HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Cannam@sc.ZIB-Berlin.de (Chris Cannam)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: another opposite in action (or is that 'inaction'?)
Date: 25 Jan 93 20:11:50
Organization: Konrad-Zuse-Zentrum fuer Informationstechnik Berlin
Distribution: alt
NNTP-Posting-Host: borodin.zib-berlin.de
In-reply-to: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk's message of Mon, 25 Jan 1993 18:15:11 +0000


In article <9301251815.AA19694@pizzabox.demon.co.uk> gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal) writes:

   Paraphrased from someone's posting on another group:

   : On a related note, does anyone know if <organisation name deleted>
   : have net access yet ? Much as I
   : would like to sell them <my product>, I doubt it would be
   : beyond their means.

   Clearly the use of 'I doubt that' here means 'I'm afraid that...'
   or 'I have no doubt that...'

I think you find this a bit in North East England.

							Chris

--
           on sighting mathematicians it should unhook the algebra from their
             minds and replace it with poetry;  on sighting poets it should
               unhook poetry from their minds and replace it with algebra

Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: scotty@netcom.com (J Scott Peter)
Subject: Re: The Second Syllable of "Clinton"
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 11:18:20 GMT

In article <1993Jan24.091351.13915@cc.uow.edu.au> boon@cc.uow.edu.au (Boon Chye Lee) writes:
>Watching the inauguration ceremony of Bill Clinton on TV, I was
>struck by how his name is pronounced over there in the US: 
>"Clin-n" as opposed to how it's pronounced here in Australia,
>"Clin-tn".
>
>A similar example is the name Martin, which I've heard Americans pronounce
>as "Mar-n" (in 2 syllables), whereas it would be rendered "Mar-tin" here.

I've never heard anybody pronounce it "Clin-n", if by that you mean
how the word "Clinnon" would be pronounced.  Americans say "Clin-tn", but
often with a glottal stop substituted for the "t".  This is perfectly
regular English.  The "t" gets changed to a glottal when followed by 
an "n", when spoken quickly.

Of course, I've always called him "Clintoid", ever since I knew he was
going to win.
-- 
J Scott Peter XXXIII  // "Instantiating new solutions in the emerging arena
scotty@netcom.com    // of transcending the de-facto horizons of industry-
Las Anjealous       // standard open paradigms."
From: briand@tekig5.pen.tek.com (Brian D Diehm)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: I need a word describing the quality of accumulated time
Date: 28 Jan 93 23:04:53 GMT
Reply-To: briand@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.

How about "accrued time"?

-Brian
--
Brian Diehm
Tektronix, Inc.                (503) 627-3437         briand@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM
P.O. Box 500, M/S 19-286
Beaverton, OR   97077
From: TSOS@uni-duesseldorf.de (Detlef Lannert)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Disc/Disk (was Re: Presently)
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 08:12:30 GMT
Organization: Universitaetsrechenzentrum, Heinrich-Heine-Universitaet, Duesseldorf
NNTP-Posting-Host: lannert.rz.uni-duesseldorf.de
Keywords: programme, program, endless, argument

In article <3066@eram.esi.COM.AU> dave@eram.esi.COM.AU (Dave Horsfall) writes:

>In article <1993Jan18.043428.13684@news.columbia.edu>,
>    gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:
>
>| The specification calls them compact discs, the audio industry calls them
>| compact discs, and the New York Times calls them compact disks, and I don't
>| know why, but it annoys everyone in the audio industry.
>
>The trend appears to be that anything flat and round is a disC, whereas
>the same spinning around inside a computer is a disK.
>
>Any ideas from whence this came?

From the same people who invented the "programme"/"program" distinction. 
And certainly for the same reasons.

[Note: We haven't had this for weeks!]
--
Detlef Lannert      DC3EK      E-Mail: tsos@rz.uni-duesseldorf.de
"Gedanken sind nicht stets parat,
man schreibt auch, wenn man keine hat."             Wilhelm Busch
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: rhb@world.std.com (Robert H Brueckner)
Subject: Re: a/an exceptions
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
	<C1FD2v.35x@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> <8447@tekig7.PEN.TEK.COM>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 01:31:24 GMT

In article <8447@tekig7.PEN.TEK.COM> briand@tekig5.pen.tek.com (Brian D Diehm) writes:

   Believe it or not, some folks pronounce "historical" without an aspirated
   "h." This makes the word "iss-torical", and by the phonetic rule then is
   preceded by "an." These same folks, who usually laugh at the Cockneys for
   dropping their "h"s, also pronounce "hotel" as "oh-tell." An hotel. Go figure.

