HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: A day at the market
Date: 20 Aug 92 21:27:30 GMT
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.


	I went into the local Kroger's and catenated "than N items" onto their
"N items or less" signs.

	To the perplexed onlookers, I said "this will result in fewer
misconceptions".

	I barely escaped the store before the police arrived.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: wcsjc@alfred.carleton.ca (John Coughlin)
Subject: Re: Can I axe you a question?
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 23:36:04 GMT

In <1992Aug18.161305.569@news.columbia.edu> gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:

>Well, I don't know if the poster is referring to the same beastly
>mispronunciation I am all too familiar with, but the one that gest me
>is NOO-kyuh-lar.  I think it was Edwin Newman who said, "When the nuclear
>age began in 1945, so did the 'nucular' age."

I've heard both NOO-kyuh-lar and NOO-kee-lar.

>Besides "ek cetera," the other ones that I just can't stand are the second
>month of the year being pronounced "feb-yoo-ar-ee."  And let's not forget
>about "goverment."  When I was in high school, I had a calculus teacher
>with otherwise pristine speech who used to call that antiderivative thing
>an "in-truh-gul."   Then there are "Ma-ra-SHEE-no" cherries and the
>"public liberry" and "endangered spee-seez" and probably lots more I'm
>forgetting.

All my life I have been trying to cure my mother of saying sec-ah-TREE
for secretary and myu-nah-SIP-al for municipal.  I have recently succeeded.
I know many people who say pro-NOUN-ci-a-tion.  Sheesh.
-- 

Flesh: John Coughlin                            Elvis ate my Cadillac
Net: wcsjc@ccs.carleton.ca     Vox: +1 613 957-2851     Fax: 990-7370
From: slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com (Mark Slagle)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Quote or simile for "success"?
Date: 15 Aug 92 09:48:54 GMT
Reply-To: slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com
Organization: You wouldn't ask this if you'd seen my desk.
In-reply-to: cochran@spam.rtp.dg.com's message of 13 Aug 92 12:25:45 GMT

In article <1992Aug13.122545.4008@dg-rtp.dg.com>, cochran@spam.rtp.dg.com (A. Jing Hippy) writes:

> |> Yawn-"they give meaning to the word "success."
> |> 
> |> I need a quote or maybe a simile. I haven't found one that
> |> fits however. Can you help?

> Wasn't it Oscar Wilde who said "It is not enough to succeed. Others must
> fail."  No, I guess that wouldn't fit in with the rest of the paragraph.

> Frank Moore Colby said "I have found some of the best reasons I ever had
> for remaining at the bottom simply by looking at the men at the top."
> Hmmmm...  That really doesn't make it either.  

"The moral flabbiness born of the exclusive worship of
the bitch-goddess success.  That -- with the squalid
cash interpretation put on the word success -- is our
national disease."  - William James

And it would have been more of a kick if I'd found
a real English English quote, instead of just an
American corruption from my dog-eared quote 
collection.  Or does it count that it was written
to a real English author (H.G.Wells)?  But see how
I snuck that bitch in there?  And with an "-ess" word 
thrown in for a bonus?  And if I can just get my ass 
in gear and find a successful donkey quote ... Chaucer
might have an ass kicking around.
--
----
Mark E. Slagle                                 PO Box 61059
slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com                       Sunnyvale, CA   94088
408-756-0895                                   USA
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: eepjm@wombat.newcastle.edu.au (Peter Moylan)
Subject: Phonetic symbols
Organization: University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 03:01:57 GMT

In article <1992Aug19.133308.10938@news.eng.convex.com>, Tom Christiansen <tchrist@convex.COM> writes:

> "root" is not unambiguous, as I continue to point out.  In many areas
> of the country, it rhymes with "foot", while in others, it rhymes 
> with "hoot".  
> 
> Here is the IPA in ASCII chart; I sure wish people would use it.

Here are some reasons why people don't use it.

>     D) this is the edh sound that you people are so fond of.

Hands up, those readers of this group who know what an edh sound is.
What, some hands still down?

>     E) the vowel sound as in 'pet'

Do you mean the way an Australian pronounces 'pet', or the way a
New Zealander pronounces 'pet'?  OK, I know you're referring to
neither of these, but many people won't.

