HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pdc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Paul Crowley)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: What does bis mean? (was What does Mk II mean?)
Date: 10 Jan 93 19:43:06 GMT
Reply-To: pdc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Paul Crowley)
Organization: Edinburgh University

Quoting john@liebnitz.ssd.kodak.com (John Hall) in article <1993Jan8.214256.16082@pixel.kodak.com>:
>What does "bis" mean, as in "V.32 bis"?  From context it appears to mean
>something like "Mk II".

If the French put a house between Number 32 and Number 34, they call it
32bis.

By the way, what was this doing in alt.fan.douglas-adams?
  __                                   _____
\/ o\ Paul Crowley   pdc@dcs.ed.ac.uk  \\ //
/\__/ Trust me. I know what I'm doing.  \X/ 
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: evan@hpl.hp.com (Evan Kirshenbaum)
Subject: Re: chaps
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 18:31:14 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <38050@uflorida.cis.ufl.edu> djohns@elm.circa.ufl.edu (David A. Johns) writes:
>Are you aware of anyone who uses "guys" for females or mixed groups
>in the third person?  In my experience it's always second person, so
>that no ambiguity is possible, since the sex of the addressees is
>known.

Of course. Me.  (Demographics: born Chicago, 1964, live Bay Area.)

I'm a big fan of women's basketball, and its quite common to refer to
the other team as "these guys" or "those guys".  (Then again, they
also play "man" or "man-to-man" defense--I once heard an announcer
call it a "person" defense, and it really sounded weird!)

For me, "these/those guys" can refer deicticly or anaphorically to any
group group: male, female, mixed, or unknown.

"These/those/the girls" can only refer to a group of all females.  It
would only be used if the sex of the referents were being emphasized
or used to disambiguate the referent.

There is no easy way to do the same for a group which is male or
mixed.  "The guys" almost always means a male group (or the male
subset of a group), but it also has a meaning roughly "the gang" or
"the crowd I hang out with", which can be all female.

>Well, theoretically it could be used to address the males alone in a
>mixed group, but I don't believe I've ever heard such a usage.  In my
>suage, in speaking to a mixed group, "Do you guys want to go bowling?"
>would unambiguously address the entire group.  If I wanted to single
>out the males, I'd have to say something like "OK, addressing just the
>guys now [third person!], do you want to go bowling tonight?"

I think I'd say "Do the guys want to go bowling" if it was a large
group and try to disambiguate "Do you guys want to go bowling" by
eye contact if it was a small enough group.

Evan Kirshenbaum		       +------------------------------------
    HP Laboratories		       | U.S. farm policy is, along with North
    3500 Deer Creek Road, Building 26U | Korea and the Stanford liberal arts
    Palo Alto, CA  94304	       | faculty, one of the world's last
				       | outposts of anti-free-market
    kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com	       | dogmatism.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: baron@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Dennis Baron)
Subject: Re: history's bogus etymology
Organization: University of Illinois
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 21:21:20 GMT

In article <1993Jan6.203201.17215@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> pwhitman@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Philip N Whitman) writes:
>Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
>Path: news.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!usc!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!pwhitman
>From: pwhitman@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Philip N Whitman)
>Subject: history's bogus etymology
>Message-ID: <1993Jan6.203201.17215@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
>Sender: news@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
>Nntp-Posting-Host: photon.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
>Organization: The Ohio State University
>Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 20:32:01 GMT
>Lines: 14
>Oh, great.  Just last quarter I found myself writing a letter to the editor of 
>the campus newspaper, pointing out the error of the columnist who said, "It 
>doesn't take a genius to figure out where this word [history] came from," and 
>proceeded to imply that it was a running together of "his story."  I should 
>have known that this was an idea too ignorant for just one person to believe 
>it.  I watched, disgusted, as the character M. O'Connell on _Northern Exposure_
>indignantly told TV watchers all across the country that "It doesn't take a
>college degree to figure out where that word came from!"  (I was struck by the
>similarity in prefacing; maybe I should cross post this to alt.folklore.urban 
>and see if this assertion always is preceded by "It doesn't take a ... to ...")
>I wonder how many million people were gullible enough to buy it, and of them,
>how many will spread it around to others.
>
>-Neal Whitman


Well, I saw _NE_ too and it seemed to me that the etymology was not being
pushed.  Rather, the emphasis was on the irony that history historically 
has ignored women.  Even if his-story spreads as a folk-etymology,
(like womb-man did for several centuries), that's not the point, is it?