   Of course, here I reveal my left-of-the-Atlantic provincialism.

   The whole thing with "a" vs "an" is because it is difficult to slide from
   one vowel sound to another without a consonant between. In the case of "h"
   words, it is particularly difficult to slide from soft "a" to aspirated "h."
   "An" provides the consonant.


OK, then how do you explain people who use "an" *and* aspirate the
"h"? This is the only way I've heard "an" used in this context. The
"h" is never elided, though it is pronounced quickly, gliding from "n"
to "i" and nearly getting lost.

RB

-- 
|"The truth is cruel, but it can be loved, and it makes free those who  |
| have loved it." -- George Santayana  // Opinions expressed here, when |
| clear and persuasive, are my own. --Rob Brueckner (rhb@world.std.com) |

Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: mjw@cch.coventry.ac.uk (Alien)
Subject: Re: piss-taking 
Organization: Coventry University
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 23:25:09 GMT


>>  >     I recently posted an article in another newsgroup where I used the phrase
>>  > "taking the piss". It seems that N.Americans didn't understand this phrase,
>>  > so can you lot out there tell me 
>>  > 
>>  >     1) is it only Britons who use it? Any Aussies care to comment?
>>
>>Kiwis certainly use it. Dunno about Aussies.
>                                     ^^^^^^^
>Blood oath! Specially when taking the piss out of Kiwis.

^^^^^^^^^^^^
Is this some Aussie expression? Or am I ignorant?

"Pissed" also has different meanings across the pond :-

U.S : 'I'm pissed' = 'I'm angry'
U.K : 'I'm pissed' = 'I'm drunk'   cf 'fissed as a part!'

Oh and here's my thoughts on all that  post about the meaning of 'fussy'
in the U.S and Canada: I'm not fussed about what you say! :-|

Matt.



-- 
______________________________________________________________________________
|                                 ******                                     |
| Name: Matthew Woodford                        "This sentence is false"     |
| Mail: mjw@uk.ac.cov.cck                     If the above sentence is true  |
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: boon@cc.uow.edu.au (Boon Chye Lee)
Subject: The Second Syllable of "Clinton"
Organization: University Of Wollongong
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 09:13:51 GMT

Watching the inauguration ceremony of Bill Clinton on TV, I was
struck by how his name is pronounced over there in the US: 
"Clin-n" as opposed to how it's pronounced here in Australia,
"Clin-tn".

A similar example is the name Martin, which I've heard Americans pronounce
as "Mar-n" (in 2 syllables), whereas it would be rendered "Mar-tin" here.

Is this just a US thing, or do Canadians do it too?

Just curious...

Boon
Economics Dept
University of Wollongong
NSW, Australia

Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Subject: Re: Words that are Opposites...
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 04:11:33 GMT

In article <8372@tekig7.PEN.TEK.COM> briand@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM writes:
>>The verb "to cleave", depending on context, can mean "to split apart" or
>>"to cling together".

>This is actually incorrect; as someone recently pointed out in this group
>(and I believe *everything* I read here!) one of the two opposite meanings
>came from a mistranslation in the King James Bible.

Well, so much for credibility.  AHD3 gives Old English cleofan and
Middle English cleven as etymology for the "split" meaning, and M.E. 
cleven, O.E. cleofian [!] for the "Stick" meaning.  The former is 
all over our speech: cloven, cleft, cleaver.  The latter can be heard 
echoing in German: kleben means, to stick.

Roger
From: rnewman@bbn.com (Ron Newman)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Guide for Teaching English in Japan
Date: 28 Jan 93 03:52:35 GMT
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman (BBN)
NNTP-Posting-Host: spcsun25.bbn.com

In article <9301262330.AA18415@pizzabox.demon.co.uk>, gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal) writes:
|> 
|> 	I am distributing a booklet called "A Comprehensive Guide For
|> 	Teaching English in Japan".
|> 
|> No you're not, you lying git, you're *selling* it.
|> 
|> 	We charge a minimum cost price of US$10 (including S&H expenses).

