HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jac54@cas.org ()
Subject: Re: English English
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 12:02:32 GMT

In article <1992Nov15.190147.12002@osf.org> david@postman.gr.osf.org (David George) writes:
>In article <15NOV199211314308@sscvx1.ssc.gov>, godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov (LAURENCE GODFREY) writes:
>|> In article <1992Nov15.040331.29535@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>,
>
>|> Who owns BT these days, anyway?
>|>
>|> We're not quite sure.  We are told it's the shareholders, but I don't know
>|> anyone who will admit to being a shareholder.
>
>The government still had a large shareholding.  Arn't the names of the
>shareholders in a plc public ?
>
>|> Are you suggesting that it is the kingpin of the 4th Reich?
>
>Hard to imagine that the Germans have bought it, it runs far too efficiently
>and with far too little bureaurocracy for their liking.  Last time I tried
>getting a line in the new improved Bundesrepublik they told me they'd run
>out of numbers and I would have to wait 3 months.  The size of the waiting
>list being governed by the shortfall of numbers !
>
>David.

	I never found the Bundespost to be excessively warm and lovable.
	In all fairness, when their engineers first went into East
	German "telecomm" conduits (I use the word very loosely) they
	found, inter alia:

1.      Lines covered in paper insulation;

2.      World War II vintage hand grenades with the pins out.

	Under those circumstances, I can understand their priorities.
	I remember the "Spiegel" reported that the original unification
	budget would barely cover the cost of revamping the phone system.

	Alec.
From: martin.baines@uk.sun.com (Martin Baines - Sun UK - SE Manager Cambridge)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: English English
Date: 16 Nov 1992 13:29:35 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems Ltd
Distribution: world
Reply-To: martin.baines@uk.sun.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: bottomdog.uk.sun.com

In article 29535@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU, ckp2n@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Christina Powell) writes:
>Who owns BT these days, anyway?

I do. Or at least a very small part of it.

It was "privatised" in the early 80s: i.e. the government floated a
majority of its share in it on the stock market. Since then more
or the government owned shares were sold, leaving about 20% in
the governments hands.

Regards

Martin

---
"You might say that, but I couldn't possibly comment"

Martin Baines, Sales Support Manager,
Sun Microsystems Ltd, 306 Science Park, Cambridge, CB4 4WG, UK
Phone: +44 223 420421                 Fax: +44 223 420257
JANET:     Martin.Baines@uk.co.sun    Other UK:  Martin.Baines@sun.co.uk
Internet:  Martin.Baines@UK.sun.com
X.400:     g=martin s=baines prmd=sunir admd=mci c=us
From: esh2@po.CWRU.Edu (Evelyn S. Hlabse)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Anyone out there from Shetland Is. ?
Date: 19 Nov 1992 15:18:04 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: esh2@po.CWRU.Edu (Evelyn S. Hlabse)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, kjell@emke.chalmers.se (Kjell Siimon) says:

>
>Hiya, folks around the misty isles!!!
>
>I would like to get in contact with anyone from/living on Shetland Islands.
>Would be happy for any reply
>so, thanks in advance.
>
>(I've also posted this question
> in soc.culture.celtic)
>
>
>Kjell the Brave
>

I'm from the Orkneys - close but not close enough right.

Evelyn
-- 

Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: ag129@cus.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant)
Subject: Re: Accent and Dialect, the politics there
Organization: U of Cambridge, England
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 13:51:17 GMT

In article <CC.92Nov20113809@arran.dcs.ed.ac.uk> cc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Chris Cooke) writes:
>He didn't mean, of course, "a brand of modern-day English English".  Nobody
>disputes that Scots, ne Inglis, is an Anglo-Saxon language.  What is in
>dispute is whether it's a branch of modern English or whether it's
>independently descended from old Anglo-Saxon "English", a rather different
>language.  Those in the know seem to prefer the latter theory, I've heard.

So your argument rests entirely on the date at which the Scottish dialects
(which you treat as a single entity) somehow 'separated' from the English
dialects?  I.e. that in 1300 the languages spoken in Devonshire and
Northumbria were the same, while that spoken in Edinburgh was different?
What date do you think this separation took place?