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: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: What does bis mean? (was What does Mk II mean?)
Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 00:35:16 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.214256.16082@pixel.kodak.com> john@liebnitz.ssd.kodak.com (John Hall) writes:
:What does "bis" mean, as in "V.32 bis"?  From context it appears to mean
:something like "Mk II".

I think it's in the comp.dcom.modem FAQ.  It's from a French standards
document.  Can't remember exactly what.  Bi-synchronous or something maybe.

G

Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: sborders@nyx.cs.du.edu (Scott Borders)
Subject: Re: ``Functionality''
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Distribution: alt
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 93 23:28:23 GMT

roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig) writes:

>Perhaps you could make the effort just *once*, Charles, to discuss
>a word without being insulting.  Many people who are not marketroids--
>whatever that is--use the word plainly and with a specific meaning. 
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Your rage has obviously kept you from thinking clearly about what 
>the word means, and what its contexts suggest.

You asked for a definition of "marketroid" . . . here it is!  I took it
from the Jargon File v2.9.9 (also referred to as "The Hacker's 
Dictionary").  I have also included the definition of "droid" for your
edification.


: marketroid: /mar'k*-troyd/ alt. 'marketing slime',
   'marketing droid', 'marketeer' n. A member of a company's
   marketing department, esp. one who promises users that the next
   version of a product will have features that are not actually
   scheduled for inclusion, are extremely difficult to implement,
   and/or are in violation of the laws of physics; and/or one who
   describes existing features (and misfeatures) in ebullient,
   buzzword-laden adspeak.  Derogatory.  Compare {droid}.

:droid: n. A person (esp. a low-level bureaucrat or
   service-business employee) exhibiting most of the following
   characteristics: (a) na"ive trust in the wisdom of the parent
   organization or 'the system'; (b) a propensity to believe
   obvious nonsense emitted by authority figures (or computers!);
   blind faith; (c) a rule-governed mentality, one unwilling or unable
   to look beyond the 'letter of the law' in exceptional
   situations; and (d) no interest in fixing that which is broken; an
   "It's not my job, man" attitude.

   Typical droid positions include supermarket checkout assistant and
   bank clerk; the syndrome is also endemic in low-level government
   employees.  The implication is that the rules and official
   procedures constitute software that the droid is executing.  This
   becomes a problem when the software has not been properly debugged.
   The term 'droid mentality' is also used to describe the mindset
   behind this behavior. Compare {suit}, {marketroid}; see
   {-oid}.

You may not agree with these definitions, but they are generally agreed
upon by those of us who write programs for a living (hence, their 
inclusion in the Jargon File). 

--
Scott Borders
sborders@nyx.cs.du.edu
borders_scott@tandem.com
From: jim@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Jim  Scobbie)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Concertise
Date: 12 Jan 93 21:03:09 GMT
Organization: Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh, UK

nadeau@bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau) writes:

>Again, a lot more innovations in language have fallen by the wayside
>than have been adopted.  And thank the Gods of Language for that,
>for otherwise English would have collapsed under its own weight!

very true

>Certainly, a language is a living, growing, organism.  But uncontrolled
>growth is cancer, which is fatal if left untreated . . .

I think language is like the jungle or any other self-regulating
ecosystem. Your analogy suggests it is like a garden, at all times
prone to weeds and insect infestation and needing the kindly
ministrations of a botanical sage. 