And what's he doing with those S&H Green Stamps? 
Haven't seen those mentioned in years...

-- 
Ron Newman		rnewman@bbn.com
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: eepjm@wombat.newcastle.edu.au (Peter Moylan)
Subject: Re: informatics
Organization: University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 10:52:30 GMT

In article <C1Etoz.2K7@incc.com>, jerry@incc.com (Jerry Rocteur) writes:
> I am seeing the word "informatics" used a lot by people over here in
> Belgium, yet this word is not in any of my 'English' dictionaries.
> 
> This is a word of French origin but is it used anywhere else, I
> particularly like the word better than ADP or EDP or IT, any
> comments?

It's not used in Australia, and to the best of my knowledge it's not
used elsewhere in the English-speaking world except in documents
translated from other languages*.  (My wife occasionally does
translations from French into English, in technical documents where
the word comes up all the time, and that word has given us no end
of trouble.)  To the best of my knowledge the concept is simply
missing from our language.  When I first came across the word in
French, I had to have it explained to me a number of times, by
several different people, before I understood it.  Each time I thought
that I had worked it out, it turned out that I was missing an
important nuance.

    [* After writing that, I remembered that I have in fact seen
      a case of an Australian University with a Faculty of
      Informatics - but their meaning of the word is rather
      different from its meaning in Belgian English.]

It's certainly not equivalent to any of ADP or EDP or IT, although
those can be substituted for it in certain limited contexts.  Nor is
it equivalent to Computer Science or Computer Engineering or
Information Science, etc., although again there are contexts where
any one (but not all simultaneously) will work as translations.
On the other hand, it's a bit more restrictive than the union of
all of these things.

I believe that the reason that the word is used in Belgium but not
here is a difference in the education system.  In courses leading
to a technical qualification, we put subjects together in different
ways.

To illustrate: my own qualifications are in Electrical Engineering,
but my work overlaps very strongly with what Computer Scientists do.
I used to tell my Belgian acquaintances that I was an "ingenieur
electricien", but after a while I realised that that was giving a
false impression.  Now I tell them that I work in l'informatique,
and the message is more accurately received.

While writing this, it occurred to me that the English word
"cybernetics" used to mean roughly what the French word "informatique"
means.  Unfortunately the meaning of "cybernetics" has changed
quite a bit over time, so it's no longer anywhere near being a
reasonable translation.
-- 
Peter Moylan                      eepjm@wombat.newcastle.edu.au

P.S.  In case anyone cares, I wasn't joking when I suggested
that there exists a dialect of English called Belgian English.

Which reminds me of a time when I was at a conference and someone
congratulated a German colleague on his fluency in English.  His
reply was "But I don't speak English at all.  I speak ICL: International
Conference Language."
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Subject: Re: concertising
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Distribution: alt
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 22:22:26 GMT

In article <1993Jan19.4867.9479@dosgate> "peter curran" <peter.curran@canrem.com> writes:
>I heard an interesting report on the CBC this morning - quoting an
>interview with Rachmaninoff from about the turn of the century:

>"When I concertise I cannot compose; ... when I am composing I
>cannot touch the piano."

>I have no idea what language this interview was in originally.
>Maybe "concertise" came from Russian?  Although in that case
>it must have lost a few prefizes along the way.   (:-))

It probably came from the German "Konzertieren."  

Anyway, to test the jargon hypothesis, I took a likely book off the
shelf (actually, out of the box) to look for the word.  I chose
Harold Schonberg's _The Great Pianists_ (1963).   Schonberg wrote for
the New York Times; parts of the book were originally written as 
articles for _High Fidelity_.  In other words, Schonberg wrote for
the educated layman; the book contains no technical descriptions of
music, nothing a reader with a little familiarity with music would
not understand.  His NYT credentials mean that he wrote to a fairly
exacting standard; and my reading of his prose confirms this.  

"Concertize" is used throughout the book, with no explanation or 
qualification.  e.g., p. 250.  

