifies
the form "tug"?  Is it a subjunctive perhaps?  I note how it differs
in meaning from "she felt someone tugged her coat" and "she felt
somone tugging her coat" but how can "tug" be the verb of "someone"?
(It's not an imperative of course: "someone tug her coat please.")
Curious Al
From: briand@tekig5.pen.tek.com (Brian D Diehm)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Sexist language
Date: 22 Dec 92 00:30:09 GMT
Reply-To: briand@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.

|>Mandar, save this humble acceptance shit for Chaucer. Anything after that is
|>merely a corruption.
|>
|>Why Chaucer, you ask? Why not earlier? Well, Mandar, it's arbitrary. Chaucer
|>was about the earliest of the evolution of our languages that is generally
|>agreed on as recognizable modern English. 
|			   ^^^^^^
|Excuse me, but Chaucer's English is an example of _Middle_ English.
|_Modern_ English is later - starting around something like 16th C or so.
|Maybe a bit earlier, but definitely after Chaucer.
|
|
|-Margaret

Margaret, you're absolutely right of course. Middle is not modern English!
Next thing, I'll be threatening Beowulf with modernity!

But none of this changes to point to Mandar, which he will no doubt miss
anyway.

-Brian
--
Brian Diehm
Tektronix, Inc.                (503) 627-3437         briand@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM
P.O. Box 500, M/S 19-286
Beaverton, OR   97077
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar M. Mirashi)
Subject: An apology
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 00:25:08 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA


My sincere apologies for misquoting John Lennon.


                                                           Mandar.                                
-- 
"Imagine there's no countries. It isn't hard to do. Nothing to kill or die 
 for, and no religion too. Imagine all the people living life in peace.
 You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one. I hope some
 day you'll join us, and the world will be as one." - John Lennon.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (John G Dobnick)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Fisher...uh...person
Date: 1 Jan 1993 20:22:42 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Reply-To: jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

> sandy@halcyon.com (Sandy Fifer) wonders:
> 
> | What's wrong with using fisher, server, sewer, crafter, etc.?  These
> | words don't sound cumbersome to me.

Also be careful who you call a fisher.  

Fisher: Carnivorous mammal of North America, _martes pennanti_.

        This is a member of the same genus as the marten (_martes
	americana_), and the sable (_martes zibellina_).
-- 
John G Dobnick                          ATTnet: (414) 229-5727
Computing Services Division             INTERNET: jgd@uwm.edu
University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee     UUCP: uunet!uwm!jgd

"Knowing how things work is the basis for appreciation,
and is thus a source of civilized delight."  -- William Safire
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: lukoff@stein.u.washington.edu (Fred Lukoff)
Subject: Re: They (was Re: Shaking people up with "she"? (was Re: Sexist language))
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 19:47:10 GMT

In article <38045@uflorida.cis.ufl.edu> djohns@elm.circa.ufl.edu (David A. Johns) writes:
>In article <BzL4yC.L31@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar M. Mirashi) writes:
>
># In article <1992Dec20.233047.24993@cdf.toronto.edu>
># g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu (Ro semary Waigh) writes:
># >The net is hardly representative of the population in general.
>#
># That is debatable. People from different backgrounds post to the
># net and the variety in opinions you encounter here, is hardly
># observed in real life.
>
>If the variety of opinions encountered on the net is hardly observed
>in real life, then the net is hardly representative of the population
>in general, right?
>
>Why do so many of your contradictions end up sounding like agreements,
>Mandar?
>
>David Johns


Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: leveret@warren.demon.co.uk (Nick Leverton)
Subject: Re: Shaking people up with "she"? (was Re: Sexist language)
Reply-To: leveret@warren.demon.co.uk
Distribution: world
X-Mailer: cppnews $Revision: 1.20 $
Organization: Indexed; Access: Random.
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 22:18:35 +0000

In article <BzDw15.MnD@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar M. Mirashi) writes:
>In article <724568836snx@warren.demon.co.uk> leveret@warren.demon.co.uk writes:
>>>... If there is a inter-dialect
>>>conflict over the word "freshman", the correct meaning should be decided
>>>by comparing it against English English.
>>Even, apparently, when it isn't an English English word ...
>Who says it isn't?

The native speakers of English English in this newsgroup do.

>...The meaning conveyed is different, that's all.
>The word should be found in all dictionaries.

I can't quibble with that, as long as it has "(US)" after it.

Nick.
Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 16:29:10 EST
From: <HERSCH@auvm.american.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Latin America

In article <1992Dec31.175208.12658@samba.oit.unc.edu>, rck@med.unc.edu (Ronald
C. Knight) says:
>
>However, I don't even feel comfortable with definition (2),
>which includes Haiti and the former French Guiana ....

In what sense is it the *former* French Guiana? Has something
happened to the map of South America that I didn't notice because
of all the changes happening in Europe? Is this no longer a
*departement* of France?

H.

Herschel Browne
"The" American University
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: nadeau@bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau)
Subject: Re: Radical feminists 
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 92 19:56:37 GMT

In article <1992Dec23.183805.26052@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> uhde@ollie.jsc.nasa.gov (Jo Uhde) writes:
>> 
>> Time for another thread. Why is it that "persons" seems to be rising 
>> in popularity at the expense of "people"? To me it seems much more 
>> impersonal, treating people as mere population units.
>
>I would also like to know the reason for the rise of this usage.
>In PC "churchspeak", at least in the Episcopal diocese of Newark, NJ,
>gay people are _always_ referred to as "gay persons".

Well, "gay people" might suggest that gays form a distinct community.
(You know, like "the people of the Book".)  Personally, I would just use
"gays" or even "homosexuals".  ("Gay", after all, is a euphemism coined
by people who couldn't face the reality of "homosexual".)

       The Rhealist - nadeau@bnr.ca - Speaking only for myself
From: djohns@elm.circa.ufl.edu (David A. Johns)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: They (was Re: Shaking people up with "she"? (was Re: Sexist language))
Date: 30 Dec 92 11:47:10 GMT
Organization: University of Florida, Gainesville

In article <12189@kesson.ed.ac.uk> iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski) writes:

# And as far as grammaticality goes, apparent violation of number
# agreement is a pretty common thing, particularly in British
# English, where singular collective nouns frequently trigger plural
# agreement.

Yes, yes -- the government have decided -- a barbarism no American
would think of uttering.

:)

David Johns