Spoken language and written language differ, of course, and the
written is certainly more gardenish than the spoken. (The very
invention of a writing system makes it so.) The mistake
many people make in evaluating written language is to think that some
words are flowers and others weeds based solely on linguistic
criteria. I call some words flowers because 1. I've always called them
flowers 2. people more powerful than me call them flowers 3. whim.
I bet you use the same criteria. 

This is just a post-and-run.  Alas, as of now I cannot follow this
group for a few weeks.

While I am here again, I'll apologise for quitting and lurking. That
Mandar  got beyond a joke last year, so off I went. 

Keep up the good work (you know who you are) 

Jim
From: Cannam@sc.ZIB-Berlin.de (Chris Cannam)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Back from the UK
Date: 11 Jan 93 14:03:21
Organization: Konrad Zuse Zentrum fuer Informationstechnik Berlin
NNTP-Posting-Host: borodin.zib-berlin.de
In-reply-to: LMEBGO@kiera.ericsson.se's message of 11 Jan 1993 06:53:19 -0600


In article <01GTE72EVG3KHCDMUI@kiera.ericsson.se>
LMEBGO@kiera.ericsson.se (Bengt G{llmo, L M Ericsson, Stockholm,
Sweden) writes:

   Cannam@sc.ZIB-Berlin.de (Chris Cannam) writes:

   >... in the north east of England (which is where I come
   >from) you get `fairly' used colloquially something like the US
   >`quite'.  ("It's fairly difficult" -> "It's very difficult")

   Is that really the US 'quite'?  I have always thought that 'fairly'
   means 'rather', 'somewhat', 'a little',  and that the use of 'fairly' 
   that you describe is an example of British understatement.

`Fairly' does mean `rather' or `somewhat'.  Generally, if you hear
it used as in the above example, it will indeed be an example of
`British understatement' (not that I think it'd be a very common
example).  The use I was referring to is a colloquialism, certainly
not just understatement; and yes, you do actually hear it used.

							Chris

--

           on sighting mathematicians it should unhook the algebra from their
           minds and replace it with with poetry; on sighting poets it should
               unhook poetry from their minds and replace it with algebra
From: crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: A letter to Mandar
Date: 4 Jan 93 19:26:40 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Dec24.054110.27386@news.columbia.edu> gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:

>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.  

Not _all_ of us feel this way.  I've always enjoyed his postings, and I
enjoy them all the more now that I know he's probably another alias of
Mahalingam (magnificent name, that!).  

The man is either nuts or royally putting us on.  Either way, it's more
fun than talking about em-dashes.

Anyone know any good suttee jokes for Mandar?


  

-- 
The trick of reason is to get the imagination to seize the actual world --
if only from time to time.     -- Annie Dillard, "An American Childhood"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lauren Crawford  //  crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Subject: Re: I'll have myself a shower
Summary: Have yourself a merry little Saturnalia
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 04:38:33 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.112629.1@wombat.newcastle.edu.au> eepjm@wombat.newcastle.edu.au (Peter Moylan) writes:
>"I think I'll go have myself a shower".

>This sounded perfectly natural to me until my wife questioned it.
>She thinks that this use of "myself" is peculiarly Australian.

>Who else would use "myself" in this situation?

I would, speaking colloquially.  I might even say, I had me a couple
beers last night.  But that would be *real* slangy.

Adding reflexives (for emphasis?) is common in colloquial speech.
"He went and got himself killed."

Roger
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Subject: Re: Person
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 17:20:20 GMT

In article <20218.2b495516@ul.ie> mckeonj@ul.ie writes:
>The word "person" derives from the Greek "PERSONA", being
>the megaphone mask used by actors in the drama to disguise
>their real faces and amplify their voices, and meaning
>"sound-through".
>I suppose "person" would be an apt word for those who insist,
>loudly, on using it to mask their own and others' humanity.