By the way, do you claim that American and Jamaican English are not dialects
of English, but languages in their own right?
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:15928 soc.culture.celtic:7346
From: mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,soc.culture.celtic
Subject: Re: Accent and Dialect, the politics there
Date: 16 Nov 92 09:46:04 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London, UK.

From: walker@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Graham Walker, 227 West Old Main,268-3847,)
>d) Finally, hows this for a debating point (re. French influence).
>I always wonder why the Scots accepted the Reformation movement, while
>the Irish (who had a comparable cultural background) remained Catholic.
>My possibly, rather simple, solution is that both cultures were more
>willing to associated themselves with a religious movement that was the
>opposite of the nation that was trying to achieve hegemony over them.
>In the case of the Irish, they were having problems with the English,
>while the Scots were having more problems with the French (Mary of
>Guise(sp?)) than they were with the English. Comments?

I don't think it has anything to do with the French. I think
the French influence on the Scots is being grossly exaggerated
in this thread.

I suspect that had a fiery Calvinist preacher got established
in Ireland, like Knox in Scotland, but in Ireland he would have
had to be Gaelic-speaking, Ireland would have gone over to
Prebyterianism, and like Scotland would have been opposing
Anglicanism on the grounds that it was still too Catholic for
their liking. Irish Catholicism was largely maintained as a
badge of opposition to the English, and it is notable that it
takes a peculiarily puritanical Celtic form, a long way removed
from say the Latin Catholicism of the Italians, but in some
ways (ironically) reminiscent of Scots Calvinism.

Matthew Huntbach
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov (LAURENCE GODFREY)
Subject: Re: * Looking for computer dealers...
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Organization: Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 00:32:00 GMT

In article <92322.170709U26043@uicvm.uic.edu>, SALIM <U26043@uicvm.uic.edu>              writes...
>Hi, I am a computer reseller and I am looking for computer dealers in
>England and other European countries.  Please respond to my account
>with any information.  Thanks in advance..
>                                              Salim Lakha
>                                             u26043@uicvm.uic.edu
>                                             fax: (708)673-0326
Hi,
  I have a company, Deltronics, which deals in hardware and some software.
How can I help you, or how can you help us?

Laurence
From: exspes@sunlab1.bath.ac.uk (P E Smee)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: English Toffee
Date: 17 Nov 92 14:33:52 GMT
Organization: University of Bath, England

In the referenced article, jrundle@david.wheaton.edu (John Rundle) writes:
>I am trying to make some toffee from an old English recipe which requires a
>small tin of condensed milk.  My dilemma is, what size is a small tin?

Just looked in our local shop, small tin is 218 grams.  I'd bet on it
being 8 fluid ounces -- condensed milk is a bit denser than water.  By
rough (fingerlength) measurement, the tin is about 2.5 inches high, and
about the same in diameter.

>One more question.  Is Swiss milk the same as condensed milk?

Who can say?  What's 'Swiss milk'?  Condensed milk is milk thickened up
by boiling, and with tons of sugar added -- I'd bet it's probably a
saturated solution of sugar in milk.  Not to be confused with
'evaporated milk', which doesn't have all the sugar thrown in.
Certainly used to be available in the States, no problem, and even
called 'condensed milk'.  I had a friend who was addicted to it.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller)
Subject: Re: Fish and chips
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 03:20:22 GMT

In article <Bxtuz7.HsK@news.fai.com> pault@ossi.com (Paul Taylor) writes:
>In article <359t02zN2bhg01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> czl30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Chris Lee) writes:
>>Today's lunch special in the Amdahl cafeteria, Fish & chips & cole slaw:
>>
>>Me:            Fish and chips please, but no cole slaw
>>Dinner lady:   Do you want French fries?
>>
>>AAAAAAAAAAARRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHH...........
>>
>>Chris Lee
>
>
>Do not despair. I have detected signs of hope in land. There are a
>few reputeable eating holes that recognise
>a: Fish ain't fish unless it is wrapped in Newspaper
>b: Vinegar and salt can be added
>
>c: and no you don't get a pickle....
>
>-- 

Over here at Sun, we have a bottle of malt vinegar on the 
condiment rack.  I was pretty impressed by that.  The fish
will not be wrapped in newspaper, but I don't regard that
as a problem.  :-)


Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,soc.culture.greek
From: jlb10@cl.cam.ac.uk (John Beaven)
Subject: Re: The Scarlet Letter
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 16:51:28 GMT

In article <28405@castle.ed.ac.uk>, jeremy@castle.ed.ac.uk (Jeremy Henderson) writes:

|> [Kafkaesque story about registering his "wedlock-free" daughter 
|> on someone's passport deleted]

I don't think I can offer any suggestions as to how to circunvent this,
but it does raise the interesting question of what nationality your
Apple is.