>     I) vowel sound in 'pig'

Same problem as with E.  I'd have to hear you saying this aloud to
know why you think this is different from 'i'.

>     O) vowel sound in 'dog'

Would that be the 'dawg' or the 'dahg' pronunciation?  I don't use
either.  The vowel sound I use in 'dog' - which is also common
in south-east England - doesn't seem to exist in US English.

And so on.  In other words, the chart is too ambiguous to be useful.

>     Examples:
> 
> 	english) 'i hate dogs and cats' would be
> 		 /aj hejt dO:gz and kats/

This example tells me that you are American, and even gives some
hints about which part of America you are from.  It does not, however,
tell the uninformed what sound 'O' stands for.

-- 
Peter Moylan                      eepjm@wombat.newcastle.edu.au
From: kozato@canon.co.uk (Yasuo Kozato)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Maternity system
Date: 21 Aug 92 08:18:01 GMT
Organization: Canon Research Centre Europe Ltd

I hope this is the right group to ask:

I am writing a document describing classification of animals and
looking for relatively more formal words to describe the key property,
"maternity system", i.e. whether eggs, or wombs. The context looks
like "Mammals can be distinguished by their xxxxx."

Thanks in advance.

-- 
Yasuo Kozato                      kozato@canon.co.uk
Canon Research Centre Europe
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Re: Can I axe you a question?
Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Organization: Columbia University
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 03:37:17 GMT

In article <1992Aug17.004116.42389@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> miner@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes:
>
>The form pronounced "axe" for "ask" is the original form.  Cf. Old
>English _acsian_, i.e. /aksjan/ 'to ask.'  As often happens, an early
>form remains here in the dialects.  It is the standard variants that
>underwent the metathesis, or reversal, of the two consonants.

I really have to wonder if the "axe" in Black English Vernacular is really
derived from _acsian_ or if it's just laziness in pronouncing "ask."


--
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
From: dks@athena.mit.edu (dks)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Smileys, gals, & guys
Date: 12 Aug 92 12:29:11 GMT
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.

In article <SLAGLE.92Aug11223033@sgi417.msd.lmsc.lockheed.com>,
slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com writes:
>In article <1992Aug7.090039.16554@athena.mit.edu>,
>dks@athena.mit.edu (dks) writes:
>> Well, yes and so forth, but I still have no idea why Lauren found it
>> necessary to say that "we gals" don't mind a bit.  I'm probably reading
>> too much or too little into her comment.  So what else is new?
>
>I thought the sweet thing just had her little
>pink tongue tucked neatly into her cute, dimpled,
>and oh so rosy cheek.

Behold, my cloying earnestness and Mark's sharp wit.  Or was that vice-versa?


Dhanesh

[This post is dedicated to George Bernard Shaw and Dorothy Parker.]
From: met@ariel.its.unimelb.EDU.AU (Meteorology General)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Can I axe you a question?
Date: 22 Aug 92 22:59:13 GMT
Organization: University of Melbourne Dept of Meteorology

In article <1992Aug21.115307.1@wombat.newcastle.edu.au> eepjm@wombat.newcastle.edu.au (Peter Moylan) writes:
>
>The "arks" for "ask" pronunciation is part of the Newcastle (NSW, Australia)
>dialect, but I haven't heard it elsewhere in Australia.
>
>Not sure about ex-scape.  My children come up with many strange
>pronunciations, but I don't think I've heard them say that.
>
>Peter

Yep,  the "arks" for ask occurs also in Victoria (Aust.); as well as 
"exscape" and "hostipal".  Note that this appears to be distinct from the
"axe" pronunciation.  I have tried the "fifth" and "sixth" and seem to 
have little trouble with either -- nor can I remember hearing people
pronounce them other than spelling suggests.

"Exscape" and "hostipal" seem to be, usually, fairly easily corrected
with practice -- from a 4-year-old cute; from an 8-year-old surprising.
"Arks" occurs at all ages.