You know, insulting people is hardly the best way to carry on this
discussion.  I thought we'd figured that out from reading Mandar's
posts.

And it's *certainly* not a wise thing to do when you've confused
etymology (the source of a word) with its meaning.  

After all, "noon" used to mean 3 PM -- what of it?  Likewise, "tree"
meant "beam" and vice versa.  "Testify" used to involve clutching
one's genitals, but doesn't any more.  

So stop the rude nonsense about "masking one's humanity" -- that's
about as cheap and silly as an argument can get.

>Myself, I prefer MAN in general and WOMAN in particular.

And when it's not clear how particular or general the expression is
supposed to be?  What then?  What of "persons unknown"?  Would you
rather have people say "men -- which could, of course, include women
in this case -- unknown"?  That would be necessary to distinguish from
cases in which the unknown agent *was* known to be male.

Roger
From: au500@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Linda Zinn)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Collecting Funny Mistranslations
Date: 11 Jan 1993 19:20:01 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: au500@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Linda Zinn)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc10.ins.cwru.edu


Hope this is the appropriate place to post. If not, I'm sure someone will
be *glad* to let me know.

I collect printed examples of English (most commonly found on packaging,
in instruction booklets) that has been literally translated from another 
language by someone with no clue as to English idiomatic usage, must less
basic grammar.

Excerpts from one of the best examples I have so far:

    On a toy package (made in Taiwan):

    Front: Magic Froggi-Tongue

           JUST A SWING IT STRETCHES FAR
                 VIVID ANIMATED TONGUE WILL SHOCK YOU GREATLY!

    Back: (Instruction of use)
          This product has stickiness, it can be stretched like soft
          rubber and will stick things like stick-fast glue. It is
          a game to play with sticking things from far away.

          Although it has stickiness, it will come off easily, while
          rubber glue will not.

          If stickiness lost, use soap to wash it, after dried, it can
          be used again for several times.

          Pull and stretch with two hands, then let go one hand, at 
          the same time, swing the wrist of the other hand.

          The secret of throwing and stretching. Swing greatly just like
          the way to swing a fishing rod--Swing Heavily! Throw Slowly!

          If sticked into a mess, it will easily come back to original
          form.

          Caution: Do not throw toward the head or face of a person.
                   Do not throw toward or out near the fire place.
                   Though not toxic, it is forbidden to eat.
                   Do not overstretch the tongue of the Chameleon
                   [yes, the front says "Froggi"], otherwise it will go off.

           Because the materials of Chameleon's Tongue contains oil, so
           keep away from dresses, valuable articles, and walls, etc. do
           not continuously place them on those valuable articles, 
           otherwise, dirty spots will appear. While packing up aside,
           put it directly into vinyl plastic bag for storage.


Does anyone have similar examples to post or e-mail to me? Before you 
flame me, I'm not poking fun at anyone for whom English is a second
language. I simply find these "translations" on packaging hilarious.
-- 
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Collecting Funny Mistranslations
Date: 11 Jan 93 20:49:20 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1ish91INNnv8@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> au500@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Linda Zinn) writes:
>
>Hope this is the appropriate place to post. If not, I'm sure someone will
>be *glad* to let me know.

A *most* appropriate place to post!  We started a similar thread to this
some time ago, and I imagine many times before that as well.  I for one
love this stuff and am most grateful to the new Magic Froggi-Tongue
addition to my own collection.

Keep 'em coming!

>           JUST A SWING IT STRETCHES FAR
>                 VIVID ANIMATED TONGUE WILL SHOCK YOU GREATLY!