If the Brit authorities say she's not British cos you are not married,
and the Greeks say she's not Greek until her birth has been registered
in Athens (or perhaps I've misunterstood and she is Greek but can't
get a passport), does it follow that she is currently stateless?

If that is the case, you may raise that question with the British 
authorities, and try to get her some stateless person travel documents
from, I presume, some United Nations office here.

If you start to follow this up, it could be the case that the droid
you talked to in the passport office would pass you on to its 
superior, and once you have pestered your way through enough rungs 
of the ladder, you may meet someone who will agree to put her on 
your passport.

You may be able to get a Citizens Adive office to help you.

My mother (Spanish) had an analogous problem when she married my 
father (Brit). 

The Spanish bozo at the passport office (this was in the early 60s)
claimed that in marrying a foreigner she had ceased to be Spanish
and was therefore a Brit. The fact that the British authorities 
hadn't been consulted on that matter, let alone granted her UK 
nationality, didn't seem to concern them. So the question arose, 
was she stateless, and if so where does she get statless person 
travel documents?

Humm, err, I think you'd better talk to my boss about it.

[repeat the above 2 paragraphs n times until...]

The issue eventually got to the Minister of the Interior, who 
agreed she must have been Spanish all along, and gave the go-ahead 
for her passport to be renewed.

Good luck,

John
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,soc.culture.canada,sci.research.careers
From: taravade@mueller.ecn.purdue.edu (Kunal N Taravade)
Subject: Re: Poor old Lawrence Godfrey...
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: 23 Nov 92 16:36:44 GMT

th2_oate@csd.uwe.ac.uk (Tom Oates) writes:
jljlejej
Chris Passier) writes:-

>>|>So much for free speech in God's own country!  Anway, their attempt has 
>>|>failed, and if I were to stop using...rant...rave...
>>|>
>>|>Laurence
>>|>

>> I'm new to this group but.... is this guy for real!?!?

>Yes.

>Imagine being stuck in a lift for 2 hours with Lawrence Godfrey...

>-- 
>****************************************************************************** 
>* Tom Oates (Univ. of West of England) * DISCLAIMER:I speak only for myself. * 
>* Email to: th2_oate@uk.ac.uwe.csd     * PGP 2.0 Key available upon request. *
>******************************************************************************
From: dbernard@clesun.Central.Sun.COM (Dave Bernard)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Antique Map Dealers?
Date: 19 Nov 92 13:02:40 GMT
Reply-To: dbernard@clesun.Central.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems

Anyone know of any antique dealers within the UK that
specialize in old maps (ie, >100 yrs old)?

	Tnx,
	Dave
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller)
Subject: Re: English English
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 21:05:53 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.173323.4472@informix.com> proberts@informix.com (Paul Roberts) writes:
>In article <1992Nov16.172832.3897@informix.com> proberts@informix.com (Paul Roberts) writes:
>>Laurence, is there anything at all that you don't dislike? Anything?
>>
>>Paul
>>
>
>By the way, this is a purely rhetorical question; I really don't give 
>a damn. Let's see, I think "/: *godfrey@sscvx1/h:j" is what I need at
>this point.
>

Hey, thanks for sharing.  

Plonker.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: prodger@leland.Stanford.EDU (phillip prodger)
Subject: Re: Jelly Baby Art
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 18:04:51 GMT

In article <yvonne.722296964@well.sf.ca.us> yvonne@well.sf.ca.us (Yvonne Lee) writes:

>
>>Which are better, Jelly Babies or gummy bears.  And which came first?
>
>Jelly babies must be better.  We won the war, didn't we?
>
>I can remember getting jelly Babies from the off license when I was a kid,
>but I don't remember seeing gummy bears until I became an adult.  It could 
>just be one of those international trade barrier things, though.  
>
>ooo, protectionism. nasty.