Mick

mick@mullara.met.unimelb.edu.au         | Most people choose to be 
Michael Johnson                         | shaped by their past rather
Dept. of Meteorology, Univ. of Melbourne| than mould their future.
Parkville, Australia                    |

Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: eepjm@wombat.newcastle.edu.au (Peter Moylan)
Subject: Re: pundette
Organization: University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 04:56:27 GMT

In article <Bsz4M1.9Bz@wpi.WPI.EDU>, padutton@wpi.WPI.EDU (Peter Alan Dutton) writes:

> (By the way, I'd assume that "patron" is probably short for "patronizer"
> as in "one who patronizes [the restaurant]". We do have a tendency
> to shorten words.)

I don't have an adequate dictionary with me at the moment, but I'm
pretty certain that it's the other way round: "patronizer" is long
for "patron".

Which in turn comes from the French patron = boss.  So much for the
equality between patrons and waitroids.

Peter
From: crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Forever Manglia
Date: 17 Aug 92 18:36:23 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

Wonderful.  Absolutely wonderful


-- 
Lauren Crawford  //  crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu
"Happy campers you are, happy campers you have been, and as far as I'm
concerned, happy campers you will always be."
                  --J. Danforth Quayle in American Samoa
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Re: Can I axe you a question?
Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 01:03:00 GMT

In article <1992Aug19.175303.17134@Princeton.EDU> roger@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig) writes:
>
>I'd be surprised to hear a radio announcer say "excape" (well, let's
>say, one on WCBS or the like); but it's a colloquial pronunciation, and
>all the tantrums in the worlds aren't going to make it go away.  In some
>contexts it's shocking; in others, it's just fine.

Why would you find it so shocking, Roger?  Everyone would understand what
he meant.  Isn't *that* all that's important?


--
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: bf455@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Bonita Kale)
Subject: Re: Thought without language?
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 13:16:27 GMT




In a previous article, miner@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu () says:

>In article <57560033@hpscit.sc.hp.com>, fish@hpscit.sc.hp.com (John Fisher) writes:
>
>[deletions]
>
>>  Is rational thinking possible without language?
>
>[deletions]
>
>No one has mentioned this yet, so I will.  I attended a weekend
>conference on deafness at Georgetown in 1985, where I learned among
>other things that there are a great many people on this planet who
>were born deaf or were deafened early in life and did not learn any
>signing system due to isolation from other deaf persons.
>
>A great many of these people live in the third world.
>
>Here are people with no symbol-manipulating system: no spoken or
>written language and no sign language system.  Now: they don't become
>brain surgeons, but they get along.  I can't find any research on
>these people, but my guess is they must do some thinking in order to
>survive in human society.
>


Oh, my God, you're right!  I even read a book about that and completely
forgot.  Susan Schaller's _A Man Without Words_ is wonderful.  The man she
knew was in touch with a whole community of wordless, languageless people,
who spent a lot of time on --of all things-- storytelling!  They acted out
events for each other.  They were languageless in that they didn't develop
standard signs for their meanings, but acted out everything fresh each
time.

But they were certainly rational human beings.  The man of the book's title
reacted to the realization of sign language much as Helen Keller
did--almost too dramatically, had it been fiction.

Bonita Kale
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: dks@athena.mit.edu (dks)
Subject: Re: "Route"
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 12:07:27 GMT

In article <1992Aug13.044648.24478@redsox.bsw.com>,
campbell@redsox.bsw.com (Larry Campbell) writes:
>In article <1992Aug12.142601.25493@athena.mit.edu>,
>dks@athena.mit.edu (dks) writes:
>> . . . I think the single phrase "paper route" has had more influence
>> than anything else on how the r-word is pronounced in the USA.  Even
>> within the usage patterns of a single individual, "paper route" seems
>> to have a reified "r-out" existence, independent of all other occurrences
>> and pronunciations of the r-word.  And since the "r-out" noun is so
>> firmly ensconced, I suppose it seems natural that the verb form would be
>> affected, given our propensity here in the US to indulge in the verbing
>> of nouns, and, as with "router," even the *wrong* nouns!
>
>Um, maybe in some (god-forsaken) locales...  but around here, when
>I had my paper route, the term always rhymed with "paper shoot".
>I never heard it pronounced any other way.