*Contented sigh*



-- 
The trick of reason is to get the imagination to seize the actual world --
if only from time to time.     -- Annie Dillard, "An American Childhood"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lauren Crawford  //  crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: rbkatz@cc.bellcore.com (Bob Katz)
Subject: Which is correct?
Followup-To: alt.usage.english
Organization: Bellcore
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 93 16:07:39 GMT

Which is correct?:

     One problem is customers using the wrong wording.

     or

     One problem is customers' using the wrong wording.  [note apostrophe]

Thanks.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Subject: Re: Concertise   2/ 2
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:51:59 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.213843.18712@rose.com> peter.churchill@rose.com (peter churchill) writes:
>

>Continued from previous message.

>places is equally effective in all places.  

Funny, I was arguing the opposite: that "concertize" has a specific
meaning, and that it's generally used in one special way.  We *don't*
usually say "concertize" to describe the grade-school recital, for
instance.  

>It would appear that `discrimination' now has such negative 
>connotations that to be discriminating in the usage of English is 
>reduced to mere affectation. The dogged determination of some word 
>mavens to admit the use of anything to everything reminds me of the 
>dogged pursuit of joy by the old trollop who would let anything in 
>merely for the sake of having it there.


Sorry, but that accusation has been tried before, albeit never that 
sleazily.  Calling me a "permissivist" with all its aura of Dr. Spock
is nonsense, as I espouse no such attitude.  I do, however, reject 
attitudes based on the proclaimed good taste of the speaker.

>I much prefer the Rhealistic approach to these matters.

Me, I look things up.

Roger
From: sngoetze@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Sebastian Goetze)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Skid Road (was Re: K Street
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 20:03:07 GMT
Organization: CSD., University of Erlangen
NNTP-Posting-Host: faui00d.informatik.uni-erlangen.de

In <1992Dec27.061735.14843@u.washington.edu> kaygee@hardy.u.washington.edu (Kevin Giansante) writes:

>In article 13775 of alt.usage.english, dant@techbook.com
>(Dan Tilque) says:

>>Originally, it was Skid Road, a street in Seattle.  It was called that
>>because it started off as a skidway.  A skidway is a track used to move
>>logs.  The Skid Road area in Seattle became an area of cheap taverns,
>>flop houses and other places of low repute.  The rest (outside the
>>northwest US) of the world changed it to Skid Row.


>Absolutely right; and today the old Skid Road is called Yesler Way.
>I thought only people in Seattle knew that, Dan.  Where are you?

They told the story in "the american Top 40 countdown" some time back
because of the band "skid row". That show is broadcasted worldwide...

Sebastian
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: nadeau@bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau)
Subject: Re: Person
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 02:49:48 GMT

In article <12283@sorley.ed.ac.uk> iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski) writes:
>In article <1993Jan7.151439.19910@Princeton.EDU> roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig) writes:
>>
>>Yeah.  "A man walks down the street."  You don't think gender?  Most of
>>us do, and Paul Simon certainly expected us to.  
>
>So what should one say, Mr Lustig?  "A person walks down the street"?
>"A human being walks down the street"?  You still don't think sex (I

How about "Someone walks down the street".

>take it that's what "gender" was meant to mean)?  I mean, if I'm made

Sex is an activity, gender is an attribute . . .  :-)

>to visualise a (yet unspecified) human being (even if the word "man"
>hasn't been used), I'll certainly have to attribute to him a sex, age,
>skin colour, approximate appearance and much else.  I can't visualise
>him otherwise.  But, of course, since all those assignments will be
>arbitrary, I'll be prepared to cancel any of them.

With "someone", you just might visualize a woman.  With "man", you are
guaranteed to visualize a male.

>That being said, "man" in "A man walks down the street" may have to
>mean a male (adult) human.  But it also may not.  With no context, it
>is difficult to say which one.  Sorry, I'm not too well acquainted
>with P Simon.

Frankly, I have no idea if Paul Simon meant a "man" or a "person".  So
context isn't enough to distinguish between the inclusive and exclusive
uses of the word.  Thus, the point some of us have been making that we
should choose our words with care to avoid such ambiguity.

       The Rhealist - nadeau@bnr.ca - Speaking only for myself
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english