It could be one of those international trade barrier things, or it could
be something more mischevious.  I'm not sure when gummy bears were invented,
but you're right that gummy bears weren't sold in the U.K. and U.S. until
the late 70's or thereabouts (just a guess).  

Seems to me yet another 'cultural penetration' to marvel at.  A foreign rival
infiltrating our economy, and our culture.

Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:16048 alt.folklore.urban:28883 misc.legal:20077
From: tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com (Terry Carroll)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban,misc.legal
Subject: Re: The amazing disappearing British Constitution
Date: 17 Nov 92 22:19:22 GMT
Reply-To: tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com (Terry Carroll)
Organization: Amdahl Corporation

In article <1e1n4rINNe7d@fido.asd.sgi.com>, livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon 
Livesey) writes:
> If you look back at the part of the posting you edited out, you will find
> one  tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com arguing that Bills to benefit individual
> persons are outlawed by the ban on Bill of Attainder.    I'm just commenting
> that not only does this appear not ban such Bills, but that they continue
> to be passed.

Correction: I said to punish, not to benefit.

Terry Carroll - tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com - 408/992-2152
The opinions presented above are not necessarily those of a sound mind.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller)
Subject: Re: Splitting up s.c.b and debate on Uk.* groups going international, vo
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 07:36:58 GMT

In article <1992Nov19.123419.17629@infodev.cam.ac.uk> ag129@cus.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant) writes:
>In article <27533@dog.ee.lbl.gov> mike@frey.lbl.gov (Michael Helm) writes:
>>Craig Cockburn writes:
>>>You assume everyone has kill files or an equivalent.
>>>I don't.
>>
>>This is a disastrous handicap in coping with USENET -- some form of
>>article killing has got to be in the basic toolbox.  Otherwise, it's
>>like having a radio whose volume is permanently wired to "all the way
>>up".  I always tell people in this situation to stop what they are
>>doing & go find software that does the job.  Can this really be
>>unavailable for the architecture or operating system you are using?
>
>I have just looked at two extremes of shareware/PD newsreaders (Trumpet
>for MS-DOS, and the CSDL newsreader for MVS/ISPF), and neither have kill
>files.  I think they are a Unix invention.  Certainly they are implemented
>at the client end and are nothing to do with the NNTP protocol.  So yes,
>in general, kill files are unavailable.


Yes, they are a "unix" invention (rather, they originated
on the usenet software which was developed for the unix platform).
So was usenet.  I have no idea of the user demographics for usenet
participants these days, but most of us who have been around for
any period of time (I've been puttering away break times and so on
with usenet for ~7 years now) still tend to think that everyone
here is on a unix box using one of the 'standard' newsreaders.

Even the most old-fashioned and plain vanilla unix-based readers
support kill files, and so should ALL newsreaders.  7 years ago
we had kill files, and we had a tiny fraction of the volume of muck
that clogs up the 'net these days.  It is mind-boggling to me that
anyone would develop a newsreader without some sort of filtering
capability.  

Despite my precise lack of knowledge regarding 'net demographics these days, 
I disagree with your statement that "in general, kill files are unavailable".  
Maybe in your neck of the woods, but I would be surprised if your experience 
translates to the general case.

Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:16238 alt.folklore.urban:29242
From: gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban
Subject: Re: Catholic/Anglican faith was(Can the Prime Minster be Catholic?)
Date: 20 Nov 92 22:36:37 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX


Matthew Huntback writes, in part,

>Now you complain about giving communion to those who are not
>confirmed. Presumably, this means you don't want to give
>communion to those who don't understand what it is all about.
>Why then should you be so offended when the Catholic Church
>doesn't want to give communion to someone whose understanding
>of what communion is is radically different from what the
>Catholic Church believes communion is?

Not that I have any complaint myself, but here is how we do it
in my church, The Christian Community (it has a few small con-
gregations in Britain and the U.S. and a larger following
in Germany as Die Christengemeinschaft). We observe all seven
sacraments, and these, especially our form of the Eucharist,
form the central foundation of the church.  We offer the
eucharist sacrament, called the Act of Consecration of Man,
to everyone unconditionally. You can walk in off the street 
if you like and take communion.  