Now, that's 30 years ago.  It may very well be that the word has 
fallen out of favor.  But sightings in America and England in 
general contexts (i.e., not the places where jargon appears)
for a century (OED citations, the above, and this one) gainsay
any accusations of "jargon," "non-word," "neologism," "sloppy,"
etc.

Roger

Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: lauriea@sco.COM (Lauriea)
Subject: Re: Back from the UK
Organization: docland
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 12:00:42 GMT
Keywords: Australia, toilet


Several months ago, I visited Australia for the 
first time.  My first week there, my husband and I were
at Flinder Street station in Melbourne, waiting
for the next train to Berwick.  The train
was scheduled to arrive in about 7 minutes,
and I had to go to the bathroom/restroom/toilet.
I spotted a train employee (an older man working
at one of the platforms), and I went up to him
and asked him where the nearest restroom was.
``No restrooms near here,'' he said, ``but there's
an old toilet in a box over on platform 1 that you can use.''
He then preceded to give me directions to platform 1,
which I didn't hear because I was too freaked out
imagining the old toilet in a box. 
My husband, who is Australian, got quite a kick
out of my reaction.
Newsgroups: alt.english.usage
Subject: Re: Back from the UK
Followup-To: 
Distribution: world
Organization: docland
Keywords: 

Several months ago, I visited Australia for the 
first time.  My first week there, my husband and I were
at Flinder Street station in Melbourne, waiting
for the next train to Berwick.  The train
was scheduled to arrive in about 7 minutes,
and I had to go to the bathroom/restroom/toilet.
I spotted a train employee (an older man working
at one of the platforms), and I went up to him
and asked him where the nearest restroom was.
``No restrooms near here,'' he said, ``but there's
an old toilet in a box over on platform 1 that you can use.''
He then preceded to give me directions to platform 1,
which I didn't hear because I was too freaked out
imagining the old toilet in a box. 
My husband, who is Australian, got quite a kick
out of my reaction.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: brea9430@mach1.wlu.ca (breadner ken u)
Subject: Words that are Opposites...
Organization: Wilfrid Laurier University
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 19:51:49 GMT

Here's an idiosyncracy I have always found fascinating.

The verb "to cleave", depending on context, can mean "to split apart" or
"to cling together".

A "fat chance" and a "slim chance" are one and the same.

Are there more of these wierd phrases out there?
-- 
Ken Breadner	(brea9430@mach1.wlu.ca)	Wilfrid Laurier University
lunatic		(the BREADbox...) 	Waterloo, Ontario, Canada 
"If you have built your castles in the air, do not despair. That is where
they belong. Now put the foundations under them." --Thoreau
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Subject: Re: between, among
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 04:43:07 GMT

In article <Mildred_Thill-240738131021@madadm02.educ.ualberta.ca> Mildred_Thill@ACT.EDUC.UALBERTA.CA (Mildred Thill) writes:
>A few days ago, a parents group I belong to got into a bit of an arguement
>about how to use beween and among. Some of us thought that between should
>be used only when referring to two things, but not three or more. However
>some said that in the sentence, "We want to improve communication among
>teachers, parents and the members of the community", 'between' would work
>just as well, with the proviso that it emphasized the two way communication
>between each possible pair in the group.

The latter is correct.  The "between=two" idea was imposed retroactively
by grammar teachers and has never reflected actual usage.  See the OED
for an excellent exposition of the distinction.  AHD calls the "between=2"
rule "a widely repeated but unjustified tradition."

Roger
From: gsc@coombs.anu.edu.au (Sean Case)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: a/an exceptions
Date: 27 Jan 93 10:29:40 GMT
Organization: Australian National University
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.76.2

rhb@world.std.com (Robert H Brueckner) writes:

>OK, then how do you explain people who use "an" *and* aspirate the
>"h"? This is the only way I've heard "an" used in this context. The
>"h" is never elided, though it is pronounced quickly, gliding from "n"
>to "i" and nearly getting lost.

Well, I use "an" before an unstressed "h" and "a" before a stressed one.
Thus
  an historian
but
  a history.

Of course, this _is_ an affectation...