Yes, Larry, I pronounce the word as you do and I know what you mean.
Nevertheless, you and I are but two, and as young Jethro Clampett used to
say, it takes four to be everybody: we aren't quite there.  Out West, in
the wide open spaces beyond Harvard Yard, there are . . . a number of
people who think of you and me as effete Frenchified snobs.  Given my
religious beliefs, calling them "god-forsaken" is neither here nor there.
They draw no swords but what are sanctified, and we'd do well not to
provoke their wrath.


Dhanesh

[This post is dedicated to Boston, where "Hub" is short for "Hubris."]
From: epp@mala.bc.ca (Lorne Epp)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Madam // Cut your head hair
Date: 14 Aug 92 17:28:33 -0700
Organization: Malaspina College

In article <9208142144.AA02346@autarch.acsu.buffalo.edu>, xiaofei@acsu.buffalo.edu (XiaoFei Wang) writes:
> Two questions for 
> alt.usage.english readers, 
> 
> 1) What is the word to use to address a married ( elderly ) woman ?
>    I used to use Madam as I learned from my home country. But I was
>    told that Madam means also a woman who manages a brothel. I am confused
>    why quiet opposite meanings are assigned to the same word.

"Madam" is all right as long as you use it as a form of address, and not
as an ordinary noun.  That is, you may say "Good evening, madam" without
causing offense, but "she is a madam" would not be a very nice thing to say.

>    I am told that 'Mam' is the proper word, but I failed to find it from
>    my American Heritage Dictionary. 
> 
It is spelled "ma'am", and is a contraction of "madam".  "Ma'am" is more
popular than "madam."

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lorne Epp                                               epp@mala.bc.ca
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: baron@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Dennis Baron)
Subject: Re: pundette
Organization: University of Illinois
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 16:26:22 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.124728.21828@athena.mit.edu> dks@athena.mit.edu (dks) writes:
>From: dks@athena.mit.edu (dks)
>Subject: Re: pundette
>Date: 12 Aug 92 12:47:28 GMT
>In article <SLAGLE.92Aug11234521@sgi417.msd.lmsc.lockheed.com>,
>slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com writes:
>>In article <Bsrs1A.9w6@wpi.WPI.EDU>,
>>padutton@wpi.WPI.EDU (Peter Alan Dutton) writes:
>>
>>> "Waitron" sounds positively robotic to me. Can't we at least keep
>>> "waiter" and "waitress"?  And couldn't the sign simply read "Now Hiring"?
>>
>>Hiring what?  Dishwasherettes?  Buspersons?  Or would it be
>>people to wait on the customers?  If the last, why not just
>>waiters, i.e. those who wait and serve (no, I don't accept
>>"server").
>
>Why not "stander"?
>
>
>Dhanesh
>
>[This post is dedicated to John Milton, 1608-1674, R. I. P.]

They also serve who only stand and wait

(in case you were wondering)

Dennis



debaron@uiuc.edu               (\                   217-333-2392
                               \'\             fax: 217-333-4321
Dennis Baron                    \'\           __________
Department of English           / '|         ()_________)
Univ. of Illinois               \ '/          \ ~~~~~~~~ \
608 S. Wright St.                 \             \ ~~~~~~   \
Urbana IL 61801                   ==).            \__________\
                                 (__)             ()__________)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: baron@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Dennis Baron)
Subject: Re: pundette
Organization: University of Illinois
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 16:22:54 GMT

In article <1992Aug10.112029.8144@vax.oxford.ac.uk> wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
>From: wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk
>Subject: Re: pundette
>Date: 10 Aug 92 10:20:29 GMT
>In article <baron.10.713203736@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, baron@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Dennis Baron) writes:
>> 1. Is it fair to coin words that combine elements of different languages
>
>Why on earth not? If it produces a "clean" word, I'm all in favour.
>
>> 2. Are feminine-suffixed nouns declining?  (Our local Ponderosa has a
>> sign on its marquee: "Now Hiring Wait Staff")  Some experts claim that
>> women thespians are renouncing actress in favor of actor.  "I'm an
>> actor now, sure, but I'm just doing this until a job as a waitron
>> opens up."
>
>I would have thought so. By the way, can someone explain why "waitron" was
>coined and not a different word. It is *hideously* ugly. I continue to use
>"waiter" and "waitress", partly because I can't think of anything else.
>-- 
>
>Stephen Wilcox             |   Remember what happened to the dinosaurs!
>wilcox@maths.oxford.ac.uk  |    I did---and look what happened to me.