Yes, we believe that understanding is important, but also that 
even after extensive instruction, the reality of what happens 
there is infinitely deeper than even the deepest understanding 
can grasp.  We believe that this sacrament, where both bread 
and wine are offered to communicants, is to be grown into 
according to the developing capability of each person's conscious 
understanding, feeling, and will.  Whether this should apply to 
other forms of the eucharistic sacrament I cannot say.  I 
should add that this service is not open to children under 
fourteen, for whom, however, there is a special children's 
service.

I should say that our understanding of communion is rather
closer to the Catholic idea than the protestant.

Gerry Palo (73237.2006@compuserve.com)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,soc.culture.canada,sci.research.careers
From: brea9430@mach1.wlu.ca (breadner kenneth cecil joseph u)
Subject: Re: Canadian free speech in action
Organization: Wilfrid Laurier University
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 02:18:30 GMT

In article <18NOV199212445009@sscvx1.ssc.gov> godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov (LAURENCE GODFREY) writes:
>Some of my Canadian readers have complained to the lab at which one of my accounts
>is based, in an attempt to have me prevented from using the vax from which I
>usually access usenet.  It seems that rather than endure my complaints about
>their awful and intensely boring country, they would rather try to construct
>a case for interfering with my legitimate work.
>
>So much for free speech in God's own country!  Anway, their attempt has failed,
>and if I were to stop using the vax in question there are many other places
>from which I can access usenet.
>
>Laurence
>
Does anyone else on here want to send a letter to his sysadmin? 

Damn it, I am sick and tired of listening to this man rave about Canada.
He's been doing it for at least six months. Let me tell you something,
sir: Every post I see of yours has the direct effect of making me even
more proud to be a citizen of Canada. Especially since you are not.

His main argument is that the country has no culture. He's 100% dead
wrong. We have little sense of our history, collectively speaking, but we
do have lots of culture. And it's not American culture either. To confirm
this, call a Canadian American and watch his/her reaction.

It sounds to me as if this person is the sort who is only happy when he is
bitching at something/someone. As for Canada being boring--I must laugh.
This is one of the most diverse countries in the world, with amongst the
greatest geography and friendliest people. 

If Mr. Godfrey were female, I'd say he had a good case of PMS: not pre, or
post, but permanent.

-- 
Ken Breadner          |Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Canada
brea9430@mach1.wlu.ca |"Life is what happens when you're busy making other
(the BREADbox...)     |plans" --John Lennon
Disclaimer: you mean somebody's taking something I said SERIOUSLY?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: jac54@cas.org ()
Subject: Re: Accent and Dialect, the politics there
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 11:59:27 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.100722.29582@dcs.qmw.ac.uk> mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:
>From: jeremy@castle.ed.ac.uk (Jeremy Henderson)
>>~and have noticed that they tend to use "you-all" for 2nd person
>>~plural quite consistently, a construction which I had
>>~previously associated with the southern USA.
>>
>>"You all" ("y'all") is commonly used in S. US to indicate a singular person.


	When addressing a single person, I think this is the impersonal
	voice. "y'all" is used to address groups too.  The personal
	interrogative in the southern U.S. is often " 'utchadoin'?"
	(' represents the glottal stop).

	Yes, I know it's irrelevant, but it's time for a cheap laugh.

	Alec.

>
>I think in the south (of England) we would use "you lot" when
>we wanted to stress that the second person was to be in the
>plural. Is this general elsewhere, would you not get it in
>those dialects where "youse" occurs?
>
>Matthew Huntbach
From: mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Accent and Dialect, the politics there
Date: 18 Nov 92 10:07:22 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London, UK.

From: jeremy@castle.ed.ac.uk (Jeremy Henderson)
>~and have noticed that they tend to use "you-all" for 2nd person
>~plural quite consistently, a construction which I had
>~previously associated with the southern USA.
>
>"You all" ("y'all") is commonly used in S. US to indicate a singular person.

I think in the south (of England) we would use "you lot" when
we wanted to stress that the second person was to be in the
plural. Is this general elsewhere, would you not get it in
those dialects where "youse" occurs?

Matthew Huntbach
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british