Sean Case
--
Sean Case               gsc@coombs.anu.edu.au
"[...] if a poststructuralist doesn't get you,
 a deconstructionist will."--Ursula K. LeGuin
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Subject: Re: The word FUCK
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 04:28:49 GMT

In article <727839462snx@sloth.equinox.gen.nz> hairy@sloth.equinox.gen.nz (Phil Anderson) writes:

>In article <1993Jan21.201233.8416@Princeton.EDU> 
>roger@astro.princeton.edu writes:

>  > >I've heard from an artsie friend that the original inhabitants of Britain 
>  > >(the Angles and Saxons) used the word FUCK as a normal part of their 
>  > >language. 

>  > Well, they certainly didn't write it, and there are quite a few Anglo-Saxon
>  > texts.  

>What word did they use? I ask out of pure prurience...

I don't know.  My link to the online OED seems to be down right now,
so I'll have to wait to see if there were antecedents along the same
line.

>(I'd note that although there's a fair amount of Anglo Saxon extant, 
>we're undoubtably missing a lot of their lexicon).

Of course, including any and all words peculiar to the spoken language. 

>  > Then why did English continue to be written?  Only high-class folks
>  > knew *how* to write.  Sorry, that one doesn't work.  French was

>Most of the literate at that stage would presumably have been 
>ecclesiastics, not the high-class as such. The rank and file of these 
>folk would have been native speakers, and most likely wrote in their 
>own language or Latin.

Sure-- but remember that the clergy did represent a cultural and 
educational elite.  And they did do lots of writing in English,
French, and Latin. 

Roger
From: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: concertising
Date: 26 Jan 93 23:38:33 GMT

Roger:
:OK:

:First citation is from 1883, in a metaphoric use marked off in quote marks:
:farm animals 'concertizing.' This indicates that the word already existed
:in its non-metaphoric use; it would be weird to invent a word for the purpose
:of using it metaphorically, without establishing its simple meaning.  This
:is American, from Harper's Magazine.

Not at all - I refer you to our recent discussion of 'semi-literate
quotation marks'... clearly the trend has been around for a long time :-)

G
From: meachem@acsu.buffalo.edu (The Meach)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: between, among
Date: 27 Jan 93 00:52:49 GMT
Organization: UB

In article <Mildred_Thill-240738131021@madadm02.educ.ualberta.ca> Mildred_Thill@ACT.EDUC.UALBERTA.CA (Mildred Thill) writes:
>A few days ago, a parents group I belong to got into a bit of an arguement
>about how to use beween and among. Some of us thought that between should
>be used only when referring to two things, but not three or more. However
>some said that in the sentence, "We want to improve communication among
>teachers, parents and the members of the community", 'between' would work
>just as well, with the proviso that it emphasized the two way communication
>between each possible pair in the group.

It's like deja vu all over again! ;-)

Hopefully, [Hullo, Detlef!] someone is closer to a source than I am at 
the moment. . .

--jtm
From: glen@slate.cs.wisc.edu (Glen Ecklund)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Canadian English
Date: 25 Jan 93 16:06:52 GMT
Organization: U of Wisconsin Madison - Computer Sciences

Matthew Isaak <mi0n+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

>Linda Zinn writes:
>>Example: When I (an American) say, in reference to food, for instance,
>>"I'm not too fussy about hamburgers," I mean any old burger will do.
>>When my Canadian fiance says "I'm not too fussy about hamburgers,"
>>he means he doesn't like hamburgers very much. (This could be compounded
>>by the fact that he's a first-generation Canadian whose speech is often
>>flavored by his Scottish heritage.)

>Thank you for pointing this out.  Im a Canadian who lives in Pittsburgh
>now.  When i say fussy, as in "I'n not too fussy about hamburgers", I
>mean I dont like hamburgers.  If I wanted to say that any old burger
>will do, I would say "I'm not too *picky* about hamburgers.  This is
>general to Canada and not an artefact of your husbands heritage. 

I'd guess a fussy baby is quite different in Canada than in the US.
-- 
Every child shall be treated with complete respect.

Glen Ecklund     glen@cs.wisc.edu   (608) 262-1318 Office, 262-1204 Dept. Sec'y
Department of Computer Sciences        1210 W. Dayton St., Room 3355
University of Wisconsin, Madison       Madison, Wis. 53706  U.S.A.