The substitutes for waiter/waitress I have seen include

waitron (derived variously from wait + tron and waiter + on)
wait
waitperson
server
and the collective, waitstaff.
there's also the pseudo-Latin plural, waitri

To my mind, only server has any promise, but I don't think waiter/waitress
is going to be displaced (except in want ads) in colloquial English.


debaron@uiuc.edu               (\                   217-333-2392
                               \'\             fax: 217-333-4321
Dennis Baron                    \'\           __________
Department of English           / '|         ()_________)
Univ. of Illinois               \ '/          \ ~~~~~~~~ \
608 S. Wright St.                 \             \ ~~~~~~   \
Urbana IL 61801                   ==).            \__________\
                                 (__)             ()__________)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: bf455@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Bonita Kale)
Subject: Re: hyphenation (the future vs. now)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 12:08:14 GMT




In a previous article, tony@iti.org (Anthony Skjellum) says:

>In writing and technical writing, strict hyphenation of English seems
>to be going by the wayside.  We do not hyphenate compound adjectives
>that have ly-adverbs, but we ought to hyphenate more than we typically
>do, to be strictly correct.


I don't know why everyone else does it, but I avoid hyphens because I have
to go back over my work and make sure they don't come at the end of a line,
or else do some extra keywork to keep the two halves together.  (I don't
want to confuse any editors.)


Bonita Kale

Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: padutton@wpi.WPI.EDU (Peter Alan Dutton)
Subject: Re: "Route"
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 12:22:19 GMT


>In article <9208111732.AA09133@MIT.EDU>, dks@MIT.EDU (dks) writes:
>> 
>> Some USAns pronounce "route" to rhyme with "out," i.e., without
>> reference to its origin.  Is there a geographic pattern to this
>> "new" pronunciation or is it better correlated with something else?

"Route" is always pronounced "root" as in "hoot", not "foot". For that
matter, "root" and "roof" are NOT pronounced "rut" and "ruff". "Aunt"
is pronounced "ant", not "ont", and "large sandwich using Italian 
bread" is pronounced "hero".

That's the way they do it in New York, so it MUST be right...
Peter!

Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: dks@athena.mit.edu (dks)
Subject: Re: Writing
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 03:58:47 GMT

In article <1992Aug17.171024.13777@dg-rtp.dg.com>,
cochran@spam.rtp.dg.com (A. Jing Hippy) writes:
>In article <1992Aug17.125155.18123@athena.mit.edu>,
>dks@athena.mit.edu (dks) writes:
>|> In USAn usage, I find both "x writes y" and "x writes to y" patterns.
>|> If anything -- and I don't have the data to back up the assertion -- it is
>|> non-USAn usage that seems to hearken to one pattern: the latter.
>|> I don't think the form of the verb has anything to do with it.
>|> I can't explain why, nor am I sure that the question of why is meaningful.
>
>Astounding.  This from the most prolific generator of questions in this
>group, many of which could be construed as much less than meaningful, not
>to mention a response to nearly every post that every other inhabitant
>of this group sends, many of which could be construed as less than 
>meaningful.

Sigh.  I guess it had to come to this, eventually.  I am sorry you
are "less than satisfied" with the content and frequency of my posts.
I shall endeavor to do better, and less.

In spite of your warning, however, I cannot resist the urge to ask one
more question: if you construe something "as less than meaningful,"
are you really construing it at all?


>Maybe it's just me, but that last sentence sounds completely and totally
>condescending.

No, it's probably not just you.  Sorry if you and/or anyone else were
offended.  The statement was factual.  If facts can condescend, so be it.


Wounded,
Dhanesh

PS: Methinks you're still chafing from that time I posted
    the line "Thank you for your docile cooperation."
    Now THAT was condescension!